Bible Study on Eph.6:1-4

Marriage, Sex and Sexuality - 12 Eph.6:1-4

The relationship between parents and children seems straightforward; the dynamics less complex than that between a husband and wife.  A child’s submission to their parent is articulated in straightforward obedience; and a parent’s in their not exasperating their child (exasperate: to make someone very annoyed, usually when they can do nothing to solve a problem). 

And yet it’s simplicity belies the tension we may feel with such stark – and seemingly optimistic – teaching.  There are many conflicting philosophies of parenting competing for our attention, several of which would frown disapprovingly at Paul’s sense that obedience should be a defining characteristic of the relationship between parent and child.  And in addition there are our insecurities, fears, sense of failure, reactions to our own experiences of being parented (or not)… all of which conspire to make parenting seem much more complicated and exhausting than Paul seems to allow for. 

Of course, Paul isn’t naïve.  As with the dynamics between a husband and wife, those between a parent and child are rooted foundationally in spiritual maturity.  We cannot take the role of parent out of the context of the relationship with Jesus.  As parents ground their identity in Christ, and are (re-) formed by the Spirit into His image, they are both more compelled by Scripture’s teaching, and more enabled to enact it, allowing it to shape the relationships within their family.  We learn to phase out the siren voices of a fallen culture, whose ideas and propaganda around parenting will only lead us away from Christ and His vision for our lives. 

And as with the dynamics of marriage, the archetypal patterns of parenting laid down throughout Scripture point beyond themselves.  Parenting is not an end in itself.  It is in our relationship with our parents that we learn how to relate to God.  Whether we realise it or not, we are either helped or hindered in our discipleship by how we have been parented.  And if we are parents, we will in turn help or hinder our children.

Why does Paul focus on obedience as the defining characteristic for children in their relationship with their parents?   Why do you think so many contemporary models of parenting neglect, or undermine this?

What does it mean for a child to ‘honour’ their parent?

What does the ‘promise’ cited in 6:3 mean?  How can Christian parents claim this promise for their children today?  …or can they?

In what ways do parents ‘exasperate’ their children?  Is it unexpected that Paul highlights this sole danger when it comes to the mistakes parents can make?  How can parents avoid this temptation?

How can parents best bring their children up in ‘the training and instruction of the Lord’ (6:4)?   What do you think Paul means by that phrase? 

How can the Church better support parents in their role?  Why do you think parents have been reluctant to engage with the support MIE has offered in the past?

One of the (dis-)qualifying factors for Church leadership relates to the effectiveness with which the principles of Eph.6:1-4 have been implemented (see e.g. I Tim.3:4-5; Titus 1:6).  

Why do you think the New Testament prioritises this?  Should this still be a consideration? 

Have you ever made a decision about whether to attend a Church or not based on the behaviour of the children of those invested with leadership in that Church?  Can you explain your answer?

If someone’s children grow up and decide they aren’t Christians, are they disqualified from Church leadership?  How can MIE better support parents whose children aren’t Christians?

Bible Study on Eph.5:31-33

Marriage, Sex and Sexuality 11 - Eph.5:31-33

Eph.5:32 is a verse that seems to capture the entirety of the Bible’s teaching in one immense and cataclysmic sentence.  But one of the things that has struck me afresh is our need to consider the Bible’s teaching much more deeply than we are prone to.  The issues that we are facing as a Church (including those raised by LLF) are complex and have far-reaching consequences.  By contrast, it is too easy for us as Christians to have ‘fortune cookie’ level arguments: a verse, a platitude, a dismissive, one-line argument that we roll out to settle the matter once-and-for-all.

Such an attitude to Christian belief and practise has never been healthy.  In today’s shifting landscapes, it may prove to be downright dangerous, and dishonouring to the Gospel of Christ.  Such levels of engagement are simply not adequate.  They do justice neither to our God, nor to those created to bear His image.  We’ll need a much greater degree of honesty – with ourselves and with each other; and a much more rigorous exploration of the Bible’s (and therefore the Church’s) teaching.  We’ll need patience as we work to establish not only what the Bible in fact teaches, but also the implications of that teaching in our own lives as disciples, and in our life and witness together as Church.

The unity to which we are called as Christians is not based on our politely avoiding the issues that threaten to fracture us…  Fellowship is not achieved by our entering a conspiracy of silence.  Nor is spiritual maturity.  An unwillingness to engage fails both our members and our mission.  Of course, simply engaging, studying, speaking doesn’t take us the whole way either.  As we saw in our final LLF session this week, repentance in attitudes and behaviours may be required.  We may need to change how we relate to each other, how we ‘do’ Church.  As I was saying earlier in the week, significant challenges lie ahead as we seek to be faithful to the Scriptures and to people.  Thank you for engaging with this term’s teaching in all its forms.  I hope it has helped you grow in your appreciation of the goodness, wisdom, and grace of our, and of His vision for life.

Take some time as a group to reflect on the last term.  What has stood out for you – highlights and lowlights?  Where have you felt affirmed, or challenged?  What has been helpful… or unhelpful?  How has this term changed or re-enforced your views on this questions of gender, identity, marriage and sexuality?

Don’t forget to think through the term in all its aspects: Sunday morning teaching and preaching; the LLF course; Home-Groups; the True Freedom Trust morning; resources on the MIE Website; books we’ve recommended that you may have read…  What did you engage with?  What did you decide not to?  Why?

Is marriage different from co-habiting?

Why does Paul stress the ‘leaving’ a father and mother, before ‘cleaving’ to a new spouse (v.31)?  What is the ‘this reason’ that underpins his teaching?

What does Paul mean when he talks about people becoming ‘one flesh’?  What implications does this have for married life?  Does it make any difference whether people are married or not when they engage in sexual activity?

If marriage is a lived parable, reflecting the covenant relationship between Christ and the Church, what does ‘sex’ convey?  How does it function in the ‘mystery’ of marriage?

Why does Paul call this a ‘profound mystery’ (v.32)?  In what sense is it mysterious?

(You might find it helpful to note other times Paul speaks about ‘mystery’ in Ephesians: 1:9; 3:3-4; 3:6; 3:9; 6:19).

Bible Study on Eph.5:25-30

Marriage, Sex and Sexuality 10 - Eph.5:25-30

It’s easy to be conned into thinking that the Bible is heavily stereotyped when it comes to questions of sexuality and gender.  But only if you don’t read it!  In fact, the Scriptures are liberating precisely because they refuse play into the categories of any culture’s preconceptions.  In the Bible, women are soldiers, prophets, monarchs, business leaders; men are poets, embroiderers, cooks, clothes designers, artists.  And vice versa.  The Word of God has always challenged cultural expectations, and consistently cuts across our attempts to label and prejudge.

But liberty can be intimidating.  Perhaps we’d prefer clear ‘rules’ about what it means to be male or female.  Spiritual maturity demands otherwise.  We see the damage done when ‘expectations’ are imposed by others.  Our culture – in spite of all its rhetoric to the contrary - develops clear (if sometimes contradictory) ideals of both masculinity and femininity.  When we don’t ‘fit’ we find ourselves pretending, desperately trying to look, feel and behave as my culture(s) tells me to.  Down this path, crisis lies. 

The Bible holds a perfect balance, poised elegantly between the perennial mistakes of fallen human culture.  It sees us first and foremost as people: unique even in our fallen state.  And yet neither is our being male and female a mere insignificance, still less a fluid social construct.  Our culture relentlessly seeks to conform us to preconceived ideas of masculinity and femininity.  Even so-called ‘progressive’ stereotypes are still stereotypes.  The Bible on the other hand recognises that our being male and female is something of cosmic significance, something primal, and simultaneously manages to avoid labels and superficial typecasting.  Only in Christ are we liberated to be those whom God has redeemed us to be.  It is for freedom that Christ has set us free.  We have no cause to be apologetic about the Gospel, and the vision of humanity it holds out.  Too easily do we buy the lie that our culture’s response of self-determination and autonomy is the route to liberty.  It is in fact the road to slavery (John 8:34).  Our culture is the source of good news.  That is only found in the Gospel.

How would you describe our culture’s different stereotypes about being a man or a woman, male or female?  Do you care about such stereotypes?  How as a Christian, do you think we should navigate them?

How would you respond to the oft-quoted idea that ‘women are more spiritual than men’?

Do you think Eph.5:22-30 is guilty of stereotyping?

If someone asked you how Christ loved the Church, how would you answer?

Do you think of your holiness as the purpose of the cross?  What priority does the pursuit of holiness have in your life?  How does that play out? What would you say to a Christian who wasn’t seemingly concerned with being made holy?

How does Jesus make the Church holy?  How would you explain this to a new Christian?

What do you understand by the imagery of head/body in this passage?  What does it mean to speak of the Church as Christ’s body, and of individual Christians as members of Christ’s body?  How does that shape your thinking about being a Christian …and about being part of a Church?

How does Christ ‘feed and care for’ His body, the Church? 

How does Eph.5:25-30 inform your thinking about the institution of marriage?

What responsibilities does this passage put on husbands?  How should it shape the day-to-day experience of married life?  How can MIE support husbands in developing these patterns of behaviour?

Bible Study on Eph.5:21-24

Marriage, Sex and Sexuality 9 - Eph.5:21-24

If you’ve been attending the LLF course, you’ll know that one of my deepest concerns about the whole process is the way in which the Bible is viewed and engaged with.  But it isn’t just LLF that is raising questions about the authority of the Bible to speak into and to shape the life of the Church today.  Many who call themselves evangelicals can also slip into the trap of relativizing the Scriptures – especially when confronted with a passage such as the one we are considering this week.

It’s certainly counter-cultural…  but it might be more accurate to say that it is culturally offensive.  As those shaped by a post-feminist culture, we will almost inevitably struggle to make sense of, or accept Paul’s teaching.  There are many attempts to soften, or sidestep what Paul says here, but perhaps the most common is to simply dismiss it as itself culturally limited and conditioned.  Paul is writing in a first century context, and we shouldn’t absolutize it, as if it were universally applicable to all cultures.

Whilst it might appear initially convenient, there are a number of problems with this suggestion.  Apart from the general observation that it suggests an inadequate view of the nature of the Bible as the inspired Word of God (that transcends culture, and as such critiques the culture(s) in which it is produced as much as our own), it runs into significant problems with each member of the Trinity.  Paul explicitly grounds his vision for marriage in the account of Creation and the life of humanity prior to the fall (5:31).  As such that teaching finds its genesis not in first century culture, but in the intentions of the Father for marriage displayed in a pre-fallen world.   Further, Paul taps into this deep unity between the purposes of God in creation and redemption grounding the dynamics of Christian marriage in Christ’s sacrificial love, and His giving Himself up for the Church (5:23, 25).  Finally, it loses sight of the fact that this is a way of life shaped by and enabled by the Church’s being ‘filled with the Spirit (5:18).  Far from being culturally limited, Paul’s vision for Christian marriage is expanded to cosmic proportions as it is framed by the life and purposes of the Trinity for all creation.

Do you think that this passage reflects more of the mind of the Spirit, or of Paul?  What do you think is the relationship between the Spirit and those inspired by Him in the writing of Scripture? 

Does this passage have any credibility in 21st century British culture?  Where do you think the tensions lie?  Why?

How would you define ‘submission’?  How do you think submission should feature in Christian discipleship? 

How does v.21 (‘submit to one another’) connect with the remainder of the chapter, which teaches that a wife should submit to her husband, but doesn’t seem to have a corresponding passage about husbands submitting to wives?

Why is it important that Paul qualifies the call to mutual submission with ‘out of reverence for Christ’?

Should Christians only ever use the traditional form of marriage vows?

What does Paul mean by ‘head’ (v.23)?  

What is Paul’s analogy between Christ / Church and husband / wife designed to achieve?  All analogies have limits – what are the limits of this one?

What would a Church that submitted to Christ look like?  Do you think MIE fits that description?  Looking more widely, what about the Church of England?

Why do we find it so difficult to submit to Christ?  How could we help each other to be more submissive to the Lord?

Bible Study on I Cor.7:25-40

Marriage, Sex and Sexuality 8 - I Cor.7:25-40

Christian discipleship (including ethics and morals) only makes sense when we have a consistently Christian way of understanding everything.  One of the most important things to remember is that ‘this world in its present form is passing away (I Cor.7:31, also e.g. I Jn.2:17 etc.).  This immediately and radically relativizes our relationship with this world, and ‘the things of the world’. 

Over the years the Church has tended to sway from one extreme to the other on this question.  For a generation the attitude may be one that all but disengages with this passing age.  We withdraw and abdicate many of the Church’s legitimate responsibilities to the world.  The next generation over-corrects, and the hope of the New Creation grows strangely dim, and loses its power to shape us.  We become overly engaged in a passing world, living as if we had no home but this one.  Both are mistaken, but it is notoriously difficult to maintain a genuinely Christian balance.

It is perhaps significant that in many of our conversations about marriage and sexuality the question of the temporary (indeed, fleeting, Ps.39:4; 89:47) nature of our life in this world is rarely considered, let alone given an emphasis that would shape our whole thinking on these issues.  We tend to be strongly attached to ‘this world in its present form’, and so find it difficult to hear Paul’s teaching, which rests on the conviction that our centre of gravity should be weighted towards the age to come. 

This is the perspective through which Paul (and the Church?) aims to interpret and respond to the circumstances of life.  It colours his attitude to suffering (II Cor.4:17); to death (Phil.1:21-26); to grief (I Thess.4:13); and in our present passage to everything from mourning to joy, possessions, and to questions of singleness, marriage and consequently, of sexuality.  It shapes a vision of life in which sacrifice makes sense. In all our culture’s talk of self-fulfilment, this note of self-denial sounds discordant.  And yet Paul’s teaching on how our relationship even with ‘good’ aspects of life in this age are fundamentally re-interpreted by our hope of New Creation remains a key to authentic Christian discipleship.

How far does your hope in the New Creation shape your emotional life, and your day to day decisions you make (vv.29-31)?  How do you think we could cultivate that hope so that it becomes more defining of how we live?

How can Paul be so sure that he is ‘trustworthy (v.25)?  Do you think Paul is trustworthy in matters of sexuality and marriage?

Is Paul undermining the institution of marriage in saying that it is a cause of ‘many troubles in this life’, and in teaching that those who are married should live as if they weren’t (v.28-29)?  What would marriage lived in the light of this teaching look like? 

Does Paul think it is better to remain single, either by not getting married at all, or by remaining unmarried if we are divorced or widowed?  How does he justify his thinking?  Do you agree with him?

Is Paul demonstrating a lack of pastoral sensitivity, and a naiveté about the reality of life, in the way he talks about being ‘unmarried’ (vv.32-35)?

Is it possible to live ‘in undivided devotion to the Lord’ if we are married (v.35)?

Why does Paul finish this section by underlining his thinking that he too has the Spirit of God (v.40)?  What is the relationship between Paul and the Spirit?  How does that validate or invalidate other people’s claims to ‘have’ the Spirit?

Why does Paul stipulate that if Christians are to marry, it must be to someone who belongs to the Lord (v.39)?  What is at stake here?  What would you advise a Christian who was thinking about marrying someone who didn’t share their faith?

Bible Study on I Cor.7:1-16

Marriage, Sex and Sexuality 7 - I Cor.7:1-16

A wise man once said, ‘there is nothing new under the sun…’ (Eccl.1:9).  Let’s remember that as we work our way through the issues raised by LLF.  It can feel like we are in unprecedented times, having to answer questions that have never been asked before.  But that isn’t the case.  The Corinthians were confused about the questions of marriage and sexuality long before we were (and the ancient Church of the Old Testament had taken more than their fair share of wrong turns before the Corinthians had ever heard of Jesus!).  It’s worth taking some encouragement that these are perennially challenging questions that in every age highlight the tensions with culture, and the pastoral problems associated with helping people move out of their culture’s way of thinking and living into a way that is marked more fully by the vision of God for His people.

And so Paul, two thousand years before us, is having to work through that vision for sexuality, singleness and marriage.  The Corinthians have been converted out of an unbelievably sexually corrupt culture, and they bring that corruption with them.  Add a liberal dose of confusion about our physicality, and the place of sexuality within that, and you end up with all kinds of dubious conclusions about what it means to live as a Christian.

Paul’s response is to teach them (again) God’s way, and then to show them how a different way of thinking and believing, leads to different decisions about how to live (so Titus 1:2, it is a knowledge of the truth that leads to godliness).  Paul tackles the issue of lifestyle first at the level of underlying beliefs.  This is the Apostles’ pastoral method, and remains ours today.

If you’ve been tracking with us, you won’t find it difficult to discern the teaching of Jesus lying behind what Paul reminds the Corinthians of.  But it is equally important to realise that Paul is applying that teaching into a specific context, answering specific questions.  This gives our engaging with I Cor.7 an additional layer that we need to be aware of as we seek to understand it.

Why do you think that the Corinthian Church has got so confused about marriage and sexuality?

MIE’s policy currently is that we won’t officiate at a marriage ceremony for someone if they are divorced and the spouse from that marriage is still living.  Given what we’ve been studying, do you think that should be changed?  If so, to what?

Based on what we’ve been studying from Jesus and Paul, do you think that Christians who have divorced, or who have remarried after they have divorced, need to repent?  What would that look like?

In v.6, what is the concession Paul is making?  How does your answer to this affect how you understand the passage?

Is Paul degrading marriage, seeing it merely as a means of stopping sexual immorality (vv.2f. & 9)

Is Paul’s teaching creating a situation in which a spouse could be susceptible to abuse, or even marital rape?

Why does Paul distinguish between his own teaching, and that of the Lord Jesus (v.10, 12 & 25)?  Is he putting his own teaching as an Apostle, and Jesus’ teaching on different levels?  Do you feel less bound by Paul’s teaching, than by Jesus’?

What does Paul mean when he says that an unbelieving spouse has been sanctified through a believing spouse? …and that the children of such a marriage would be holy (vv.12-14)? 

Why is a Christian not ‘bound’ if they are left by an unbelieving spouse (vv.15-16)?  Is Paul saying that the marriage is over?

Bible Study on I Cor.6:9-20

Marriage, Sex and Sexuality 6 - I Cor.6:9-20

It always makes me laugh when I hear people talk about ‘getting back to the NT Church’, as if it was somehow purer or more ‘sorted’ than it has ever been since.  Reading through the NT, I find myself wondering rather if I’d have been willing to go to some of these Churches at all.  I suspect that if we had happened upon the congregation(s) meeting in Corinth we would have wondered if it counted as a Church at all.

Even the most cursory reading of I & II Corinthians highlights problems with worship and witness, belief and behaviour. Disunity, conflict, idolatry, abuse of corporate worship, confusion over what spiritual maturity looked like, misunderstanding of core Christian beliefs … and almost inevitably disagreement and divergence on questions about marriage and sexuality.  Most of us would likely have felt God was calling us somewhere else.

However, it is remarkable that the one thing Paul doesn’t do is give Christians permission to feel spiritual superiority, or indeed to leave - either to go to another Church somewhere else, or more likely, to start one.   In the midst of such an unpromising experience of Christian discipleship, Paul doesn’t lose sight of the genuine work of the Spirit, as He draws people to Christ and slowly conforms them to His image.  More than that, Paul rejoices that, while the Corinthians may not yet have achieved a consistently authentic life of discipleship, they were nevertheless ‘washed… sanctified (i.e. set apart for God’s purposes)… justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and by the Spirit of our God’ (6:11).  Paul’s call to, and confident anticipation of growth is rooted in God, not the Corinthians.  Although they haven’t yet worked out their salvation, it is nonetheless real.

Their growth is hindered by their lack of understanding.  Ignorance of large parts of the Apostle’s teaching and illegitimate interpretations and inferences from what they did know meant that – in spite of the richness of their spiritual experience - even the most elementary aspects of holiness lay beyond their grasp.

From what you know of the Church at Corinth, would you have felt comfortable attending?  Can you explain your answer? 

Do you think the Church in the days of the Apostles is substantially different from the Church today?

In the light of I Cor.6:9-10 how important do you think it is for Christians to live holy lives?  How do you reconcile a passage like this to the idea that we are saved by faith? 

How do you think the Corinthians ended up with the idea that they had the right to do anything (v.12)?  And with the idea that God would destroy both food and stomach (and so presumably it didn’t matter what they did with either)? 

What does it mean to say that ‘the body … is for the Lord, and the Lord for the body (v.13)?  How should this affect the way Christians treat and use their bodies?

Why does Paul suddenly mention the resurrection (v.14)?  Paul revisits this at length in I Cor.15.  How does the Corinthians’ wrong thinking about resurrection contribute to their un-Christian lives?  Does wrong thinking always lead to wrong living?

As you read through this passage, Paul clearly sees connections between our sexuality and our spirituality.  Can you figure out how the two things relate in Christian experience?

Is sexual sin in a different category from other sin?  Does that make it worse? 

‘You are not your own’.  How does that make you feel?  How does this simple observation impact our thinking about being a Christian?

Bible Study on Romans 1:18-32

Marriage, Sex and Sexuality 5 - Rom.1:18-32

What is the most severe crisis humanity is facing?  For the Apostle Paul, the answer underpinning any other answer we might have to that question is ‘the wrath of God’ (1:18).  We are likely to find this destabilising for a number of reasons, but not least because Paul seems to think that God’s wrath is already being revealed here and now.  This isn’t some future event – or at least it isn’t merely a future event.  It seems that in this sense at least, condemnation mirrors salvation.  As Christians we know that some albeit limited aspects of our salvation are experienced in the here and now.  Yet much of what we anticipate about bring a Christian has a future, end-of-the-age, focus.  Similarly, the articulation of God’s wrath against sin has its centre of gravity in the end-of-the-age, but elements of it find expression in this age.  So Psalm 7:11, ‘God is a righteous judge, a God who displays his wrath every day’.

Sometimes we can miss the big picture stuff in the Bible…  But as we read through Scripture it’s extraordinary how many of what we call ‘natural disasters’ are attributed to the expression of God’s wrath against the realities of human sin (not always, but often).  Our mechanistic view of creation tends to obscure the sense of cause and effect.  But the revelation of God’s wrath is not limited to the physicality of our world.  It also finds expression in the moral world of human ‘thought, word and deed’.  Human sin is not merely the cause of God’s anger.  The relationship is more sophisticated than that.  The proliferation of human sin is also the revealing of God’s wrath.  Our rejection of God and His ways at both personal and societal levels results in our being given over to a deeper experience of our corporate sinfulness.  It is worth noting in passing that catches up ‘all the godlessness and wickedness of people’…  and not just the expressions of sin that we might find particularly distasteful (see vv.28-31).

Of course, the Epistle to the Romans is all about what God – in His love - has done in Christ to break the cycle of sin and judgment.  But Paul’s exploration of the Good News starts with our confronting God’s wrath.

Do you think it’s right to say that natural disasters are the expression, or revealing of God’s wrath?  Can you think of passages that either support or refute such a claim?  Do you think the same is true today?

What do you think about Paul’s claim that the result of sin is God giving humanity over to greater sin (1:24; 26; esp. v.28)? 

Is there a gradation of sin…  is some sin ‘worse’ than other sin?  What about sexual sin… is some sexual sin ‘worse’ that other sin, or even other sexual sin?  Can you think of passages from the Bible that back up your view?

Is Paul right that everyone knows the truth about God, but is suppressing that knowledge (1:18-19; 21; 28)?  …and later, that everyone knows ‘God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death (1:32)?

What do you think is the link between the idolatry of vv.21-25, and the ‘sexual impurity’ of vv.24 & 26-27?   Do you think such a link continues to feature in a secular society?

In light of the observation in last week’s sermon that it wasn’t until Freud that our sexuality came to be considered as our identity, do you think it is appropriate for Christians to use labels such as ‘heterosexual’ or ‘homosexual’ to describe people?  Is it something the Bible ever does?

Do you agree with Paul’s assessment of human culture and behaviour in vv.29-32? …or do you think he is overstating his case?  Does Paul think there are any good people in the world? 

Can you think of any examples of the way that our culture approves of those who practise things that lead to death (1:32)? 

Why does Paul spend so long (1:18-3:20) underlining the sinfulness of humanity?  Is he simply being negative?

Bible Study on Matthew 19:1-12

Marriage, Sex and Sexuality 4 - Matt.19:1-12

It is a simple matter of observation that the Bible begins and ends with a marriage.  In Gen.2, we see Adam wounded, and from his wound comes his bride.  There is such a poignant moment in Gen.2:22, when the LORD God acts as the Father of the Bride, and presents His daughter to Adam.  At the other end of the Canon we see the reality to which the shadow was pointing: the Church ‘coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride dressed for her husband’ (Rev.21:2).  God’s vision for marriage – and particularly His Son’s marriage – shapes all of history.

When we understand that this age has its origin and its destiny in a marriage, we can understand why Satan has always sought to undermine the institution of marriage in society, and the experience of marriage in the lives of individuals.  It has been the focus of his ire for all the generations of human history. Again and again he has attacked it, corrupted it, weakened it, sought to destabilise it and undercut it.  It is important to realise that there is nothing new under the sun! 

In the face of his opposition we find the prophets again and again re-asserting marriage, both as a covenant in its own right, but also as pointing towards the covenant of Christ and His people (Is.54:5; Hosea etc.).  We find Jesus Himself defending its integrity against those advocating a first century equivalent of no-fault divorce, and doing so with an absoluteness that is shocking to his own disciples (Matt.19:10).  Jesus is not naïve.  He understands that His teaching excludes some (including Himself) from personally participating in marriage.  He also understands that some are excluded against their will.   In a world where sexual expression is seen as a human right, and where (self-) denial is seen as a form of (self-) harm, Jesus’ teaching is simply unacceptable.  Again, Jesus isn’t naïve.  To even grasp the meaning and significance of marriage, let alone live toward it, is something we can only do through the enabling of the Holy Spirit. 

How would you have answered the Pharisees’ question in v.3?  How do you think it’s a ‘test’ for Jesus?  Where has this language of ‘testing’ been used before in Matthew’s Gospel?  What conclusions can we draw?

How does Jesus’ use of Gen.1 & 2 enable Him to chart a path between the horns of the dilemma He faces?  What is the significance of Jesus’ correcting the Pharisees use of ‘command’, using ‘permit’ instead?

Read Jer.3:6-14.  In the light of all you know about God’s faithfulness, how do you make sense of Jer.3:8? 

Do you think that the creation story to which Jesus refers (19:4-6) precludes same sex marriages?   

Why does Jesus make an exception for ‘sexual immorality’ (v.9, see also 5:31-32)?  Do you think this is the only exception?

Do you share the disciples sense of shock at Jesus’ teaching?  Why / why not?

How does Jesus’ teaching in v.12 help us to navigate the complexities of today’s debates about sexuality? …or does it not really help at all?  As a Church, how should we respond to Jesus’ categorisations?

Bible Study on Gen.1:26-2:3 & 2:18-25

Marriage, Sex and Sexuality 3 - Gen.1:26-2:3 & 2:18-25

Vast amounts have been written about the climactic creation of humanity, but our current series (engaging with LLF) is exploring questions of identity, gender, sexuality & marriage.  And so we start with a focussed observation about the ‘very good’-ness of a physical creation, and specifically of a physical humanity.  We are more than physical, but not less.

This is an important place to start because we are constantly tempted to undermine our physicality, and to see it as less than intrinsic to, or even in conflict with, who we really are.  In our culture we are growing used to hearing the idea that for someone to be true to who they really are, they may have to disregard, or change their body in a number of ways.  A dualistic view of humanity that separates who we really are from who we are physically is deeply problematic from a Christian perspective.

Our physicality, and with it our male- or female-ness, is not an accident, nor is it the result of cosmic pragmatism.  Still less is it a lifestyle choice.  Our bodies may be painfully confused or confusing (and increasingly so as this basic framework for understanding humanity is being lost) but that doesn’t mean they are anything less than vital and inherent to our being.  Our future, after all, focusses on resurrection bodies.

We are increasingly aware of the deep crisis that confronts our thinking about ourselves.  Never have we known so much about humanity, and so little about being human.  As we have suppressed our knowledge of God, we have been left with no worthier object of study than ourselves.  Paradoxically, as we lose our understanding of God and His purposes in our creation, we lose precisely the capacity to understand what we are and why.  Far from this Biblical vision being a source of oppression and repression, it is only from the Scriptures that we can expect liberty and joy.  Only here can we hope to understand humanity, who we are, how we are… and what has gone wrong. 

Do you agree that we are intrinsically physical?  What do you make of the Bible’s teaching about humans having a ‘soul’ and a ‘spirit’ that survives the death of the body?

What do you think is the defining characteristic(s) of being human?  What is it that separates us from the rest of creation (particularly the animal kingdom)?

Do you think the Bible’s teaching about our identity and sexuality is the road to fulfilment, freedom and joy?  What would you say to someone who argued the Bible’s teaching about marriage was oppressive and outdated?

As a Christian, what do you make of the gender revolution our culture is currently undergoing?  How do you navigate it?

What do you think is the ‘image of God’ in which we are made?  …how, if at all, is it different from His likeness?   Do you think it is significant that ‘likeness’ is not mentioned in Gen.1:27?  How does the fall affect this?

‘male and female He created them…’  What distinguishes ‘male’ and ‘female’?  Is it more than physical differences?  Do you think it is possible to change from ‘male’ to ‘female’, or vice versa? 

Why do you think Adam is created in the way that he is, and why is Eve created in the way that she is?  Why not create her directly from the dust of the ground as well? 

How does the sequence of events in 2:18-24 lay the foundation for our vision of marriage?  Within that context, what is the meaning of sex? How then does sexual sin affect our understanding of God? 

Bible Study on Eph.5:8-20

Marriage, Sex and Sexuality 2 - Eph.5:8-20

Paul has been charging the atmosphere between two poles: a foundational conviction that we are loved by God in Christ; and that as God’s ‘dearly loved children’ we are called to pursue an increasingly faithful following of God’s example of love, holiness, purity and self-giving.  Reminding us of the division that Jesus, by the Spirit, renders between light and dark in Gen.1:1-4, Paul teaches that proclaiming Christ results in the same radical division today.  The world, including people, still divides into light and darkness.

Paul’s sense of urgency might still cause us to catch our breath.  His relentless conviction that we should strive to dispel any shadow can feel a bit ‘extreme’ to us, more binary than we are used to.  Where Paul sees light and dark, we tend to see nuanced shades, a spectrum on which it sometimes difficult to see exactly where dark becomes light.  Yet his sense of the radical distinctiveness of the people of God, and the resolution with which we should pursue that distinctiveness, are unmistakable.

Paul’s insistence builds on what we were thinking about last week, but he lays reason on reason for us to share his urgency, rising to a sense of inevitability: we must live out the integrity of who and what we are (v.8-9); we have the opportunity to live in a way that pleases the Lord (v.10); deeds of darkness have no value (v.11); everything we have done will be exposed when we are resurrected to judgement (vv.13-15); if we aren’t very deliberate about how we live, we will simply be swept up in the darkness of our surroundings (vv.15-17). 

Yes, but how?   How can we live like this?  Aspects of Paul’s answer might surprise us: it has to do with the intentionality with which we live, with our relationship with the Spirit in life and worship, with our familiarity with Scripture, with music and ‘psalms, hymns and songs’, and with gratitude. 

Does the urgency in this passage, and its sense of clear choice excite you, or leave you feeling uncomfortable?  Does it ring true to your experience of life… or does life feel more complex that Paul seems to allow for?

If we lived as Paul is suggesting, would we simply all end up in a Christian ghetto, isolated from any contact with the world? Is Paul risking a denial of much that is good in our culture and society?

What do you think characterises ‘darkness’ and ‘light’ (vv.8-9)?   How would we recognise it in ourselves? …in each other? …in our world?

How can we ‘find out what pleases the Lord (v.10)?  How does the idea that we can live in a way that pleases Him leave you feeling?

What does Paul mean when he teaches that we should expose ‘the fruitless deeds of darkness’ (v.11)?  How do you feel about doing that?

Do you agree that it is shameful to ‘mention what the disobedient do in secret’ (v.12)?  Why does Paul qualify his comments with: ‘in secret’?  Why do you think the Lord is waiting until the Resurrection to expose truth (vv.13-14)?

How do wise people live (v.15, and foolish people, v.17)?   How can we make the most of every opportunity (v.16)?

In what ways is ‘being filled with the Spirit’ both like and unlike being drunk on wine’ (v.18)?  can you back up what you think from the Bible? 

What is it about ‘psalms, hymns and spiritual songs’ that can help us live as children of light?  Why speak, rather than sing (v.19)?

How can we encourage one another in thankfulness (v.20)?  Why is it important to do so? 

Bible Study on Eph.5:1-7

Marriage, Sex and Sexuality 1 - Eph.5:1-7

By now, you’ll have picked up something of how this term is working out as we re-engage with Eph.5 & other related passages as the term progresses.  We’ll be exploring together the sweep of the Bible’s teaching on marriage and sexuality.  But Paul doesn’t simply drop the question of ‘Christian households’ onto his congregation(s) ‘out of the blue’.  It is a natural and Spirit-inspired outworking of a train of thought that we boarded in Eph.1:1. Paul has been exploring the glory and joy of so much of what God has done in the Gospel.  Part of the problem for us has been the immensity of Paul’s vision and the vast scope of all he has taught us.  The Gospel – as we experience it – stretches back into the heart and mind of God before even Creation is called into being.  The Church has been caught up into God’s purposes of redemption and renewal, and as such has been re-created, restored to the very life and community of God, and renewed in their whole experience of being human.  An entirely new way of being human has opened up to them – a vision for life that goes far beyond our wildest hopes and dreams. 

We have been immersed in God’s love for us in Christ Jesus, and on that foundation the Spirit longs to rebuild us individually and together into that Christ-oriented way of being and living.  Paul (and the Spirit who is inspiring his writing) isn’t simply looking for us to become more moral, or to clean up our act (a bit!).  We are called to a total transformation, to ‘put off our old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; to be made new in the attitude of your minds, and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness’ (Eph.4:23-24).  When we left off Ephesians last year, we had begun to get a sense of what that new life looked like, and just how different it is from ‘life’ as experienced by so many.  Coming into Ch.5, we pick up Paul’s desire for us our spiritual development, and growth into Christlikeness...

Just how different do you think the ‘Christian’ life is from the life that is lived and experienced by those who don’t know Christ?  Is Paul perhaps exaggerating for effect?  How different do you think your own life is from that of others who know who aren’t Christians?    Do you think it should be (very) different?  Why / why not?

You might find it helpful to look at some passages where Paul seems to stress some of these differences:  Eph.2:1-3; 4:17-24; also e.g. Titus 3:3-8.  Do you think such generalisations are accurate… or helpful?)

How would you describe what it looks like to ‘follow God’s example …and live a life of love’ (Eph.5:1-2)? It might help to be as specific as possible…  Have you ever known someone who really gets this?  What were they like?

How important is it for us to be confident in our being ‘dearly loved children’ (Eph.5:1)?  What would you say to someone who wasn’t so sure they fell into this category?  What does it feel like to know you are ‘dearly loved’ by God in Christ?  How does it shape your view of yourself and how you aspire to live?

Why is Paul so focussed on immorality, impurity and greed?  How would you recognise people who were characterised by these patterns of sin?

What do you think constitutes ‘obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking’ (Eph.5:4)?  Does it really matter how you speak? 

Why does he call greedy people ‘idolaters’ (Eph.5:5)?

Is Paul saying that people like this aren’t Christians?  What would you say to someone who struggled with greed, or immorality? 

What ‘empty words’ is Paul worried about Christians hearing? 

What does it mean to be ‘partners’ with such people?  How far can you disengage from them?