So how far is too far when it comes to sexual activity between unmarried men and women? In this post, I discussed how sexual propriety between unmarried men and women must conform to a familial standard of purity. Simply put, sexual activity (of any kind) must be reserved for the marriage relationship (1 Corinthians 7:7-9). We can know if an activity is sexual by considering that action within the context of the family relationship (see 1 Timothy 5:2). In other words, if I would not engage in a certain activity with my sister because it would be deemed sexually inappropriate to do so, then that activity is of a sexual nature and to be reserved for the marriage relationship.
In Raising Purity, I examine the above sexual ethic against the backdrop of the first-century Greco-Roman culture. As is argued below, the New Testament authors are working within, and affirming, a culturally accepted sexual ethic regarding sexual relations between unmarried men and women. Failure to consider this wider context often causes many Christians to redefine purity in a way that would have been foreign to the biblical authors. Two aspects of the ancient culture are particularly noteworthy here. Continuing from the book…
First, unlike our present day understanding of sex (which tends to be strictly limited to sexual intercourse), the first-century Jewish and Greco-Roman concept of sex was more holistic. A man and woman who repeatedly initiated and then suddenly cut short their sexual relations prior to consummation (as is common in Christian dating relationships today) would have been unusual in Paul’s day. Either one abstained from sexual relations altogether, or carried them out to their full consummation. Thus in the ancient culture the sexual relationship does not appear to have been broken down into a series of distinguishable steps (e.g., kissing, caressing, intercourse), with only the final stage—intercourse—qualifying as “sex.” Intercourse was viewed as the consummation of sex, not the sum total of sex. Thus when the biblical authors warned against sexual immorality, they were understood to be warning against all extra-marital sexual activity.
Secondly, in both the ancient Jewish and Greco-Roman context, the ability of a respectable young woman to find a suitable marriage partner was, in no small part, contingent upon her father’s ability to prove her chastity. Consequently, a father took great pains to protect the moral integrity of his daughter’s reputation until the day of her marriage. Respectable young women did not leave the house unescorted, and the practice of cloistering (i.e., where a young woman was kept in the home and secluded away from any male non-relatives) was often employed. Needless to say, our contemporary dating practices were completely foreign to the first-century context. Respectable young women did not spend time alone with males who were not part of the household, nor did they engage in even light sexual activity prior to marriage. In fact, respectable, unmarried women in the ancient world were, in many respects, not easily afforded the opportunity to engage in sexual misconduct. (This explains why the commands in the Bible regarding sexual purity are almost all directed toward men, who, unlike young women, would have had more social license to visit prostitutes or take a mistress—practices that were so standard for the culture of that day that even the Christian men at Corinth routinely engaged in such behavior.)
Consequently, in Paul’s day, premarital sexual activity that intentionally stopped short of sexual intercourse was not common. Either men and respectable women abstained from it altogether, or a man engaged in it fully with a prostitute or mistress. Given this historical and cultural framework, we can understand why the biblical authors did not feel a need to spell out “how far is too far?” It was already understood, even within the wider secular culture; any sexual activity outside the marriage relationship was off limits.
We must not redefine purity in a way that would have been foreign to the biblical authors. In the first-century context, the concept of purity automatically meant treating members of the opposite sex as family. The New Testament assumes and affirms this standard of sexual purity.