Welcome to a series in which I give my responses, from the perspective of generous spaciousness, to a sermon given in an evangelical mega-church. Another pastor in the area asked me to respond to this particular sermon – and because it seemed like so many typical evangelical sermons that I hear seeking to address homosexuality, I thought it might be helpful to make these thoughts more widely available through the blog. I would encourage you to read part 1 and part 2 before diving into this piece.
The preacher stated that he wanted to make four theological propositions, offer three exhortations to same-sex attracted people (his language), and two exhortations for family members and friends. In this post we look at the second theological proposition. It is one that we hear so often. The bible is clear. Period the end. No conversation. No questions. No historical or cultural context to consider in any weighty manner. No matter that the concept of homosexuality was completely foreign to any of the authors of Scripture at the time of writing. Never mind that the idea of sexual orientation would not have been comprehended in the cultures and by the people that the Scriptures were originally intended for. And yes, of course these things were not surprises or unknown to God. But God spoke through particular people in particular times and in particular places.
What about the many scholars and pastors and Christians who would understand God moving through a progressive revelation? Understanding that God reveals himself more and more through the witness of Scripture – and is most fully revealed in Jesus Christ – helps us interpret earlier passages and reminds us to interpret texts to the early church in a manner that is consistently Christ-like. In other words, if our interpretation isn’t Christ-like we ought to go back to the drawing board so-to-speak, get down on our knees and ask the Spirit to make the person of Christ clear to us in the passage. I would also be among those who believe that the Holy Spirit is alive and well and actively continuing to reveal Jesus to us in our current context.
I often say that Christians are not just responsible to articulate what they believe – but why they believe it. What I did not hear in this particular sermon, and what I often miss from those who claim “the bible is clear” is why they believe that. If we are indeed talking about the potential for an entire population to form intimate relationships and families or the prohibition to do the same, surely that is worth a deeper explanation of why God would continue to hold these expectations given our current understanding that orientation is not simplistically tied to excess and lust. Now I know gay Christians who are committed to celibacy – and I deeply respect them for their care in discerning and their consistency in living out their convictions. But when I invite them to share with me WHY they believe the way they do, they have a lot more to say than simply, “the bible is clear.”
And again, there are Christians, in increasing number, who do not think the bible is so clear. What is one to do with these people – who profess faith in Jesus Christ and commitment to the Scriptures – even if they do so in a way that is different than this particular preacher? As I so often say, there are different parts in the Body of Christ, and they have different functions, but one part of the Body cannot say to another part, “I have no need of you.” I did not hear any acknowledgment in the sermon that there is diversity in the Body of Christ on these matters. And if the church is as large as it seems to be based on the number of pastors, there is bound to be people who are asking different kinds of questions and wrestling with God about these matters. In the manner the sermon was delivered, such folks get the clear message that their questions aren’t welcome, that there is no desire for open conversation. The sermon pretty much cements the deal on perpetuating D.A.D.T (don’t ask, don’t tell).
If the first confession of the early church was simply, “Jesus is Lord” – then why are we adding so many qualifications to who can be considered a follower of Jesus? If the first confession simply meant, “I will follow the way and teaching of Jesus rather than Caesar” – then why do we demand that we view Scripture in the same way and interpret it in the same way? If anything, the Rabbinic tradition, of which Jesus himself was a part, demonstrates robust wrestling with the text. Jesus said so often, “You have heard it said ….. but I say unto you.” And if all the law and the prophets hang on the dual command to love God fully and to love our neighbors, why is uniform understanding of moral strictures presented as essential? Where does “In essentials – unity; in non-essentials – liberty; in all things – love” fit?
When a preacher states, “the bible is clear” it puts the freeze on acknowledging our diversity, engaging current theological and interpretive perspectives, and makes for a pretty unsafe environment for questions and dialogue. And what does that mean for the sexual minority young people sitting in those pews? What does that mean for the closeted adult? What does that mean for the person in a mixed orientation marriage who really needs a place for honest conversation about the unique realities they are navigating? What does that mean for the mother and father whose gay child is attending an affirming church and wanting to engage them in respectful conversation? What does that mean for the grandparents whose lesbian granddaughter has announced her engagement and has asked grandpa to walk her down the aisle?
Generous spaciousness recognizes the reality of these dilemmas and encourages congregations and families to have the quiet courage and mutual respect to open these complex matters in the space of dialogue in the humble confidence that God will reveal a way for them to be faithful and to love each other well.
Throughout the past couple of centuries, men have declared the bible “clear” about a great many topics. In a good number of those instances, later Christians determined that those men were incorrect about what they “clearly” understood.
I love that you value mercy for all people and realize how hopelessly stuck we are as humans, 100% dependent upon the unfathomable mercy of God. How awesome that He is good! And He rules! Since I have some very dear friends who are in a lesbian relationship, I asked God, why do You say homosexuality is off-limits for Your Kingdom? I really needed to know. Even the Apostle Paul had not yet fully attained to a 100% perfect heart and mind yet God began a good work in him that would carry him across into eternity with unity with Jesus and the Father. All believers are on a journey and all believers are credited with righteousness because God wants an eternal relationship with us and accepts Christ’s sacrifice for everyone who has faith in Jesus’ substitutionary act of profound mercy. So these thoughts were swirling in my heart along with a lack of understandng. Why do You, God, mention homosexuality in Scripture with a negative connotation? He replied “Because no life can come from that union. Everything I do produces life.” Health and healing are part of the process of life. Yet in sickness or need, words we don’t associate with health and life, sometimes God speaks the most clearly and trains our hearts and minds in such times. Nothing is hidden from God and nothing can change who He is. He loves to reveal secrets to His friends. We are His friends if we obey His teaching. What does He teach? We are here to reflect His glory, His heart, and His holiness. He loves a good debate, if our heart is desirous of drawing closer to Him in reality and truth.
Thanks for stopping by Mimi. I appreciate your last line – and I do think that when we wrestle with God it can draw us closer to him.
I can also appreciate that you have discerned based on your sense of God leading you. I wonder, how do you engage those who have discerned differently? Those who sense God has led them in a different way?
Not sure Wendy. I would have to hear the individual in conversation to discover the cry of his/her heart. I’d have to read the body language, the look in the eye. And would have to compare my responsive thoughts to the words in Scripture as well as the Spirit in Scripture. It would be a tailor-made response, likely.
That is, I think, the best we can do this side of heaven ….. and continue to walk in humility.
Isn’t it clear that a man should not lay with another man? Leviticus 20:13, and then Romans 1:27 saying its shameful. As a guy, I struggle with that. I have such a hard time listening to people try to justify it. Yes, God loves us all,absolutely,yes, Jesus died for all of us, no matter what. I have gay and lesbian friends in my life who I love. It is the justification of it I am having trouble with in my heart,and trying to understand, It is said in both the old and new testaments that it should not happen, and is shameful. its the getting married/relationship aspect, and saying it is okay, that I am struggling with. How can we be okay with something that both the old and new testaments say is wrong? Are we not rewriting scripture to suit the situation we don’t want to feel guilt about? Think about it, I do, almost too much. Isn’t it black and white? We should stay celibate then, should we not? I struggle with this daily.
HI Daniel. I can understand some of the feelings you’ve described. It is very anxiety-producing for those who want to be faithful when they encounter what seems to be trying to make scripture suit us rather than scripture forming us.
The purpose of generous spaciousness is not to try to convince anyone to adopt a particular position. What we want to do is cultivate space so that people can ask the questions and do the wrestling that they feel they need to do. We believe that God is big enough and faithful enough to lead and guide people – we don’t need to try to control what they think or believe.
What I have come to discover is that I need to actually listen to those who differ from me in their interpretations and not just assume they are rewriting scripture or justifying something. If I assume they are trying to justify something that is wrong – I will never truly hear their struggle with God and with the text.
There are a lot of people who read texts in Leviticus and in Romans who also recognize that homosexuality as we understand it today – was not what Paul would have thought of in his day. At the same time, it is difficult to know exactly what Paul is talking about. Is he talking about same-sex sexual behaviour that primarily heterosexual people participate in out of excess and lust and potentially idolatry? Could he have been thinking about long-term, covenanted relationships between two consenting adults who experience same-sex sexual orientation? Some would say that, “yes these prohibitions would have had this scenario in mind” others would say “no Paul is thinking here of infidelity and sexual deviance where there are power imbalances and exploitation.” I don’t claim to have the perfect answer to these questions – but I do want to make room for people to grapple with them – and to potentially land in different places as they experience the Spirit leading them and their conscience informing them. The reality is, faithful Christians deeply committed to the scriptures are landing on different conclusions to these questions. So I want to focus on the question, “How now shall we live together? How can we love one another despite our differences?”