Dad, are willys rude (teach your children godly sexuality)

Are willys rude

I was walking with my youngest son to the garage to pick up our car from its service when he asked:

“Dad, are willy’s rude?”

“Not at all – God made them so they can’t be rude.”

“But when I say willy at school I get told off. So they must be rude.”

I could see the logic.  I also had to do some on the spot thinking….

“OK. What’s the coolest present you can imagine?”

He thought for a while and then replied “A minion’s pizza!”

I have no idea what that is – and frankly neither did he – but it combined two things that he loves together so it must be cool.

“So imagine one of your friends gives you a minion’s pizza and you throw it on the floor. And your friend says ‘That’s so rude!’”

“So is a minion’s pizza rude?”

“NO!!!!”

“But they said it was. So it must be rude.”

“It’s not rude”

“Well why did they say it was then?”

“Because I of what I did with it.”

“Exactly. God made willys and so they’re not rude – but you can do rude things with them like talk about them in a bad way. So just like we treat a special cool gift like a minion’s pizza in a special way – we need to treat our special cool gift of willys in a special way too.”

This kind of conversation captures the two principles of teaching godly sexuality – we affirm it’s goodness and we affirm its holiness (and also here and here).

Just affirming one of these two would lead to disaster whether that be worldly hedonism or religious repression.  So it’s important to express both.

I hope this conversation proves helpful – if you want to add your thoughts below then please do so – or if you want a godly answer to a question your child has asked then do also comment below.

Am I a bad parent? (godly parenting)

bad parent

 

Do you feel like you’re a rubbish parent?

Do you feel like you are damaging your children?

Let me tell you about a couple I know of.

The wife was only about 13 or 14 and was naïve and inexperienced.

She married a husband who was much older than her and was a manual labourer who only just managed to keep them off the bread line.

They were so poor they couldn’t even afford a goat that is the traditional celebration meal for their first child.

For most of their life they lived in a “dodgy” town which the rest of their country looked down upon.  In addition, due to an incident they became social outcasts in their community.

This incident also nearly caused the whole marriage to be called off – in fact the husband had to be persuaded before he’d even consider going ahead.

So clearly the couple had weaknesses and lived in an area and environment that wasn’t brilliant for bringing up kids.  Their parenting wasn’t much better.

They lost their eldest child and only noticed after a whole day!  It took a further three days of searching before they found him!

In addition, they didn’t get their eldest child – in fact, they thought he had lost his mind and said as much in public and tried to take charge of him.

These two incidents show some serious weaknesses as parents and I question anyone who thought they were suitable for adoption.

Yet this was the couple God entrusted with His beloved Son.

These were the imperfect parents who were raising His perfect Son.

And just like they messed up we are going to mess it up.

Now don’t get me wrong.  This isn’t going to be one of those motivational posts that say “don’t worry about it – God has trusted you with your children so you must have what it takes and everything will be fine.”  That would do you and your children a disservice.

We are going to mess up yet God still calls us to be parents.  How do we move forward in such a contradiction?

Recall that as parents, we are only meant to be an image of the perfect parent – we don’t have to be perfect (and indeed can’t be) our job is to apologise when we get it wrong and point to the perfect one.

For example, I regularly say “I’m sorry I messed up and lost my temper.  Daddy God is so much more patient than your earthly daddy.  Will you pray for me that God will make me more like Him.”

Similarly, when my children mess up, I forgive them and pray with them that the Father would transform them too – we are all on a journey together of being transformed from glory to glory.

Whilst saying sorry is helpful there are still consequences of our mistakes that a sorry can’t fix.  But, we have a God who can redeem our mistakes.  There are so many times I have prayed for my children as they slept that he would undo the damage of my mistakes and He has been so gracious.  He delights in restoring all things and transforming them into the likeness of His perfect Son.  Despite the illnesses, brokenness and dysfunctions my wife and I have walked through our children are becoming whole.

Furthermore God knows that we can’t do it on our own and He doesn’t expect us to do so.  The resources of Heaven (including wisdom) are available so that we can carry out this most important of tasks if we ask for them.

“The homemaker has the ultimate career. All other careers exist for one purpose only – and that is to support the ultimate career. ” CS Lewis

So when you mess up and the Accuser starts giving you grief don’t seek solace in platitudes – seek the forgiveness that is freely available through Jesus’ blood and the transforming power that is freely available for you and your children through our union with Him.

Father, thank you that there is grace. Thank you that everything we need is available in You. Give me my daily bread for parenting my children and forgive my sins as I forgive my children’s sins. For Yours is the power to transform situations and the glory that comes out of your redemption, for ever and ever. Amen.

If you want a light-hearted look at Mary and Joseph as parents I did a short skit on this:

Other related posts are “God will never give you more than you can handle (and other myths)”, “Nothing is impossible” and “Jesus is Wisdom Incarnate” where I share more of our journey into parenting and God’s grace.

Why is God expressed principally as masculine in the Bible? (godly sexuality)

god male

In our previous post we saw that male and female image God’s masculine and feminine polar characteristics transcendence and immanence in 10 ways. Hence, the man is focused “outward” towards the physical world whereas the woman is focussed “inward” towards relationships .

Since this teaching follows on from that post you would be wise to check it out first.

To say which gender is more important is like saying which part of God is more important. If you take away a part you lose the full image of God – so in order to fully glorify God (that is to declare His nature fully) it is essential that both genders are expressed in marriages, parenting and society.

Masculine not feminine

If we denigrate the feminine characteristic of immanence, we end up with a distant God; one who sets the world running but is far removed from it and its day to day running. He initiates but doesn’t sustain/nurture us – we’re all on our own. Alternatively, this distant God enacts His will without regard to us or our needs. He is a God who is holy and unapproachable. We can offer our sacrifices and prayers but He’s unlikely to notice.

This is the Greek view that came as a consequence of the separation of the spirit and the physical worlds that infected the early church still holds sway now. This was strengthened by the Enlightenment’s focus on the masculine discursive reason/rational thinking that devalued the feminine intuitive way of thinking and rejected mystery. It led to an increase in those who declared themselves deists. It is the view of fundamentalist Christians, Muslims and, to a certain extent, conservative Christians.

Feminine not masculine

If we denigrate the masculine characteristic of transcendence, we end up with a God who is present everywhere, who is mothering – sustaining us and giving us life. Who is relational but is not holy or separate from us. Therefore since this God so “loving” we can do whatever we want as it doesn’t matter.

This is the view held by New Age religions, pantheists, fertility cults, liberal churches and in many ways Hindus also hold this view.

Neither masculine nor feminine

Since God’s nature contains both masculine and feminine qualities then surely to refer to God as “Him” is incorrect. Perhaps we should refer to God as “it” or, as some theological colleges suggest, “the One who is the Creator”, and thus avoid the tricky gender issue altogether ?

Whilst on the surface this appears to try and capture the fullness of God’s nature – it does so by contradicting Scripture (eg Jesus taught us to pray “Our Father”) and by eliminating the meaning behind God expressing Himself predominantly in the masculine.

So why is God referred to principally in masculine terms?

There are two main reasons. Firstly, much of the Old Testament (especially the Creation story and the deliverance from Egypt) was a proclamation of the transcendence of YHWH against the gods and goddesses of the surrounding nations. Hence, since transcendence is a masculine characteristic, God would express Himself principally as masculine.

The surrounding nations had both gods and goddesses. For example, Baal and His consort Ashtoreth, the Queen of Heaven (whose asherah fertility poles were used to ensure fertility of the land and of women). Hence, as a consequence, their creation myths were linked to the fertility of the goddess and so creation was formed out of their own bodies (eg Enuma Elish).

“Where gods are feminine, they are linked with fertility and the earth. The feminine is the fertile. It is inextricably linked with creation.” Gavin Ashenden

Whereas YHWH is utterly distinct from creation (hence “I am who I am”). Creation was made (bara) by Him from nothing.

The second reason is the God relates to us in a principally masculine way.

“God is so masculine that we all (male and female) are feminine in relation to Him.”
CS Lewis

God takes creates the world, we are tasked with stewarding it and give back only what we have been given and nurtured. God takes risks by imbuing us with free will. God initiates and we respond. God actively goes out and pursues us and woos us and we respond. He sought out Abraham, Moses and then a people for Himself. Hence, we love because he first loved us. God gives us the gift of life from without and we receive it. God gives us talents and we invest/nurture them. God powerfully delivers us from our enemies. God gives grace to the undeserving and we choose to receive this gift. God calls out our true nature. God gives His seed to Mary who nurtures it. Finally, God appears in Jesus in a male body showing that He gives Himself for us and we respond as His Bride.

“The Jewish revelation was distinctive in its exclusively masculine pronoun because it was distinctive in its theology of the divine transcendence. That seems to be the main point of the masculine imagery. As a man comes into a woman from without to make her pregnant, so God creates the universe from without rather than birthing it from within and impregnates our souls with grace or supernatural life from without. As a woman cannot impregnate herself, so the universe cannot create itself, nor can the soul redeem itself. Surely there is an inherent connection between these two radically distinctive features of the…biblical religions…: their unique view of a transcendent God creating nature out of nothing and their refusal to call God “she” despite the fact that Scripture ascribes to him feminine attributes like compassionate nursing (Is. 49:15), motherly comfort (Is. 66:13) and carrying an infant (Is. 46:3). The masculine pronoun safeguards (1) the transcendence of God against the illusion that nature is born from God as a mother rather than created and (2) the grace of God against the illusion that we can somehow save ourselves—two illusions ubiquitous and inevitable in the history of religion.” Kreeft

Since the shape of salvation is principally masculine– it comes from without and not from our own efforts – this is the reason why, unlike the religions of all the surrounding nations, there were only male priests. Their masculinity demonstrates that grace comes from without. It is not man providing animals that makes the gods pay attention and forgive him. It was the fact that the animals were symbolic of the grace that was going to come to them through the Messiah .

Common objections to God being expressed as masculine

Some suggest that God only revealed Himself as masculine due to the patriarchal culture. Whilst at first glance this seems sensible if there is only one God (instead of many), this view is disingenuous for a number of reasons:

Sociologist Dr Goldberg notes that every society ever known has been patriarchal in that men dominate in three areas – the upper hierarchical positions, whatever roles society deems as high status and in male-female interactions . Since this phenomenon is universal it must have a physiological cause. And hence this is part of their created nature.

And this is the issue with this theory: it’s the wrong way round. It assumes that humans are independent of God and so He seeks to express Himself in ways that we understand. Whereas the reality, as we have seen in previous posts, is that God has made creation, including mankind, to glorify Him by reflecting His nature.

God is the Father from whom all Fatherhood is named (Eph 3:15). He is the source of the image. It is not that we have fathers and then project that image onto God nor that He then expresses Himself as a father so we understand Him.

Marriage was created to reflect the mystery of our union to Christ (Eph 5:31-32). Jesus is the source of the image. It is not that we invented marriage and then He expresses Himself through that concept.

Similarly gender, which permeates all of creation, reflects God’s nature. Male and female are made in His image and therefore embody His masculine and feminine characteristics in both physiological and psychological ways. He is the source of the image. It is not that children are merely blank slates whose behaviour is socially constructed.

This view comes from the women’s liberation movement. Women were made to feel inferior by many men, rather than respected as equal image bearers, and so by saying there is no difference would imply equality. However, by rejecting the differences between genders this view loses the meaning behind why God expresses Himself as masculine. Therefore, this leads them to reject the differences within God and see him as gender neutral and look for another reason as to why He expresses Himself as principally masculine.

But equality doesn’t mean uniformity. If it did then we would only need one gender to fully reflect the image of God. One sex would be redundant – whereas God has designed it so both are needed to reflect His full image and therefore we are designed to be dependent on each other. Our unity expresses God’s glory.

Further, this view naturally postulates that men and their patriarchal culture are to blame and hence can lead to the demonization of masculine traits such as competitiveness and rejection all of that culture. Instead the blame should be seen to be sin which has cut men off from the source of love. Therefore the solution is the blood of Christ.

Working within this paradigm, the fact that the Hebrews have no goddesses can be interpreted to be suppression of the feminine .

We have seen already why God is principally expressed in the masculine, but in addition, ethnologists, such as Wilhelm Schmidt, Andrew Lang and E.O. James note that in all primitive cultures, a monotheistic High God is “a genuine feature of uncontaminated primitive religion” and that “the name ‘father’ is applied to the supreme being in every single area of the primitive culture when he is addressed or appealed to…” Polytheism came about as tribes met and blended or conquered each other. So the Hebrews were actually going back to the original truth.

Finally this paradigm would see that the fact that there were no priestesses as a sign of male oppression of women.

However, all the surrounding patriarchal nations had priestesses. So this would have to mean that the God was not able to stand against the Hebrew society that oppressed women. This is bizarre given that the Law was in total contrast to the surrounding nations. Therefore, we would have to conclude that God gave laws which were complicit in that oppression. Further, this would imply that Jesus was also unable to stand up for what was correct in this matter and was complicit. Which again is bizarre given that He stood up and overturned all the false traditions that did not reflect His Father’s nature and desire.

Within this paradigm the only logical possibility, if God is not a tyrant, is to say that the Bible is not actually the word of God but only of man. Men hid what God the Father and Jesus actually said and our whole faith is based on a lie.

“Goddesses have, of course, been worshipped: many religions have had priestesses. But they are religions quite different in character from Christianity…. Since God is in fact not a biological being and has no sex, what can it matter whether we say He or She, Father or Mother, Son or Daughter?
But Christians think that God Himself has taught us how to speak of Him. To say that it does not matter is to say that all the masculine imagery is not inspired, is merely human in origin; or else that although inspired, is merely arbitrary and unessential. And this is surely intolerable; or, if tolerable, it is an argument not in favour of Christian priestesses [or a gender neutral God], but against Christianity” CS Lewis

It is my hope that by understanding the meaning behind gender we see the logical outworking of that in how God principally reveals Himself to us and how we relate to Him and why it is important that both genders need to expressed in marriage, parenting, the church and society.

Male and Female: Transcendence and immanence (godly sexuality)

transcendence-and-immanenceWe know that creation glorifies God by making His divine nature known (Rom 1:20) and in this series we are examining how gender reveals to us the nature of our God.

In a previous post we have seen that only together do male and female represent the full image of God and one of those ways was to reveal the fullness of God’s character.

In this post we look at ten ways how God’s opposing characteristics of masculine transcendence and feminine immanence are embodied in the man and the woman.

Transcendence

Transcendence is that is “God is far ‘above’ the creation in the sense that He is greater than the creation and He is independent of it.”   God creates the world from without – it is separate/external to Him.  He is the creator we are His creation (Gen 1:1, 14:19b, 22).  That is why the Hebrew word for God creating, bara, is reserved solely for Him (Strong’s H1254).  God in this sense is holy – that is He is separate/distinct from His creation.  He is Yahweh – “I am who I am” (Ex 3:14) – not defined or linked to this world.  ’adam only became a living being after he received the gift of God’s breath from without (Gen 2:7).  Similarly, God’s grace is also from without – it’s a gift independent of us or our ability to earn it (Eph 2:8-9).  He is the one who initiates a relationship with us, who pursues us and we only love because He first loved us (1 Jn 4:19).

Immanence

The complementary feminine characteristic of God is His immanence.  God is intimately involved in creation, “for it is continually dependent on him for its existence and its functioning”.   In Christ all things hold together (Col 1:17) and he is continually “upholding the universe by his word of power” (Heb 1:3) and “in his hand is the life of every living thing and the breath of all mankind” (Job 12:10) and “in him we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:25, 28).  He is our nurturer, our sustainer.  The spirit that God breathed into ’adam continues to give life to His body until it departs.  God is Immanuel (Isa 7:14) – God with us, the God who dwells among His people seen by the pillar of cloud by day and fire by night (Ex 13:21-22).  His presence filling the temple (Ex 25:8; 40:34-35; 1 Kgs 8:10-11); and ultimately His presence with us in Jesus (Mt 1:23-25) and His Spirit (Mt 28:20b; Jn 14:16-17).  He is the one who responds to us in our distress (Ps 18:6), who reveals His plans to His prophets (Jn 15:15; Amos 3:7) and responds to their desires (Ps 37:4).

Note that it is the Spirit that broods over the waters (Gen 1:2).  It is the Spirit that represents God’s shekinah glory filling the temple, His presence with them in the pillar of cloud and fire.  It is also the Spirit that gives new birth (Jn 3:5) and sustains all life.  Hence, it is no surprise that the Hebrew word, ruach, for spirit/wind/breath is feminine.  Interestingly it has masculine pronouns/adjectives applied to it when it refers to God’s Spirit.

Male embodies the masculine characteristic of transcendence and female embodies the feminine characteristic of immanence

Since transcendence and immanence are opposing/polar characteristics it is hard to keep them in balance – which is why God embodied these masculine and feminine attributes of Himself in male and female creatures and in particular humans who are made in His image (Gen 1:27).  Together their oneness reveals the glory of the unified nature of God’s attributes.

“One of the ends for which sex was created was to symbolize to us the hidden things of God.” CS Lewis

Now Greek thought separates the spirit/mind from the body/physical world (the so called Platonic divide) and this thought permeates our Western culture.  However, the Hebraic/Biblical worldview is holistic.  There is no separation between the spirit/mind and the body – we are integrated beings – spiritualised bodies or embodied spirits.  Therefore the body is an expression of the soul/spirit of the individual – it makes visible the invisible.  Hence we would, under this worldview, expect the masculine and feminine spiritual qualities to be reflected in the psychology and physiology of the man and the woman.

Below I outline ten ways that we observe this reality.  There may be others but this is all that have been revealed to me so far.  By all means feel free to add more in the comments below.

Firstly, the most obvious feature is the difference between the male and female bodies so that the male causes procreation from without, whereas the female incubates this life in her womb and then nurtures it at her breast.  This reflects how God creates the universe separate to Him and yet sustains it by His Spirit.

This is why ‘adam who, although he contained male and female, had a male body which reflected the glory of godly masculine understood that there was no suitable companion .  He saw that his body was designed to give life to another who would nurture it but there was no other like him.

“The essence of masculinity is initiation and the essence of femininity is response” Elisabeth Elliot

Secondly, this means that the male body initiates whereas the female responds.  This is also seen in the courtship display of all species – the male initiates and the female responds (whether that be by reciprocating or flying/walking/crawling off).  Likewise, despite it not being politically correct, this has been the case in all cultures around the world.  On a physiological level we might ascribe this behaviour to testosterone but on a spiritual level this reflects the fact that God initiates the creation of the universe and also initiates relationship with us and we respond to Him.

Is this the reason why the man is always attracted to “the chase” (the initiation) whereas the woman is attracted to the “happy ever after” (the incubation)?

Thirdly, we see this in how the baby is made.  The Hebraic understanding was that the man planted a seed in the fertile soil of the woman’s womb .  Now we have a greater understanding of biology we can see this on a deeper level.  The male sperm is designed to go out to find the egg, whereas the egg awaits and receives the sperm to form a new life.

Fourthly we see this in the hormones.  Men have much more testosterone than women  and this makes them assertive and gives them energy and motivation to act and take risks.  Whereas women have much more oestrogen which makes them more sensitive to emotion and feelings of others. I saw this with my children: even though they played with the same toys, the boys were propelling them and moving them whereas my girls arranged them to talk to each other.  I also saw it in a male friend that needed to take oestrogen for medical reasons who then experienced so much more emotion than before.

Fifthly, we see this in the differences in muscle and fat.  The male body has more muscle and bone growth which enables it to take action in the physical world whereas the female body is soft, with more fat to protect the womb and feed an infant during pregnancy and afterwards through milk.

Sixthly, we see this in the physiological differences in the brain.  The male mind tends to excel in visuospatial tasks whereas the female mind tends to excel in verbal fluency and perceptual speed tasks.  Again the male brain is geared to outward tasks whereas the female brain is geared to inward tasks.  Hence, boys tend to learn kinaesthetically whereas women tend to learn verbally.

Seventhly, as a consequence there are two ways of gaining knowledge.  The masculine discursive reason and the feminine intuitive mind.  The male requires external empirical facts before he will accept something whereas the female internally directly ‘knows’ something is true.  It is also the difference between learning about something as external to oneself verses experiencing or being in it.

Eighthly, we see this in how men and women respond to stimuli (sexual and otherwise).  Men react more to external/physical stimuli whereas women react more to internal/mental stimuli.  This is evident in the vast disparity in the sales of pornographic images/videos to men and the sales of romantic novels to women.

Ninthly, we see this in the way men and women relate to others.  Men naturally relate to others whilst doing something – their focus is external – whereas women naturally relate without doing something but simply by being together.  This is reflected in the statement that “men relate to each other side by side facing the same direction whereas women relate face to face”.  This is why the original way of raising sons was them learning the family trade alongside the father.

Lastly, we see this in the roles the mother and father play in the development of children.  The mother nurtures the young children and keeps them safe and secure, whereas the father helps them separate themselves psychologically from the mother and be called out into their separate identity .

“It is the father (or father substitute) who affirms son and daughters in their sexual identity and therefore as persons….at puberty and adolescence we are listening for the masculine voice…that convinces us that we are truly and finally separate from our mothers.” Leanne Payne

Children raised without a father lack this calling out and tend to be more aimless or seek their value in things – such as careers.  Whereas children raised without a mother tend to be unable to develop close relationships.

By now it should be no surprise that this is reflected in the physiology as well.  It is the man’s Y chromosome that causes the testosterone flood in week 7 to call out the male development from the ‘female’ baby.

Creation of male and female

We can see these themes reflected in the different ways male and female bodies were created.

Then the LORD God formed (yatsar) a man (‘adam) from the dust of the ground (‘adamah) and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man (‘adam) became a living being. (Gen 2:7)

‘adam was formed physically from the ground.  The Hebrew word used for formed, yatsar, means to form or fashion like a potter squeezes and moulds clay into shape (indeed the word is translated as “potter” in 17 places such as Jer 18:2- or Isa 29:16b).

So the LORD God caused the man (‘adam) to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs (tsela’) and then closed up the place with flesh.  Then the LORD God made (banah) a woman (‘ishshah) from the rib (tsela’) he had taken out of the man (‘adam), and he brought her to the man (‘adam). (Gen 2:21-22)

Whereas the woman, ‘ishshah, is made from the side of ‘adam.  The Hebrew word used for made, banah, means to construct or build – it is used of a house.  The Hebrew understanding is that the man builds the physical home but the woman was understood to fill it – so ‘adam provided the frame from which the woman expanded .  Banah can also mean to establish or cause to continue.  The Hebrew connection is that to build a house implies that one establishes a family .

The man (‘adam) said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ (‘ishshah) for she was taken out of man (‘iysh)” (Gen 2:23)

But then when Adam meets the woman, ‘ishshah (woman or wife), he then give himself another name  ‘iysh (man or husband) which recognises his additional nature which is in relationship to the woman.  So man’s primary nature is the physical world (hence the name Adam which is related to the ground, adamah is also used hereafter)  but now he is also now relational (so the name ‘iysh is used whenever it is in relation to the woman).

Whereas the woman’s, ‘ishshah, primary nature is relational.  But since ‘iysh was created from the ground she also has a secondary nature that is in relation to the world.

The curse

Finally we can see this principle reflected in the curse.  Now since we know that it is God’s desire to bless and he sends the rain on the righteous and unrighteous alike (Mt 5:45), then the curse must simply be a consequence of no longer being in harmony with one’s nature as well as no longer receiving the life and love of the Father.

The man, Adam, is still related to the ground, ‘adamah, but he is no longer in harmony with it – so he is no longer a gardener but a farmer having to work the ground (Gen 3:17b-19a).  There is brokenness in his outward focus.  We can see this in how men can pursue careers and ministries outside of the home and neglect the home.  Men have a bent for building empires at the expense of others – roles are more important than relationship hence they always ask “what do you do?”

Whereas the woman, ‘ishshah, is still related to the man, ‘iysh, but is now no longer in harmony with him  and there is sorrow in the nurturing and giving birth.  There is now brokenness in her inward focus.  We can see this in the nurturing of low self-esteem.  Women have a bent for intimacy at the expense of their own worth.

Summary

So we have seen that everything about the male is outward focussed – doing, taking action, risk taking, creating, initiating, giving, concerned with form (roles) – and reflects the transcendent nature of God.  Whereas everything about the female is inner directed/immanent – being, sustaining, safety, nurturing, responding, receiving, concerned with relationship – and reflects the immanent nature of God.

“The masculine faces the world: It is oriented to things; it explores; it climbs. Its energy is directed toward the physical: measuring, moving, building, conquering. The feminine looks inward toward feeling, sensing, knowing in the deepest sense. Its energy is directed toward relationships, coming together, nurturing, helping.  Both the masculine and feminine are relational, but the masculine relational drive is toward the physical, toward working and playing together the feminine drive is toward being together.  In fact, another way to describe the same contrast is masculine doing and feminine being”.  Alan Medinger

Marriage: a journey into oneness (godly marriage)

john-spencer-3

Recently, I heard of another celebrity couple breaking up. Whereas once I would have not cared that much or blamed their lifestyle, now I find it breaks my heart and I start praying.

Marriage is a prophetic image of Christ’s covenant with us, a breakup is declaring to the world that He will give up on us – that His love is finite and His devotion limited.

How terrible a statement – how can we as Christians shrug our shoulders and move on? Our weeping joins with heaven that cries “what God has joined together let no man separate” – that something on Earth would reflect this reality and shout it out for all to see.

Now this couple cited the distance apart as the reason for their breakup. As I was mourning this, the phrase “it’s not the distance apart but the distance in your heart” popped in my head.

Marriage is a journey into oneness symbolic of our journey of oneness with Christ. Each day we choose whether we go deeper or whether we hold back.

cs-lewis-4

Daily we choose how much to reveal about our innermost hopes, dreams, worries and anxieties. Daily we choose to become more vulnerable or to hide our true selves from our spouse.

By revealing more we can become closer, by holding back we build a wall.

My wife believed me to be a very confident man when we married. I was outgoing and bubbly and would take her on days out to new places. The truth was anything but. I was confident in situations that were familiar but terrified of the new – the only reason she thought otherwise is that I took her to places that I had been before but she hadn’t.

It’s very hard to hide in marriage from someone who wants to become closer – but I tried. My wife booked holidays to new places and I was frightened – but rather than opening up I hid it behind “not wanting to go out” from our hotel or saying how it was all rubbish or, even worse, blaming her for choosing terrible places. By pushing her away and holding her back from my true self, I was steadily building a wall. This was one of the contributing factors to her packing up the car 7 years later driving to my office and telling me she was leaving me. As I regularly tell my children – that day I made one of the best decisions of my life. I said “I will do what it takes to fix this – I’ll even attend a marriage course”. It was that course that began the process of putting us back together. So many weeks involved me apologising for hurting her which she gracefully forgave and her heart was softened again.

But the issue of hiding was still there. I didn’t even realise I had it. Keeping people out was my survival mechanism – built to cope with a volatile earthly father and the bullying I experienced during the majority of my schooling.

Whenever someone would get too close I would instinctively want to lash out to keep them back. In retrospect, this explains why we always argued on the way home from church and healing courses. The Spirit had become exposed my woundedness and so I felt unsafe and needed to protect myself.

The breakthrough moment was 3 years later on our 10 year wedding anniversary trip. With the help of my friend I had organised a romantic visit to Rome. But I didn’t speak Italian and I had never been there before. To say I was terrified was an understatement.  I wanted to stay in our hotel room rather than go out and just buy food from a supermarket rather than go to restaurants.  But she wanted to explore it all. It was a recipe for disaster or redemption.

One day we were sitting outside the Coliseum – I just wanted to stay there all day hoping my paralysis would pass rather than go somewhere else new.

My wife turned to me and asked, “What are you thinking?”

Normally I would have brushed her off with “nothing” but everything was so exposed that I responded, “Do you really want to know?”

She replied, “Yes” little realising what was about to be revealed.

For the first time in our marriage I truly opened up all my innermost workings to her – I reeled off the fear after fear that were plaguing me.

The funny thing is I don’t remember what she replied I just remember the feeling of release that her acceptance brought and how our holiday became beautiful as her acceptance and love meant I didn’t need to hide anymore.  We became allies against this enemy of fear.

Ultimately our marriage is a shadow of our relationship with Christ and each day we can choose to become closer or to build a wall.  There is no standing still.

Yes, He knows everything about us already, even the number of hairs on our heads, but it is only by us voluntarily opening up ourselves to Him that intimacy is deepened and His light floods in.

Unlike a human spouse who might reject us, He will in no wise cast us out, He is gentle and humble in heart and the perfect love that we let in will drive out our fears that we had previously kept hidden.

He is gentle but He will put us through testing, through desert times to expose what is in our hearts so that a deeper intimacy is developed than could ever be achieved from comfortable living.

Just like my trip to Rome, as uncomfortable as it was, was an opportunity for a depth in our marriage more than I could have ever have achieved if I just did all the same things every day and stayed in my comfort zone.

May you continue to open up each door to your heart that He is knocking on and not harden your heart.  May you see every difficulty as an opportunity for becoming more intimate, more full of His light and  more “filled with the full measure of His love”.  Inn Jesus’ precious name.  Amen.

CEO or Father (godly children)

john-spencer-2

My eldest daughter had her first day at primary school and was distraught to discover that there was another girl in the class with the same name.

“But daddy, how will you know which one of us to pick up at the end of the day?”

I replied, “Because only one of them is my daughter.”

This might seem silly to us grown-ups but maybe my daughter’s question is actually something we say to (or think about) our Father in Heaven.  And maybe my response is a shadow of a truth that we adults need to hear from our Heavenly Father

How often in our lives do we honestly think that God won’t notice us?

I mean there are a lot of other Christians doing the same things as us….

When I heard God’s call clearly to start helping parents teach their children about godly sexuality I was so excited about the revelation He was showing me.  I felt so special that He would call me to this task.

But then I discovered that God had called others to the same task.  I was devastated.  What’s the point in so many of us doing the same thing?

And the enemy whispered that I wasn’t unique, I wasn’t special, that I can’t have heard the call right. Anyway why would God call me to such an important task and besides who would listen anyway.

I confess that I fluctuated between giving up or doing the task but covering my insecurity with a false bravado claiming how great I was.  I was fearful of those others who were doing the same thing so I didn’t want to reference their resources and I even resorted to visiting “competing” ministries’ websites to try and steal their visitors for my own site.

I was just like my daughter:

Wondering whether my Father truly notices me and knows who I am, whether he values what I’m doing.

I didn’t realise my uniqueness to my Father.

But what if their gifting is greater or their ministry bigger?

What’s the point of me doing the same thing when others are clearly more qualified.

Let me giving another example with my daughter:

On a parents’ evening at school when I go into to look at the children’s work displayed on the walls – is my daughter worried I’m going to only look at the pictures which are drawn the best?

By no means!  She knows that I’m looking for her work.  It doesn’t matter to me whether another child has drawn a particular picture better than her as I’ve only got eyes for her work as that is the one that is most precious to me.

So it is with our Heavenly Father:

God is not a CEO of a company with a limited number of positions that we all have to compete for.  He is a Father that delights in the uniqueness of each of His children.

Suppose my daughter compared her work to others and saw that they were better and give up writing or drawing.  I would be heartbroken.  There would be a hole in my world.

So too with us.

If we could compare our ministry or gifting to others and give up because someone else is better we would break our Father’s heart.  He values what we are doing.

There is always room for another child in the Father’s family as every child is unique and brings a distinctive flavour to the family even if they do the same things/hobbies as each other.  And only when they’re all present is the whole family complete.

There is room for you.  Never fear.

Father, open my eyes to see you as the perfect father who delights in me, knows who I am and delights in the work I do for Him.  Let me realise that there is a special place for me in the family and help me to bring my contribution to it no matter what others around me may be doing.  In Jesus’ name.  Amen.

This is my second post on godly children – looking at how our children behave to open our eyes to how we behave as children of God.  My first was a guest post on this blog.

An absolutely excellent article on this subject was written by Matt Stinton on the Bethel Music blog here.  You won’t regret reading it.

PS If you own one of those sites that I spammed during my insecure days – please forgive me.  Know that I now honour you by recommending your sites and resources to my followers and I create memes that honour the revelation you have received.

Top 10 posts of 2016

best-blog-posts-2016-v2

When I started this blog I sought to share the revelation that God had been giving me on my journey to sexual wholeness and I wanted to help others on the journey and help parents communicate a godly view of sexuality to their children.  I am so grateful for the many messages from readers who have benefited from my writings and my vulnerability.  Thank you so much and I hope I can continue to bless you in 2017.

So in order from least to most views here are the top ten posts of the year:

10. Discipline vs punishment vs education (godly parenting)

This post spoke of how the word discipline comes from the word disciple and is about training.  It was a calling of parents back to the Hebrew way of showing not telling. (56 views)

9. Destination sickness (godly desire)

The Christian life is a journey not a destination.  This vulnerable post spoke about how our obsession with getting “there” leads us to work harder or give up and not to grace. (57 views)

8. Wired for intimacy part 1 (godly sexuality)

This post looks at how, even from birth, babies are wired to seek faces.  This reflects how we are wired to seek God’s face. (59 views)

7. Redeeming Christmas (Godly Parenting)

A post that helps parents make the Christmas celebration more Christ-centred for their children and themselves. (64 views)

6. Calling out your child’s true identity (godly parenting)

The story of Gideon shows us how God calls out his true identity and this serves as a model for us as parents to call our children into maturity. (78 views)

5.   How to stop looking at women lustfully (godly desire)

Another vulnerable post where I share the difference between worldly solutions to lust with a godly approach which has helped me. (86 views)

4. Trump, Clinton or Christ?

A topical post that sought to counter the political spirit that was/is seeking to break the church’s unity and therefore it’s prophetic voice to the world. (142 views)

3. Nothing is impossible (teach your children godly sexuality part 15)

As parents it’s easy to despair and think all is lost. This post spoke on the reality of our God who is able to redeem all things – not just so we are healed/fixed but so that the mistakes become sources of grace to others. (169 views)

2. An alternative ending to the Orlando shooting

A topical and vulnerable post about the similarities between my life and Omar Mateen’s.  His life ended in tragedy, mine in redemption through expressing my same sex desires to Jesus. (328 views)

1. Immature giftings (Godly Parenting)

This post was aimed at parents to help see that sometimes bad behaviour is actually an immature gifting that needs to be directed to its true purpose.  However, many people found this post as a source of grace for them on the journey to maturity – whereas before they had berated themselves – they actually saw they were stamping on their giftings/callings. (1846 views)