- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostA La Carte (10/12)
- Next Post »Become a Friend of the Blog (There's Still Time!)
Sex & Assurance of Salvation
- 10/12/10
- 8
One of the joys of reading widely is in finding interesting connections between things that might otherwise seem to be unrelated. Let me explain.
I recently read through R.C. Sproul’s book What Is Reformed Theology? Actually, I’ve recently read through almost all of R.C. Sproul’s books and have noted that he has several recurring emphases. One of these is the importance of a right understanding of God’s work of preservation. Of course this emphasis makes sense when you know that Sproul is a long-time teacher and defender of Reformed doctrine.
Sproul’s concern with understanding the doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints is not purely a theological one; it is not simply that he wants to have his theology right. His concern is practical. “There is clearly a link between our assurance and our sanctification,” he says. “The person who lacks assurance of salvation is vulnerable to a myriad of threats to his personal growth. The confident Christian, certain of his salvation, is free from the paralyzing fear that can inhibit personal growth. Without assurance we are assailed by doubt and uncertainty with respect to God’s promises, which serve as an anchor for our souls.”
What Sproul wants people to see is that assurance of salvation, a doctrine which flows out of God’s act of preservation (Sproul says rightly that the doctrines may be distinguished from one another, but never separated), is critical to spiritual growth. Those who lack assurance that they are saved often become bogged down by concern for their salvation. They have trouble growing in their faith because they cannot see past the uncertainty about their own spiritual condition. And this makes perfect sense, right? It is difficult to grow in the deeper things if we are still wrestling with the very basics. This is why every Christian should seek assurance of his salvation.
Now let’s turn for a moment from R.C. Sproul to Nancy Pearcey (and if you want to know what binds the two authors together, it would probably be a shared love for Francis Schaeffer). In her book Saving Leonardo, Pearcey has a chapter on “Sex, Lies and Secularism.” She writes about how sex is perceived in our secular culture and says this: “A video put out by Children’s Television Workshop defines sexual relations as simply ‘something done by two adults to give each other pleasure.’ No hint that sexuality has any moral or social significance. No suggestion that it has a richer purpose than sheer sensual gratification, such as bonding husband and wife together to create a safe haven for raising children.” Secularists miss the bigger, better purpose for sex and reduce it to an exchange of physical services, a mere commodity.
When people make sex into something so small, they miss that it has many big purposes, one of which is as a unique means of binding a husband to a wife and a wife to a husband. When a husband and wife are enjoying the sexual relationship, when they are bound together in this unique way, there is a stability to their relationship. And within the stability of the relationship of father to mother, children can thrive, knowing that they are raised in the safe haven of a committed family. And this is one of the reasons God gave us sex—to create the stability our families need.
Do you see how these two things relate to one another? Here is Sproul telling us that we can best grow as Christians within the context of God’s perseverance and here is Pearcey telling us that we can best raise families within the context of a stable, committed family. In both cases, God has given us the structure we need to thrive. And in both cases Satan will do whatever he can to destroy those structures. He will steal the assurance Christians have that they are truly saved and will watch as they wither, as they find that they cannot grow in the faith. And he will destroy families or disrupt the sexual relationship so he can undermine the stability in which children can grow and thrive.
So I suppose at the end of it all I’m left seeing anew the importance of the sexual relationship not just to a husband and wife but to their family (though that family will, hopefully, be unaware of the details, of course!) and the importance of pursuing and finding assurance of salvation. In both cases, God seeks our good and Satan seeks our destruction.

I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Comments (8)
_What Is Reformed Theology_ is the book that caused me to finally stop struggling against the biblical doctrines of grace. I will always be grateful for Dr. Sproul for his work as a teacher. Interesting connection you’ve made.
Excellent connection, and very applicable for me. I’ve been a believer since childhood, but only in the last year have come to believe Biblical truth is best understood in Reformed theology. I need to get my hands on this book!
To me this reminds me of a fact Christians seem to miss, namely God is smarter than us. I know we understand this, but I feel like we live outside of this truth. If God is truly God and is all-knowing then we should be confident that His way is the best way. When we come to terms with this we are more willing (although we still have to fight the sinful flesh) to submit to His will.
www.studyyourbibleonline.com
Tim, although I appreciate your point about the context of a stable framework being beneficial for things built on that framework, I would hesitate to say that the primary purpose of sexuality is “stability” or that it’s “for the children” because it seems a little too Roman Catholic, in that it’s kinda utilitarian. I’m not certain this is what you (or Pearcey) is suggesting, but that’s how it comes across here.
Now, not everything Roman Catholic is wrong, of course, but I do think they miss a lot of meaning sometimes while focusing on tradition. Catholicism, for example, makes a heavy emphasis on procreation as the primary purpose of marriage. While Protestants recognize children as a blessing, they tend to see the primary, eternal purpose of marriage as image-bearing the relationship between Christ and the church. Why is polygamy wrong? Primarily because, even though it may result in more children, it misrepresents the relationship between our one Lord and his one church (Eph 4:4-5).
By the same token, while it’s true that familial stability is a benefit of sex, I don’t think it’s the primary purpose. Rather, I think the primary purpose of sex is to bind husband and wife in closer communion with one another, which of course, has spiritually significant resonance. Paul implies in 1 Cor 6:16-17 and again in Eph 5:31-32 that not just marriage, but sexuality itself is symbolic of our unity with Christ. If a man who sleeps with a prostitute becomes “one flesh” with her, we can deduce that it’s the act of sex itself, not a marriage ceremony, that produces this union.
Yes, closer communion between husband and wife does result in familial stability, but I think that’s a beneficial side-effect, not the primary purpose.
(Slightly off the beaten path, but in the chewy James 2 passage discussing the relationship between faith and works, James affirms in verses 21 and 22 that Abraham was justified by his faith, but that his faith was “completed” or “consummated” by his works. So I find the structure of marriage and sex to be a helpful guideline for the relationship between faith and works. True marriages are proved and consummated in sex, just as true faith and unity with Christ is proved and consummated in works.)
Andy
What you wrote prompted me to reread what Tim wrote again. Forgive me if I missed it again but I didn’t see him mention sex as being “the primary purpose” for family stability. I did see him saying the following: “And this is one of the reasons God gave us sex—to create the stability our families need. Saying it is one of the reasons and saying it is the primary purpose are two different things. Perhaps Tim might want to weigh in here for the sake of clarity.
Tom, you’re right. Tim does say that this is only “one of the reasons.” I think what gives the impression that it’s the chief reason is the Pearcey quote, which says, “…[sex] has a richer purpose than sheer sensual gratification, such as bonding husband and wife together to create a safe haven for raising children.” Now I’m sure there’s a longer context there, but the quote as presented here implies that Pearcey believes this is the primary purpose of sex, which as I said, strikes me as a bit utilitarian.
I think Satan is very adept at using both assurance of salvation, or lack thereof, and sexual sin in conjunction with each other.
Andy,
I believe you’re completely misunderstanding the Catholic Church’s understanding of both marriage and sexuality:
“Catholicism, for example, makes a heavy emphasis on procreation as the primary purpose of marriage.”
This is wrong, but it would be less wrong if you substituted ‘sex’ for ‘marriage’. Procreation is a primary purpose of sex, but not the sole purpose. The Catholic Church teaches that both children AND unity (what you call bonding) are the two ends of sex.
(By the way, neither purpose can be fully achieved while using contraception.)
The purpose of marriage does include the sexual elements, but it also includes the sacramental elements (i.e. imaging the Trinity).
To clearly understand the Catholic view of marriage and sexuality, I encourage an exploration of Pope John Paul II’s phenomenal ‘theology of the body’, some of the most profound theology of the past century.