Each year, Ron Luce gives a sex teaching to the Honor Academy interns which includes the ideas that oral sex is wrong, lingerie is wrong, sex toys are wrong, and only certain sexual positions are allowed. In the past, Dave Hasz has responded to concerns about the unScriptural basis for these teachings by saying that Ron is just giving his personal convictions, not teaching that his views are Scriptural. However, according to this recording from 2001, Ron starts his talk by saying:
We are going to talk about God’s idea of intimacy in marriage.
So, Ron was clearly presenting these teachings as God’s will. Throughout the class, he continues to talk as if all of these ideas are God’s truth and not just his personal conviction.
Let’s talk about oral sex for a second…Christians justify this because of the Scripture in Hebrews 13:4 – “Marriage bed is honorable and the bed is undefiled.” And what people say that means is that as long as you are married you can do whatever you want and people use this Scripture to justify treating their wives like animals…Think about this for a second, this phenomenon, humans are the only species that God made that can face each other while having intercourse. How about that? There is a reason for that. Because its not an animal act, its intimacy with a person. God made it so that we are forced to look at each other in the eye when we experience this intimacy with each other.
In one fell swoop he has condemned both oral sex and any position where you aren’t directly facing your partner. I wonder why it is too difficult for Ron to actually use logical arguments based on actual facts. After all, he teaches tens of thousands of people every year and he has a responsibility to tell the truth.
Equating oral sex with treating your spouse like an animal is quite a jump. In fact, there is absolutely no Scriptural reason to make that leap in logic. And if Ron contends that Hebrews 13:4 doesn’t mean that you can do whatever is mutually agreeable in the bedroom, then why doesn’t he offer up and alternate interpretation?
In addition, many scholars believe that the Bible actually discusses oral sex in a favorable light!
You will also notice that Ron did not use a Scriptural argument to back up his idea that only certain sex positions are the “godly” way to have sex. Instead, he appealed to the animal kingdom stating that no animals have sex face to face. Even if that were true, the logic of that position still does not hold water.
However, several animals have sex face to face:
– Pygmy Chimpanzees
– Orangutans
– Dolphins
The above quotes from Ron Luce, as well as yesterday’s quote are from a 2001 teaching so you may wonder if they are still relevant. Unfortunately, the Honor Academy teaches pretty much the same exact thing every single year. This powerpoint presentation, entitled “God’s Idea of Intimacy in Marriage” from Ron Luce was taught to the CURRENT intern class, sometime in the past few weeks. You’ll notice he says the EXACT same things.
So, for the past 13+ years, Ron Luce has taught interns about sex not based on Scripture but on HIS OWN dysfunctions and hangups. Instead of dealing with his own dysfunctionl ideas of sex, he has enshrined them as God’s will and passed them on to his eager and unsuspecting followers. Instead of embracing the freedom of the marriage bed, he seeks to keep couples in bondage to rules stated nowhere in Scripture nor even upheld by the majority of Christians!
It is also ironic that Ron ignores the one book in Scripture (Song of Solomon) that actually addresses sexuality in depth! Why is Ron so intent on ignoring what the Bible has to say about married sexuality and instead substituting his own made up rules?
If you are married, you are free to enjoy your partner with any activity that is mutually agreeable and does not cause any emotional or physical pain. That is the only litmus test you will ever need for your married life with your partner!
32 comments:
When we had the ‘sex’ talk in 1997 at Ron’s house, all I kept thinking was ‘poor Katie’. Nuff said!
One note… Although many people may not understand this some of our usuals I know will. RA you said as long as it does not cause pain, but that is even sometimes limiting enjoyable activities. I would say as long as it does not cause UNWANTED pain. Some guys/girls get off on things like having their hair pulled… That’s not a bad or sinful thing! Some christians put lessor arbitrary markers than Ron does on sex which still goes against the marriage bed can be anything you want (even if that happens to include some WANTED pain occasionally.)
That said Poor Katie and poor every former intern who gets married to another intern and having them both think these are accurate and they don’t feel the freedom to be themselves and enjoy the fullness of their partner in a very free way!
He also discussed toys and lingerie. If I recall correctly, he believes that bringing these into the bedroom complicates things and will eventually lead to a complete lack of self-control within a couple’s sex life. He believes that every time you raise the ante you’ll want to raise the ante again and again until you’ve thrown all moral limits out the window. Which suggests that you will be hosting orgies with animals and mud pits because you just can’t get enough… What a dope.
“Things have changed… in the past… few weeks…”
LMAO ERIC
Dude I totally remember this talk. And the slide show! Rofl I remember that our core was all talking about it after the fact, and one girl was like “uh that’s stupid, when I get married we’re doin’ what we want :|”
In hindsight, man, I wish I could have appreciated her freedom to be able to say that.
Yes, the dangers of the law of diminishing returns ensures that if you bring other elements into your sexual relationship, you will be unable to step back at a later date. You will be doomed to eventually murdering your partner in some sadomasochistic sexual frenzy of lust.
For this same reason: Once you add different or alternative spices to your food, you will be hopelessly lost down the slippery slope of endless spicy-ness. This is why I only eat PB&J and cloud sandwiches.
One of the things I hate about this teaching is that it teaches virgins (who have no way of knowing better) that everything pleasurable for a woman is off limits!!! I’m sorry but no woman has her best sex in 4 minutes of missionary–unless she’s on TV or in a movie. The church in general has sent a message to women that you are an accessory to your husband’s sexual pleasure but all you get out of the experience is to “feel connected.” No, no, no! That is crappy, selfish, one-sided sex (guess why men like to teach this)! BOTH partners should be giving–that’s why you are partners, you work together to make the experience pleasurable for both. The fact that women are capable of having sex even if they aren’t enjoying it doesn’t mean that is the experience God intended!!! Men, marriage does not entitle you to great sex–giving your wife great sex entitles you to receiving great sex! And great sex for a woman is not as much about your “performance” during intercourse as it is about how much you are doing for her before and after, something I don’t hear TM talking too much about! I hate that Christian women are made to feel that most things which can provide orgasms for them are dirty and impure. A marriage where only one person receives sexual fulfillment and satisfaction is what is really impure! To all the ladies who have been messed up by this teaching, I speak freedom! You CAN enjoy sex as much as your husband–God wants that for you!
I remember this talk from last year. When Ron said the thing about no oral sex, one intern brought up the scripture from Song of Solomon and Ron answered, “That’s just how some people interpret that scripture.” He didn’t say anything on how he interpreted that passage. I really wanted to ask him what his interpretation of it was just to see what he would say but I didn’t.
I also remember my roommates and I having a long discussion about this in our room after we were taught this. I pulled up some Mark Driscoll sermons. I am all for what is mutually agreeable within the marriage covenant. This is one area in which I do not agree with Ron.
Yes, the dangers of the law of diminishing returns ensures that if you bring other elements into your sexual relationship, you will be unable to step back at a later date. You will be doomed to eventually murdering your partner in some sadomasochistic sexual frenzy of lust.
For this same reason: Once you add different or alternative spices to your food, you will be hopelessly lost down the slippery slope of endless spicy-ness. This is why I only eat PB&J and cloud sandwiches.
One of the things I hate about this teaching is that it teaches virgins (who have no way of knowing better) that everything pleasurable for a woman is off limits!!! I’m sorry but no woman has her best sex in 4 minutes of missionary–unless she’s on TV or in a movie. The church in general has sent a message to women that you are an accessory to your husband’s sexual pleasure but all you get out of the experience is to “feel connected.” No, no, no! That is crappy, selfish, one-sided sex (guess why men like to teach this)! BOTH partners should be giving–that’s why you are partners, you work together to make the experience pleasurable for both. The fact that women are capable of having sex even if they aren’t enjoying it doesn’t mean that is the experience God intended!!! Men, marriage does not entitle you to great sex–giving your wife great sex entitles you to receiving great sex! And great sex for a woman is not as much about your “performance” during intercourse as it is about how much you are doing for her before and after, something I don’t hear TM talking too much about! I hate that Christian women are made to feel that most things which can provide orgasms for them are dirty and impure. A marriage where only one person receives sexual fulfillment and satisfaction is what is really impure! To all the ladies who have been messed up by this teaching, I speak freedom! You CAN enjoy sex as much as your husband–God wants that for you!
WOW – Phil I think you’ve just explained TM’s affinity towards PB&J sandwiches. Evil spicy-ness!
julie, thanks for bringing this up. Studies have shown that a large majority of women cannot reach climax via penetration alone. No oral and missionary only = no climax (for many women) = unhappy marriages. Women should not be made to feel “un-christian” for wanting to enjoy sex.
“Studies have shown that a large majority of women cannot reach climax via penetration alone.”
And then you factor in the physical changes that happen after a woman has a couple of kids. This is so, so true.
I remember this talk from last year. When Ron said the thing about no oral sex, one intern brought up the scripture from Song of Solomon and Ron answered, “That’s just how some people interpret that scripture.” He didn’t say anything on how he interpreted that passage. I really wanted to ask him what his interpretation of it was just to see what he would say but I didn’t.
I also remember my roommates and I having a long discussion about this in our room after we were taught this. I pulled up some Mark Driscoll sermons. I am all for what is mutually agreeable within the marriage covenant. This is one area in which I do not agree with Ron.
@RA
You need to rethink your litmus test. Is it alright for my wife and I to introduce farm animals into our sexual relationship as long as we both agree that it would be enjoyable and wouldn’t cause any physical or emotional harm?
There are limits, and they are not the limits we make up for ourselves.
It’s true that we each may have different limits. Those limits are defined by God within the context of our relationship with our spouse.
If you continue espousing the idea that whatever you and your spouse agree on is the same as what is right in God’s eyes, you’re probably doing a greater injustice than Luce is.
Charlie Brown – Yes, good point. It didn’t occur to me that I would have to limit the marriage bed to the husband and wife, but yes, obviously introducing farm animals or 3rd parties would be outside what I would consider appropriate Christian behavior.
Thanks for keeping me on my toes. 🙂
Jan2010, I’m glad you were able to have those conversations and think about things Ron might not have been 100% correct on. It is good to hear those conversations are happening.
I would also be careful, though, to avoid Mark Driscoll as your next source for teachings on sex. I don’t think it’s appropriate to start a debate on Driscoll’s theology or methods in this post (although it might be a fascinating topic for the forums!), but please be aware that he is known in many circles for his horribly sexist teachings. I certainly wouldn’t want to go to him for guidance when it comes to sex and relationships, even if he does have a more open mind than Ron Luce when it comes to this one specific area.
(I think Ron and Driscoll actually have a lot in common, as they routinely ridicule those who are “weak,” “pansy,” “limpwristed,” “hippie,” “wimpy,” etc.)
It’s not enough for Teen Mania to control every other part of interns, but they have to control their future sex lives too?!?! Man, this place is so jacked up. I keep realizing more and more hang-ups I have because of my time spent at the HA.
@ Charlie Brown
One thing I have seen in a toxic religious organization is that ministers will turn points such as possible third parties such as farm animals (Really, wtf?) not because people are actually considering taking the family heifer to bed, but because the reference to something ridiculous and/or sickening for most people is actually used in reference to other things the preacher finds abominable.
Since LizBR pointed out that they have slurs such as “”weak,” “pansy,” “limpwristed,” “hippie,” “wimpy,” etc.)” it seems very likely to me that their ideologies are somewhat ego driven and they thrive on causing others to share their own hang ups, and not so much because they are actually concerned that their students and the spouses will actually bed the family duck.
Julie: very, very well said. I think RA should make your comment its own blog post, because it sums up the sexist teaching about sex at TM and in much of evangelical Christianity very well.
Jeff: another really good point. Ron has issues.
And yes: poor Katie
Ok…comments restored. Hope blogger quits eating them.
@jeff
i agree. There is lots of fear mongering among cult leaders. I don’t think that’s relevant to this discussion though.
I used a reference that is culturally unacceptable because it makes it easier to measure the angle between the thought process, and the end result.
If you’re measuring geometric angles, it’s easier to measure accurately when you’re dealing with large scale items. Measuring a 15 degree angle when your rays are only .05 inches long is difficult without precise instruments. Measuring a 15 degree angle when the ray’s are 6 ft long is much easier.
Either way, the angle is still the same.
I use an extreme example to clearly expose the flawed thinking (aka the angle), not for shock value.
The flawed thinking can be exactly the same in 2 scenario’s (15 degrees), but the amplification of cultural irrelevance can make it plainly clear.
My point earlier was that RA’s process for determining what was right was not all that different than Ron Luces. Using your own rules, or using Ron Luce’s rules, are both going to put you on a divergent angle.
Ron is clearly injecting his own rules into what is acceptable in the bedroom. RA is clearly doing the same thing. Ron is saying “This is what I think is right.”. RA is saying “You can do what ever you think is right.”.
My point is, that’s the same flawed thinking.
Many things Ron says make him sound extremist. Some things he says make him sound cruel. I’ve even heard him say several things that make him sound ignorant.
In this one teaching, Ron goes ahead and says a multitude of things that make him sound…stupid. Not ignorant. Not unwise. Stupid.
I know that’s borderline defamatory, but I’m just stating an opinion. I’m not trying to be a troll…but RA, if this opens some sort of flaming session, I’m sorry, and you can feel free to delete this comment.
PS – Flamers: I didn’t say Ron IS stupid. I said this makes him SOUND stupid. That is all.
Wow. What a horrible sex partner Ron must be. Poor Katie. Seriously. But then again, she is so sexually repressed that she probably doesn’t know that she is missing anything.
I’m not trying to slam her. Just making a statement.
It’s one thing if you choose to not partake or give oral sex b/c you just don’t like it. It’s an entirely different thing to say that it is ungodly. Geez. Why must Christians put limits on everything and call it God-ordained doctrine?
Yes, poor Katie, but also, poor little Lucelings. His daughters are going to be very sexually frustrated if they don’t find men who have the exact same philosophy. Wait, is Ron going to videotape their wedding nights to make sure they do everything right, or how will he know?
Personally, weird coming from my own parents, but their definition on sex that I’ve adopted is “What’s beneficial to both and harmful to neither within the marriage relationship.” Obviously as some have pointed out, bringing in 3rd parties (whether human or animal) would be violating some other part of Scripture, somewhere. Lol. Also, I think a “need” for a dildo or other toy means the man probably needs to learn some new techniques, it’s embarrassing when a perfectly good battery-operated toy is a replacement, and I suppose the same could be said in the reverse situation.
There is no reason to assume that his kids will follow his teachings…they definitely seem to have their own minds. 🙂
Who are you to say what God would or would not be happy with?
You know, I truly believe that if there is a God, he would be greatly saddened that there are pseudo-ministries such as the HA out there distorting his word and character.
BTW, why not post under your real name rather than an anonymous?
I had a very hurtful and embarrassing experience last year when I was there. When I was at the Honor Academy my Dorm Director saw me doing laundry and confronted me. Im going to be blunt and tell you that she told me my underwear was inappropriate and that I could not wear them as an Intern, and thongs were not a ideal thing for a Christian lady. I was totally shocked by this random and hurtful statement. I told her that I was sorry but I never thought about it, and my mom bought me them. I never thought anyone could really tell you what kind of underwear or personal things to wear, but apparently they can. I didnt think much of it, until later on she brought my CA into the room, and they told me that if I wore them they could make boys stumble. I told them im sorry but if boys are looking bad at me, then thats their problem. Needless to say, it ended in me having to call my mom and she talked to leadership about this crazy and personal thing. My entire brother core then found out about it, and it was pretty embarrassing. For boys to find out you wear thongs, and that your having an honor council case because you wont change somethings that totally personal, is pretty absurd. Im still hurt by this issue, and cant talk to anyone about it. – Lauren
Lauren – I’m so sorry your personal boundaries were violated like that. Its inexcusable – and bizarre. Why should anyone care what kind of underwear you are wearing – as long as its not showing when you are around campus, I don’t see what the problem is. They really made you go before the Honor Council for that? What rule were you supposedly violating??
WOW Lauren, I am so very sorry that they did that to you! You should have the right to wear whatever underwear you want I mean it’s UNDERWEAR I am so so sorry you were stuck in that situation!
OH Hell. This reminds me of the time I was told wearing “red heels” was not appropriate. Because everyone knows red is a “distraction” for males…. SHEESH.
Because of size issues and the fact the wife likes to be able to breath during “intimacy” we have to adjust position somewhat. Good thing wife doesn’t share Rons view. If there a measurement of how close your faces have to be?
Post a Comment
Comments violating the comment policy may be deleted.
Comments on posts older than 7 days will go into moderation before publishing.