Nepaug Bible Church - http://www.nepaugchurch.org - Pastor's Sermon Notes - http://www.nepaugchurch.org/Sermons/zz20070415.htm

THRU THE BIBLE EXPOSITION
1 Corinthians: Discipling Believers With Very Sinful Backgrounds
IV. Overcoming Moral Laxity In Marital Roles And Conduct
A. Aligning With God's Order Of Sexual Orientation And Behavior
(1 Corinthians 7:1-9)

Introduction: (To show the need . . . )

At all levels, we face a great conflict over what constitutes the "right" and "wrong" sexual orientation and conduct to have:

(1) National Broadcasters Hall of Famer Don Imus was fired last week by CBS Radio and MSNBC for making a sexist/racist remark about the mostly African-American Rutgers women's basketball team ( The Hartford Courant, "Imus Fired By CBS," 4/13/07, p. A4). He admitted he made "a stupid mistake,'" but that the ensuing furor was "insane' and out of control.'" (Ibid.) Many callers on Brad Davis' "Talk of Connecticut" am 610 radio show agreed with Imus, but Brad Davis backed Rosemary Dempsey, Connecticut head of the National Organization for Women who claimed " . . . thousands of women in this state and country are sick of the sexist-racist humor of the white radio jocks who have made millions at our expense . . ." (Ibid.)

(2) The same paper ran a front page story by Courant Staff writer, Daniela Altimari reporting the Legislative Judiciary Committee voted to approve legislation legalizing same-sex marriage. The bill moves to the House, and if it passes there and in the Senate, Governor Jodi Rell promises to veto it. However, the Democratic majority could override her veto, making same-sex marriage legal in Connecticut!

The committee debate was anything but mild: T. R. Rowe from Trumbull who opposed the bill, said: "This isn't about civil rights. This is about radically redesigning the most basic . . . institution that society has.'" On the other hand, Representative Beth Bye testified of her own civil union, weeping as she told how her father, a devout Roman Catholic, had finally accepted her lesbian union, Ibid., p. A7.

Then, further to complicate matters, an informal poll in the April 9, 2007 Hartford Courant reported 59.6 % of the people in our state oppose passing a law to legalize same-sex marriage! (Ibid., p. B3)

(3) Locally, some of our schools have curriculums that affirm same-sex parenting, but this is strongly opposed by pro-family groups!

(4) Additionally, we face moral laxity in the media itself. This was reflected in the comic section of the April 9, 2007 edition of The Hartford Courant (p. D7) that ran a "Funky Winkerbean" strip where a teen asks a girlfriend to commit fornication with him, and she agrees.

So, we may ask, "In view of the great conflict we face, what IS the RIGHT sexual orientation and behavior to have?!"

(We turn to the sermon "Need" section . . . )

Need: "What is the right sexual orientation and behavior to have?"
  1. The Corinthian believers had written to Paul, asking clarifications on issues related to sexual orientation and behavior, cf. 1 Cor. 7:1.
  2. This request rose in part due to the huge moral vacuum at Corinth:
    1. The verb, korinthiadzomai, "to act the Corinthian" was coined due to the fame of the city's 1,000 prostitutes of the temple of Aphrodite, the pagan Greek goddess of love and beauty, Ryrie Study Bible, KJV, 1978, p. 1619; Liddell & Scott, Greek-English Lexicon, 1968, p. 981; Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary, s. v. "Aphrodite."
    2. So, as in our era, Corinth's Christians needed moral insight from God.
  3. Paul then gave a COMPREHENSIVE view of GOD'S RIGHTEOUS STANDARD of SEXUAL ORIENTATION and CONDUCT, 7:1-9:
    1. Providing he had God's gift of celibacy, the believer could remain celibate and concentrate on serving Christ, 1 Corinthians 7:1b, 7-9:
      1. Paul noted it was good if a man did not have sexual relations with a woman, meaning, in this context, to stay single (cf. 1 Cor. 7:1b where "touch" is a euphemism for sexual intercourse as in Gen. 20:6; Prov. 6:29; Bib. Kno. Com., N. T., p. 517), 1 Cor. 7:1b, 7-9.
      2. Paul himself had the gift of celibacy from God, so he generally recommended it as a positive status to others, 1 Cor. 7:6-7, 8.
      3. On the other hand, if remaining an unwed virgin caused one not to be able to control himself sexually, he did not have the gift of celibacy, and thus was to marry, 1 Corinthians 7:9, 2 NIV, ESV.*
    2. Now, in getting married, a believer was to enter only a heterosexual, monogamous, adult marital union and meet his sexual needs by way of his spousal partner alone, 1 Corinthians 7:2b-6:
      1. In 1 Cor. 7:2b, Paul taught one's spouse was to be heterosexual:
        1. The word rendered "every man" KJV ("each man" NIV, ESV) is the masculine gender form of hekastos, meaning "each" where "every woman" KJV ("each woman" NIV, ESV) is the feminine gender form of hekastos, U. B. S. Greek N. T., 1963 ed., p. 591. In this context, these words respectively refer heterosexually to males and females, not to parties acting in an aggressive or a passive homosexual role in the same gender!
        2. Then, the word translated "wife" (KJV, NIV, ESV) is the Greek term gunaika that means "wife" as a secondary meaning, but it primarily means "woman (adult female)," Ibid.; Arndt & Ging., Greek-English Lex. of the N. T., p. 167.
        3. Also, the word "husband" (KJV, NIV, ESV) is from the Greek term andra that means "husband" as a secondary meaning, but it primarily means "man (in contrast to woman)," Ibid., U. B. S. Greek New Testament; Ibid., Arndt & Ging., p. 65.
        4. So, Paul taught one was to marry one of the opposite gender!
      2. Since Paul directed that one man is to wed one woman, marriage was to be monogamous, not polygamous, 1 Corinthians 7:2b!
      3. As Paul used gunaika and andra to mean adults, he countered all sexual roles and activities involving children, 1 Corinthians 7:2b!
      4. Since Paul also taught that marrying one heterosexual adult partner was meant to counter temptations to immorality (1 Cor. 7:2a), and as Jesus called mental sexual lust immorality in Matthew 5:27-28, God opposes all other forms of orientations and actions (like voyeurism and pornography, etc.) that deviate from fulfillment by union with one's heterosexual, monogamous, adult, human spouse. Indeed, Paul noted each husband and wife is responsible to meet the spouse's sexual needs within their marital union, 1 Cor. 7:3-4.
      5. Now, spouses could briefly cease meeting each other's sexual needs, but only if this was (a) by mutual consent for (b) a limited time (c) for the purpose of devotion to God, (d) and only if the two came together again that Satan not tempt them to sin, (7:5)!
Application: (1) May we trust in Christ as Savior to have eternal life and forgiveness, John 3:16; Col. 1:14. (2) Then, (a) if we can remain unwed without burning in sexual lust, we have the gift of celibacy, and staying single is preferred for the sake of dedication to God, 1 Cor. 7:1b, 7-9. (b) Yet, lacking this gift, God wants us to marry into a heterosexual, monogamous, adult union and then to meet our needs only by that spouse! (c) All of this is possible by the believer's reliance on the indwelling Holy Spirit Who gives us power for righteous sexual orientation and conduct, Gal. 5:16-23.

Lesson: With the exception of the gift of celibacy, God's RIGHTEOUS sexual orientation and behavior standard is for one adult man and one adult woman to wed and then to meet each other's sexual needs only between themselves. All other variations violate God's righteousness.

Conclusion: (To illustrate the sermon lesson . . . )

The April 12, 2007 edition of USA TODAY, p. 3A ran the story, "Duke rape charges dropped", reporting the rape charges by a female African-American stripper against some white males of the Duke University lacrosse team before whom she had performed a striptease were dropped by North Carolina's Attorney General, Roy Cooper. His reasons were a lack in "the accuser's credibility . . . a lack of physical evidence, a questionable identification process and pretrial publicity by (Durham County district attorney Michael) Nifong."

Comments by the article's author, Andrea Stone (p. 3A) and the paper's editorial page (Ibid., p. 12A) might leave us feeling the athletes were victims. One lacrosse player, Reade Seligmann, said: "This dark cloud of injustice that has hung above our head has finally cleared, and we can get on with our lives,'" and that the case had "opened my eyes up to a tragic world of injustice I never knew existed.'" The Attorney General himself noted: "I think a lot of people owe a lot of apologies to a lot of people.'" The editorial on the subject, in sympathy for the lacrosse players, closed by citing Labor secretary Raymond Donovan who, as he was cleared 20 years ago of fraud and larceny charges, famously asked, "Which office do I go to get my reputation back?'"

Yet, in God's view, neither side at that party was innocent -- both the white male athletes and the African-American female stripper sinned! Even if the lacrosse players did not lay a hand on the woman, they attended a party to view her as she performed her striptease, so they mentally committed immorality in Jesus' Matthew 5:27-28 view! Then, the stripper willfully participated in her act, aiding the mental immorality of her viewers, so she also sinned! Then, Scripture implies she should save her body for her spouse, not expose it before a bunch of partying male university athletes! Had she or the men heeded the Scriptures in this sermon, neither would have been at the party, so neither would have known its lifelong, reputation-dashing carnage!

And that is where applying this message becomes valuable!

We believers must hold that human sexuality is an entity that GOD CREATED, so it is WHOLESOME if it is expressed WITHIN the bounds of BIBLICAL MARRIAGE; however, OUTSIDE that realm, it is SIN, and HARMS! Then we will relate well to God and one another to EXCEL in sexual orientation and action for GOD'S glory, not to mention for our OWN BLESSING!