Men can't control themselves: True?

The author of The Prisoner of Zenda wrote a prequel called The Heart of Princess Osra.  Basically, every chapter follows the life of a different man who falls in love with Princess Osra.  Every one of them either must leave the country or die because her beauty has driven them mad with love.  In one case a man, who has disguised himself as a soldier to get close to her, ultimately decides to kill the princess so that honest men will no longer suffer because of her beauty.  He, of course, can’t do it, but instead dies to protect the Princess.  After this Osra asks the King to make her a nun so “that she might trouble honest men no more.”

This is an entertaining story to read, but is a pack of lies for girls.  Let me address five myths:

Myth #1: Men can’t control themselves.

Bull.  There are men who don’t control themselves, but that’s true of anyone, right?  What you wear, or how you look, doesn’t make a guy do anything.  In the Christian world we talk about girls causing guys “to stumble” by wearing clothing that might cause them to lust.  Girls don’t cause this.  This is important because lots of girls feel ashamed of themselves when they have been violated (physically or verbally or by text etc.) by a guy.  There is part of them that feels like they caused it or “asked” for it.  I’d like to drive 100mph on the highway because it would be a thrill, but I choose not to do it.  But, if I did, and got a ticket, I can’t say “movies with chase scenes” made me do it.  If a guy blamed you for a violation of his, he is lying. 

There is another side this coin: how you look does have impact.  Here's a post where I addressed this.

Can a Christian Be Gay?

This subject has led me into many mental and spiritual wrestling matches.  I have read, studied, talked, and prayed about it, knowing that it is a defining issue of our time in the western world.  I have even changed perspectives several times, trying to follow God's heart.

And, of course, it's not just an "issue."  It's about real people, with real lives, real hopes and dreams.  It is so much more complex than I ever thought it was when I was younger.  Having read and heard perspectives from Jesus-followers on both sides of the debate (and in the middle), I particularly found the podcast in this post refreshing.

The speaker is Wayne Jacobsen and this is his podcast called The God Journey.  The subject of same-sex relationships is not his usual topic, but here he gives such a compassionate, honest, and relate-able explanation of where he is one this journey.  He also reads from an article that differs from him and also plays the audio of a story of a Christian man with same-sex attractions.

I implore (fancy for: beg) you to listen to all of it.  I know it's long, but I think if you stop part way through you will miss the full nature of Jacobsen's answer to the question: Can a Christian be Gay?

Is it lust 2

I wanted to make a small clarification about the Brad Watson article that many of you read the other day.  Let me compare lust to anger.

Jesus says in Matthew 5 that “You have heard that it was said to our people long ago, ‘You must not murder anyone.' Anyone who murders another will be judged.’  But I tell you, if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be judged.”

Is Jesus really saying that we should never be angry at someone?  By “angry” we mean feeling frustration at someone else for what they have done.  Of course, we can’t believe that’s what Jesus is talking about.  Being realistic tells us, He must mean something else.

Most of us would come to this conclusion: Jesus is saying that just because you don’t kill someone, doesn’t mean it’s okay to be nasty to them, speak ill of them, swear at them, or hope you can do wrong to them.  It is the ACTIONS that flow from a HEART that desires to harm, not our THOUGHTS. 

In other words, “Okay, fine, you haven’t murdered that boy that made fun of you, but you harm God’s heart still by talking nasty about him at lunch and looking for ways to embarrass him, if you could.”

The same is the case with lust.  Jesus says, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’  But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

Jesus is not saying, “Don’t have sexual thoughts” or “Don’t be turned on by the sight of attractive people.”  He is saying, “Just because you don’t have sex with this other person, doesn’t mean it’s okay to make them feel uncomfortable with unwanted touches, or looks, or unwanted flirting.  Just because it doesn’t work, when you try to get them into a sexual situation, doesn’t mean you didn’t hurt the Father’s heart.” 

It is the ACTIONS that flow from a HEART that desires to take advantage of others.

Also, we must remember that Jesus is targeting married people.  Jesus was speaking to people in a time, when it wasn’t unusual for a man to have to leave his wife for long periods of time (because of slow travel or work etc.).   This left wives at home alone, unprotected, and vulnerable in a male-dominated society.  In essence, he was probably saying to some of the men, “You know that woman who is your neighbor whose husband is gone right now?  Just because you haven’t succeeded in seducing her, you have already harmed your Father’s heart by trying.” I suspect that Jesus was targeting this situation more than anything.

Sexual humor-is it okay?

What's okay to say to someone?  What is okay for someone to say to you?

It's less and less clear for many of us.

Not long ago, my wife Beth and I were at an event where we met and talked with a couple that we didn't know.  They were totally fun to talk to, but there were a few moments that bothered me.  A couple times the guy made humorous sexual comments.  In one case my wife said something random and the guy jokingly took it in a sexual direction.  Admittedly, it was funny and we all chuckled.

The comments were purely in jest and weren't personal, but still, I thought, why does this guy think making sexual comments around my wife is okay?  (not to mention the fact that his girlfriend was there as well).

Now, I'll be honest, the way my wife worded what she said was accidentally funny because it sounded like a double entendre (a simple phrase that can be misconstrued sexually).  But here's the difference: I didn't say it out loud, but the other guy did.

Sexual humor is funny.  As a married person it is something that can become a fun, flirty part of your relationship with your spouse.  But wisdom has taught me: you must be careful about it.  When in mixed company (guys and girls), it's just, well, inappropriate.  I know, it's such a 'teacher'/'parent' word.  But I use it because, honestly, it has an appropriate time.  We all laugh about things that make us uncomfortable.  It's part of life.  The question is: when is it inappropriate?

If you're a guy, I get it: our sex drives are a very, very powerful part of our makeup.  That's not bad.  Our Father designed us that way.  We are more likely to joke sexually because it's on our minds a lot!  However, girls are different.  They experience their sexual side in a very different way and making sexual jokes will not (did you hear? NOT) be a turn on to them.

Sexually-laced texts and comments about their bodies in texts will not be taken romantically.  Let me put it straight-forward: it's wrong.  It makes girls feel unsafe, even violated.

If you want to communicate you're attracted to a girl, do what girls like (not necessarily what you as a

guy would like): be sweet, ask questions, encourage her, be funny, open up to her, compliment her.

Even if you're not attracted to a girl you're around it is still inappropriate to make sexual jokes.  She's still a woman and should be respected.

If you're a girl, first, it's important to recognize that most guys are not 'perverts'.  God made the male sex drive quite prominent in their thoughts.  They have to learn to hold back those thoughts and actions.  Most guys learn this through good parenting, role models, and spiritual growth, but not always.

On the other hand, you don't have to act like you like sexual comments or jokes.  In fact, it would be ideal for you to say you don't appreciate them upfront if a guy starts doing it.  I know that is hard to do socially, though.  If nothing else, ignore them or drop subtle hints of disapproval through facial expressions or comments.  You're a lady, and you deserve to be treated like one no matter what your age.

I think the above is true whether you are a Jesus follower or not, but even more so, for those of us who follow Christ, we want to act, as Paul once put it, "above reproach."  Men and women are different-that's a beautiful thing-but let's respect it too.

A Swimsuit Issue of Men?

By now, if you are around the news at all, even via Yahoo,  you've probably heard about, or at least seen, the cover of  Sports Illustrated's swimsuit issue.  Some of you may even have a copy lying on the coffee table at home.  I do not, but the controversy surrounding the latest cover is quite interesting.  One particularly frustrated reaction about the cover came in a CNN article titled: "Why no Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue of Men?"


Interesting question.  Why don't they have a swimsuit issue with guys in swimwear?

The intellectuals out there are so bothered by this!  People with graduate degrees in Gender Studies raise their arms in dismay!

Yet...my grandmother, who never graced the door of a college or maybe even a high school, could tell you the answer.  Men are aroused visually to a degree incomparable to women. 

Yes, women appreciate a good-looking man, but most adult women don't get turned on by seeing the leg of a random dude.  A guy wearing a small bathing suit would be cause for chuckles, not awe. 

As Jesus-followers we have had a long history of granting saint-status to women's mode of attraction.  They are lured by a whole person, a person with a story.  That's why romance novels and romantic comedies are so alluring to them.  They might enjoy a picture of some hot famous man, but not typically by an anonymous one.  They like a specific guy with a story.

Are they better?  Are women better able to reflect God this way?  Are men just more sinful because they get turned on by visual means so easily?

I would suggest that God made both men and women different and both are valid. 

Both sexes have to fight their natures.  Men have to fight their sex drives so that it doesn't harm others and that it is channeled toward an honest, loving relationship (ultimately marriage). 

But women have their fight too against their nature.  Women are prone to be overly emotional, to
think with feelings instead of reason, to manipulate relationships, and to have outbursts (I'm being general of course.  There are always exceptions).  They too have to learn to restrain their bad sides and to channel their emotional energies in healthy ways.

Women are often given a pass and instead, too often, men's sexual designs are vilified.  The author of the CNN article illustrates this when she asks, "If the point (of the SI Swimsuit Edition) is to objectify women, and subvert them in some way, then why isn't there a similar model for men?"

This charge is often leveled at men: they just "objectify" women.  They turn them into sex objects.

I used to make this argument as well.  But what does it mean?  Here is what I think "they" mean: men are turned on by looks, and when they are, they see (read "value") women only as objects for sexual desire and nothing else. 

I would like to stand up and pronounce what most (of course there are bad men, just as there are bad women) men have known for centuries: Men can walk and chew gum at the same time. 

A man can find a woman utterly attractive and alluring, and...(are you ready for this?)...ALSO recognize her as smart, intelligent, professional, capable, competent, even a genius. 

Most grown-up men do not have a problem with this.  God bless the man who marries a woman that he respects as a competent, intelligent person, but also sees her as a delightful source of sexual and relational pleasure.  Isn't this what we all long for? 

I recently heard a man talk about his parents who died a few years ago.  He remarked that his mom kept herself looking sexy (we usually say 'attractive') for her husband until she was 89 years old (In the last year of her life, she was hospitalized and unable to tend to her appearance).  His mom was not subjugating herself or falling into some male scheme of being objectified; she understood how the man she loved was attracted and she strove to bless him, just as in the same way he reached out to the ways she was attracted.  That is what marriage does.  We don't marry a twin.  We marry someone different and we long to meet each other's needs, even when they are different from our own.

In closing, I do want to acknowledge that the SI cover is hyper-sexual and there are moral issues to address as to whether it should grace the cover of such a publication that ends up, in many cases, on the coffee tables of many households for children to behold.  My point in this post was not to address that, but to use it as a springboard to recognize the God-designed differences of male and female sexuality.

Oh, and check out Proverbs 5:18-19.  It shows that the Bible has something to say about this subject too!

Guilty of Lust? Part 2

Here's the rest of the quote from Is It Lust or Legalism by Brad Watson.

In Jesus' teaching, the man who compromises the marriage of another has a heart tainted by sin.  He has acted out of a heart filled with sinful lust and a spirit of adultery.  The lust is not there in his heart because of a night dream, a mental picture, or even a sexual fantasy.  He is not guilty because of sexual desire, but because he has made a heart decision to pursue a sinful course of action by making unlawful sexual advances on someone else's wife.  Even if he never fully succeeds in "going all the way," in Jesus' book, he is still an adulterer - maybe not physical adultery, but certainly an "adultery of the heart." 

Up to this point we have been discussing the unlawful pursuit of married women.  What about chasing after a married man, someone might ask?  In Biblical times it was lawful for a man to have multiple wives, so unmarried women could legally pursue marriage to men that were already married.  This is why the Law only referenced adultery as a sin which occurred with a married woman.  In today's society, with polygamy outlawed in most places, adultery would obviously include illicit pursuit of a married man as well as chasing after a wedded wife.

Interestingly, however, this scripture really has nothing directly to say about courting or dating behavior between unmarried people.  Many young people with hormones raging have been confused and discouraged by this passage.  How can they even pursue a spouse in a godly way without becoming sexually aroused to some degree?  And how can single people who are "looking" for a spouse keep from looking longingly into the eyes of someone with whom they are developing a loving relationship?  Thankfully, Jesus was not outlawing arousal, desire, or dating.  He was simply making the point that going after someone else's spouse was adultery from the start.  It violated God's law of love by underminding a marriage covenant and stealing from someone else.  But pursuing a romantic relationship with someone that is unmarried should not be considered wrong as long as it is free from manipulation or control and is properly submitted to godly counsel and authority.

(On a side note, I'm not sure what he means by "submitted to godly counsel and authority."  I'm assuming its a fancy way of saying that you have to be smart not to blow off good people's-those who know and love you-opinions when it comes to who you are dating.  When you're in love it's hard to hear what you don't want to hear.)

Guilty of Lust? Part 1

So, Jesus said something that appears to be really crazy.  It's so crazy that if you have any hormones in your body, then it will give you serious pause:

You have heard the commandment that says, ‘You must not commit adultery.' ²⁸ But I say, anyone

 who even looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
So if your eye—even your good eye—causes you to lust, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.
³⁰ And if your hand—even your stronger hand—causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. Matthew 5:27-30


So, uh, does that mean that if you look at someone else because they're attractive to you then you are committing "adultery of the heart"?  That's certainly what I was taught in almost every single youth group, bible study, and Christian relationship book.

However, I have been finding more sources that understand where this is coming from better.  I want to quote at length from the book Is it Lust or Legalism by Brad Watson.  It is the best book I've ever read on the subject.  Today is part 1 of 2.  Here's part 1:

For the people of Israel, the Law of Moses was clear - having sex with someone else's wife was wrong.  Specifically, it was a sin against the woman's legitmate husband.  That was the technical definition of adultery.  Interestingly, having sex with an unmarried woman was not technically adultery.  Penalties were in place for a man who had sex with an unmarried virgin who was still a part of her father's household (and therefore her father's property under Jewish Law), but this was not considered adultery.  According to Jewish law, adultery actually occurred when an illicit sexual act was consummated between a man and a woman married to someone else.  The Matthew passage is therefore specifically referring to a man who is pursuing another man's wife.  Even the Greek word "gune," translated here "woman," could and in this case should be translated "wife."  This passage is specifically warning one man not to threaten the marriage of another by going after the other man's bride.

Jesus challenged some of the people's traditional way of thinking by claiming that it was not just intercourse with a married woman that was wrong, but even sexual advances towards her that made a man guilty of adultery.  In other words, Jesus eliminated a major "loophole" some had used to justify their bad behavior.  His words meant that a man who inappropriately made sexual advances towards another man's wife was already guilty of sin.  His sinful behavior exposed a heart already corrupted by a spirit of adultery even before any actual sex occurred.  Although the man was not technically (according to the Law of Moses) an adulterer if he had never actually taken the woman to bed; he was still, in God's eyes, guilty of sin.

This teaching from the Master revealed the heart of God's original command beyond its surface requirement.  Jesus wanted the Jewish people to honor their word, their covenants, and their brother's property.  In the ancient world women were definitely regarded as people, but also as property.  Adultery was seen as a theft against the legitimate husband and his entire family.  The one who "stole" a husband's "sexual property" (his wife) was not only coming between the husband and his wife, but also potentially robbing the entire family of legitimate heirs.  For if a woman was caught in adultery, any child born later would be suspected of being illegitimate.

The reason Jesus makes dramatic statements about "cutting out the eye," or "cutting off the hand" was that both the eye and the hand were used in the plot to steal the woman's heart.  A seductive look and an inappropriate touch made the eye and the hand the physical tools to work the evil of the heart.  This kind of teaching was not unique to Jesus.  The Babylonian Talmud (Jewish book of moral teaching) gives other examples of famous Jewish teachers using these same arguments, referring to eyes, hands, and feet that were responsible for adultery.  By referencing the eye and the hand, it becomes clear that Jesus was talking to the crowds about real external behavior as opposed to mere thoughts.  He was specifically rebuking men for staring inappropriately at married women or touching them in a sexual way.  He was pointing out that a persistent, lustful gaze and flirtatious, sexual touching of another man's wife was, in reality, the beginning stages of adultery.  Even though actual sex may never occur, it was still a sin against the woman's husband, and an attack on their marriage covenant.

Next time, Watson will comment a bit more on how this relates to your life, specifically as a single person.

Stay out of bed

A few posts ago I quoted from this book that my wife and I are reading called The Birth Order Connection.  Over and over again we are amazed at Leman's real-life practical relationship wisdom.  I came across another quote that I wanted to share.

I know that in Christian circles you hear the "wait until marriage" mantra when it comes to sex.  I wanted to share Leman's version because, while he is a Christian, his book is not written for just them.  He has some interesting insights from having counseled couples as a psychologist for decades.  Here it is:

To stop means you're going to have to rise above your feelings.  One of the best ways to do this, frankly, is to stay out of bed.  I don't want to sound like a broken record, but premarital sexual intimacy has led more people into disastrous marriages than I could possibly count in my lifetime.  Sex masks what is really going on in a dating relationship.  Your body will betray your mind if you let it. 

Instead of being carried away by passion, make a few mental notes.  "What is it about this guy that is attracting me?"  "Why do I find myself drawn to this woman?"  As part of this analysis, you need to be aware of your weaknesses, whatever they may be: "I might be a bit starved for attention these days and easily overwhelmed by the fact that somebody actually wants to spend time with me.  I need to be careful."  Or this: "We always seem to have a good time, provided we end up in the sack.  I wonder what a date would be like if I told him I don't want to sleep with him anymore?"

Be bold and courageous in searching out your greatest fears.  If you suspect he may leave if you no longer sleep with him, try it out!  Confirm or dispel your suspicions; that's what dating is for.  If he hangs around, this relationship just may have a future.

One of the things I really think is valuable here is: sex ties you to someone before you know if you want to be tied to them.  Living together does the same thing.  It locks you in more significantly than the depth or commitment of your relationship really is.  I'd say we need to get back to what dating is really about: "trying people out" to see if they're worth marrying.  Yes, have fun, enjoy it, laugh, and so on, but do so with this in mind: I want to leave the 'exit' door open.  The more intimate you get, the tighter the exit door becomes. 

We all know that people start off dating on their best behavior because they want to impress.  That's okay; that's normal.  But remember that in time you will see more of the real person they truly are.  So, he or she may seem like the best thing that ever happened to you for the first few months, but give it time.  Go slow physically.  You will n e v e r regret going slow. 

So, let's say you give it time and you really do see a future.  Yes, you can feel free to narrow the exit.  Still, though, pace yourself.  No one gets married and says, "Gee, I wish we had jumped in the sack more (or at all) before we got married."

Again, Father has our happiness in mind.  He's really smart and this shows that his ideas make sense for us and our relational happiness.

Living Together?

This is a segment I took directly from this book by Kevin Leman that my wife and I are reading:

From early sex, today's dating darlings typically advance to "shacking up," or living together without being married.  The number of unmarried couples who live together in America increased by close to 1,000 percent between 1960 and 1998.  Whereas cohabitation before marriage was an anomaly in the early 1900s, today, over half of all marriages include some form of premarital cohabitation.

Supposedly, this living together is a form of trial marriage, a way of gathering vital information about a partner's character, but guess what?  This so-called "weeding-out" process actually works against the intended goal of lifelong, fulfilling marriage!  Instead of pulling weeds, it plants them!

A recent Penn State study found that couples who live together before getting married have poorer

communication skills when trying to solve a problem than those who didn't cohabit prior to marriage.  Study coauthor Catherine Cohan suggested that cohabitants "may have less invested in the relationship, leading them not to try to develop their skills."

Numerous studies have shown that cohabitation results in hurting women and men who have suffered numerous relational breakups, creating an ever-growing distrust of future relationships.  Such "quasi-commitments" actually weaken the mutual dedication and perseverance that is all-important for a successful marriage.  It's not too surprising, then, when Popenoe and Whitehead point out that only one in ten last five years or more.  Sadly, every one of these failed, cohabiting relationships makes you a little less fit to enjoy a lifelong, satisfying marriage.

I have counseled thousands of couples, before and after marriage.  Some of them have lived together before tying the knot.  Others never moved in together, but spent their share of time heating up the sheets.  Still others managed to stay of out bed and kept their own address until the day they got married.  Without equivocation I can say that if you want a marriage that takes you from your twenties until the day you die, that fulfills you and inspires others, that results in kindred-spirit communication and soul-mate loyalty, having sex before marriage and living together before marriage will take you in the wrong direction.  That's not the best way to find your true love.

Is it Lust? 2

I wanted to make a small clarification about the Brad Watson article that many of you read the other day.  Let me compare lust to anger.

Jesus says in Matthew 5 that “You have heard that it was said to our people long ago, ‘You must not murder anyone.' Anyone who murders another will be judged.’  But I tell you, if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be judged.”

Is Jesus really saying that we should never be angry at someone?  By “angry” we mean feeling frustration at someone else for what they have done.  Of course, we can’t believe that’s what Jesus is talking about.  Being realistic tells us, He must mean something else.

Most of us would come to this conclusion: Jesus is saying that just because you don’t kill someone, doesn’t mean it’s okay to be nasty to them, speak ill of them, swear at them, or hope you can do wrong to them.  It is the ACTIONS that flow from a HEART that desires to harm, not our THOUGHTS. 

In other words, “Okay, fine, you haven’t murdered that boy that made fun of you, but you harm God’s heart still by talking nasty about him at lunch and looking for ways to embarrass him, if you could.”

The same is the case with lust.  Jesus says, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’  But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

Jesus is not saying, “Don’t have sexual thoughts” or “Don’t be turned on by the sight of attractive people.”  He is saying, “Just because you don’t have sex with this other person, doesn’t mean it’s okay to make them feel uncomfortable with unwanted touches, or looks, or unwanted flirting.  Just because it doesn’t work, when you try to get them into a sexual situation, doesn’t mean you didn’t hurt the Father’s heart.” 

It is the ACTIONS that flow from a HEART that desires to take advantage of others.

Also, we must remember that Jesus is targeting married people.  Jesus was speaking to people in a time, when it wasn’t unusual for a man to have to leave his wife for long periods of time (because of slow travel or work etc.).   This left wives at home alone, unprotected, and vulnerable in a male-dominated society.  In essence, he was probably saying to some of the men, “You know that woman who is your neighbor whose husband is gone right now?  Just because you haven’t succeeded in seducing her, you have already harmed your Father’s heart by trying.” I suspect that Jesus was targeting this situation more than anything.

Can love and lust coexist?

I've noticed an interesting mash-up during our debates as of late.  Here is an argument I heard several times as we tried to analyze which characters in the stories we studied had the most pure love:

Such-and-such character's love was more pure because there was no lust. 


There are two problems I see here for the Christ-follower:

1. They are using the word "lust" incorrectly.  They are using the word to mean "physical desire."  Lust is not physical desire.  I desire my wife physically, but that doesn't mean I lust after her.  In the Christian use of the word, "lust" is to plot to lure someone into a sexual situation when that situation is morally wrong. 

Admittedly, most of American society does not use the term in its biblical sense.  They do see "lust" not necessarily as a bad thing, but as one's physical desire for another.

2.  Regardless of the use of the term, the real problem with the argument is the implication that desiring someone physically inherently makes love impure. 

I would say the following is more accurate: Desiring someone only for physical pleasure or predominantly for physical pleasure makes love either non-existent (in the first case) or definitely less pure (in the second).

But if love is accompanied by physical desire that is not only okay, but holy.  The erotic love poem, "The Song of Solomon" in the Bible is evidence of God's joy in a man and a woman loving each other and desiring each other at the same time. 

We are not just spirits.  God has made us both spirit and body (Jesus came as both, not just a spirit, as well) and to have someone love and enjoy both is the fullness of love.  In fact, that is the thing that only a marriage has.  You do not love your friend's body, nor your relatives'.  But you do love both your wife or husband's person and body.

The challenge is for the unmarried Christ-follower who is trying to keep the greatest body-love experience of lovemaking for marriage.  It is a bit of a tight rope walk.  You may be dating someone and honestly find yourself really drawn to not only their personality, but also their body.  Your goal is to find ways to express that love in its right timing and in a way that respects your significant other's boundaries and comfort level. 

Like a fire, physical desire can easily get out of control while dating, so you have to put up walls

around that fire so that it only goes so far.  But the good news is that Father didn't just give you a book; He gave you the Holy Spirit.  Listen for His leading in how to best love your boyfriend or girlfriend.  Trust that He cares about your relationship and your desires and wants to lead you.

The cool thing is that one of the most important symbols of Jesus' love for His people is the image of a bride and a groom (see Ephesians 5:28-33).  That love in human terms is insanely personal and also saturated in physical desire for each other.  God wasn't afraid of that comparison and seems to think it can represent pure love. 

Is It Lust?

One of the challenges of life is that love is interwoven with sexual desire.  Desire, however, operates inside of each of us, regardless of whether we are in a romantic relationship or not.

So, what do you do with it?  One side of our world says to do whatever you want.  It doesn't really matter.  Then, for some of us who are Christ-followers, we have another community around us that has opinions about how to deal with our sexual desires.  In my experiences, that community often strives to give us lots of "NO's", but doesn't often speak to the reality of the intensity of our urges.

One author that, I believe, writes with more clarity than almost any other I have found is Brad Watson, a pastor, and an author of the book Is It Lust or Legalism.  He wrote an article in Charisma Magazine that gives a taste of what God taught him on this subject.  Check it out here:  Is It Lust or Legalism?

I'd like to get some dialogue running about Brad's article.


After reading Brad's article, here are some questions I think that are worth exploring:

Is this practical?
Is Watson giving too much freedom to our thoughts?
Is Watson's advice similar or different to what you've been taught elsewhere?
Do you think he's right?
Should we even care about this stuff?

Dirty Dancing at Dances

I can still picture it: having to break up a couple that was grinding on the dance floor.  I hate

chaperoning.  When Beth was still teaching at LW I would have to chaperone the yearly Spanish dance with her, and, of course, we had to play 'dirty dancing' police.  



As soon as Beth stopped teaching I never chaperoned again.   



Is suggestive dancing really bad?  Inherently, I'd say no.  Much like using the F-bomb isn't inherently sinful.  Swearing really bothers a lot of people, but that doesn't make the word somehow evil.  



So, just because someone might make sexual movements while dancing, doesn't mean they're sleeping around.  

The issue in both cases is: what does it say about you to others?  



In much the same way that your speech gives people an impression of you, so do things like how you dance.



A common response is this: 
I don't care what people think.



This kind of attitude is a virtue, but only when it comes from a desire to do right or be true to values.  



Jesus calls his friends, "a city on a hill" and "a lamp on a stand."  You mean something to the world.  That's actually a cool reality.  It's quite amazing when you take seriously the fact that the manner in which you live your life speaks a message to those around you.



Jesus put it this way, "Let your light shine so that others will see your good life and praise the Father."



Father will speak his love to those around you in part by how you live your life.  

Let me be clear, though, since we're talking about suggestive dancing.  This is not an anti-sex message.  We are all created sexual beings.  We have feelings and desires that are in us that are both wonderful

and confusing.  But the question is: how does your sexual side look in the public sphere?

Let's use the example of sexual jokes.  A guy who uses them frequently will come to be seen as someone who glorifies sex.  A guy who has a sense of humor, but also treats girls sweetly and kindly, will come to be seen as a guy who is romantic.

'Dirty dancing' glorifies sex instead of romance.  Have you ever noticed how even elegant dancing has some sensual elements to it?  Couples doing figure skating routines are a good example.  There are caresses, dips, hands on waists, and intimate embraces, but it's somehow...beautiful.  

To me, public romance praises the beauty of love.  Public sexuality praises the mechanics of the body.  To speak nothing of musical tastes, this is the difference between Taylor Swift and Miley Cyrus.   

So, "right or wrong" is irrelevant in this case.  I won't lay down some "line" when certain dancing is sin.  As a Jesus-follower, I'm not looking to just follow a list of rules.  I want my life to mean something to others and that means I need to be aware of what it is saying to those around me.

The Heat of Homecoming

Ever notice how feeling the ‘heat of the moment’ makes you do things that you normally wouldn’t?  For some people this is the only way they get school projects done!  Other times people make awesome spikes in volleyball or 3 pointers in basketball in the heat of the game. 

Homecoming does this too.  Guys that otherwise are pretty shy, for example, actually work up the guts
to ask girls to the dance.  The pressure actually brings out some good! 

Then there’s the other side of heat.  You know what I’m talking about.  The dumb moves.  Everybody does those and if you avoid them all together you’ll never take a risk.  YOLO.  I can’t believe I just wrote that.

But there are some things worth avoiding and usually you can see them coming.  All dances, but particularly the biggies like Homecoming and Prom, give us a lot of ‘heat of the moment’ opportunities.  That’s one thing that makes them a blast, but they can also create memories you wish you never had.

A guy, while slow dancing, begins to drop his hand way below the small of your back.  Or your date gets a lot closer to you than you want.  An upper classman sneaks alcohol into the dance and you, being younger, feel stupid turning down their offer to try it out.

A lot of stuff happens after the dance.  Maybe it’s a sleepover, maybe it’s a party, maybe it’s just in the car with friends on the way home.  Either way, stuff can happen.  Maybe there’s some drinking going on, and a girl who seems really out of it is looking really good and is all over you.  Situations like that can happen quite easily.  At the end of the night two people’s lives have changed forever.

I know a girl who is still working through what happened to her 10 years ago when a guy, without her permission, on a date touched her very intimately while seeing a play.  Something simple can get very complicated very fast.

When some people were wondering how to follow Jesus He told them, “If anyone would come after me, let him take up his cross daily.”  Picking up a cross takes a lot of effort, not to mention carrying it.  Plus, you’ve got to make a decision to do it in the first place, a decision where you decide whether you’re a cross bearer or not.

If you’re a cross bearer, then start to pray and think: what will that look like for me, specifically?  How will your life look differently compared to people who aren’t pulling a cross around? 

When it comes to Homecoming, how does being a cross bearer affect how that evening turns out? 

Guys, how can you really make your date feel honored and lovely, as opposed to making her feel like

your opportunity to cop a feel?  How can you make her feel incredibly beautiful and special because you, yes you, took her to dinner and that dance?  And this is true whether you’re going as friends or as a couple.  Even if you’re not ‘interested,’ make her feel like a diamond.  Jesus had a way of making each person feel that way.  You can do the same.

Girls, I hate to put it this way, but you have to watch out for aggressors.  Most guys aren’t, but there are enough of them.  Plus, there are a lot of immature guys that don’t think through their actions.  How can you choose wisely who you go to the dance with?  What situations can you plan on avoiding so you’re not stuck in a situation where you feel the pressure of ‘heat’?  Cross bearing for you may be more about honoring yourself enough to be wise.  It may also mean looking for a guy that is hot, fun, AND knows how to walk like His Savior (just a hint: that kind of guy just might be lurking behind a nerdy exterior).

Now, some of you are going with someone that you do, in fact, want to be romantically involved with.  God loves this and wants to be with you in this.  So, what might it look like, as a cross bearer, to communicate your feelings (verbally or other) in a way that respects the other?  Think creatively.  Ultimately, that’s what romance is anyway.

The dance of romance is complicated.  Our hope to avoid some of the situations I’ve mentioned is not intended to steal the mystery out of it.  Enjoy the fun of Homecoming.  Yet, maybe the heart of it is to protect the ‘fun’ part by keeping the ‘heat’ in check.