Is Sexuality Temporary?

[Ben Chomp]

God created sexuality. In the beginning he made them male and female. And sexuality has a very important purpose and meaning in God's plan. Sexuality first advances God's plan through marriage and child-rearing. But it also provides one of the greatest living pictures we have of the gospel in marriage (Ephesians 5).

As a sexual being, you are either a man or a woman. This identity is one of your most foundational identities such that it is difficult to imagine being you apart from your sexuality. But is our sexuality a permanent part of our identity or only temporary? I don't know the answer to this question, but there are a few things that make me suspect that our sexuality might be temporary:

1. The meaning of sexuality and marriage is to teach us about Christ in this age. Now that Christ has come, marriage is already less necessary and it is okay to live as a single person (1 Corinthians 7). In the fullness of time marriage will become just as obsolete as the OT temple.

2. Jesus says that marriage is only for this age. In the age to come, people will neither marry nor be given in marriage. I suspect this might mean that we also will not enjoy sexual activity. This furthermore could mean that we will no longer be sexual beings.

3. Paul teaches that in Christ there is no male and female. Certainly we remain sexual beings in this age after we become Christians and sexual distinctions still matter. Men are called to be leaders in the home and in the church. But our identity as Christians goes deeper than our identity as men and women such that Paul can say that we are a Christian before we are a man or woman and there is some kind of radical equality going on in Christ. This could mean that in glory we will no longer need these sexual identities.

What are your thoughts? To my shame, I've not read any good theologians on this topic though I am sure that someone has written something on it.

 

[RamistThomist]

We have sex in heaven.....

(crickets)


.....meaning, we have sexual identity in heaven. While I wouldn't overload a parable with theological meaning, but I think Jesus uses masculine pronouns about the rich man and Lazarus.

Anyway, there will be national identities and kingdoms and tribes in heaven, so probably sexual identities (only two of them) as well.

 

[RamistThomist]

I suspect this might mean that we also will not enjoy sexual activity. This furthermore could mean that we will no longer be sexual beings.

Two totally different things. One doesn't follow from the other. Celibates don't have sexual activity but they are sexed beings.

This is part of the problem of thinking gender and sex are the same thing. They aren't. Sex refers to male/female. Gender refers to language.

 

[VictorBravo]

Anyway, there will be national identities and kingdoms and tribes in heaven, so probably sexual identities (only two of them) as well.

I was thinking even ten years ago you wouldn't have had to put in that parenthetical. Now it is a must.

 

[Ben Chomp]

We have sex in heaven.....

(crickets)


.....meaning, we have sexual identity in heaven. While I wouldn't overload a parable with theological meaning, but I think Jesus uses masculine pronouns about the rich man and Lazarus.

Anyway, there will be national identities and kingdoms and tribes in heaven, so probably sexual identities (only two of them) as well.

How much exegetical certainty do you have about this? Do you base it solely on that parable?

 

[Ben Chomp]

Two totally different things. One doesn't follow from the other. Celibates don't have sexual activity but they are sexed beings.

True. Celibate people are still sexual beings. But when marriage and reproduction go away (assuming that they will go away in heaven), then what would be the purpose of continuing as a sexual being?

This is part of the problem of thinking gender and sex are the same thing. They aren't. Sex refers to male/female. Gender refers to language.

I have not and will not use the word "gender" in this discussion.

 

[RamistThomist]

How much exegetical certainty do you have about this? Do you base it solely on that parable?

I can turn it around: where do you see that we are no longer sexed beings? That's the burden of proof. "No longer male and female" actually applies now, but no one thinks that we aren't really biologically different.

 

[RamistThomist]

But when marriage and reproduction go away (assuming that they will go away in heaven), then what would be the purpose of continuing as a sexual being?

I don't know. If God thought they were going to go away as well, he would have told us.

 

[Ben Chomp]

I can turn it around: where do you see that we are no longer sexed beings? That's the burden of proof. "No longer male and female" actually applies now, but no one thinks that we aren't really biologically different.

I suspect that this may be the case since people no longer marry in heaven but are like the angels. As far as I know, the angels are not sexual beings. I don't have much exegetical certainty on this, but I do have my suspicions.

Another reason is the role that sex plays in redemptive history. It makes sense that the trajectory would be toward not being sexual beings in glory. But, again, that's very speculative.

 

[Ben Chomp]

I don't know. If God thought they were going to go away as well, he would have told us.

Perhaps he did.

 

[Ben Chomp]

Another thing to mention is that sex has meaning in this age. When people marry they must marry a person of the opposite sex. And men are called to a position of responsibility and leadership.

But I'm not sure that this same meaning will be relevant in heaven. We will no longer have marriage because we have the fulfillment of marriage in Christ. We will no longer reproduce because we will have eternal life and we will have filled creation and subdued it. I'm not sure that male headship will still be relevant in glory apart from the headship of Christ.

 

[Ben Chomp]

"No longer male and female" actually applies now, but no one thinks that we aren't really biologically different.

I think it applies in an already/not yet, Ridderbosian sense. Paul says to married folks that they ought to live as though they are unmarried now (1 Corinthians 7). This is obviously in an already/not yet sense. We shouldn't abandon our wives. But we should also realize that marriage is temporary and not ultimate.

"No longer male and female" is already true in the sense that we have a radical equality in salvation and we are all sons of God through Christ Jesus. But it may not yet be fully fulfilled because we still must live as men and women in this age that is passing away.

 

[RamistThomist]

But it may not yet be fully fulfilled because we still must live as men and women in this age that is passing away.

That's what needs to be proven, not assumed.

 

[RamistThomist]

Perhaps he did.

I'm all ears (assuming they, too, won't pass away)

 

[RamistThomist]

As far as I know, the angels are not sexual beings. I don't have much exegetical certainty on this, but I do have my suspicions.

That's a weak foundation upon which to build a rather starting theological conclusion.

 

[RamistThomist]

Will Jesus be male in heaven?

 

[Ben Chomp]

That's what needs to be proven, not assumed.

I'm not assuming anything. I think that there are hints either way and I don't have a certain answer.

 

[Ben Chomp]

Will Jesus be male in heaven?

I would have to affirm that he will, although with marriage, sex, and reproduction out of the picture, I'm not sure what it will mean to be male or female in heaven.

 

[Ben Chomp]

That's a weak foundation upon which to build a rather starting theological conclusion.

Yes I would not arrive at a firm conclusion on this question. Not yet anyway.

 

[Ben Chomp]

I'm all ears (assuming they, too, won't pass away)

I've already stated the rationale behind my suspicions in the OP. These were obviously not provocative for you.

 

[Ben Chomp]

Hah!

Interestingly, Peter Kreeft takes the position that not only will there be sex in heaven, but there will be sexual activity in heaven. He agrees that there will not be child rearing or marriage in heaven, but says there will be sexual activity between the saints in a non-monogamous way.

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/scotty-smith/article-is-there-sex-in-heaven/

 

[Ben Chomp]

What's biblically clear:

1. No marriage in heaven
2. No child rearing in heaven

What's biblically unclear (to me, at least):

1. Will there be sex in heaven (men and women)?
2. Will there be sexual activity in heaven?

 

[RamistThomist]

I've already stated the rationale behind my suspicions in the OP. These were obviously not provocative for you.

They weren't because they were assumptions that were yet to be proved.

 

[TylerRay]

I would have to affirm that he will, although with marriage, sex, and reproduction out of the picture, I'm not sure what it will mean to be male or female in heaven.

What does it mean to be male or female to those who don't marry, have sex, or reproduce here and now?

 

[Ben Chomp]

They weren't because they were assumptions that were yet to be proved.

They are not assumptions. They are facts of Scripture (Jesus really did say that there would be no marriage in heaven) combined with some tentative suspicions.

 

[RamistThomist]

What's biblically clear:

1. No marriage in heaven
2. No child rearing in heaven

Strictly speaking, the verse only says they won't marry or be given in marriage. It doesn't say anything about previous marriages. I won't press that point too hard, though, since the previous married life/lives didn't seem to be that important to Jesus in the parable.

1. Will there be sex in heaven (men and women)?

Jesus still has his human nature in heaven (orthodox Christology demands this). So presumably he still has male organs (not trying to be crude, but Jesus in his humanity is still identified as a male in heaven).

 

[Ben Chomp]

What does it mean to be male or female to those who don't marry, have sex, or reproduce here and now?

It means that they are biologically able to do these things and that they are called to play certain roles in this age. Will male headship still be relevant in heaven?

 

[RamistThomist]

They are facts of Scripture (Jesus really did say that there would be no marriage in heaven)

No one disputes that.

combined with some tentative suspicions

That's what remains to be proven.

 

[Ben Chomp]

That's what remains to be proven.

Well duh!

 

[RamistThomist]

Will male headship still be relevant in heaven?

I think a better rephrasing of the question is under hierarchy, not headship (and if the Facebook group "Geneva Commons" saw me saying this, I would probably get banned for anti-Wilsonite content). There will be hierarchy, as we will rule nations and judge angels.