Good Sex, Second Edition: Egalitarian Sexual Ethics with a Biblical Base

By Martin J. Buss and Nickie M. Stipe

During the biblical period, society in a large part of the world, including that of the Bible, gave priority to males over females. The Bible thus gives instruction about how to live in such a society. But the Hebrew part of the Bible, which Christians call the Old Testament, said that this condition was part of a punishment for disobeying God in the first time period.
Later, when the Christian New Testament was produced, Jesus announced that a new, much better world is in the process of beginning. In this new world, there is one inclusive principle of a good life, namely love. His follower, Paul, then stated specifically that in the new reality the sexes are equal. In sexual relations, spouses would need to accommodate each other on an equal basis as an expression of love. That is the one basic rule. He left further details open, although there are useful guides that describe attitudes. The present work will discuss specific guides, but no firm ones for sexual partners beyond mutual accommodation.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Wipf and Stock
• Release date: Apr 13, 2023
• ISBN: 9781666758993

Martin J. Buss

Martin J. Buss is Professor Emeritus at Emory University.

Book preview

Introduction

Martin Buss

Are you interested in how sex can be good both as a specific experience and as a contribution to life generally? Are you interested in what the Bible can say to current life? If so, this book is addressed to you. The book has primarily Christians and would-be Christians in mind as readers, but others may be interested in what is said.

As a retired biblical professor, I show in Part I how Jesus and Paul’s one basic rule of love applies to sexuality and discuss in Part II the biblical data for specific sexual issues. In Part III, the conversation partner is Nickie Stipe, a middle-aged biblical scholar whose dissertation I directed. Religiously, she is a contemporary pagan (pagan historically referred to country people). Briefly stated, this term describes movements that emphasize Earth/nature worship, personal and social liberation, personal responsibility, and an ethic of doing as little harm as possible. As a member of this movement, Nickie believes that the Earth and everything on it is divine and that multiple aspects of reality such as love and strife, life and death (human and divine)—sometimes represented as divine beings—are sacred. Our conversations show how interreligious dialogue and cooperation in ethics is possible now, as it has been in the past.

Although the two of us differ in religious perspective, we agree to a large extent—not entirely—on a sexual ethics that has an egalitarian perspective. The situation we address has the following history.

Although Christians have always differed from their contemporaries in their religious view of the world, they largely agreed with them in practice about specific rules for sex and other aspects of life. They did so because they all lived in the same society, which at least at one time believed that men should rule over women. At that time, the use of heavy metal for weapons in warfare and for the plow in agriculture favored males, before later inventions leveled the playing field.

However, the Hebrew Bible has a narrative that regards male domination as unfortunate, a consequence of human failing. This kind of organization can then be expected to change in the great new world that is promised.

Subsequently, Christians believed that the coming of Jesus meant that the new order was beginning. Jesus already paid close attention to women. Following him, Paul explicitly championed the equality of the sexes. Specifically, he argued for mutual submission, which includes agreement (Eph 5:21). For sexual relations, he formulated the principle that spouses have authority over each other’s bodies, which logically includes practical agreement about them (see II, 4).

Paul was apparently the first to argue in writing for sexual equality, together with a Roman philosopher who had a similar position near the same time. Their commonality reflects the fact that societies are often similar in organization at a common stage of historical development. Divine directions in general revelation, which, according to the Bible, is present everywhere, apparently take current conditions into account.

Within the Bible and after it, change in sexual ethics came about only gradually. Already in a letter attributed to Paul, there is a shift from mutual submission to one-sided submission by the wife. Realistically and indeed explicitly, this accommodated to society (Eph 5:22–24; see I; II, 4). From the early Middle Ages on, however, Christian women moved toward greater equality.¹ Major social steps were taken about 1970. Nonmarital relations became more accepted for females as they were for males, although more cautions continued to be needed. Many men no longer expected that they would marry a virgin. Extramarital relations by wives came to be treated similarly to those by husbands. Women could welcome opportunities for expanded sexual relations, but they did not want to be viewed any longer as impersonal sex objects.

The Christian church, however, still largely lags the rest of society in recognizing sexual equality. In the past, the pagan tradition was also patriarchal, but neo-pagans like Stipe are not strongly bound by the old. It is now odd that when a biblical ideal is largely accepted in society, it is still rejected by many Christians.

A partial reason for the lag is that the highly valued Bible was produced during a time of male dominance and its specific rules largely serve that situation. In contrast, the general principles that the Bible presents are applicable in different human conditions. In part this is due to the fact that, especially in the New Testament, it deals with attitudes that guide actions rather than with precise rules (see I).

These general principles deal primarily with an attitude or orientation, namely love. This attitude will, of course, be expressed in actions, but, following Jesus, the New Testament places specific rules on a level subordinate to love.

Part I will deal with what is meant by love in life generally. This operates together with wisdom, which uses intelligence and can have more-or-less tentative rules.

Part II will then present analyses of biblical passages that deal with sexual relations. Each analysis will begin with its primary themes and then furnish details.

Part III will present conversations about practical issues in the spirit of advice. Christian views will draw on the biblical discussion in Parts I and II. At the same time, they will take account of other data and perspectives in line with the point made in Part I that Christians should engage in wisdom conversations with others.

Stipe and I do differ on various points, although we agree in supporting sexual equality. In this process, a neo-pagan outlook stands closer to the Christian than does an anti-religious or non-religious one that rejects a higher reality.

Since important topics are treated in different ways in the three parts, there will be overlaps between them. These will be indicated by cross-references.

1

. See, for instance, Wilcock, Equality Is Biblical,

63

–

77

. However, this work argues without a biblical basis for different male and female energy.

Part I

Basic Christian Ethics: Love, Forgiveness, and Wisdom

Martin Buss

The basic Christian ethical principle (adopted from the Hebrew Bible and shared with Judaism) is to love your neighbor as yourself. Jesus characterized this as comprehensive of ethics. (For a listing of the many texts about love, see II, 1). What does love mean?

To love means to have a positive outlook and feeling toward someone or something. This does not need to involve a flutter, but it is emotional in a deep way, since it deals with what is valuable rather than with dry facts. The call to love means then to value another as one values oneself. This call joins a call to love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength.¹ In fact, the worth of Deity (who is wor[th]shipped) includes that of all others.

To use an analogy, if you are looking for someone to take care of children, you probably would want a person who loves children rather than someone who would care for them only for pay. Similarly, the biblical call means that God wants persons to be loving in the depths of their being.

The heart of the love called for in the Bible lies in acknowledging that other persons have worth in themselves, independent of what they contribute to others. The worth is created by God, who then sees that the created beings are good even before they help anyone else (Gen 1:31). This worthiness appears when you are open to other persons instead of trying to determine what they can do for you. This aspect of love can be called respect, in which even God participates. (This view is contrary to one that characterizes love as directed to the unworthy.)

Receptive openness to the worth of others leads to supporting their flourishing energetically. Such support can be called caring. Love can then be described as respectful caring. To be sure, effective caretaking is often not possible. Sometimes giving to others is not even appropriate since that can interfere with their own endeavors. Usually, what is most appropriate is to increase other people’s ability to help themselves.

Both the receptive and energetic sides of love (recognizing worth and giving support) express a sense of being connected. This sense is not the same as union, for complete union absorbs you and the other into a larger whole, so that both sides lose their integrity. Love can experience fusion, but it does not continue in that state. Rather, the word neighbor describes someone who is both near and distinct from oneself. The nearness does not have to be physical; indeed, interaction can now be worldwide. Included in one’s neighbor is one’s enemy (Prov 25:21; Matt 5:44).

Love, as described, clearly represents the comprehensive basis of Christian ethics, with everything else built on this foundation.

The New Testament does not have absolute standards beyond this. Murder, adultery, and theft—categories that deal with life, sexual relations, and physical possessions—are rejected but are in themselves nonspecific in what they prohibit. For instance, what constitutes murder (see II, 4)? Specific acts that are to be practiced or avoided need to be determined in consultation with other believers as well as with attention to secular analyses.

Augustine, who is revered by both Catholics and Protestants, provided a classic statement of the comprehensiveness of Christian love:

The character of human actions is determined only by whether they have their basis in charity [i.e. love]. For many things may be done that have a good appearance, and yet proceed not from the root of charity. For thorns also have flowers: some actions truly seem rough, seem savage; howbeit they are done for discipline at the bidding of charity. Once for all, then, a short precept is given you: Love, and do [then] what you will: whether you hold your peace, through love hold your peace; whether you cry out, through love cry out; whether you correct, through love correct; whether you spare, through love do you spare: let the root of love be within, of this root can nothing spring but what is good." (Homily

7

on the First Epistle of John, section

8

)

Love Is Positive

To love one’s neighbor as oneself is positive. In fact, Christian ethics is largely positive, beyond neutral life, although Christians usually accept in their life the validity of negative ethics (what is forbidden) that is current in society.

Unlike other traditions, which usually have a negative form of the so-called Golden Rule, Jesus formulated it in a positive way: As you want others to do to you, do to them (Luke 6:31). In another version, he adds: this is the law and the prophets, that is, inclusive of all ethics (Matt 7:12). The positive Golden Rule calls for a way of looking at things, one that asks, What good can I do? However, if one takes the word as to mean what you yourself desire, in line with one of the versions of the rule, there is a problem, for others may not want what we ourselves want. Thus this formulation is not a good rigid rule but should be treated like some directives by Jesus that other parts of the New Testament do not take literally.

The call to love is positive also in including the phrase as yourself. Your own physical and mental enjoyment is not only legitimate but to be advocated if you believe in a loving God. In a Christian view, such enjoyments are viewed as divinely furnished possibilities for which you can be thankful.

Furthermore, love is experienced as a great privilege. In fact, love is an exceedingly joyful condition both for the one who receives it and for the one who extends it. In a way, that is not surprising, for love is a strongly encouraging state of body and mind, even when joined with pain. Indeed, one of the paradoxes of life is that