As I developed a more mature theology, I could not see the condemnation of homosexuality in the Bible apart from the general condemnations of all kinds of sexual immorality. Isolating texts against homosexual sin from the general teaching of the Bible in Hebrews 13:4 that said all sexual expressions outside of heterosexual marriage or celibacy were sinful seemed wrongheaded and wrong hearted. Paul's use of homosexuality in Romans 1 as "exhibit A" for human depravity just seemed to be using the most obvious case, not the worst sin in the catalog of human wretchedness. While gay Christian apologists were clueless about rightly interpreting the Bible, I never found their defense of their sin particularly more offensive than any other groups defense of their favorite vice, including building a gym for our kids rather than a church for the poor in India.
But my experience of Christian rhetoric against homosexuality features a consistent assumption that homosexuals choose to be the way they are, and while I agree that behavior is chosen, I do not agree that every element in the homosexual orientation is chosen, or that the orientation can be easily changed.
"Who condemns you?....Go and sin no more." says an enormous amount about how I believe Jesus addresses homosexuals today.
So we must hear it all. Who we are. Who made us this way. How sexuality reflects God and defines us. How far we all have fallen. No part of the Bible is less adaptable to culture and more universally descriptive than its teaching on sexuality. In scripture, holiness and happiness are not possible if we do not hear and live out passages such as...
- Genesis 1:27-28 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. 28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth...
- Ephesians 5:31-32 31 "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church.
- Hebrews 13:4 4 Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.
That these passages do not endorse homosexuality or homosexual marriage is beyond dispute. Gay advocates know they must resort to serious reinterpretation of the Bible to sustain any semblance of a Biblical case. What seems to be heard so seldom is how these passages call ALL OF US, no matter who we are, to an understanding of sex that is tied to our worship of God. It is the image of God, the mystery of Christ and the holiness of God that are at stake. Not my desires and preferences. Gay advocates apparently believe that gay sex can be sanctified to fit within this picture,
and to be a God-glorifying, God-honoring act. It is impossible. We must never hesitate to plainly, and sadly say this, even as we confess that we are guilty of the same betrayal of the intention of God.At the same time, it couldn't be clearer in scripture that all sexual sin violates this intention. Adultery. Lust. Immorality of any kind. There is no such thing as "heterosexual righteousness." We are idolaters if we insinuate anything of the kind.
At the same time, we need to realize that scripture does not picture the church opposing public immorality primarily through political means. In our system of elected government and constant campaigning, we tend to forget that the early Christians lived in a highly immoral society where they did not have access to the controls of power and public policy other than through conversion. The early Christians did not picket or protest. They witnessed, prayed, worshiped, and lived holy lives. Some of that witness influenced society, but in general, society went its Godless way. If there were to be a large-scale alteration of public morals, it would be through the power of the Holy Spirit, not by an imperial edict or judicial ruling.The question tends to become something like this: What would Jesus do? Would he, if he could have influenced laws and elections, have devoted significant energies to political means of improving public morals? My answer is simple. I think Jesus would have done what any person could do within his time and place to provide safety, security and morality. But I do not think Jesus would have taken on political causes, because they do not promote what changes
hearts and lives eternally or individually.
Throughout the New Testament, Christians exemplify radical kinds of love and service, but not as political activists. It is always in witness to Christ and his Kingdom. So there seems to be a difference in the way Jesus views the actions of a believer and the possibilities for a political utopia.
But homosexuals are no worse sinners than ourselves. Homosexuality has not outpaced heterosexuality in the depravity department. That homosexuals have developed political skills and know how to win the propaganda battle means we must respond, but we can't afford to become "haters" when our Savior so clearly sends us out to love these very people. The fact that they are on TV is a fact to be dealt with. It is not any more corrupting than a commercial for a credit card
You can read the whole 6,000 word article here
DO IT
NOW
****************************************************
Ok, extremism aside...
I know this is excessive qouting from Michael Spencer's post, but these comments resonated with me so deeply. Part of it is that his explanation had a lot of me shaking my head in agreement and saying to myself, 'this is what I have been trying to say along!" As well, at this particular point in my life, dealing with some personal family issues, it is much needed and has already helped me in how I am going to deal with this issue going forward.Read it, tell me what you think or just your reaction to the comments I posted here.
No comments:
Post a Comment