Hebrews 13:4 (EMTV) says, “Marriage is honourable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge”. This text is making a profound declaration about marriage and sexual intimacy. Marriage is an institution that is honourable among all people and sexual intimacy is not defiled or sinful (‘bed’ is translated from the Greek word koites and means ‘sexual intimacy, coition, sexual intercourse’).
This statement should undergird our thinking and expressions regarding marriage and sexual intimacy. I say this against the backdrop of recent statements from a sermon by Andrew Scott regarding sexual intercourse and foreplay within marriage. When one listens to Scott’s endless harangue about sexual activities which he considers to be “illegal”, one can’t help but be in dismay at his inflammatory and myopic statements about sex. He has issues with “backshot”, oral sex, and various other positions that he deems repugnant. To make matters worse, he masterfully culls text from the Old Testament (Gen. 19 and Eze. 23) out of context in his attempt to prop up his intrusive views. But the fact of the matter is, Andrew Scott’s positions on sexual positions has no scriptural foundation.
Scott’s pronouncements make out sexual activities to be dirty and superstitious, which, if executed wrongly, will potentially curse one’s life and marriage, and cause disease and death. He argued that “backshot”, or doggy-style sex, should be shunned because it has killed some men. Scripture just does not teach his small-minded positions on sex. In Genesis 1:26-28, we see where God, having created humanity, gave them the order to have and enjoy sex! Of course, this isn’t expressed this way in the Bible, but the command to “be fruitful and multiply” can only occur via the medium of sex. What is interesting about this first command to the married pair in the Garden of Eden is the fact that God commanded them to have sex but did not legislate what sexual activities they should exercise. Nothing was stated as taboo. God left those things for the married pair to explore.
Whereas Andrew Scott attempts to create shame and guilt around sex, in Genesis 2:23-25, the sinless couple experienced no such fear. God takes the matter of sexual satisfaction in marriage so seriously that He made it a law for the Israelites that a newly wedded man should not be enlisted in the army nor be given public office but that he should remain at home for one year for the sole purpose of pleasuring his wife (Deut. 24:5). This was a honeymoon for an entire year!
That certainly would give newlyweds ample time to explore each other’s bodies, get to know each other intimately, communicate their likes and dislikes in the bedroom, engage in different sexual activities, and essentially be intoxicated with each other’s love. This certainly would give the marriage a great start and greatly contribute to its longevity, productivity, and happiness.
In the Book of Proverbs, we find a delightful statement about sexual intimacy and activities. In Chapter 5:15-20, the author calls for marital fidelity and the ecstatic enjoyment of sex by couples. In vs. 18-19, he says, “Let your fountain be blessed, and rejoice in the wife of your youth, a lovely deer, a graceful doe. Let her breasts fill you at all times with delight; be intoxicated always in her love.” (ESV)
This passage paints a different picture from that which Andrew Scott attempts to paint about sexual intimacy. Solomon urges a man to rejoice in his wife, let her breasts delight him, and to always be intoxicated with her love. This surely includes foreplay and sexual activities that Andrew Scott attempts to demonise and ban. The Bible sees sex within marriage as something that is delightful, passionate, holy. This is completely opposite to Scott’s view. And if we notice carefully again, positive commands are given to enjoy sex and marital love but dos and don’ts are not given. This again corroborates the fact that God had never intended for anyone to intrude in a married couple’s bedroom and dictate love-making.
This is such a sacred matter that God is silent on. If God, the creator of sex, takes this position, how dare Andrew Scott venture into such a sacred territory and private space to legislate what is acceptable and unacceptable sexual activities for couples? He is completely out of order! His pronouncements can have adverse effects on marriages.
I would love to highlight a few observations from Songs of Solomon and the New Testament. Songs of Solomon is an astounding book in the Bible that shows the power and passion of erotic love, detailing how couples should explore and admire each other’s bodies. One wonders if Andrew Scott is familiar with this book or has ever read it! The book is raunchy escapades, explicit sexual desires, foreplay, and vivid descriptions of body parts between Solomon and his wife.
From the beginning of this book, we are taken into unbridled romance and intimacy. She says, “Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth! For your love is better than wine … .” (1:2) She desires that he “… lie all night between my breasts”. (UKJV) In chapter 4, Solomon expresses how she has “ravished” his heart (vs.9 – KJV) and admires her beauty (vs 10). As he kisses her, he comments that her lips drip honey and that milk and honey are under her tongue (vs. 11). In verse 12, he appears to describe either her virginity or the fact that she belongs exclusively to him. Having described her sweetness and bodily delightfulness in verses 13-15, and in verse 16, she invites him to come into her garden and eat his pleasant fruits. This is X-rated stuff! This is Holy Scripture! In chapter 7, Solomon, apparently in rapturous foreplay, describes her body from head to toe in the most beautiful way. Significantly, in verse 2 of this passage, he appears to be describing her vagina. As a married man, I can imagine Solomon describing this as he kissed his wife up and down, making love to her. This little book is so chock-full of erotica that time would fail me to explore all the nuances.
If Andrew Scott has not read Songs of Solomon before, I would advise him to study it thoroughly for several months before he attempts to make public statements on sex and marriage. His views show that he is grossly unfamiliar with this gem of Scripture.
In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul made profound statements about marriage and sexual intimacy. In vs. 3, he says, “A husband should fulfil his marital responsibility to his wife, and likewise a wife to her husband.” (HCSB) This is talking about sexual activity. It is a marital duty that should be lovingly reciprocated by both parties.
In verse 4, Paul drops a bombshell that further dismantles the mindless statements that Andrew Scott made. He says, “A wife does not have the right over her own body, but her husband does. In the same way, a husband does not have the right over his own body, but his wife does.” (HCSB). This is pointedly saying that the bodies of couples belong to each other and they can lovingly, sexually please each other as they desire. Again, leaving sexual practices are entirely up to them. I am rather disappointed that Andrew was unfamiliar with such passages of Scripture. In vs. 5, Paul advised, “Do not deprive one another sexually … .” (HCSB) This is clear and pointed. Husbands and wives should not attempt to sexually deprive each other, sexually or otherwise.
But Andrew Scott’s teaching is essentially advising, in contradiction to Scripture, that husbands and wives should deprive each other of sexual innovation. Again, he is out of order! He has no right to barge into people’s bedrooms and pass laws that will regulate their sex lives. God leaves that to the couple. Andrew Scott should find his place and do the same.
Elce-Junior ‘Thunder’ Lauriston is a Christian minister, apologist and student at Bethel Bible College of the Caribbean. Email feedback to viewpoints@gleanerjm.com and elcelauriston@gmail.com.
