The Freudian Illusion of Adolescence

Throughout antiquity, three life stages have been identified and studied. These life stages have been defined by childhood, youth, and old age. The study of philosophy and the natural world has verified these stages of human development for millennia. Within the last 150 years, the creation of so called “adolescence” has drastically changed western societal norms and human development. This recent change has interrupted the transition from childhood to adulthood, creating a fundamental crisis of identity. Purporting so called “adolescence” will not prepare children for adulthood, but only maintain the behavioral status quo considered acceptable by “adolescents”.

By embracing so called “adolescence” one cannot embrace or learn the responsibilities of adulthood because adulthood is philosophically and categorically different. Behaviors that are acceptable for “adolescents” are not acceptable for adults. Therefore, “adolescence” is not a training ground for adulthood, but a life stage of experimentation and boundary-testing. This causes much frustration in the home, as the number of rules increase while they should be decreasing. Unfortunately, many times the law must get involved as the boundary is tested beyond the home.

The legal definitions of adulthood have been created for our protection, not as a standard age by which we can hope to raise children. Western law was not created as a substitute for good parenting, but as a safeguard from the effects of bad parenting. Embracing the responsibilities of adulthood is not illegal, but failing to by the age of 18 may be.

Proof of the above lies within the common practice of entering a pub and becoming intoxicated on one’s 18th birthday. This practice is evidence that the western concept of coming-of-age is not actually about embracing responsibility and adulthood, but pushing the boundaries of the law. Certainly it is not illegal to get drunk on one’s 18th birthday, but the activities that follow often include police officers.

Because the teenage years are formative, this is all the more reason to embrace adult responsibilities and attitudes. The habits learned in these years will last a lifetime of adulthood. If one learns to shirk responsibility and become ego-centric during the teenage years, it is more than highly probable that they will remain this way for their entire lives. The neuroplasticity of youth is a double-edge sword, as the twig is bent, so grows the tree.

The concept of “adolescence” can only provide a reference point for “normative” behaviors. It will never prepare anyone for adulthood, because the expectations of adolescents and adults are vastly different. One cannot learn the responsibilities of adulthood by being locked into a category that fails to expect the behaviors of an adult. It is only by embracing adulthood, not adolescence, that one can learn appropriate responsibilities and enter emotional and relational maturity.

1 Corinthians 7 is an authoritative text

Among western evangelicals, teachings surrounding sexuality and marriage purposefully avoid 1 Corinthians 7, due to issues of convenience and ignorance, as well as some confusion regarding identity. Some pastors claim that 1 Corinthians chapter 7 is not authoritative, and should be balanced with other scriptures on the same subject. Upon careful study of the references to self-control and abstinence, we do not find these passages contradictory to the chapter, but they clearly and explicitly resonate with it. 1 Corinthians chapter 7, then, is a fitting capstone for instructions on marriage and sexuality, taking into consideration all of human sexual history and teaching in the bible, as well as Christ’s discourses on the subject.

The question of ability and giftedness arises multiple times during teachings of celibacy. Christ Himself seemed to support celibacy, only if the disciple could accept this call. In Matthew 19:12, Christ speaks of celibacy being “given” and “accepted”. “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12 For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

Christ’s teaching on celibacy seems to indicate that issues of self control are not unrelated to the marriage question. Paul seems to support that conclusion with his discourse numerous times. In verse 8 he says “Now to the unmarried[a] and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. 9 But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.” Earlier he states “because of the sexual immorality among you, each man should have his own wife”. He supports the effort for celibacy, only if it would not be a barrier in achieving sexual morality in the Church. He wishes that all men could be like him (celibate) “but one has this gift, another has that”. Paul confirms that celibacy is desirable for the sake of the Kingdom of God, but if one cannot abstain from sexual immorality, it defeats its original purpose.

It is important to have clarity on the abstain command given by Paul after he confronted the fence-sitting Peter. He conferred with the council in Jerusalem, and then wrote to the church, summarizing all the Jewish laws and customs with this simple command: “You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.” (Acts 15:29) Considering that sexual immorality was such an important issue, 1 Corinthians 7 would be useful in avoiding sexual immorality, thus amplifying and clarifying the abstain command.

Genesis clearly honors marriage, as well as the entire Old Testament, especially at a time when spiritual blessings were directly tied to one’s offspring. The only thing in creation that was “not good” was the fact that man was “alone”. While woman and marriage were created immediately after this, community is not solely attained through this union. Christ was the product of the human and the Divine, and spiritual birth and re-birth is as significant as the physical. Because of Christ’s work, physical union is not necessary for the Divine community to grow, but simply obedience to Christ as Head, and service to God’s family, the Church. 1 Corinthians 7, then, resonates with this fact, claiming that both marriage and celibacy propagate Christ’s Church when they are fully respected and honored. Both are solutions to the “ungood” state, when fully understood and engaged.

Supported by scriptures throughout the bible, 1 Corinthians chapter 7 is the authoritative text for marriage and sexuality, and should be carefully and dutifully adhered to by leaders and pastors of Christ’s Church. Dismissing or confusing it will undoubtedly cause sexual immorality to occur, thus leading men and women astray from orthodoxy. Such a situation would result in debasement of the ordinance of marriage and a false concept of celibacy, abstinence, self-control, and purity.

Embrace suffering?

Various forms and movements of Christianity have come and gone over its dynamic history. Many revelations have fueled the creation and formation of various denominations and ministries. Among nearly all of these, the cross remains a central icon. For many of these forms, this symbol of perseverance and suffering reminds members of Christ sacrifice, while somehow acting as protection against pain and suffering. Members conclude that Christ has suffered on our behalf, therefore we need never experience His suffering. This notion is not only unfounded, it brings the sect into questions of origin. A form of Christianity that does not embrace suffering is illegitimate, especially if it claims to be an apostolic one.

Among new and trendy forms of Christianity, suffering is akin to the plague, and the cross magically absorbs all bad feelings. If one suffers and is not healed, he or she is condemned for lack of faith. Members of these sects quote 1 Peter 2:24, claiming that “by His stripes you are healed”. The question that must be answered is: healed from what? “He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness.” Christ’s work deals with the problem of sin, and the method of spiritual healing is prescribed by the Great Physician. Certainly Christ did heal the sick as He went about his ministry. He prescribed physical healing for the problem of sin in these cases, to point people to the True Cure; Himself. But this case of healing the sick did not always cure the spiritual problem. “Were not 10 cleansed?” Many did not return to thank Christ or follow Him after their healing in Luke 17.

The second source of sin helps us to understand why suffering may be necessary in dying to sin. The “flesh”, or the carnal nature, desires to be free from God, and it constantly desires to serve itself, and its pleasures. The spiritual man is choked out by this enemy, and seeds of Salvation are uprooted. Considering that the flesh is an enemy that we cannot escape in this life, Christ may afflict this enemy to accomplish His eternal purposes. After Paul visited the third heaven, he was given a “thorn in the flesh”, sent by God to keep him humble after his great revelations. The words of Christ, after Paul had pleaded to be released, reveal the purpose of this affliction. “My power is made perfect in weakness”. The purpose of suffering in this case, is to make Christ’s power perfect. It was not because Paul lacked faith.

The obvious contradiction to the prosperity gospel, lies within the dozen or so verses in the New Testament, discussing the fact that we “share in His sufferings”. These verses are found in Romans, 2 Corinthians, Philippians, Colossians, 2 Timothy, Hebrews, and 1 Peter. For our souls to prosper, affliction is necessary. Strengthening the flesh will only cause it to contradict the Spirit and lead us towards destruction.

What then about choosing suffering? Should we afflict ourselves? This question of choosing the path of suffering will separate the novice from the spiritual athlete. Hebrews 11 is the perfect answer to this question. “24 By faith Moses, when he had grown up, refused to be known as the son of Pharaoh’s daughter. 25 He chose to be mistreated along with the people of God rather than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin. 26 He regarded disgrace for the sake of Christ as of greater value than the treasures of Egypt, because he was looking ahead to his reward.”

For those who are worthy of eternal rewards, choosing the path of Christ will always be the Narrow Way, where comforts and luxuries may get in the way of a greater call. To share in Christ’s work means to share in His sufferings, where God’s power was made perfect in weakness for all time; on the cross.

God is a community

For two Millenia, Christians have been living in various forms of community. In the book of Acts, the Bible states that “they were together, and had everything in common”. The text describes a level of closeness and unity that is not normative in many western forms of Christianity. Many suggest that independence is important and community should exist only in ways that do not infringe on personal aspirations and desires. Among many reasons, one reason why Christians should accept the value of interdependence rather than independence, is that God Himself is a community of infinite life.This life-generating union we find in Genesis in the creation account. God says “let Us make mankind in our image”, and thereafter, “in His image He created them, male and female”. God was a community in the beginning, and created a biological and spiritual version of Himself when He created mankind. Therefore, mankind is created to be a community of exponential propagation. God commands “Be fruitful and multiply”. The key to this life-generating force, is the synergy that finds its origin in the Spirit of God. Biological and spiritual birth and rebirth finds its origin rooted in the very essence of the Holy Trinity.

Spiritual and physical death originates from a spirit other than God, that which we understand as evil. The sources of evil are clear in the bible and have been written about for thousands of years. The disunity began in the garden as Adam and Eve acted independently of God and ate fruit outside God’s provision. God’s provision was abundant and fertile, but mankind sought sustenance outside of it. Because God created everything, the only sustenence outside His provision is, metaphorically, a dry wasteland, a place that is not fertile and that no Life can exist. It is a place that Mankind is god and a judge, thus eternally produces bad fruit. The three sources of evil are his world, his flesh, and his master, the Destroyer.

The Second Member of the Trinity is the spirit of rebirth, the Only Son, the Alpha and Omega, Jesus the Christ. Chosen by God to regenerate the ones chosen before the foundation of the world, He faithfully married humanity with the Divine, restoring the order of creation. He presents humanity to God as a “pure and spotless bride” at the wedding feast of the Lamb. She also prepares herself to meet God by listening to the Holy Spirit and confessing and believing in the Christ’s eternal work at the cross.

The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not only a sustainable community, They are a community of infinite power and eternal life that cannot be contained. Christians who know the character of God and His attributes desire to exist in the same way, being obedient to the Spirit of Life. Those who are not born of God do not understand the nature of God, but find their fulfillment in pseudo-abundance, a lesser spirit that only looks life-giving and fruitful. This spirit of man eventually produces bad fruit. It is not connected to the Vine, thus its fruit does not survive when tested by the refining fire in the book Revelation. Those born into the family of God, find themselves in the universal Church, the community of Saints, of which Christ is the Head.