This paper examines whether marital intimacy can be taught or restored through deliberate intervention, approaching the question from both secular and Biblical perspectives. Drawing on research into cognitive behavioral couples therapy (CBCT), marital enrichment programs, and the dimensions of intimacy identified in the literature, the paper argues that intimacy skills are trainable. It also reviews scriptural guidance from Genesis, Ephesians, and Corinthians to show that God ordained intimate marriage from the beginning and provided instruction on how to achieve it. The paper further addresses unmet intimacy needs, including those caused by PTSD in combat veterans, and surveys evidence that therapeutic and faith-based approaches both yield measurable improvements in marital satisfaction and closeness.
The paper consistently moves from a general claim to supporting evidence and then back to the central thesis — a classic claim-evidence-warrant structure. For example, when discussing unmet intimacy needs, it introduces a theoretical model (CBT attributional dimensions), supports it with a direct quotation, and then links it back to the broader argument about trainability. This technique keeps each section analytically coherent rather than merely descriptive.
The paper opens with a research question and a dual-framework thesis. It then establishes historical context for marriage before defining the multi-dimensional nature of intimacy. A dedicated section on unmet needs — including a clinical case study of combat veterans — creates the problem the final section resolves. The teaching section surveys specific interventions (CBCT, Couple CARE, ACME, CCET) before returning to Biblical instruction. The conclusion ties both frameworks together in a unified answer to the opening question.
Marriage, as a concept, has become one of the most talked-about subjects in the United States over the past few years. The traditional idea that a man and a woman made up the couple within a marriage is being challenged, largely on the basis of the external benefits of marriage. Couples outside the traditional model often live together for long periods of time without a formal contractual agreement. This trend is coupled with accounts about the decline of marriage (Coontz, 2007) and reports that couples feel less need to marry than they once did, choosing instead to cohabitate. One thing that has not changed, however, is the belief that marriage should unite two people who are intimately connected (Polinska, 2011).
As a matter of fact, people still regard marriage as one of the most honored institutions in American society. Coontz (2007) stated: "The percentage of people who believe it is acceptable to cheat, lie, or keep secrets in a marriage has fallen over the past 40 years. Many couples work hard to enrich their relationship and deepen their intimacy, with a dedication that would astonish most couples of the past." This would actually surprise many observers, given that the divorce rate remains historically high (Polinska, 2011). Nevertheless, though people may not marry as readily as they once did, they still believe that once married, couples should remain together (Coontz, 2007).
This leads to a discussion of marital intimacy and whether it can be taught to couples who have either lost it or experienced its ebb. The fact that people believe married partners should remain together is unsurprising; that intimacy can be enhanced through a structured course or therapy may be more surprising to many. This paper examines marriage from both a Biblical and a secular perspective and argues that not only can intimacy be taught, but that it has been taught since ancient times.
The earliest known account of a man and a woman entering into what people today would recognize as marriage occurred when God joined Adam and Eve together, and Adam declared: "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh" (Gen. 2:24). Before this moment, in Genesis 2:18, God speaks of the intimacy a man needs: "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him." It is not merely the word "alone" that signals the intimacy God intends for the couple, but the word "helpmeet." Later verses, particularly in the New Testament, explain that a helpmeet is someone honored and loved by her husband (1 Peter 3:7; Eph. 5:25). Yet the history of marriage changed dramatically over the millennia.
While God arranged the first marriage, arranged marriages became the norm throughout much of history. Only recently have people across all classes and castes been able to choose their own mates freely. The reason was practical: "Marriage was seen as a means of enlarging one's economic enterprise, acquiring powerful in-laws, strengthening military alliances, or (for the less privileged) enlarging the family's labor force" (Polinska, 2011). Marriage was too consequential a transaction to be left to the individuals being wed, who might not choose the most advantageous match. For the economically disadvantaged, choices were often limited, particularly during periods when men were away at war or exploring new lands.
Times changed, as they often do, through shifts in prevailing thought. "Romantic love became widely accepted only in the nineteenth century under the influence of Enlightenment thought, the ideals of the French and American Revolutions, and of the Romantic movement" (Polinska, 2011). This does not mean that people never fell in love before this era, but that marriages were primarily arranged rather than self-selected. The concept of intimacy was also different: prior to the early twentieth century, women were largely regarded as property (Coontz, 2007), first owned by their fathers and then transferred to their husbands. Because of this arrangement, marital intimacy was not considered a priority in the way it is today (Coontz, 2007).
Marital intimacy was nonetheless one of God's concerns, as the scriptures already cited demonstrate. The concept is elaborated most fully in the writings of Paul, particularly in Ephesians chapter five, which provides the most detailed Biblical explanation of how spouses are to relate to one another. To wives Paul says, "Wives, submit yourselves unto your husbands, as unto the Lord" (Eph. 5:22). This may sound severe, but verse 25 places an equally demanding charge on husbands: "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church, and gave Himself for it." The wife is called to submit to a man who loves her as Christ loved the church — enough to die for it — a standard that is extraordinary and difficult to meet. The chapter concludes: "Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverences her husband" (Eph. 5:33). The husband demonstrates intimacy through love; the wife through reverence. God gave each partner the instruction most suited to their individual nature, yet people throughout history have struggled to follow it.
Intimacy encompasses the sexual dimension of marriage, but that is not its sole component. Stahman (2004) identifies eight distinct dimensions of intimacy: "social, emotional, cognitive/planning, financial, spiritual, intergenerational, affectional, and sexual." The social dimension concerns how the couple spends time together — not that they share every interest, but that they genuinely enjoy one another's company (Stahman, 2004). The emotional dimension involves how each partner feels when thinking of the other while apart, including the sense of security that comes from that thought. Most committed couples also share a desire to build a long-term relationship and make decisions in service of that shared goal (Polinska, 2011).
Financial discord is frequently cited by divorced couples as a primary cause of separation (Coontz, 2007), so financial unity — a shared approach to earning, spending, and planning — constitutes its own dimension of intimacy. Spiritual unity is another important element; while many couples have successfully navigated different religious upbringings (Coontz, 2007), Stahman (2004) found through his research that spiritual unity meaningfully contributes to marital intimacy. The intergenerational dimension acknowledges that marriage joins two families with potentially very different customs and expectations, a dynamic that has the power to impair a couple's closeness. Affectional intimacy — caring for one another on an emotional and physical level that does not require sexual expression — is also distinct and important (Stahman, 2004). And finally, there is sexual intimacy.
When the word "intimacy" is used today, many people immediately think of its sexual dimension (Coontz, 2007; Polinska, 2011; Stahman, 2004), yet as the list above shows, that is only one component. Stahman (2004) writes: "An intimate sexual relationship is one of the most important aspects of marriage. It keeps marriage vital. It is the glue that holds couples together. Without it, small problems become large ones, and large problems can result in destroying the marriage." Sexual intimacy often signals the overall health of the relationship; when it diminishes, it may indicate that one partner is not feeling close to the other. "The sexual side of marriage is closely linked with the emotional and personal elements in the relationship… What the married couple have to achieve, therefore, is a sexual relationship that expresses, sustains, and renews their deepest and most tender feelings for one another" (Stahman, 2004).
This theme is also addressed in I Corinthians 7, where Paul writes to Christians who had received inadequate instruction and were, in some cases, distorting their faith as a result. In verse four Paul states: "The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband; and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife." Paul was acutely aware of the sexual perversions prevalent in Greek culture and wanted to clarify God's design for marital intimacy. The Bible frequently presents counterintuitive guidance, as God tells Isaiah: "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts" (Is. 55:9). In Corinth, Paul teaches that spouses cannot treat their bodies as solely their own; in marriage, the two have become one flesh (Gen. 2:24), and in that union, bodily autonomy is shared — which Paul presents as the ultimate expression of intimacy.
It is a sad fact that sometimes couples cannot meet the intimacy needs of their partner. Researchers explain why intimacy needs go unmet in different ways, but many trace the disconnect to a misunderstanding of the other person's needs (Coontz, 2007; Kirby, Baucom & Peterman, 2005; Polinska, 2011). Polinska (2011) argues that "the invention of the historically unprecedented idea that marriage should be based on love and mutual affection is responsible for greater fragility, but also for creating good, satisfying marriages that bring much happiness to people's lives." He views love as a recent and culturally specific requirement for marriage and sees two possible outcomes: on the positive side, deeply fulfilling partnerships; on the negative, a fragility that leaves many needs chronically unmet (Polinska, 2011).
Kirby, Baucom, and Peterman (2005) found that "fulfillment of communal needs (e.g., intimacy) was highly correlated with relationship satisfaction" and that "intimacy is of particular importance because a sense of closeness has been given high priority in intimate relationships in our society." They further note that "not having one's partner respond appropriately to a request for intimacy can be viewed as a negative event or response from the partner. According to the CBT model, individuals will have internal reactions (i.e., thoughts and emotions) to this negative event, which may lead to external responses (i.e., behaviors)" (Kirby, Baucom & Peterman, 2005). The request for intimacy need not be sexual; it may be as simple as reaching out for emotional connection and finding one's partner distracted or dismissive. Unmet needs of this kind are seen as precursors to behaviors ranging from withholding affection to concealing the hurt caused by the partner's unintentional indifference (Kirby, Baucom & Peterman, 2005).
When needs go unmet, the marriage may not immediately end, but it can enter a prolonged period of diminished fulfillment (Stahman, 2004). The spurned spouse may enter a cycle of blame that progressively erodes feelings of closeness. According to Kirby, Baucom, and Peterman (2005), "there are three important attributional dimensions that will influence how an event is experienced: (a) Locus — who is viewed as the cause of the event; (b) stability — whether the cause is likely to change over time; and (c) globality — whether the cause will likely influence many aspects of the relationship." First, the wounded partner identifies the other as the cause of the disconnect, beginning the unraveling of intimacy. If that cause is perceived as stable — an enduring character trait rather than a momentary lapse — the damage deepens. Finally, if the wounded spouse perceives the same indifference appearing across multiple domains of the marriage, the problem compounds further. As Stahman (2004) notes, "An intimate relationship is one of caring, mutual trust and acceptance"; once those are questioned, the foundation becomes unstable.
Unmet intimacy needs can also result from physical or emotional injuries sustained by one partner. A study of soldiers who had experienced post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) following combat found that "one of the most common manifestations of PTSD is impaired marital adjustment and chronic marital distress" (Ahmady, Karami, Noohi, Mokhtari, Gholampour, & Rahimi, 2009). The injury — whether physical or emotional — leaves the soldier unable to offer the intimacy that was once a natural feature of the marriage. The same pattern can arise in other marriages from disease, emotional distress, or incapacitation of various kinds (Ahmady et al., 2009).
The central question this paper addresses is: can marital intimacy be taught? The concern is that a person who cannot experience intimate feelings for a spouse, or who has lost those feelings, may be unable to recover or develop the intimacy that both research and scripture indicate they need. The research shows that attempts to teach or coach marital intimacy have taken many forms, with varying results.
Polinska, W. (2011). "Till death do us part"? Buddhist insights on Christian marriage. Buddhist-Christian Studies, 30, 29–40.
Stahman, R. F. (2004). Intimacy in marriage. Brigham Young University. Retrieved from
You’re 70% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.