It\u2019s OK for the Church for the better part of twenty centuries to interpret the Song of Solomon as a parable of Israel\u2019s or the Church\u2019s or the individual\u2019s relationship with God \u2014 with YHWH or with the Father or with the Son (as in nuns being married to Christ). It\u2019s also OK for the apostle Paul to liken our relationship with Christ to be like a husband-and-wife\u2019s sexual relationship and to use the sexual\/gendered relationship to express the mystery of the Church. But for some it is not OK for Rob Bell to speak of our healed relationships with God, with self, and with others as our sexuality \u2014 which for him means our \u201cconnectedness.\u201d It\u2019s OK for the Church for the better part of twenty centuries to interpret the Song of Solomon as a parable of Israel\u2019s or the Church\u2019s or the individual\u2019s relationship with God \u2014 with YHWH or with the Father or with the Son (as in nuns being married to Christ). It\u2019s also OK for the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":197,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[476],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2335","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-books"],"yoast_head":"\n
\nToday I give some major points. Tomorrow I\u2019ll register my criticisms. I\u2019m wondering what you thought of this book.
\nFirst, let me ask this question: What is this book? I\u2019m not entirely sure. Here\u2019s how I would sum it up: it is a book that contends life is all about connection \u2014 with God, with self, with others, and with the world (and you know I\u2019m totally with him here). And it contends that the most intimate connection we have now \u2014 sex \u2014 is actually a picture of the ultimate, eternal connection. So \u201cthis\u201d (sex) corresponds to \u201cthat\u201d (God).
\nSecond, this means the book is in many ways what you want young kids to have. College kids and 20 somethings and 30 somethings who are thinking about getting married, or who are in relationships, or who have broken off relationships. (He does have a nice, if far too brief, section on singles \u2014 but I do think the book is not really for singles even if \u201cthis\u201d points to \u201cthat\u201d and the \u201cthat\u201d is for all of us, single or married.) I think it would be a fantastic book for a study for those who are contemplating marriage. Sex God<\/em> is a bit of a theology of connection as revealed in the theology of marriage. It could be a springboard for couples to ponder their relationship and what life is all about.
\n[BTW: My next Bible study series will be on Song of Solomon \u2014 when I\u2019m done with Psalm 119.]
\nThird, others have summarized this book so I won\u2019t do it again. (Ben Witherington<\/a>\u2018s probably got the fullest summary.)
\nFourth, I\u2019ll tell you what I liked most about this book: he\u2019s dead-right. Life is about connection with God, with self, with others, and with the world. And everything about \u201cthis\u201d life can be about \u201cthat.\u201d If I think marriage is more than a picture of our relationship with God, and even more than this temporary participation of that eternal union, I do think marriage embodies what life is ultimately about. An intimate union that personalizes and crystallizes what life on this earth is all about. We need to do more exploring of the relationship of sexuality and spirituality, or our embodied union with our union with God is solid theology \u2014 it is Paul\u2019s theology of the body and marriage and Christ and his Body.
\n(But I don\u2019t think I\u2019d say our sexuality is our connectedness or our connectedness is our sexuality. That\u2019s promiscuous with the word \u201csexuality\u201d for me.)
\nFifth, the book has plenty of comment that I agree with; there is some interrelational wisdom here; some nice solid explanation and application of what the Bible says; and there is a solid theology at work: God has made us to love God and ourselves and others and to care for this good world he has made.
\nSixth, he makes the claim that our sexuality is about all of our connections. I don\u2019t explain things this way; I don\u2019t tend to sexualize existence. I have to think about this some more.
\nSeventh, he\u2019s got good stuff on the importance of our bodies \u2014 we are not animals (just bodies having sex with one another) and not angels (we have bodies and the body matters). He\u2019s got very good stuff on the significance of the female body and female body\/self image. His chp on lust is good: it promises but can\u2019t deliver what one thinks it will. His chp on vulnerability reveals a God who risks when he loves us \u2014 and God\u2019s integrity is not blown away with cheap theology here. God gave us freedom.
\nEighth, his chp on marriage as mutual submission is excellent \u2014 that if we are hung up on who\u2019s in charge we\u2019re in trouble. He grounds this in God\u2019s self-giving love in Incarnation. (He should have gone here into perichoresis and the Trinity.) Incarnation is that self-giving perichoretic love of God entering into the world of the created being \u2014 humans.
\nTomorrow: I register some critique of Sex God<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"