Raising Purity

What Constitutes Sexual Relations? or How Far Is too Far? Part 3

November 23, 2009 | 1 Comment

I’ve had a number of thoughtful responses on the Straight Up blog to my posts on sexual purity, a few of which question my interpretation of 1 Timothy 5:2. So I want to touch on this in a bit more detail. Ultimately, I believe my interpretation of this passage is correct, but in the end, my conclusion is not dependent on it. My interpretation of 1 Timothy 5:2 supports my conclusion, rather than serves as the basis for my conclusion. So leaving aside this contested verse, here’s another run at my basic point. See if my logic makes sense…

First, sexual relations are to be reserved for the marriage relationship. Second, there’s more to sexual relations than sexual intercourse. Third, any activity that is sexual in nature should be reserved for the marriage relationship. I think most of us agree up to this point.

But now a question looms… How do we determine if an activity is sexual, or merely physical? Identifying the sexual nature of certain activities is pretty easy. Oral sex, mutual masturbation, fondling, etc., are all clearly sexual activities. But what about kissing?

Logically, the easiest way to determine the sexual nature of an activity is to consider it against the backdrop of the family relationship. If I would refrain from doing a certain activity with a biological relative because it would be sexually inappropriate, then that activity is of a sexual nature and should be reserved for the marriage relationship.

But one reader responded, “With all due respect, in regards to the concept of ‘familial treatment,’ would you suggest I stop holding the hand of my girlfriend, or that I instead become OK with the thought of holding hands with my sister?”

An understandable question, but one that misses the point. The intent of viewing an activity against the backdrop of the biological family is not simply to ask “What activities do I avoid doing with my biological relatives?” but rather “What activities do I avoid doing with my biological relatives because those activities are sexual?” I’ve seen a father hold hands with his young daughter, and an older brother hold hands with his younger sister. This may not be common as we move into the adult world, but there is nothing sexual about holding hands. If holding hands was a sexual activity, we would not permit it between biological relatives at any stage in life. But if we saw a father giving his daughter a prolonged open-mouth kiss, we’d be calling DCFS. And we should. Some activities are physical/affectionate (holding hands, hugging, kissing on the cheek, a quick peck on the lips, etc.), while other activities are sexual and would be deemed completely inappropriate between blood relatives.

So reducing my logic to it’s simplest form, I assert the following…

1. Sexual relations should be reserved for marriage.
2. Sexual relations include more than sexual intercourse.
3. Some forms of kissing (e.g., open mouth, prolonged, French) move beyond affection and are sexual in nature.

thus I conclude,

4. Sexual forms of kissing should be reserved for marriage.

If you disagree with my conclusion (point 4) , I welcome your thoughts on where my logic breaks down in points 1-3.

Of course, it’s hard to make a such counter-culture point in a few short posts. The first chapter of my book lays out a theology of human sexuality, drawing on Christ’s relationship with the Church, which helps to provide a theological backdrop against which to understand this standard of sexual purity. And chapter two provides more extensive argumentation than I’ve provided here. If you’re interested, you can download for free the first first two chapters.

Look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Categories: About the Book, How Far is Too Far?, Sexual Purity