Chapter Four
The Feelgood Generation

In every period of the history of mankind, it can be supposed that the "pleasures of sin" have had a very strong appeal. It is certain that sins of many kinds are pleasurable. This is especially true of sexual sins. It is no wonder then that the person who is determined to seek self-gratification as a primary goal is very frequently drawn into sexual activity. Living as we do in an age marked by extreme selfishness, and observing the current emphasis on sexual hedonism, we see that most appeals for restraint go unheeded, even among those calling themselves Christians. These appeals are buried under an avalanche of contrary advice coming from every form of media available to us in the "Information Age," from pulp magazines to the "world-wide-web." The writers of such things advise, "Do what feels good!" They have succeeded in convincing many, because every selfish person wants to do what feels good. So, the "Age of Feelgood" is upon us.
The person who loves food and seriously overeats is often repaid for his folly with ill health, heart attacks, intestinal and organic disorders, and such like. In spite of these consequences, the person who over-indulges on food is often deaf to pleas for moderation by loved ones who see the ruin coming on. So it is also with the person who indulges the appetite to commit sexual sin. He or she ignores all warnings regarding the spiritual, and even physical consequences of sexual perversity, being enticed by the sensual pleasure of such sins. This societal problem is most evident in some areas of Africa, where the AIDS crisis is overwhelming the voices calling for self-control. Progress in the fight against its spread is almost nil, because age-old customs of promiscuous sex prevail. Poor Africans cannot afford many alternate activities which might give pleasure, and distract them from the constant temptations of sex, so they resent any suggestion that they curtail their free access to sexual pleasure, even though it is destined to kill an extremely large proportion of them. Concerned officials and doctors are slowly realizing that the key to controlling the spread of AIDS is not moderation, or even "protection," it is abstention. Yet, in Western industrialized nations abstension is seldom advised (even though alternate pleasures abound and are affordable). We have not progressed beyond the "protection" phase of prevention, because of the prevalence of the doctrine of sexual hedonism.
The plea of the Lord to those tempted to be sexual sinners is not "be moderate," or "protect yourself," it is "Abstain!" Yes, He calls for moderation in many things, but not in this. God's purpose in calling for abstention is not the prevention of the spread of AIDS, since this fatal physical consequence of promiscuous sex has been around only a few years, but He desires to prevent a greater problem: our spiritual death and its eternal consequences. Consider this comparison. The eating of food is a necessary function of a living organism (only complicated by inordinate or inappropriate appetite), and abstinence from food beyond a certain point brings physical death. Many people are alarmed at learning that a friend has fallen victim to the self-imposed phobia called anorexia, the fear of eating too much. Some years ago, in a well-publicized case, Karen Carpenter tragically cut short a magnificent career as a popular singer by deliberately starving herself to death. Yet, in the case of sexual sin, the charge from heaven, proclaimed by the Apostle Peter, is "...abstain from fleshly lusts which war against the soul" (1 Peter 2:11b). This sort of abstinence is for the prevention of spiritual death resulting from sin....it does not cause death, as anorexia does. The desire for sexual intercourse is an appetite that can be denied completely without any serious physical consequence, yet with great spiritual benefit.
It is interesting that Peter's plea in this verse is prefaced with the statement, "Beloved, I beg you as sojourners and pilgrims..." Christians have a future destination toward which they are to travel without being distracted by turns to the right or to the left. They are primarily sojourners, temporary dwellers on the earth, purposed by God to serve Him during the relatively short period of their lives. As pilgrims, they journey toward the Day of Judgment, when Jesus will give them as an inheritance "a kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world" (Matthew 25:34). It is "an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven" for them (1 Peter 1:4). Abstinence from illicit sex is a small price to pay in exchange for such a rich and enduring reward!
Abstinence is taught by Jesus on the principle that we owe the Lord dedicated service and exclusive devotion. In that portion of scripture in which He revealed His strict New Testament rule on marriage and divorce, His disciples were dismayed, and said, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry" (Matthew 19:10). In a challenge to them to be governed by a higher priority, Jesus said that "there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men," but that there are also "eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake..." (Matthew 19:12). This is a lesson hard to learn, unless we are aware of the transitory "pilgrim" nature of our earthly sojourn.
People who are not impressed by appeals to practice this sort of sexual restraint fall easy victim to Conventional Wisdom. They are easily persuaded by it, because self-control has never been a part of their education, only self-indulgence. When they begin experiencing the pleasure of sexual mischief, then proceed to pre-marital sexual intercourse, they finally justify their licentiousness by applauding the persuasive arguments of intellectuals who profess to see nothing wrong in any kind of sex. Pragmatists preach the principle, "Do what feels good! Don't be bothered by the obsolete guilt complexes of Puritan America." What the victim of this Conventional Wisdom fails to see is that such advice comes from people just like himself who also have never learned self-control, who have also experienced the pleasure of sexual mischief, and have used their subjective opinions to justify their own licentiousness. The advice therefore comes from those who have no desire to serve God, or who think they can serve God acceptably by applying their own personal standard rather than by His.
The notion also prevails among many self-proclaimed Christians that the adulterer or adultress has not really done anything so terrible. "Look at the sound reasons why they were tempted to abandon their vows of sexual faithfulness to their spouses," they say. Sex in their marriage was becoming routine, and unsatisfactory (their native selfishness prevented them from seeing the benefit in selflessly trying to correct this situation). The problem is that each party brought an individualized agenda into the marriage, and maintained it in the face of a need for cooperation. Consequently, stress had grown through the years. So, the normal outlet for sexual desire is abandoned, because the spouse has become a competitor rather than a partner. This competition for individual rights then generates a presumed need for more "breathing room." Needing an outlet, and having abandoned God's formula for sexual release, they seek another partner. These and many other such excuses may also be intensified in the mind of the adulterer by the "attractiveness" of that newfound partner in sex. After they have destroyed their sanctified marriage, their lame plea is, "Isn't a person entitled to sexual satisfaction, and pleasure?"
"Yes," God says in answer, but he stipulates that it must be with that spouse to whom you pledged your faithfulness. He counselled Israel, through the prophet Malachi, "....Jehovah hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously, though she is thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant........He sought a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth" (Malachi 2:14-15). To the people of this age, he commands through the Apostle Paul, "It is good for a man not to touch a woman. But, because of fornications, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband" (1 Corinthians 7:1-2).
In the frantic search for self-gratification, however, ignored are the potential heartaches initiated by broken vows, sundered families, abandoned and dismayed children, and all the other fruits of such selfish sin.
The scenario of the broken home and disillusioned children need not ever be played out, if the husband and wife understand and apply the biblical principles of love. Christian love is altruistic. It seeks the gratification of others. The husband who loves his wife, as God teaches him, will never give his wife cause to look for sexual satisfaction in another man's arms. He will treat her body as if it is his own, "nourishing and cherishing" it (Ephesians 5:28-29). He will "dwell with his wife according to knowledge, giving honor to the woman, as unto the weaker vessel" (1 Peter 3:7). He will be "tenderly affectionate" toward her, a characteristic of love taught in the Scripture (Romans 12:10), along with being "patient, kind, without envy, humble, and unprovoked" (1 Corinthians 13:4-7). Need we say that the Christian wife has similar obligations to her husband?
In an atmosphere of such love, sex is extremely satisfying for both husband and wife. The Apostle Paul, though unmarried, was guided by the Spirit of God to say to married Christians, "Let the husband fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again lest Satan tempt you because of your lack of self-control" (1 Corinthians 7:3-5).
Marital unfaithfulness is epidemic today, but the notion also prevails that it is foolish to wait till marriage to enjoy the luxurious pleasure of sex. In answer to those who admonish restraint, reinforcing their appeals by the authority of inspired Scripture, the indulgent hedonist brands their words as personal opinions, and clings to his own, answering, "When my sensual urges are stimulated by intimate bodily contact, and begin to flow voluptuously through my body, exciting and enticing me to succumb to the pleasure of pre-marital sex, it is foolish to resist! And besides, it really feels good!" Then, if the hedonist is honest, he may add, "It feels even better, if I can suppress all feeling of guilt, and can also forget the social, spiritual, and even medical consequences of the act." His descent into this chasm of immorality may have its beginning with the profane choice of abandoning virginity to a very sexy and willing lover. The choice is profane, especially for those who are Christians, because in doing this they claim the right to possess and use that which actually belongs to the Lord, their bodies, and have "joined them to a harlot." The word of the inspired Apostle Paul is, "Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a harlot? Certainly not! Or do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her? For 'the two,' He says, 'shall become one flesh.' But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him. Flee sexual immorality" (1 Corin-thians 6:15-17).
The "liberated" woman, when she glibly and casually surrenders her virginity to the gratification of her flesh, profanes that which is treated by God as a treasure to be guarded and reserved till marriage, so that the husband may be confident that he has taken a bride who has not been immoral. This is not a prudish Victorian concept, or even Puritanical in origin, it is biblical. Under the Law of Moses, a man had the right expect that his bride would be a virgin. After the wedding night, if he suspected that she was not, he had the right to defame her publicly. However, she also had the right to defend herself against the charge, if it was false. The parents responsible for her righteous upbringing could display the bedclothes of the marriage bed stained with the blood of her torn hymen. The husband would be duly chastised and fined for his false accusation, and could never put her away in divorce. However, if this "token of virginity" was not found, then the community executed a penalty of death on the woman (Deuteronomy 22:13-21).
The potential husband of Old Testament times was not free from sexual restraint. He claimed the right to a wife who entered the marriage as a virgin, because he himself had submitted himself to strict rules of sexual behavior. If he had kept himself in a state of virginity, because of these prohibitions, he had every right to claim a daughter of Israel who had honored the same laws. The Priests of Moses' time were forbidden to marry a woman who was a harlot, that is, one who had engaged in premarital sex. They were also forbidden to marry a divorced woman. A devout widow was acceptable as a wife. The High Priest, however, could marry only a virgin. (Leviticus 21:13-15.)
This exaltation of virginity is evident also in the New Testament. Christ was born of a virgin, according to prophecy (Isaiah 7:14, Matthew 1:18-23). In figures which extol the purity of the church, virginity is a sign of that purity. Paul told the Corinthian church, "For I am jealous over you with a godly jealousy: for I espoused you to one husband, that I might present you as a pure virgin to Christ" (2 Corinthians 11:2). And, in Ephesians 5:22-33, a passage that is applicable both to temporal marriage, and the relationship of the church to Christ, Paul tells us, "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself up for it; that he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of water with the word, that he might present the church to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish."
Virginity might even be called "sacred," in light of these truths. It is certainly more precious in the sight of God than in the eyes of modern hedonists. Under biblical authority, the promiscuous woman, or man, is not desirable as a marriage partner. There were, of course, some exceptions. The woman who was forced into sex by a man was not charged with promiscuity or "harlotry," but only if the circumstances prevented her from being rescued from the rapist (see Deuteronomy 22:23-27). The severe judgment of God on those who favor casual sex shows His desire to keep his creatures from sexual "defilement." Dinah, the daughter of Jacob, who was raped by a Canaanite prince, was so defiled. It did not matter to the brothers of the girl that the rapist wanted to marry her. They said she had been defiled, and that he had treated her shamefully, as if she was a harlot. Because of his audacity in violating moral precepts, the prince, and many of his subjects learned a hard lesson at the hands of these vengeful brothers (see Genesis 34).
These examples of God's treatment of heterosexual perversions do not touch on another "abomination." And though "it is shame to speak" of things which were done secretly in the "darkness" of spiritual rebellion in the early days of Christianity (Ephesians 5:11-12), we must acknowledge that some people today "feel" that they should be counted as bona fide Christians while following the homosexual and lesbian lifestyles. Their public, brash, demonstrative pressures on society and the churches for recognition and approval of their deviate behavior ignores all the scriptural condemnations against it, both in the Old and New Testaments.
We will refrain from speaking also of the disgusting practices that even go beyond these things, because it is time for the consideration of Reality Checks. To the fornicators and adulterers, the Word proclaims "Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed (of marriage) undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge" (Hebrews 13:4) To the so-called "gay community," and practitioners of perverse sex beyond, the same divine Word says "....the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites... will inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Corinthians 6:9-10, and compare the historical background of homosexuality revealed in Romans 1:24-32, which tells us that their perversion results from "refusing to have God in their knowledge," and that "they that practice such things are worthy of death"). God even tries to persuade us that unrestrained sexual lust is a self-inflicted evil, by saying, "Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body, Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body" (1 Corinthians 6:18-20).
But these very specific condemnations carry the full force of Reality Checks only if they are believed by the reader to be inspired of God. The problem that exists in many churches today is that the Bible is treated as a collection of fantasies, myths, and fables, containing many fatuous pieces of advice that ooze through the cracks in between them. "Now hold on!" you may say, "If this is so, why do churches exist at all, having only roots that are bedded in such a useless volume of literature?" The answer, in the judgment of many, is that many churches (guided by skeptic seminarians parading as "pastors") find enough acceptable material on moral philosophy, gleaned and separated from the useless parts of the Bible, on which to build a tenuous religious system, and are satisfied with this nucleus. By a careful sifting process, they think, the essential wisdom of the ancients (or, of God) is discoverable in all that mass of untruth and superstition and bigoted opinion called the Bible.
These distilled miniscule germs of "truth" form the basis of modern religious dogma, and to the delight of many self-serving people, often show agreement with the humanistic precepts of Conventional Wisdom. This is all that makes them acceptable and applicable to human behavior. All the rest of the Bible's mythical "drivel" is dis-carded. A sizeable part of this discarded refuse contains the offensive list of condemnations of sexual behavior. Modern liberal interpreters question their verity, and plead, pathetically, "Surely God did not intend to forbid His creatures to indulge in the satisfying pleasures of such engagements, after implanting the yearning for that pleasure within them." The anathemas in the Bible against adultery, fornication, homosexuality, and other more sordid sexual practices, are considered only spurious insertions written by prudes, eunuchs, and sexual cripples who were jealous of the freedom and pleasure enjoyed by more virile specimens of mankind.
Some social and medical evils that issue from sexual promiscuity are alarming to sociologists, physicians, and even politicians, but the solutions that are offered do not reflect, or even come close, to God's. To ease the hurt felt by families victimized by adultery, the sociologist offers only the philosophy of adjustment and stoic acceptance. To the onslaught of venereal disease and AIDS, the physician only offers hopeful research for future "cures" that will permit promiscuity and perversity to continue without any serious medical consequences. To ease the panic of a public concerned about the breakdown of the family unit, and the moral degeneration of society, adulterous and promiscuous and even "gay" politicians only proclaim sympathy, make conciliatory speeches, and usually end up offering nothing substantive in the way of a remedy.
Against all this, we read that God created Adam and Eve, man and woman, and ordained in their relationship the divine precedents of heterosexuality, mono-gamy, and marital loyalty (Genesis 2:18-24). It is within this relationship that God allows the legitimate right (and pleasure) of sexual intercourse. Marriage is God's institution for the prevention of unlawful fornication (1 Corinthians 7:1-5). He describes homosexuality, promiscuity, and perversion, as "abominations," a word that expresses "abhorrence" and "disgust" (Leviticus 18:22; Deuteronomy 24:1-4; Proverbs 11:20; and compare Proverbs 7:1-27). He calls these evils "works of the flesh" that deny inheritance in the eternal Kingdom (Galatians 5:19), and tells us in a previous verse, "For the flesh lusts against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish." Now, most people who freely gratify every sexual desire think they are doing the things they wish to do, but they are wishing for the wrong things. If they claim to be Christians, they should be wishing to do the will of God. God says to us through the apostle Paul, "...You received from us how you ought to walk and to please God, for you know what commandments we gave you through the Lord Jesus. For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you should abstain from sexual immorality; that each of you should know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification, not in passion of lust, like the Gentiles who do not know God; that no one should take advantage of and defraud his brother in this matter, because the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also forewarned you and testified. For God did not call us to uncleanness, but in holiness. Therefore he who rejects this does not reject man, but God, who has also given us His Holy Spirit" (1 Thessalonians 4:1b-8).
Did you read this passage carefully, weighing each word and phrase? In one short statement, Paul virtually answers all the modern critics who reject the Bible's condemnations of sexual sins by showing that the message is from God, who claims a creator's right to command his creatures. It is not from Paul, or any other man, and therefore cannot be rejected. He shows that unholy sexual immorality is incompatible with serving the consistently holy and moral God revealed in Scripture. He shows that such sinful behavior joins the "Christian" practitioner more with the Pagan godlessness of the Gentile world. And he shows that these commands issue from the "Lord Jesus," who died for us, a fact that makes us spiritual debtors to obey Him. The dedicated Christian takes these words to heart, but the pseudo-Christian only wears the name of Christ, and does not submit to Him.
We could perhaps follow the custom of many of the "Christian" marriage counselors, who (without first trying to probe the extent of their client's commitment to God) extol the vivacious joy to be found in marriage, emphasize the gratification of keeping the marriage vow of faithfulness, and romance the honor of loving a mate as God has loved us. We could also describe and express despair over the manifold heartaches of divorce and unfaithfulness and promiscuity. But the core of the matter is that God has set forth a spiritual agenda to which He commands us to conform, in order to "please" Him. His implications are extensive. Through His immutable teaching, he implies that a person can and should love, and be faithful even to a spouse who has grown old, ugly, infirm, and cranky. Has He not loved us, even when we were undeserving sinners? (See Romans 5:8). This, and many other precepts are the Reality Checks for the immorality resulting from a preference for Conventional Wisdom. It is not the purpose of this essay to review and explain all that the Word of God teaches about sexual behavior, but simply to urge Christians to face the "real" need to understand and obey its precepts. Where is the selfless Christian believer who will face reality and conform to the will of God? He can transform his own life, and this choice, universally connecting him with all those who have made the same choice, may also alter and heal our immoral society as well.