| ReadBibleAlive.com
Front
Page |
| Series Theme: "Culture Wars" |
Chapter 17: Specific Battlefronts: 2 . The Gay Phenomena : Biblical Perspectives
CONTENTS
Part 17:1 Introduction
Part 17:2 Preliminary Considerations of the Old Testament Law Focus Comments about the Old Testament Some Answers And So? Summary-recap
Part 17:3 Further Easing into the Old Testament Focus Comments about the Old Testament Some Answers And So? Summary-recap
Part 17:4 Further Considerations of the Law of Moses And the Law Four Caveats Recap-Conclusions Part 17:5 And the New Testament Focus Observing the detail Some Conclusions Comparisons Not isolated teaching Summary-recap
Part 17:1 Introduction
For the Christian who believes that “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness ,” (2 Tim 3:16) while wishing to be open and accepting of gay friends, the Bible appears to present some uncompromising statements in respect of homosexuality which are difficult to ignore. This chapter seeks to confront those apparently uncompromising statements, and where possible
Each of these things are important because very often those wanting to defend the Gay cause simply seek to write them off, often for some unsustainable reason, while those feeling very uncomfortable with the Gay position want to use them, without thought, to hammer the Gay position into oblivion and in so doing also diminish the individual who God still loves.
The Bible verses of course do not come with commentaries and so we are sometimes left speculating on one side or the other but I believe, as a Bible-believing Christian I have a duty to (i) not only be concerned about the meaning of the Scriptures, but also (ii) have concern for all individuals, whatever stance they may be taking in life. This chapter seeks to cover the first point and the next chapter, the second point. Neither chapter should thus be read in isolation.
Part 17:2 Preliminary Considerations of the Old Testament Law
Lev 18:22 Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.”
Focus: Before we start considering Old Testament verses about, say, homosexuality, we need to understand the purpose, context, and history within the Law in the Old Testament Scriptures.
Comments about the Old Testament: Some try to reject Old Testament teaching by saying, “Well, of course, the Law doesn't apply today, it was just given for a primitive people and we're so much more sophisticated and know so much better with all our knowledge and technology.” And someone else might join in, “That's right, they seemed to be talking about killing people for the most minor or issues,” and another might join in with, “Yes, some of the laws of Moses are simply weird.” Each of these comments sadly displays ignorance over the content, context, and nature of Scripture.
Some Answers:
1. Historical Context: When discussing the Law of Moses, we have to be very careful. I have elsewhere referred to the Law “for that group of fallen people, a people called into existence to reveal Him, and to manage their fallen, imperfect lives at that time” , and I made the double emphasis by the underlining.
The Law was first and foremost for Israel to follow. It was given preparatory to them entering and taking the Promised Land and therefore there are a number of restrictions on behaviour within it that actually (and many people miss this) tell them not to do certain things that would be copies of what the occult-driven, pagan idol-worshipping, inhabitants of the Land, were doing, a group of peoples who should have been totally driven out but never were completely.
2. Discriminatory Awareness: In perhaps being seen to write off the laws for the above reasons, we should immediately refute such a stance and observe, for instance, that the Ten Commandments of Ex 20 appear distinct from the following covenant laws of Ex 21 & 22 and the ritual laws of Leviticus and the additional relational laws of Deut 21 to 25. Nowhere has there been such an all-embracing set of fundamental laws for life as found in the Ten Commandments and it is an unwise person who suggests they no longer apply to us today. (The fact that they are ignored my modern western societies is something else!)
Having said what we have said about the Ten Commandments, and the rest of the Law found in the Pentateuch, we should not write off the rest of the Laws because although they were specifically for Israel as they went into the Promised Land, the nature of those laws, reflect the design of God for the fallen world. They thus reveal the things God is concerned about for His people and specifically things that were distortions or aberrations of His design, recognising Israel as part of fallen mankind (see the importance of chapter 5.2) but nevertheless able to receive guidance as to how they were now to live. They could never return to before the Fall, but they could nevertheless live disciplined lives limiting wrongs by the laws.
3. The ‘big picture': A question I have never heard asked (or preached upon) is, “Why did God bring Israel into existence?” As I have read and studied over the years, I have concluded that the threefold answer I find myself with, is essential to our understanding as we read the Old Testament. I believe there are three reasons:
i) To reveal the sinfulness of mankind that needs a Saviour. Again and again and again, Israel turned away from God, got it wrong and got into difficulties – and that despite God's presence with them all the time. They are the case book for the world that focuses us on the fact that we are all sinners needing a Saviour. They were and are no worse than the rest of us: “ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” (Rom 3:23) or as the JBP version puts it, “ everyone falls short of the beauty of God's plan ,” and as the Message version adds, “ we are utterly incapable of living the glorious lives God wills for us.” Israel were the living demonstration of that.
ii) The counterbalance to the above, is to reveal the loving kindness and mercy of God displayed throughout the Old Testament. The unread critic declares the Old Testament shows a hostile, unkind, vicious, spiteful and judgmental God (all descriptions from a leading atheist). The exact opposite happens to be true if the critic will only read comprehensively and with an open mind! So it will require you to be an open-hearted seeker who reads, to see that, but it IS there. Unfortunately, this is not the place to expound on it, so if you are uncertain, take my word please.
iii) The third reason for Israel's existence was to provide a ‘God-aware-culture' into which the Son of God could come from heaven, a people prepared with lots of encounters with God and lots of knowledge about Him. The Son thus came into this prepared environment. If you are not sure about that, imagine him coming into any other country of the world that had had no such preparation and then try and imagine how the four Gospels would be different – if they even existed.
And So? The survival of Israel throughout the Old Testament period was uppermost in God's laws and actions for the three reasons above. If at times the laws appear severe it is because of the critical nature of this ‘project', the ongoing existence/survival of this nation for the above reasons. Behind each inhibiting law we should ask ‘why?' and what was God's intention for a better way for us.
Summary-Recap: I have taken the time and space to address some of the key criticisms that are brought against the Law in the Old Testament to create a background in which to discuss the laws affecting the subject matter of the culture wars, laws which sometimes appear draconian, but which were essential to enable the above three reasons to be worked out – as we'll see further shortly.
Part 17:3 Further Easing into the Old Testament
Gen 19:4,5 “Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house. They called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.
Focus: We need to confront the Old Testament Scriptures to determine the truth or otherwise of what they teach and not jump to conclusions but instead apply the three stated goals in the first Part.
A cautious ‘account' approach: Our verses above bring us an account of a rather unsavory happening in the city of Sodom (from which the word ‘sodomy' comes) referring to anal sex between two men. Some try to play down the actual act to focus on the violence behind it in this example. One commentator suggests this act has nothing to do with homosexuality per se but was a not-uncommon behaviour expressing domination and humiliation by one people over another. A similar account follows some years later, recorded in Judges: “While they were enjoying themselves, some of the wicked men of the city surrounded the house. Pounding on the door, they shouted to the old man who owned the house, “Bring out the man who came to your house so we can have sex with him.” (Judg 19:22)
Observe the description, “wicked men”. Many modern-day homosexuals would protest that their anal sex comes from love, while others would suggest that it is frequently merely an act of lust to satisfy desire. Both incidents have large question marks over them, and the gay community would justly like to disassociate themselves from these two incidents in that there is a violent-lust clearly observed in both incidents.
In the previous chapter we quoted Andrew Marr in respect of early days of the freed Gay community but now two comments need to be made in response to that quote. First, yes, it would be good to hear from the gay community that this was just ‘early days' and not the blueprint of life in the gay community, i.e. completely sex-focused. Second, as we went on to suggest in the latter part of the previous chapter, the above is no worse than the parallel picture of the straight sexual practices of today's western world, as we saw in the chapters on Sexuality.
Part 17:4 Further Considerations of the Law of Moses
And the Law: We have already observed the basic teaching found in Leviticus: “ Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.” (Lev 18:22) As so often such an instruction is found to have additional support elsewhere in the Law. Thus we find a little later, “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads .” (Lev 20:13)
Four Caveats: We need to observe four cautions or, maybe lessons, to be noted here.
i) The first is the follow on from what we said above about the uniqueness of Israel and the vital importance of protecting them and their existence as a nation. Their existence was not merely under threat from surrounding enemies, but by turning from God, when they would simply become like any other nation and fail to reveal the nature and character of God (their primary purpose). This would involve ignoring the Law and, even worse, adopting the ways of surrounding pagan nations, and thus losing their unique distinctive in the world, a distinctive that, as we've just said, should have made them stand out as a wholesome, prosperous, and successful people (most clearly seen in 1 Kings 10). Any rejection of the Law would be a potential step in undermining Israel as a unique nation under God. For that reason, the death penalty was supposed to be a deterrent against breaking the Law and its application is recorded only a very few times, which would seem to indicate it did work as a deterrent.
ii) Second, note that, although some in history have tried, seeking to implement these Laws of Moses in the legal frameworks of other nations never works because they are intrinsically linked to relationship with God (e.g. Ex 20:2) and where that is absent, there is no foundational reason to impose them on other people. (But see practicalities later). The bigger ‘sin' is always godlessness.
iii) Third, note the distinctions between (a) the laws for Israel as a unique nation, and (b) morality or ethics that some would like to enshrine in law. Thus, as much as we, as bible-believers, may wish to suggest that this whole realm of behaviour falls short of the wonderful possibilities of God's design, these ‘laws' are not something we should consider imposing on others whose worldview and behaviour is what we believe to be contrary to the heart of God. The bigger goal is introducing them to God. We note the distinction between behaviour that the world finds acceptable, and behaviour that we believe the Bible shows to be a better way AND we cannot impose that latter one on others; we can only hope to show the goodness of it as a better path.
iv) The fourth thing to observe is that these laws are about specific behaviour and are not about the inner inclinations a person finds they have. We'll come to this again later but it is the outworking or behaviour that is prohibited. A person may feel they have been born with same-sex-feelings, different to those normally experienced by the majority of society, but that does not diminish them as a person in God's eyes. Every person, whatever their outward behaviour, is still a person made in the image of God, and for whom Jesus died! (We'll consider feelings more in the next chapter).
Recap-Conclusions? We have observed two historical and biblical accounts of homosexual rape, obviously for very questionable and unacceptable reasons. We have further observed two prohibitions within the Law of Moses – for Israel, this unique state, revealing God – both of which challenge homosexual sexual behaviour . In both cases, the reason given is that such acts are contrary to God's design for men and women. (Remember the study about a fallen world.) The big question for the Christian community is how do we reconcile • God's original design of one man + one woman, • The variety of ways humanity has turned from God's original designs, • The apparent needs of the individual to feel ‘a meaningful person' fixed as they feel they are, and • Loving acceptance with loving disagreement?
Part 17:5 And the New Testament
1 Tim 1:9,10 “We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine”
Focus: We need to find balance and understand the distinction between ‘being' and ‘behaviour', although we recognise many in the Gay community will appreciate this distinction. (See also next chapter).
Observing the detail: The Law, says the apostle Paul in our verses above, is not for good people but to restrain behaviour that runs contrary to God's design for mankind. Murderers we would quite happily accept as wrong. However as soon as we pass that point, we find ourselves in complete conflict with modern (godless) society. The ‘sexually immoral', in the light of the rest of the Bible, (adultery – Ex 20:14) refers, most obviously, to those who cross the boundaries of marriage (Deut 22:22). The Law also picked up on sex outside marriage. It is worth noting that virginity was expected before marriage (see Deut 22:14,15). Rape was also right out of bounds as we noted in a previous chapter on Sexuality.
Seeing that ‘practicing homosexuality' follows as the next prohibition, we should observe that it is no better or no worse than other forms of sex outside the design of God (one man and one woman for life – permanency implied within Gen 2:24 – leaving and ‘cleaving'). Continuing through the verses, slavers, liars, and perjurers are all linked in Paul's teaching as contrary to the design of God . So, the listing is what might be viewed – in our eyes at least – as bad sins and not-quite-so-bad sins. Modern Western societies seem quite happy with cohabitation, even though surveys show it is more unstable than marriage (as Sacks pointed out in an earlier Chapter) and is a much greater cause of harm to children and young people (as Perry pointed out in an earlier chapter). Similarly, we do little to help people avoid divorce, again a practice that numerous surveys show to be harmful to young people (if not the conflicting parties!).
Some Conclusions: The points that should be picked up and which we should make here before we go any further are a) all people sin (every one of us!) and b) in God's eyes all sins make us guilty and in need of a Saviour, but c) some sins have a greater harmful effect on us and others, and d) all sins are a derailing of the design of God for good to prevail in our lives.
Comparisons: Let's compare i) unrestrained sexual activity outside a committed relationship to ii) adultery and divorce, and iii) homosexual activity. All three are, I would suggest, virtually accepted as normal by today's western societies. All three, I would have to add, run contrary to the Bible's guidelines seen in both the Old Testament Law and New Testament teaching. But the bigger issue, I would like to propose, is that all three stop men and women reaching up to achieve their potential in God. The ‘Christian position', I would like to suggest, should be one of compassion and concern and availability to pick up the pieces after the fallout occurs, as it so often does and, again, which we will show before we finish this series for believers or open-hearted seekers.
Not isolated teaching: In addition to the above two verses we should also note, “Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Cor 6:9,10) Those within the gay community may suggest here that we note the plural indicating those with a permissive promiscuous outlook which a committed relationship would reject. In 1 Tim 1:9,10, if I may repeat our starter verse, Paul taught Timothy, “the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine.” I'm sure we're all happy about slave traders and perjurers being excluded from God's kingdom, but how about those church leaders who, in recent years have been caught in adultery? How do we understand this? Can they repent and be saved? Of course. As can anyone in that list of behaviours who recognise they have got it wrong.
Yet Paul had another, even bigger blast against the Greek or Roman worlds of his day when he declared, “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.” (Rom 1:26,27) It's a simple declaration of uncontrolled desires being let lose but the language is quite clear and reflects the public declarations of “I'm gay” being potential adverts for sex. Perhaps heart condition and outlook is all important and gays in committed relationships would rightly shy away from these descriptions.
Summary-Recap: The New Testament is more uncomfortable on this subject than the Old, but the emphasis seems to be again and again on behaviour that indicates a disregard for God as against a distinct inner sense of identity that has been impacted by the fallen world. For the child of God who struggles with their sexual identity, I catch a picture of Jesus sitting down beside them and expressing his totally loving acceptance and, just maybe, an alternative path for the days to come. (see Jn 8:11). Perhaps that might be Jesus expressing himself through you or me. Perhaps we can understand this more when we see some further aspects of this discussion in the next chapter.
|