CHAPTER SIX

WHY DID GOD MAKE US MALE AND FEMALE?

Paul is a forty-something, successful minister in a mid-sized, affluent church. He is respected as a loving shepherd, a devoted father and husband, and a community leader. By outside appearances, one would assume that Paul deals well with his sexuality. He avoids coarse jokes, preaches against X-rated movies, and has remained faithful to his wife. But on the inside, Paul has struggled for many years with his sexuality, and his past still haunts him. Much of it traces to his rearing at home and church. L4et's listen in as he tells his story:

I was born in the late forties and raised to believe that sex was not something to be discussed. It was a forbidden subject at home and at church. I attended a conservative Christian college in the Midwest where again there was no discussion of sexual issues or sexual problems. They were "sinful," and if you were "right with God," you wouldn't have those types of problems. The college was fearful that students might have sex, that a girl would become pregnant, and the school would lose its support from [that girl's home] church. The concern was so great that even the cafeteria was divided down the middle--there was the boys' side and the girls' side. There was no sitting together even for dinner. You could go out on a date from 7:00-11:00 P.m. on Friday and between church services on Sunday--that was it! In that environment I learned that sex was not a subject to be discussed. If you ignored it, then you wouldn't have a problem in the church. In spite of this, it became a great problem for me, personally and professionally. It took me many years to learn to counsel people without being embarrassed when sex was brought up as an issue in their home. But the biggest problem developed in my private life.

In my teen years I was very shy. I never had much of a relationship with girls because I was afraid of their rejection of me. My image of myself was so poor that I "knew" everyone else felt the same way about me. I assumed that to ask a girl out would make me too vulnerable. My fears ranged from a simple "No" to the fear of someone's laughing at me when I asked her to go out.

But the problem with that shyness was that I didn't lessen my curiosity of the female anatomy. Instead it forced me "underground" to a world of secretivity and exploration, into the world of pornography and self-stimulation.

In his private world Pastor Paul found "no ridicule, no risk," he said. But he soon was hooked on pornographic magazines as he tried to escape his fears and supply his sexual drive. He became uncertain, and his habits affected his ministry. Once, as a youth pastor, he tried to counsel a man at the end of the church service. Paul took him aside and asked about his need, and "he handed me a note that simply stated, 'Masturbation.' That shocked me! I had no idea how to help him. I quickly prayed for him and dismissed him. I regret my actions now, but no one ever told me what to say to people who need prayer about sexual issues.

"In hindsight, no wonder that I was so shocked. I was still dealing with the problem and the guilt myself. It took me years to get this under control.... The issue of escapism and how to handle stress was what I had to learn, and with God's help I am still learning it."

How many Pauls are there today? How many Christians sit in their pews week after week, sing hymns and praise choruses, listen to sermons and take notes, and inside feel dirty and hypocritical because of present or past inability to deal with their sexual drives? How many are longing to hear a positive way to deal with their sexuality but are too ashamed to ask for help?

COMMON ATTEMPTS TO HELP

Christian singles have come a long way since Paul's college days. Young men and women can sit together in Christian college cafeterias, sex and AIDS awareness seminars are common, and once taboo topics can now be discussed in churches. Unfortunately, though, the answers that are given to our young people and adult singles are, in my opinion, still inadequate. They do not present any positive motivation to remain celibate. Positive guidelines for single sexuality, especially ways to deal with sexual temptation, are essential yet lacking.

Two of these common (yet insufficient) approaches to teaching abstinence to teens and adults are what I call the ostrich option and the detour dilemma. As you read about these two negative approaches, think back to the things you were taught about singles and sexuality. Is one of these approaches similar to what you have been taught? Is it the way you have been trying to keep your sexual impulses under control?

The Ostrich Option

Teens and single adults are still being told to handle their sexual urges by avoiding them. This really isn't so different from what Pastor Paul was taught in the '50s. The main difference is that, in Paul's day, even the discussion of sexuality was considered sinful. Today, it's not considered a sin to talk about sex and to admit that we have sex drives, but the answer is still, "Don't think about it, don't go to places or watch things that will make you feel it, and above all don't do it."

This was painfully obvious to me as I listened to a tape of a popular youth pastor lecturing about sex at a high school convention. His main message was, "Don't get yourself into situations where you will be sexually tempted." He gave a personal example:

"When I travel to speak at conferences, I am always careful when I go into my hotel room for the first time," the speaker said. "The first thing I do is take the movie listing off the TV and turn it face down so that I can't read the movies. Then I call the front desk and ask them to block all movie rentals from my room. That way I can't watch any movies that might excite me sexually. You gotta plan ahead and avoid anything that will cause you to fall."

Now I agree that many movies are harmful to watch, but I was saddened that this leader's main message to his teens about sex was "avoid it!" In our culture, that simply isn't possible. What are teens to do when they are watching a football game and the cameraman focuses in on the cheerleaders or some cute coeds in bikini tops? What should they do when, as they watch the evening news, a report about a series of sex crimes is covered in lurid detail or a clip is aired from a Chippendales Nightclub for women? How should they react when they are walking down a street and suddenly a woman dressed very provocatively rounds the corner and walks right towards them? Are they to prevent all such temptations from happening? No, of course not. That would be impossible. By the time they see such a woman or man or hear a lurid report, even if they turn their eyes away or turn off the TV, the image is already fixed in their minds. And the more they try to forget it, the easier it is to become obsessed about it.

In all honesty, I did not consider his suggestion to the teens to be in their best interest. Rather than learning to control their impulses, they were being taught to protect themselves from all temptation. Try as they may, no one can insulate himself or herself from sexual temptation. As with the ostrich who puts his head in the sand to avoid trouble, the trouble is still there, even though he can't see it.

Some singles avoid dealing with their own sexuality by making themselves unattractive to others. Some do this by over-eating or by excessive under-eating. Others dress poorly or practice poor hygiene. Still others maintain a negative, unattractive demeanor and attitude. The methods chosen and combinations used are as numerous as are the men and women who are fearful of their sexuality. They try to avoid the issue by somehow hiding it or making it seem unappealing. But in the end, this approach does not solve the root problem. Like a bandage over a cancerous growth, it may hide the problem, but sooner or later the cancer will destroy everything. Avoidance simply is not the answer.

Jodie began dating at fifteen. At seventeen she had a couple of bad dating experiences and wanted to end her dating, so she began to eat. "[I was] convinced that dating was not for me, and I subconsciously gave it up. I still acted like I wanted to date, but I immediately gained thirty pounds [an effective method of keeping most men at arm's length] and began believing all men were evil. This, of course, worked very well to keep me from dating. I realize now with hindsight that this was a protective measure for someone who at the time was not very psychologically sophisticated but did not want to be hurt anymore."

The Detour Dilemma

Another popular suggestion is for singles to harness their sexual energy and use it in some other way or area. One singles pastor told his singles that the solution to sexual frustration was to exercise more. He said, "When I feel tempted, I go out and run a couple of miles. If I'm really tempted, I run five or six. I find that if I run long enough I can use up the sexual energy in a positive way." Yes, you guessed it. This particular singles pastor now runs marathons. But not everyone can run marathons, or swim laps, or lift weights as a way of diverting sexual energy.

Sometimes the detour approach takes on overtly Christian content, such as the divorced evangelist who dealt with his sexuality by "spending more time reading the Word." To be sure, the Bible is an excellent source of strength and comfort, and reading it will deeply nurture us as believers. But what this evangelist didn't realize was that he was merely replacing his former addictions on cocaine and sex with a new addiction. He was able, for a while, to throw his energies into Bible study, but after a time this became humdrum. Interestingly, he finally gave up on Christianity and the Bible, saying that it just wasn't powerful enough to deal with the real world.

One charming retreat speaker gave her audience a different route for this detour approach. She said, "Whenever a Christian lady asks me how as a single I deal with sex, I just tell her, 'Honey, get busy for the Lord. If you serve Him day and night like I do, you won't have the time or energy to worry about sex." Again, this sounds spiritual and sacrificial, but it too is insufficient. Rather than producing balanced, whole Christians who are able to control their thoughts and impulses, it produces worn-out, burned-out, tired Christians. And they are probably worse off than before, because in their weakened condition they are more susceptible to temptation.

Exercise, obsessive Bible study, and even "getting busy for the Lord" are just examples of sublimation. Sublimation is a defense mechanism that channels forbidden impulses into more socially accepted outlets. An easy way to visualize sublimation is to imagine that a deep pothole has formed on a busy highway. Construction crews put up barricades to keep drivers from driving on that road, and they erect detour signs to guide the drivers along alternate routes. The detour allows drivers to continue to function safely. In the same way, the unconscious often places barriers in front of unacceptable desires and redirects that energy toward more acceptable outlets.

As a temporary approach, sublimation may be helpful, but as a long-term solution it fails again and again. Let's return to the road crew illustration: If a pothole appears in the road, it certainly is wise to temporarily direct drivers away from the danger and onto an alternate route. But sooner or later, the pothole should be repaired so the normal traffic flow can resume.

What would happen if, rather than fixing potholes, our local maintenance teams decided to make every detour permanent? Chaos would result. Soon the detour would itself develop potholes; a detour for the detour would have to be erected, and so on. Our communities would end up tangled messes of redirected routes. It would be virtually impossible to get anywhere efficiently. A standstill would result, because all the roads would have potholes and none would be repaired.

I remember experiencing this type of traffic nightmare in the summer of 1977, as a young college student traveling through the Soviet satellite countries behind the Iron Curtain. I was a part of a team of college students who were trying to bring Bibles into the Eastern bloc countries. We made it through each crossing without trouble but then met with a difficulty that we hadn't expected. The roads and highway infrastructure of these countries was an absolute mess--crumbling roads and potholes everywhere. There were detours upon detours, as the repairs never seemed to find completion.

As the navigator for the group, I often despaired of ever finding our destinations because the detours would not lead us to the right roads. The much better option for the local authorities would have been to fix the potholes quickly so the most efficient routes could be open to traffic. Similarly, the better option in our personal lives is to deal directly with our sexuality. If we respond to temptation or sexual frustration by creating permanent detours around those areas, new problems will soon appear on the detour.

For instance, we may get busy for the Lord and choose to serve God in a ministry area of our local church. But what will we do when we meet an attractive member of the opposite sex in that new ministry group? The inability to deal with sexual frustration is still there, and we have not learned how to handle it positively. So we have to create a new detour within the current detour. We may say to ourselves, "OK, I'll be a part of this ministry, but I'll try not to sit close to that person." Later, it's not just physical proximity that's a problem, but also visual proximity. So we decide to not even look in that person's direction, and the sublimation chaos deepens. What a mess! Our lives become a jumble of detours.

This is the dilemma we place ourselves in when sublimation is used as a permanent solution rather than a temporary option. For single Christians, the sexual issue cannot be avoided forever; the potholes need to be positively dealt with and permanently fixed.

In spite of the popularity of the ostrich and detour approaches to single sexuality, neither avoidance nor sublimation deals with the real issue. Instead, they just delay and mask the fact that singles are sexual people. Singles need more--they need a positive reason to remain celibate and a positive way to handle temptation when it comes.

God has left our sex switches on for a reason. In His wisdom He has chosen not to switch singles off for a while sexually. He has a reason for doing this, and it is not mere biology.

MORE THAN JUST BIOLOGY

Many singles claim, "Well, God created me with these parts, so I'm going to use them. He created me to be a physical person, and sex is just as natural as breathing or eating. It wouldn't be wise for me to stop breathing, would it? And eating is a physical drive too. If I stop eating, I will destroy this body. Sex isn't something I can just turn off, it's a natural part of life. In spite of what the Bible says, I feel the body is good and sex is good. After all, whatever is natural is good." They are saying sex is a biological function and unavoidable. This is the naturalistic, evolutionary view of sexuality. Since we are mere animals, this argument says, we should not deprive ourselves of bodily pleasures. Even more important, we must not deprive ourselves of sexual pleasure because it is our duty to procreate and keep our genetic inheritance alive.

But surely there is a deeper reason for our sexuality than mere biology; there must be a more profound explanation to our desire for intimacy than just the evolutionary survival of the species. Sex must be more than just a bestial attraction and a response. Of course, in a culture in which God at best is seen as irrelevant, and at worst is seen as dead, the human being is reduced to a merely animal level. Accept the idea that God does not exist, and you need not worry about such things as the spiritual or transcendent. All of life is reduced to purely physical, animal terms.

Shakespeare, in the tragedy Othello, had one of his characters adopt the same low view of sexuality. Lago, Othello's trusted officer who betrays that trust, scoffed at anyone who thought that sex was a transcendent experience and denied that it was in any way elevated above a purely physical level. For Lago, sex was all "goats and monkeys." In other words, it was a purely animal act and made clear the fundamental bestial level that humanity, for him, could not rise above.

This reduction of our humanness to a purely physical level is reflected in the modern industry of pornography, which treats sexuality and bodies as mere objects to photograph and display as one would any other physical object. The word pornography comes from the Greek word porneia, whose root, porn, means 'to sell, and was first applied to Prostitutes who used their bodies for financial profit. Pornography, true to its etymological heritage, means sex for sale.

Sadly, today the pornographic industry is not the only industry that uses sex for a profit. Sex is used to sell movies; many producers believe a G-rated movie will probably not make the profit that it would if some steamy sex scenes were added and the rating changed to an R. Not only does TV and radio advertising use sex to sell products, but the very content of the most popular shows is unabashedly sexual. Everything from hair care products to food, from clothing to cars, from vitamins to vacations uses sex to sell its wares. It almost seems as if our whole culture uses sex for a profit.

A REFLECTION OF GOD

The Bible proclaims loudly that we are not mere animals, naked and bestial. Neither are we sexual simply on a physical, animalistic level. Theologically, there is a hidden purpose behind our creation as sexual persons. Understanding this hidden purpose helps us to do two things: value ourselves more and learn a positive way to handle sexual temptation. The good news is that our sexuality is not merely biological or bestial but instead is a reflection of God.

This truth is not buried in some obscure passage in the Old Testament or in one of those small, prophetic books that few can find or pronounce. The reason for our sexuality is not embarrassing and therefore relegated to a footnote somewhere. Instead, it is given clearly in the very first chapter in the first book of the Bible, right there on page one-Genesis 1: 27. Many scholars see this verse as the culmination, the climax of the passage.

The Hebrew writer of the book of Genesis, in the first chapter, was saying that in the beginning God created everything. After He created most things, He climaxed his creative actions with His best work ever--man and woman. The greatest of His creations and the goal of the whole creation effort is given in verse 27:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them.

A LITTLE LESSON IN HEBREW POETRY

Before analyzing the Genesis 1:27 passage, we must first note a few things about Hebrew poetry. Though this may seem at first glance to have nothing to do with sexuality, it will become helpful for us in a moment (so hang in there for a few paragraphs and some fun diagrams). Hebrew poetry is quite different from the poetic sounds and patterns we are used to. Instead of emphasizing rhyme and meter, as does much English poetry, it often uses parallel structure; that is, each line is parallel to another line in a certain way. Parallelism is a beautiful and complex type of poetry, and fortunately for us one that survives translation well. One type of parallelism is synthetic parallelism. Here, the first line is directly parallel to the next line, but its themes would be better supported and explained by the following line. An example of this is Psalm 1: 1:

Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked, or stand in the way of sinners, or sit in the seat of scoffers.

Contrary to some energetic expositors, the last three lines do not describe the three different types of men that a godly person ought to avoid. Instead, the three lines add together in a synthetic way to give a stronger and more powerful expression of the central point: Don't hang around with bad guys. By repeating themes in exact order, the writers could bring emphasis to the important thoughts, which was important before the days of underlining and bold type.

It's sort of like the father who really wants to make a point to his son who has just wrecked the family car and wants to borrow the other car. Dad says in exasperation, "I don't want you to drive the car, I don't want you to sit in the car, I don't even want you to look at the car!" As we all quickly realize, the father is not outlining in precise, scientific detail three things that he wants the son to avoid. Instead, through synthetic parallelism he is driving his point home: "I'm upset, and you're going to have to walk for a while."

Another type of Hebrew parallelism is antithetical parallelism. In this type the main point was made by saying the theme first positively and then negatively (An example of this is Proverbs 3:5, "Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding.")

A third type of parallelism is called chiasm (pronounced ki-asm), which means a sort of crossing. Here the same themes are switched in adjacent lines, the switch drawing attention to the themes and sometimes bringing one into prominent position. If the switching themes were connected by lines, an X would form between the lines. The word chiasm actually is derived from the Greek letter X, called chi. An example of chiasm is found in the two opening lines of Amos 5:14-15.

Seek good, not evil... Hate evil, love good...

The same theme is expressed by both lines, but the order of the two parts is reversed. The crossing of themes lends power to the poetry.

THE POETIC STRUCTURE OF GENESIS 1:27

Genesis 1:27 uses both synthetic parallelism and chiasm; let's take an in-depth look at the verse. First, we will underline the subjects, verbs, and direct objects in each line and connect them:

So God Created Man in his own image,
In the image of God he created him,
Male and female he created them.

This part was really easy. The Hebrew writer did not want us to miss his parallelism, so he used the same verb (created), the same subject (God/he), and a simple object (man/him/them). This is a normal example of synthetic parallelism, in which each theme corresponds to its match in the next line. We can clearly see the flow of the poetic lines. It is against this flow that the poet will bring to the fore his main point.

We also have an easy time with the chiasm (crossing of ideas) between the first and second lines. There, the phrases "in his own image" and "in the image of God" cross with the phrase "God created man" and "he created him.

It is as if the chiasm has thrust the phrase "in the image of God" onto center stage. It has been brought forward to claim our attention. This is exactly what was intended, for the author's big surprise is waiting for us in the synthetic parallelism that remains between lines two and three. There we are told what the image of God actually is:

In the image of God he created him,
Male and female he created them.

The point of this poetic structure is to strongly emphasize that the image of God is reflected in our creation as male and female. The message is clear: the image of God is reflected in the male-female relationship. What exactly does it mean to reflect the image of God in the male-female relationship, and how can that help us to deal with sexual temptations?

THE IMAGE OF GOD

Past generations have speculated about the image of God, the imago Dei, assuming that the image was our souls, our original righteousness, and especially our minds. This last and most popular notion about minds simply meant that we are in God's image because we are the only rational, abstractly thinking animals. However, we now know that animals are capable of some rational, abstract thinking too. Koko the gorilla, for instance, has a vocabulary of more than five hundred words and can create her own words by putting two words together to form compound nouns. If humans are distinct from other animals, it cannot be due to our rational capacity alone.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Karl Barth, two twentieth-century theologians, saw a different message in the poetic structure of Genesis 1:27: the image of God was expressed in our creation as male and female. Bonhoeffer said this expressed an analogy of relationship (analogia relationis). In other words, the analogy, or likeness, between God and humans is relationship, the ability to relate. And Barth described sexuality as the "God-like" in us. By this he did not mean that God was sexually differentiated. Instead, our sexuality displays our ability and inclination to be relational people. We are created with the inborn ability and need to relate to others.

It is no wonder that we desire so deeply, then, to find intimacy. It is God's created intention for each of us. We are designed to be in relationship; we are driven to develop intimate friendships. The image of God in us, according to Genesis 1:27, is our ability to relate and share intimacy. It is, therefore, when we love others and allow ourselves to be loved that we most reflect the image of God.

THE GOD OF LOVE

But why is the image of God reflected most when we are relating to others intimately? The answer to this question is subtle in its simplicity, yet also beautiful in its profundity. God's image is reflected when we love naturally, because above all else, God's nature is to love. "God is love," as I John 4:8 proclaims.

Here we are touching on a very deep truth, one that theologians for two millennia have described by the word Trinity. The idea of the Trinity is confusing to most of us, for our logical minds cannot compute the meaning of three-in-one. For some this has been a stumbling block to faith. Attempts to explain the Trinity by analogies of ice and eggs are incomplete and not fully satisfying.

Instead, there is a deeper significance to the Trinity, to the notion of a God who is three-in-one. Within the very being of God is the reality of a shared intimacy and love. There is a communion within the being of God. God does not just love others; He shares love within Himself. Among the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are fellowship and friendship. In His very being love is expressed. Thus1 John 4:8 says "Cod is love," and not merely "God loves." This is why the notion of Trinity is so vital. A monotheistic, non-trinitarian God loves others, but is not loving within Himself. A triune God, though, displays a reciprocal love and intimacy among the members of the Trinity.

We humans are created to share such reciprocal love. We each are designed by God to be involved in loving, mutual, intimate relationships. In other words, when we enter into deep and loving friendships, we do so because we were created to be relational. We weren't meant to live as hermits or in solitary confinement. God created us in His own relational image so that we would--in spite of the hazards and pain--develop intimate relationships with Himself and others.

And in a wonderful way, this drive towards relationships is a positive tool God uses to prod us to quality friendships. Our sexuality is actually a gift from God that can help us develop true friendships, as we shall see in the next chapter.

CHAPTER SEVEN

THANKS FOR VISITING! GOD BLESS YOU!

[ Index | Internet | Salvation | Computer | Botany | Study | Personal ]