The other debated word in this passage, translated
as “effeminate” in the King James, is “malakos” in the Greek. This was a
very common word in ancient Greek, and it literally means “soft.” It
was used as an insult in a wide array of contexts – to refer to those
who were considered weak-willed, cowardly, or lazy. And all of those
failings were particularly associated with women in ancient times;
hence, the rendering “effeminate.”
In a specifically sexual context, the
word was used to describe general licentiousness and debauchery, but
this wasn’t limited to any particular kind of relationship. Men who took
the passive role in sexual relations were sometimes labeled this term,
which is the basis on which some modern translators connect it to
homosexuality.
But so many people were labeled this term for so many
different things – most of them not even sexual in nature, and most of
the sexual ones about men in relationships with women – that there’s no
valid basis for picking out one possible reason out of dozens and saying
that that must have been what Paul had in mind. It would be more
faithful to the text to return to the ambiguity that prevailed for more
than 1,900 years of translation.
The notion that Paul is singling out
gay people here and saying that they will not inherit the kingdom of God
simply doesn’t hold up under scrutiny.
In the final passage, 1 Timothy 1:10, the first
word – “abusers of themselves with mankind” – reappears in a list of
people Paul says the law was written against. Here, the translation is
“them that defile themselves with mankind.” The translation issues and
debates here are the same as those from 1 Corinthians. Again, the
strongest inference that can be drawn from other uses of this term is
that it referred to economic exploitation through sexual
coercion—possibly involving same-sex activity, but a very different kind
than what we are discussing.
So those are our six passages, the six verses in
the Bible that refer in some way to same-sex behavior. And indeed,
they’re all negative. But that isn’t a conclusive argument. The majority
of references to sexual behavior in general, and to heterosexual
behavior, in the Bible are negative. That’s not because sexuality is a
bad thing, but because most of the references to it in Scripture are to
lust, to excess, to infidelity, promiscuity, rape, or violence.
And yes,
the Bible also contains positive affirmations of opposite-sex
relationships in addition to hundreds of negative verses about forms of
them. And it does not contain explicit positive statements about
same-sex relationships. But it also hardly ever discusses same-sex
behavior of any kind, and the very few references to it are in
completely different contexts than loving relationships. In Genesis 19,
there is a reference to threatened gang rape.
In 1 Corinthians 6 and 1
Timothy 1, there is a reference to what appears to be sexual
exploitation. In Romans 1, Paul refers to lustful same-sex behavior as
part of an illustration of general sexual chaos and excess. And though
he labels this behavior “unnatural,” he’s using this term in the sense
of “uncustomary” gender roles, just as he’s referring to social custom
when he labels long hair in men “unnatural.”
The only place in Scripture
where male same-sex relations are actually prohibited—in
Leviticus—comes in the context of an Old Testament law code that has
never applied to Christians.
The Bible never directly addresses, and it
certainly does not condemn, loving, committed same-sex relationships.
There is no biblical teaching about sexual orientation, nor is there any
call to lifelong celibacy for gay people.
But the Bible does explicitly
reject forced loneliness as God’s will for human beings, not just in
the Old Testament, when God says that “[i]t is not good for the man to
be alone,” but in the New Testament as well. In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul
writes about marriage and celibacy. He was celibate himself, and he says
that he wishes that everyone else could be celibate as well. But, he
says, each person has their own gift.
For Paul, celibacy is a spiritual
gift, and one that he realizes that many Christians don’t have. However,
because many of them lack the gift of celibacy, Paul observes that
sexual immorality is rampant. And so he prescribes marriage as a kind of
remedy or protection against sexual sin for Christians who lack the
gift of celibacy.
“It is better to marry than to burn with passion,” he
says. And today, the vast majority of Christians do not sense either the
gift of celibacy or the call to it. This is true for both straight and
gay Christians. And so if the remedy against sexual sin for straight
Christians is marriage, why should the remedy for gay Christians not be
the same?
The arguments and debates that we have, both in the
church and in civil society, about gay marriage tend to get lost in
abstractions. Is it right for a man to marry another man? Or for a woman
to marry another woman? Well, it doesn’t seem right. That isn’t how God
designed us. He made men for women, and women for men. That is His
design—His definition of marriage—and it’s not for us to tamper with or
change.
But these arguments are always made by people who are themselves
heterosexual, who have always fit in, who haven’t endured years of
internal torment and agony because they have a different sexual
orientation than their friends, than their parents, than seemingly
everyone else in the world. But those people, gay people, are just as
much children of God and just as much a part of His creation as everyone
else.
And there’s something terribly unseemly about straight Christians
insisting that gay Christians are somehow inferior to them, or broken,
or that gay people only exist because of the fall, and that God really
intended to make everyone straight like them. But you know, I am a part
of creation, too, including my sexual orientation. I’m a part of God’s
design.
That’s the first thing that I learned growing up in Sunday
school – that God created me, that God loves me, that I am a beloved
child of God, no more and no less valuable than anyone else. I love God.
And I love Jesus. I really do. But that doesn’t mean that I need to
hate myself, or somehow wallow in self-pity, misery, and loathing for
the rest of my life. That’s not what God created me to do.
Our discussion of this issue, of the “gay issue,”
can’t take place in the realm of abstractions, of musings about ideal
design and ideal gender roles, as though gay people don’t even exist.
Jesus placed a particular focus on those others overlooked, on those who
were outcast, on mistreated and marginalized minorities.
And if we are
working to emulate the life of Christ, then that’s where our focus needs
to be, too. Romans 12 tells us to “honor one another above
yourselves…rejoice with those who rejoice,” and “mourn with those who
mourn.” Hebrews 13:3 says, “Remember those who are mistreated as if you
yourselves were suffering.” How fully have you absorbed, not just the
existence of gay and lesbian Christians, but the depth of the pain and
the hurt that their own brothers and sisters have inflicted on them?
Does that pain grieve you as though it were your own?
And how aware are you of the ways in which you may
be contributing to suffering and hurt in gay people’s lives? It’s still
commonplace for straight Christians to say, “Yes, I believe that
homosexuality is a sin, but don’t blame me – I’m just reading the Bible.
That’s just what it says.” Well, first of all, no, you are not just
reading the Bible.
You are taking a few verses out of context and
extracting from them an absolute condemnation that was never intended.
But you are also striking to the very core of another human being and
gutting them of their sense of dignity and of self-worth. You are
reinforcing the message that gay people have heard for centuries: You
will always be alone. You come from a family, but you’ll never form one
of your own. You are uniquely unworthy of loving and being loved by
another person, and all because you’re different, because you’re gay.
Being different is no crime. Being gay is not a
sin. And for a gay person to desire and pursue love and marriage and
family is no more selfish or sinful than when a straight person desires
and pursues the very same things. The Song of Songs tells us that King
Solomon’s wedding day was “the day his heart rejoiced.” To deny to a
small minority of people, not just a wedding day, but a lifetime of love
and commitment and family is to inflict on them a devastating level of
hurt and anguish.
There is nothing in the Bible that indicates that
Christians are called to perpetuate that kind of pain in other people’s
lives rather than work to alleviate it, especially when the problem is
so easy to fix. All it takes is acceptance. The Bible is not opposed to
the acceptance of gay Christians, or to the possibility of loving
relationships for them.
And if you are uncomfortable with the idea of
two men or two women in love, if you are dead-set against that idea,
then I am asking you to try to see things differently for my sake, even
if it makes you uncomfortable. I’m asking you to ask yourself this: How
deeply do you care about your family? How deeply do you love your
spouse? And how tenaciously would you fight for them if they were ever
in danger or in harm’s way?
That is how deeply you should care, and that
is how tenaciously you should fight, for the very same things for my
life, because they matter just as much to me. Gay people should be a
treasured part of our families and our communities, and the truly
Christian response to them is acceptance, support, and love. Thank you,
and thank you to everyone for coming tonight.
-Matthew Vines
THE END
J-Bo
No comments:
Post a Comment