Wednesday 6 July 2011
Want to discuss the Bible and Homosexuality? This is the place!
As long as people are respectful of one another, I'm happy to have discussion about the "big debate" regarding the Bible and homosexuality (from a Christian perspective). If you want to know my thoughts on it, read previous posts. Please just be aware that for anyone wrestling with their sexuality, it can be a very difficult time, so bear this in mind in how you express yourself. God bless.
7 comments:
Thank you for leaving a comment, even if it is to disagree! Please be courteous and remember that what you say can be read by others too.
To comment, write below and then select your profile from the drop-down menu. If you have no blogging profile, you can use name/url or post anonymously.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Christian Greetings M. M. !
ReplyDeleteI'm Nicolas (so called!) who was also on the "Coffee with Louis" site.
Thought I could share a (thankfully shortish) paper which mainly reflects my present position:
http://www.inclusiveorthodoxy.org/files/biblestudy.pdf
It's the same one I shared at Louis' blog, in which case you may have seen it.
If you had any comments, I'd be interested. I don't go along with everything there, but accept about 95% of it ??
Hi Nicolas
ReplyDeleteGreat to hear from you! Welcome to the site.
I saved that link when you posted it and have printed it off. It's got a lot to read, so I'll be honest and say I've only skimmed it so far. Certainly there seems to be nothing too controversial in it, and I have heard most of the arguments before and found them to be balanced and credible.
The part that is new to me, is the concept from Romans 1, of heterosexual men "giving up" natural relations. That is a very interesting proposal and I shall have to prayerfully consider it.
What about you? Were there any bits you didn't agree with? What is the missing 5%, if you don't mind me asking?
I have to say, I've yet to hear a convincing Biblical argument that says the Bible is clearly against all forms of homosexuality. However, I've also noticed that most people who do believe this, seem unwilling to even have a discussion about it, which intrigues me. I used to believe it was all wrong, but then allowed God to challenge me and I asked Him to show me His will in the issue.
Please feel free to throw in any thoughts you might have!
God bless
Monk <><
Thank you MM
ReplyDeleteYes, I need to read it through and give a few comments. Will get back to you!
Nicolas
So, almost two(2)years later ... !
ReplyDeleteSince then, I did present a precis of my understanding of the Bible's take on homosexuality on another website, and engaged in a conversation about it. But it was not easy to get it going at all, exactly as you yourself say! It appears here:
http://www.christianstogether.net/Articles/280981/Christians_Together_in/Christian_Life/Rescued_into_True.aspx
(Rescued into True Freedom)
with my bit starting at page 17 in the responses.
The lady who did correspond said that they were tired of going over the same stuff again and again, but I don’t think she really engaged with the details.
Since debating with her, I've had a few new thoughts. She tried to deny the contexts of gang rape, prostitution and sexual slavery in each Bible text. The one place where she may be right is Lev 20, where the context does seem more domestic (unlike Lev 18 which context is about lack of cultic purity -- pointing to temple prostitution). But isn't it interesting that when we turn to the NT, all three NT texts are strongly and clearly in the context of unhealthy relationships: pagan temple prostitution and sexual slavery (or so I believe).
Following on from this could be a further study on the difficult subject of exactly what difference Jesus’ teaching does to the laws of the OT. Any help for me there?
re all the different “exchanging” and “giving up”going on in Rom 1:23-27 -- yes, I think I accept that Paul is saying that these are married heterosexuals who are engaging in homosexual rituals at their pagan temples. In any case, like you, I don’t think Paul is even thinking about the phenomenon of faithful same-sex relations which we know today.
Some do say he would have known such a phenomenon and that he included it in his condemnation, but I don’t think so. However, as I’m not keeping up with all the study on this subject, I’d appreciate anything you can add about any of this. Blessings. Nicolas.
Hi Nicolas. I'm so glad to have encountered someone of a like mind! I find it bewildering that so many fail to see that almost all references are in extreme situations such as gang rape, prostitution and temple worship. In the oft-quoted Romans 1, there are 2 key verses that shows the people Paul is referring to: "For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him" and "Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God" (verses 21 and 28). These are clearly not Christians, and I find it deeply offensive that so called Christians include all gay Christians in this category (I am not gay, it should be said, but I feel the insult on my brothers and sisters!).
ReplyDeleteRegarding Jesus' teaching, I am always struck by his reply to the teacher of the law who asks what the greatest commandment is. He says that all the law and the prophets hang on the 2 commandments of loving God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength and loving our neighbour as ourselves. He also said that a tree is known by its fruit (which Paul echoes with the fruit of the Spirit in Galatians). To me,these are the true measures of a Christian faith, and if a gay Christian shows these characteristics, then who am I to judge someone else's servant (Romans 14)? I read some of your comments on Christians Together (which impressed me greatly), and I saw the following comment:
"What you have done is to put your own interpretation on the verses of scripture quoted and twisted God's word to suit your approval of homosexuality within the Christian church.
I do not find your theories convincing and they have been formed in an attempt to call what God has clearly designated as evil, good. The love that a man has for his wife and vice versa cannot be likened to the biblically designated lust that exists in a homosexual relationship.
If this is your lifestyle then you are living in disobedience to the word of God. If it is not you are encouraging others to live in disobedience to God's word. In either situation you are making God a liar."
This reply to your genuine comments was illogical and very unkind.
Regarding Paul, I think he would have known of same sex practices, but I don't believe any would have known of sexual orientation as a genuine and natural phenomenon (like being left handed as I mentioned in another post). I actually believe that were Paul alive today he would have advised his own teaching of 1 Cor 7 to apply equally to the homosexual Christian. Here he says that if they have the gift of celibacy, then they should remain single (not because sexuality is a sin, but as he says, to protect us from the cares of the world). However, he states that it is better to marry than burn with passion. This is why I am personally in favour of allowing Christian marriage to same sex couples who seek God's blessing over their lifelong commitment that echoes the love of Christ for his bride the Church. However, I completely understand that not everyone is able to accept this teaching.
I don't know if I've shared anything helpful there or not, but I appreciate your post greatly. God bless you Nicolas.
Regarding someone's reply to your comment, that we were clearly not designed for same sex relations, I would agree that from a biological reproductive perspective that is accurate. However, there are examples in nature of homosexual behaviour (so we cannot say it is unnatural). Also, there is an assumption that if it is not in our design then it must be sinful. However, many things were not in our design, such as wearing clothes, cancer, old age, mental and physical disability etc. None of these things in that list is considered by mainstream Christianity to be sinful, yet each could be a consequence of the fall. Sadly, people cannot seem to see this, instead preferring to see homosexuality as something like alcoholism or an addiction, rather than a natural orientation, through which we can equally glorify God (or equally sin as with heterosexuality).
ReplyDeleteThanks, MM, for so full a reply, and for these extra points which are very helpful. It's helpful to be able to bounce ideas back and forth.
ReplyDeleteI came across a strong recommendation for a book called: "Bible, Gender, Sexuality" by James Brownson, saying that "unlike some revisionists his exegesis is not strained but very plausible".
I don't have time to buy or read it, but will try to find more reviews on it -- maybe on the Musing Monk website sometime :)
Re same-sex marriage, my only problem is the use of the word "marriage" for a different kind of thing -- or as my son said: "your only argument is a linguistic one!" So my only objection is that different things should be called by different names. My other rant is that the male/female union to conceive and commitment to care for children is so unique -- why can't it have it's own name? Then I think, maybe I'm being selfish... After all, the word licence is used for wedding licence, gun licence etc, so why not the word marriage? Still, the grumpy old man still wants to preserve the word marriage in its traditional meaning!
More important is the (almost) denial among some that same-sex couples do love each other (just as we heteros do) and do have long and faithful relationships. Or if they do accept this exists, I don't know how they can then call this wickedness. If the analogy used is the "alcoholic" one, then they've already moved away from their idea that it's just plain wickedness. And yet, surely their (mistaken) reading of the Bible texts says that it is wickedness pure and simple, not just an addiction.
I'm going to be on holiday, but will get back later, to catch up with your other pages.
Thanks, and Christian blessings! Nicolas.