Share

“Man Seeking Love Meets Ashtray:” The Sexual Indelibility of Mankind

By Dr. Jeffery J Ventrella

“Antidotes to Idolatry” – Part 4 

CAVEAT:  This Dicta includes descriptions of pagan sexual conduct and may not be suitable for younger readers

“Man who married sex doll dumps her for an ashtray”[1]

Yuri identifies as a pansexual, and can fall in love with ‘a character, an image, a soul, just a person’”.[2]

“[T]hey  . . . exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man . . .”[3]

It’s a modern, though pagan, love story.  Yuri met Margo in a bar – sounds rather typical.  He immediately liked her.  When a patron disrespected her, Yuri, being the jacked body-builder that he is, intervened.  Then Yuri began dating Margo and they were a steady couple for two years.  Then, as love blossomed, the knot was tied in a wedding ceremony.  Alas, it was not meant to be, and they split; not even plastic surgery could preserve her attractiveness to Yuri.  

Oh, by the way:  Margo is a doll, a real mannequin-like doll.  Yuri now seeks companionship with his next “lover” . . . an ashtray.  You read that right:  An ashtray – no [cigarette] butts about it!  Some see Yuri’s escapades as purely a freak show; others see it as a publicity stunt; still others view it in clinical terms:        Agalmatophilia – being sexually attracted to inanimate objects, particularly statues, mannequins, and similar figurative depictions.[4]  How should we think Christianly about this?  Is there a coherent way of understanding this repellant and deviate conduct beyond the “yuck factor,” which certainly is apparent?  Let’s get to the gist.

Creation and the Heterosexual Normative Binary

Every human enjoys a unique story.  And, there are billions of them.  Yet each human story is situated in God’s overarching story:  Creation, Fall, and Redemption.  It is this Christian metanarrative that supplies meaning to each of our individual stories. That story begins with God, the Creator.[5]

This God creates from nothing all that is, including mankind.  Critically, Mankind is a distinctive part of creation:  the only creature made in the image and likeness of the Creator.  Maleness and femaleness together comprise and bear the imago Dei:

“Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Then God said, And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

      So God created man in his own image,

            in the image of God he created him;

            male and female he created them.[6]

Accordingly, God entrusted the Cultural Mandate jointly to both Adam and Eve, because they comprise His image:  

And God blessed them. And God said to them,“Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”[7]

There’s more:  This creation account informs us of an irreducible metaphysical constituency of this Imago Dei.  Mankind is an immutably dimorphic sexed creation – expressed in a heterosexual binary – this sexual binary reflects the cosmological Binary between Creator and Creation.[8]  Note carefully:  the imago Dei label applies to Mankind as a sexed creature – not an androgynous or sexually ambiguous one.

These creational norms establish and depict a hierarchy and corresponding boundary between Mankind and the rest of creation predicated on the imago Dei.  Transgressing the boundaries separating Mankind from the other creatures, and/or pursuing homosexual practice within the imago Dei ultimately undermines the Creator/Creature distinction.  And, it comprises an idolatrous use of the created order.

Idols Aren’t Idle:  Sin and the Antithetical Progression

Paul, who in many ways, provides “NT commentary” on Moses’ Creation account,[9] explains what the Fall has done to the created order.  Romans 1:18-32 teaches that when sin entered the world, it precipitated theological and ethical consequences:

  • The Truth is suppressed[10] in unrighteousness
  • The Truth is then exchanged for the Lie[11]
  • Creation, instead of the Creator, is worshipped and served[12]
  • Unrighteous practices manifest as a correlative to ungodly worship[13]
  • Unrighteous practices become “approved” in both cultural convention[14] and actual law[15]

Paul is starkly realistic, but he is not bleak or pessimistic.  In fact, he later notes in Romans 12 that Christ and His redemption reverse the Theological, Spiritual, and Ethical deviations he outlined earlier:

  • Instead of giving our bodies to sexually deviant practices, we now present them as “living sacrifices,” “holy and acceptable to God”[16]
  • Doing so constitutes “spiritual worship” instead of idolatrous creation worship
  • And given renewed minds, we now can discern how we ought to conduct ourselves, resisting the world’s conventions and ethical norms (“unrighteous practices”) that arose from the exchange of the truth for the lie[17]

But why is Paul seemingly fixated on sexuality and sexual practices?  Is he simply obsessed with sex or somehow suppressing his own sexuality, as some unorthodox people teach?  Hardly.

Idolatry’s Sexual Dimension

Though the scope of depravity is comprehensive,[18] there’s no getting around it: Paul’s prime illustration of this depravity centers on vile sexual practices.  God “gave them up”[19] to:

  • Dishonoring their bodies[20]
  • Dishonorable passions[21]
  • Shameful acts, including sodomy and lesbianism

Have you ever noticed that religious systems that stray from Christian reality inevitably manifest a strong sexual component?  This stands to reason since Mankind is a sexed creature as well as a religious creature, having been created by God.  If Mankind expresses his religiosity (“worship”) falsely, he will eventually conduct himself improperly sexually as well.[23] Consider some standard institutions – as well as several recent examples making headlines – in which deviate sexual practices form an approved core of the group’s identity:

  • Mormonism and Islam both institutionally embrace polygamy[24]
  • Hindu practices like Tantric Yoga[25] incorporate sexual experimentation as part of pursuing moksa[26] or enlightenment
  • One Taste, a “wellness” company, promotes “orgasm meditation,” including pressuring women members to sexually satisfy investors supposedly as part of achieving enlightenment[27]
  • NXIVM – a cult promising female empowerment coerced members to sexually engage with its founder, who then branded them like cattle[28]
  • Lawrence Ray – the father of a sophomore coed – led a domineering sex cult which initially operated from student housing at Sarah Lawrence University[29]

The reason Paul emphasizes sexual sin is because marring and deviating from the creational heterosexual binary detracts from God’s Cosmological Binary, the distinction between Creator and Creature.  In other words, sexual sin is not simply yucky ethically, but depicts deep (and deeply erroneous) theological opinions regarding God, including dampening the reflection of His glory in and by His imago Dei.  How so?  Let’s consider Yuri and Margo again.  But first, let’s consider how suppressed truth continues to operate.

The Echoes of the Law Written on Heart

Let’s more closely examine these points.  While repulsive, what we see in gross sexual sin is that – just as Paul notes – the truth remains.  It is neither vaporized, nor obliterated. Rather, it is suppressed, not eliminated.  This means the truth abides, and its echoes surface even in the midst of deep sin, as we will see even with Yuri and his “marriage” to a sex doll.  How so?

First, Man is imago Dei and can’t not be imago Dei.  Accordingly, being religious is inescapable.  The question is not whether Man will express religion, but rather, what will be that expression’s object:  The Creator or something in the Creation, like an ashtray.

Second, God has written the work of the law on every human’s heart.  This creates an important testimonial dynamic which either excuses and/or accuses Man; ethical neutrality cannot exist:

For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them.[30]

Third, Man distorts and denies the truth even though his unrighteous practices strive in some ways to conform to the law written on his heart; he cannot escape it.  This means that for example, while he may reject heterosexual monogamy in favor of polyamory, he will still insist on imposing moral rules on such arrangements.[31] These comprise the sort of ethically conflicting thoughts Paul mentions, which simultaneously accuse and excuse.

Participants often express that their deviate sexual practices possess or satisfy a spiritual component, an understanding which testifies to man’s inherent religiosity.  This is Yuri’s view:

What do you like most about Margo? What made this relationship different from your previous ones?

One of my most important previous relationships was when I was 20. I dated this girl for seven years, and this long-term relationship made us transform and change together.  

I loved her very much but she wanted children, and I was not then ready for fatherhood. I still don’t want to have children. So we decided to break up, and for a long time, I could not meet other girls because I still loved her very much. 

After we broke up, I began dating guys, and had my first experience with a man. That’s when I realised how diverse my sexual needs were. I also realised it was important for me to find a partner who shared my sexual preferences, as well as the spiritual qualities that were important to me.[32] 

This echoes the notion that marriage, though a creational ordinance, is imbued with spiritual significance.[33]  Yuri, as a man created in God’s image, cannot escape his religious nature and yearnings, and thereby deems his relationship to a sex doll as being “spiritual.”

Notice also, Yuri sought to solemnize the relationship to Margo the doll via “marriage.”  In his own country (Kazakhstan), this constituted a valid marriage because the only requirement necessitated the participants be a male and a female.[34]  This echoes the truth that marriage is a publicly witnessed event; it must be solemnized in the presence of witnesses to be valid.  His insistence on having a ceremony reflects his desire to have his conduct “excused,” just as Paul notes – the work of the law on his heart is active, not passive.  He desires his conduct to be both ethically excused and culturally approved.

Moreover, following his “separation” from Margo the doll, Yuri sought companionship with an ashtray.  As he expressed it:

He explained all about his new relationship, saying: 

“I like the touch of sharp metal on my skin, it excites me so I think you can understand what attracts me to this ashtray.”

“I have a special passion for objects — they have always been alive for me,” he added.

“This is certainly not the same as a person, these are completely different feelings. This is akin to how a violinist can love his violin which is 300 years old.”[35]

And, in a repellant turn we see Yuri planning to “consummate” his new relationship.  How so?  By having an artificial vagina somehow implanted in it.[36] This impulse echoes the truth that in an actual marriage, two become one flesh.  Yuri recognizes at some level that an intimate relationship requires physical consummation, aping the biblical account.[37].  Again, the work of the law actively drives him and his deviant conduct to pursue and attempt to conform to godly forms of righteousness yet denying its godliness. 

Yuri’s sad tale confirms at least two things.  First, mankind is inescapably religious; he is and can’t not be a worshipper.  The only question is what is the object of his religious impulse:  the true and living God, or in his case a piece of metal designed for discarded stinky tobacco products?  

Second, mankind is indelibly sexual; he can’t not be sexually expressive.[38]  The only question is whether he will channel his sexual energy as designed into what Paul deems “natural relations.”[39]  

So, as we approach “Pride Month” we can confidently engage with those embracing the LGBTQ agenda in dialogue by graciously pressing these twin truths – their deviant sexual agenda confirms the accuracy – and hope – of the Christian worldview.  Paul, who deeply described sexual sin, nevertheless confidently noted that in the power of Christ, “such were some of you” [church goers in Corinth]      

But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.[40]

May Yuri receive the grace of repentance and actually obtain abundant life.[41]  One, like Yuri, made in the image of God needs no ashtray for achieving sexual validation.  To contend otherwise is just blowing smoke.


[1] https://theweek.com/news/world-news/954014/man-who-married-sex-doll-dumps-her-for-an-ashtray

[2] Man who married a sex doll finds new love with ashtray he took from a nightclub, https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/man-who-married-sex-doll-24895898

[3] Romans 1:23

[4]Scobie, A., & Taylor, A. J. (1975). “Perversions ancient and modern: I. Agalmatophilia, the statue syndrome. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 11(1), 49–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6696(197501)11:1<49::AID-JHBS2300110112>3.0.CO;2-6

[5] Peter J. Leithart, Creator – A Theological Interpretation of Genesis 1 (2023)

[6] Gen. 1:26, 27

[7] Gen. 1:28

[8] Dr. Jones has called this the distinction between Hetero and Homo cosmologies.

[9] Peter Jones, Capturing the Pagan Mind:  Paul’s Blueprint for Thinking and Living in the New Global Culture (2003)

[10] Romans 1:18 – note, however, that the Truth is not obliterated; it is “held down” or suppressed – this, as will be seen, echoes into the culture even given sinful conduct.

[11]Romand 1:25 – for unfathomable reasons, most English translations compare “the truth” with “a lie” but the Greek contains the definite article, “ho” and thus the better translation is directly parallel: “the truth” is exchanged for “the lie,” as the NKJV renders it.

[12] Romans 1:25

[13] Romans 1:26-31 – notice the comprehensive scope of evil practices outlined here.

[14] Notice how even Christians, especially in social media, regularly gossip, slander, boast, and ruthlessly act – often justifying such speech as using a “serrated edge.”  Pro tip:  those expressing keyboard courage in this manner would do well to marinate on James 3 before blathering in cyberspace.

[15] For example, the Supreme Court of the United States “constitutionally codified” same-sex “marriage” in 2015, Obergefell v. Hodges 576 U.S. 644 (2015)

[16] Romans 12:1

[17] Romans 12:2

[18] See note 13, supra 

[19] Gk. Paradoken – Note too, Paul’s intentionally using the same term in describing God’s “giving over” His own Son for our redemption:  Romans 8:32: “He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up [paradoken] for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things?”

[20] Romans 1:24

[21] Romans 1:26 – This truth irreconcilably clashes with those who teach – like ReVoice and Preston Sprinkle – “Side B sexuality,” that is, that same-sex attraction is not in itself sinful and therefore there exists a new third category of humanity labeled “Gay Christian.”  The biblical taxonomy only includes two human categories:  Christian and non-Christian.  Cf., the Tridentine (Roman Catholic) doctrine of concupiscence: “This concupiscence, which the Apostle sometimes calls sin,[23] the holy council declares the Catholic Church has never understood to be called sin in the sense that it is truly and properly sin in those born again, but in the sense that it is of sin and inclines to sin.”  Council of Trent, Session V (17 June 1546).  Unlike some Protestants who hold to this unbiblical position, the Roman Catholic Church is sufficiently honest to acknowledge that the apostle Paul calls evil desires themselves sin.  Cf., Col 3:5 – earthly “passion” and “evil desire” are to be “put to death.”

[22] Romans 1:28

[23] The obverse is also true:  people who compromise sexually often change their theological convictions in an effort to justify their immoral conduct.  The point is that theology and ethics correlate both ways.

[24] While it is true that the Utah Mormons, seeking statehood, and after losing in litigation, “revised” this position, other strains of Mormonism continue the practice.  See, Benjamin Park, American Zion:  A New History of Mormonism (2024); and U.S. v. Reynolds, 98 U.S. 145 (1879)

[25] Red Tantra:  Sexuality and Attachment, https://aumtantrayoga.com/red-tantra-sexuality-and-attachment/

[26] Sanskrit for “liberation” or “release” from the cycle of reincarnation

[27] The group’s founder has been federally indicted for grooming followers to engage in sex with investors:  https://nypost.com/2024/02/02/metro/glamorous-founder-of-alleged-orgasm-cult-appears-in-ny-court-after-being-accused-of-grooming-members-into-having-sex-with-investors/

[28] How NXIVM Seduced Hollywood Stars and America’s Most Powerful Elite Into a Barbaric ‘Sex Cult’https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/tv/a33658764/what-is-nxivm-sex-cult-celebrities-stars-the-vow-hbo-true-story/

[29]The docuseries Stolen Youth sets forth the “horrifying manipulation of several college students” https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2023/feb/09/stolen-youth-documentary-hulu-sarah-lawrence-cult

[30] Romans 2:14, 15

[31] Lessons from a 20 Person Polycule sets forth a number of norms, boundaries, et al – in other words, rules that govern the relationship, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/04/15/magazine/polycule-polyamory-boston.htmlsee alsoLearn About Polyamory:  What is a Polycule?  This describes “normative” consensual types of arrangements – in other words RULES that apply depending on the structure of the polyamorous relationship:  the V, the Triad, the Quad, Platonic Polycule, the Polyfidelities Polycule, https://www.polyamproud.com/post/learn-about-polyamory-what-is-a-polycule

[32] https://www.vice.com/en/article/wx8ywm/man-married-sex-doll-viral-relationship

[33]Marriage ultimately points to the union between Christ and Church, the Bridegroom meeting his Bride as the heavenly Jerusalem comes to earth in the consummation.  Eph. 5:31, 32; and Rev. 21:1, 2

[34] Naturally this doll merely manifests stereotypical female attributes.  For Kazakh law to recognize this doll as “female’ is absurd.

[35] https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/man-who-married-sex-doll-24895898

[36] “I think the vagina can be placed in a tube and the tube can be placed in a round hole where cigarettes are thrown,” he said. https://nypost.com/2021/09/01/man-who-married-his-sex-doll-is-in-love-with-ashtray-now/  Note that in effect, this is actually ethically better than what occurs with supposed “reassignment surgery” in which disfiguring and sterilizing perfectly healthy sex organs is deemed helpful to the confused patient.  

[37] Gen. 2:24

[38] Even the chaste Buddhist monk is sexually expressive because by denying his “natural relations,” as Paul puts it (Rom. 1:26, 27), he confirms he is a sexual creature.  Paul also rejected this form of celibacy, noting: “[S]ome] will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth.” 1 Timothy 4:1–3

[39] Romans 1:26, 27

[40] 1 Cor. 6:11

[41] Jn. 10:10

Posted

May 13, 2024

Scriptures

Contributors

Categories

Blog