The Sexual Life (Part 2)

October 31, 1999 AM
By Rev. Dr. Robert S. Rayburn
From: The Doctrine and Practice of Marriage

Review

  1. The establishment of marriage and the creation of man and woman for marriage.
  2. Celebratory Speech as the primary means of the practice of married love.
  3. The Headship of the man in marriage and the submission of wives as realities of nature, and so divine callings, that are to be sanctified and practiced in a Christ-like way, to the mutual pleasure and blessing of man and woman.
  4. The endemic temptations of married life: the peculiar temptations of men and women in marriage and where, so often, marriages go wrong.
  5. Then we considered the biblical data concerning the proper choice of a spouse.
  6. Finally, last week, we began our consideration of marriage as a sexual union and as the divinely ordained context for the sexual life.

We continue that subject today.

The Sexual Life (continued)

Last week we considered the Bible’s candid, earthy, and emphatic teaching not only that marriage is the only proper context for sexual love, but that God intends marriage to be actively a sexual union of a husband and a wife. (Christians should be careful, by the way, of using the world’s way of speaking about sexuality. "In our increasingly androgynous age, sexual speech and mores are designed to fit all couples, homo- and heterosexual, and all manners of intimacy, serious or frivolous." [A. and L. Kass, "Proposing Courtship," First Things 96 (Oct. 1999) 32.] A married couple is "sexually active," a teenager is promiscuous!)

We noticed that in a preliminary way last week from both Proverbs 5:15ff. and 1 Cor. 7:1-7. In the Proverbs text the father hopes for his son a wife in whom he can "rejoice", a "fountain" who will be blessed to him ("fountain", as we saw last week in comparison with Song of Songs 4:12 is a reference to the woman as a sexual partner or to the sexual union of a husband and wife), whose breasts will always satisfy him, and whose love will always "captivate" him (love, obviously here, and so "captivate" have erotic overtones).

As the Puritan Thomas Watson comments on this passage, in regard to the way in which an erotic marriage is a barrier to sexual sin,

"It is not having a wife, but loving a wife, that makes a man live chastely. He who loves his wife, whom Solomon calls his fountain, will not go abroad to drink of muddy, poisoned waters. Pure conjugal love is a gift of God, and comes from heaven; but like the vestal fire, it must be cherished that it go not out." [The Ten Commandments, 160-161]

You will notice, by the way, that the Bible’s interest in sex education is entirely moral, a matter of character formation or, what is called in the Bible, "wisdom." It is not clinical, the birds and the bees. It is, in other words, the exact reverse of the sex education abroad in our culture today.

The Bible’s great statement of this theme of the life of marriage as an erotic, sexual union is The Song of Songs. And it does concern wedded sexual fulfillment (3:11, though "king" and "queen" may also be titles for the groom and bride during the celebration of the wedding feast, a NE custom).

You are aware, that through the centuries, first in Jewish exegesis and then in Christian, the Song has been interpreted as a celebration of God’s love for his people or Christ’s for the church. The Banner of Truth, for example, still publishes the 19th century commentary of George Burrowes’ written according to this interpretation.

Here is Burrowes’ comment on Song of Songs 1:2.

"The desire which in the heart of the saint absorbs every other, is for the manifestation of the love of the Lord Jesus, through the influences of the Holy Spirit; and this love is thus ardently desired, because its effect is more reviving and exhilarating than any of the pleasures of sense, even of wine, the most refreshing of them all." [105]

We used to like to sing, from the first edition of Trinity Hymnal, Isaac Watts’ lovely hymn "Christ hath a garden walled around" which takes Song of Songs 4:16 as a reference to the moving of the Holy Spirit in the midst of the church. Now, it should be said that most of the time it would have been admitted that the Song had something to say about the love of husbands and wives too; after all, it was that love that Christ’s love was here being compared to. But, the justification of the book, the explanation of its place in the Bible, was as a statement of divine love, not human, marital love. Jerome, in the 4th century, laid out a reading plan for a Christian girl that had the Song tackled only after she had acquired a thorough grounding in the rest of the Scripture, lest, if studied too soon, she jump to the mistaken, damaging conclusion that the book is about physical love. [Kelly, Jerome, 274]

Now there were always immense problems with this interpretation of the book. Allegorical interpretation always suffers from want of adequate control. How do we know, really, what anything means? After all, Christian interpreters have given every conceivable interpretation of virtually every text in the book. One of my favorite examples is the church father, Cyril of Alexandria, who took 1:12, "My lover is to me a sachet of myrrh resting between my breasts" as a reference to Christ between the Old and the New Testaments. Well, maybe; but how would anyone know? Similarly, Origen took 1:5 to refer to our blackness in sin, but beauty in conversion.

But there is a more fundamental problem with this view of the Song. Christ’s love for the church is "agape" love, love in spite of. But as anyone can see who reads the Song, the love being described and expressed – from both sides, that of the lover and the beloved – is not agape, but eros, love because of. The reason why the lover loves the beloved so ardently is because he finds her so beautiful, so desirable, so much the fulfillment of all his dreams and desires. That is not Christ’s love for the church!

What we have in the Song is a celebration of the love of a man and a woman, first who are about to marry and then who marry. And a number of things can be said about this love.

First it is described, in breathless terms, as a romantic/erotic passion. You have this at the outset, in the very first verse. "Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth – for your love is more delightful than wine." The love that is being talked about is physical love (kisses) that produce wonderful sensations (wine). The association between sexual love and wine is well attested in the ANE. Here is a poem from the group of poems called "The Cairo Love Songs" that date from 1300-1100 B.C. [No. 23]

I embrace her,

and her arms open wide,

I am like a man in Punt, [Punt was a town on the Somali coast, known for

its myrrh trees]

like someone overwhelmed with drugs.

I kiss her,

her lips open,

and I am drunk without a beer.

The parallelism of love and wine is a signal to us that "love" throughout the book will refer not to love in the broader or more abstract sense, but rather love with its erotic, romantic connotations, the love of strong-feeling and physical response and delight. Wine is use precisely because of its associations with joy and excitement. It played a role in all biblical celebrations because "it makes glad the heart of a man."

In 2:5 we read the Beloved saying, "Strengthen me with raisins, refresh me with apples, for I am faint with love." Raisins and apples were both erotic symbols, aphrodisiacs in the ANE and the thought is probably sexual here. She needs to be restored for more love-making, as the previous two verses readily suggest. But, in any case, the breathless, romantic passion is in full view. Take it is as an expression of romance in general, or as an erotically charged romantic passion, the passion is itself unmistakable and a large part of the characteristic of love in the Song.

G.K. Chesterton wrote to his fiancée, Frances, the night of their engagement:

"…little as you may suppose it at the first glance, I have discovered that my existence until today has been, in truth, passed in the most intense gloom. Comparatively speaking, pain, hatred, despair, and madness have been the companions of my days and nights. Nothing could woo a smile from my sombre and forbidding visage. Such (comparatively speaking) has been my previous condition. Intrinsically speaking it has been very jolly. But I never knew what being happy meant before tonight. Happiness is not at all smug; it is not peaceful or contented, as I have always been till today. Happiness brings not peace but a sword: it shakes you like rattling dice; it breaks your speech and darkens your sight. Happiness [in love, he means] is stronger than oneself and sets its palpable foot upon one’s neck."

It is the power of this attraction that meets us everywhere in the Song. And, of course, meets us everywhere in life and in every different way. I remember reading of James Denney, the Scottish theologian, who died in 1917, but whose books on the death of Christ and the doctrine of redemption are still in print and being read by evangelicals today.

"…a friend met him one day standing still in the street, his head bare, and tears on his cheeks. He said simply, it was there [where he stood] his beloved wife had felt the first pangs of the illness from which she died…. The last years of unsparing activity were the spendings of a broken heart." [Letters of Denny to Nicoll, xliii]

What were those tears but another way of a husband saying that he was "faint with love."

Second, this love of husband and wife is described in the Song as an overtly sexual passion, fulfilled in love-making.

This is a continuation of the first point, but needs special emphasis, for, to a degree that has not been recognized in the Church, the Song of Songs is about sexual desire and sexual fulfillment. We already have that in chapter 1 most explicitly: "my lover…between my breasts" (v. 12); "our bed is verdant" (v. 16).

The full and complete demonstration of that fact would take too long and would perhaps leave you embarrassed, sitting as we are in mixed company. But, you know, the Song was read annually to the gathered companies at Passover who would have perfectly well understood the erotic imagery. We can easily imagine husbands and wives nudging one another at the most erotic parts.

But let me draw your attention to two features of this love poem, or, better, this set of love poems. First there are the four descriptions of the pair, three of the woman (4:1-7; 6:4-9; 7:9) and one of the man (5:10-16) and there is no denying the erotically charged interest in the physical attractiveness of their respective bodies to one another (however difficult we may find it to enter into the meaning of the imagery!). Note, for example, 7:7-8.

Then, there is 4:9-15 (noting "sister" as a term for the female lover in ANE love poems; the romantic/erotic speech – cf. 4:11 with the prostitute’s in Prov. 5:3; the aphrodisiacs (cf. the prostitute’s use of them in Prov. 7:16-17). "Garden" is a familiar ANE image in love poems for the female genitals or for her sexual charm in general.

In some erotic ritual texts from the ANE a goddess will invite the king to "plough her."

One of the Egyptian love poems from the period begins

Distracting is the foliage of my pasture:

[The mouth] of my girl is a lotus bud,

her breasts are mandrake apples…

and proceeds to describe her charms in similar figures. Both "lotus" and "mouth" are widely recognized euphemisms for the female genitals. In another we read,

I am your best girl:

I belong to you like an acre of land

which I have planted

with flowers and every sweet-smelling grass.

Now, you clearly find this double entendre here in the use of these "garden" and "plant" images in 4:11ff. because you have them all mixed together with other unmistakable references to a woman as a sexual object or to her sexual charm. For example, we saw last week in Prov. 5:15ff. that "spring", "fountain", and "well of flowing water" were all sexual images. In v. 12 we find "spring" and "fountain" paralleled with "garden."

But, you will notice that the reference there is to a "spring enclosed," a "sealed fountain." This is virginity. Consummation has not yet been experienced. But 4:16 and 5:1 clearly describe the consummation of sexual pleasure and experience. Remarkably erotic texts if you appreciate the meaning of the imagery! [One of the wonderful things about the Bible’s way of presenting this material is that a child would have no knowledge of what is being talked about even while adults were growing red in the face!]

4:16 and 5:11, and their account of sexual consummation after virginity, interestingly, are the exact center of the book. There are 111 lines of verse before 4:16 and 111 lines after 5:2. Sexual delight and fulfillment in one another is clearly the central theme here, as indicated by its position in the book. Proof that we are reading nothing into this is the fact that the terminology of sex and love-making employed here is the same as that used by the wise father in Proverbs 5-7 in describing to his son the sexual enticements and offered pleasures of the prostitute.

There is a great deal more than this that is overtly sexual in the Song that I will leave to you to discern in your next reading. Once you realize the drift of the imagery, the book takes on a completely different character.

But, what is most important for us to realize, all of this is in Holy Scripture. This too is the word of God. And it is a word for brides and for grooms, for those who are marrying! It celebrates the power and wonder and pleasure of sexual desire and fulfillment. It is God’s own celebration of this dimension of life and marriage!

Third, this sexual, romantic ardor of marriage is mutual.

There is as much sexual fire on the woman’s part as on the man’s. Indeed, almost twice as many verses in the Song come from her lips as from his. She is not reticent about expressing her desire and, clearly, there is a mutuality of sexual pleasure. In the days of the Reformation this was recognized clearly and there was a reassertion of the woman’s rights in marriage that had been far too long forgotten in the church.. Calvin, in his comment on Deut 24:5 wrote that God ["imo ultro concedit, ut maritus et uxor se oblectant"] "indeed…grants to both, that husband and wife delight themselves."

You get this, to some degree, much earlier as well. In the preaching of John Chrysostom, in the 4th century, for example, you find a remarkably earthy and candid acknowledgement of the goodness of mutual sexual pleasure. In a sermon on the last verses of Colossians he speaks of the pleasure of sexual love which welds two spouses together, fusing and commingling their bodies just as when we pour myrrh into olive oil. And to those who were embarrassed by his frankness he went on to scold them; there is no need to blush when talking openly about marriage, an honorable estate and an image of the presence of Christ.

I do not deny that there is an initiative that belongs to the man and that the woman needs, but I say that the Song does not permit us the view that in marriage one or the other should delight in the sexual/romantic aspect of love more than the other or get the good of it more than the other. But that fire must be kept lit! And, as we said weeks before, it is lit and kept aflame by nothing so much as loving, appreciative, celebratory, romantic speech, which is, after all, what you find in the Song, indeed, that’s all you find in the song. It is sexual passion fueled by words of love!

But there is a further complication and that is the profoundly different sexual physiology and psychology of men and women. They are as different as night and day and everyone knows it, even if everyone does not wisely accept the practical implications of this fact. An easy way of illustrating the difference is to consider prostitution, the world’s oldest profession. It is a way of life to be found everywhere in the world; a mega-billion dollar business and it serves a clientele that is 99.9% male – either women serving male customers or men serving male customers. One does not see women in pick-up trucks, cruising strips looking to pick up male prostitutes. And why is that? Because a man can have a satisfying sexual encounter with a woman he does not know, does not like, does not respect, and whom he knows full well would not do this for him were he not paying her money. A woman looks at this and thinks, "You pond scum!" She cannot imagine a sexual dalliance on those terms. We could easily enlarge the number of illustrations of how the vast difference between men and women sexually is an artifact of human culture and leaves its evidence everywhere to be seen. Suffice it to say that men and women are not the same and those differences are what ordinarily complicate love-making in marriage.

And it is the man’s calling to create the romantic environment in which those differences cannot only be overcome, but exploited to fulfill the erotic pleasure that God intends for husbands and wives.

Dorothy Sayers, in a letter to Charles Williams in 1944 wrote of what she considered "the distinguishing marks of true bedworthiness in the male." She found them to consist "in the presence of three grand assumptions: 1. That the primary aim and object of bed is that a good time should be had by all. 2. That (other things being equal) it is the business of the male to make it so. 3. That he knows his business." [In Coomes, 93-94]

But there is a great deal for a man to learn and much that only his wife can teach him. I find it a wonderful mystery and certainly God’s intention that he had deliberately created us strangers of one another sexually. A man has no breasts, for example, and so will go to his grave never knowing what a woman feels there, and vice versa. That requires a man to learn from his wife and to create an atmosphere of openness and trust if ever there is to be the full experience of sexual pleasure. And he had ordered human life so that men and women are stimulated differently, requiring, at the last, in the most intimate act of all, that we consider the interests of others before our own. And he had determined that here too, one gains one’s life by losing it. I offer only those hints in a setting such as this one. Still, how remarkable the Bible’s emphasis on sexual pleasure as the blessing of marriage. And how much that pleasure – as the expression of a romantic love – invests all of life with charm and delight. It is hard to be very sad or very disturbed about other things for very long when you are head over heels for your wife or husband and when loving him or her and making love to him or her gives you, day by day, the purest pleasure.

Return to top