Why Christianity Needs Gay People
Now that I’ve processed a large portion of my recovery from ubf, I am free to rebuild and rework my theology. Two years ago, in October 2012, I was inspired by the bible story of Esther to come out as a Christian gay rights pacifist. Since then I’ve been consumed by addressing the elephant in the room in all Christian circles: gay people. I began a meticulous search through Scripture to find out what made Christians so anti-gay or at best merely tolerant of the LGBTQA people. That study has now lead me to write my fourth book, a book that has no mention of ubf or my recovery; a book with the working subtitle: “Why Christianity Needs Gay People”.
Ezekiel 16
My bible search began of course with the famous six “clobber passages”. These are the six knives that have been stabbed into the hearts of so many gay people around the world, even used to justify laws for jail or death for being gay.
The first one I Genesis 19, the Sodom and Gomorrah story. Like most bible readers, I just assumed the sin of Sodom that angered God was homosexuality. But then I read Ezekiel 16:49-50, and that entire chapter.
“’Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.” (NIV)
Now certainly the same-sex gang rape incident described in Genesis 19 was detestable. It is described as an abomination in other translations. But what is the primary sin described here? They were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned. They did not help the poor and needy. I do not think God is pleased with sexual perversion, but the sin that gets the God of the bible really furious is arrogance and apathy.
Dr. David Gushee
Recently the Reformation Project welcomed a conservative theologian Dr. David Gushee and scheduled him as their keynote speaker for their Washington DC conference in November. Here are some priceless quotes from this Distinguished University Professor of Christian Ethics at Mercer University, a Baptist college and divinity school in Georgia.
“I do join your crusade tonight,” Gushee’s prepared remarks say, according to a draft obtained by Religion News Service. “I will henceforth oppose any form of discrimination against you. I will seek to stand in solidarity with you who have suffered the lash of countless Christian rejections. I will be your ally in every way I know how to be.”
Gushee says the journey to his current position has been a long and winding one. During the first two decades of his academic career, he maintained a traditional view of sexuality and “hardly knew a soul who was not heterosexual.” As he worked on issues such as torture and climate change, his attention was drawn to other issues — slavery, segregation, defamation of Jews, subjugating women — for which Christians once cited Scripture for their entrenched positions.
Then in 2008, his younger sister, Katey, came out as a lesbian. She is a Christian, single mother, and had been periodically hospitalized for depression and a suicide attempt. It made him realize that “traditionalist Christian teaching produces despair in just about every gay or lesbian person who must endure it.”
“It is difficult to overstate the potential impact of Gushee’s defection. His Christian ethics textbook, “Kingdom Ethics,” co-authored with the late Glen Stassen, is widely respected and was named a 2004 Christianity Today book of the year. He serves as theologian-in-residence for the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, a coalition of 15 theological schools, 150 ministries, and 1,800 Baptist churches nationwide.”
My Fourth Book
I plan on continuing to read, discuss, debate and explore this topic. I plan to expound on three big reasons why Christianity needs gay people, and why same-sex marriage is not the problem, but the solution. There is not only an “elephant in the room” of the kingdom of God, there is a Lion. Thoughts? Questions? Challenges?
I fully agree that the LGBTQA community “have suffered the lash of countless Christian rejections.” This clearly must change and absolutely needs to change. The big question is how. This is my simplistic rumination.
Older Christians (and some younger Christians) say and believe that Christians must be loving, not condemning and welcoming of the gay community, though they still firmly believe and will not change from their position that marriage is between a man and a woman.
Younger Christians (and some older Christians) will affirm the former, but insist that marriage can also be between those of the same sex.
Based on each side’s understanding and interpretation of the same Bible verses, the first group cannot conceive of gay marriages as strongly as the second group firmly believes that it is OK.
I think that the gap between these two positions are huge and perhaps presently insurmountable. What I believe first needs to happen is to not throw stones at the other side. Each side should begin by not pressing and insisting their firm belief and position on the other side, especially if done angrily and with indignation, intolerance and impatience. This, I believe is happening at present, and is a horrible testimony to the watching world.
If we can’t begin by not doing what we should not do (throw stones at each other), then it does not appear that any resolution or progress would be forthcoming any time soon. Each side will simply more deeply entrench themselves in their own camp.
Ben,
“Each side should begin by not pressing and insisting their firm belief and position on the other side, especially if done angrily and with indignation, intolerance and impatience.”
Gay people have already done what you say. We cannot simply begin again, for the debate already began. Still they are “on the outside” and laws exist to put them in jail or be executed in parts of the world.
Ben, I changed the picture on my article, as the picture I chose first was not appropriate.
What would you see in my article that is “throwing stones”? I have no intention of throwing stones, so please correct my blindspot if I did so.
Recently the Catholic Synod expressed these words that ring true to me. I know the Synod ended up taking out this language, but my book aims to explain what these gifts and talents entail:
“…gay people have “gifts and talents to offer the Christian community.”
The document also said “Without denying the moral problems connected to homosexual unions it has to be noted that there are cases in which mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners.”
source
So then, why does Christianity need gay people? The three big thoughts that have surfaced in my soul the past several years are these: We’ve introduced too much fear into the kingdom of God as it exists today. We’ve lost the meaning of the righteousness Jesus promised to impart to believers. We’ve not drank from the new wine aspect of the gospel of Christ for a very long time.
Gay people can teach the church how to love more deeply, how to regain the purity of righteousness that exceeds that of the law-keepers, and most importantly, how to see the amazing joy that Jesus promised.
Like Pope Francis and numerous bishops and many in the body of Christ, I see the need to return to the theology of liberation, love and peace.
Brian, best wishes for your next writing project.
I ran across a thoughtful article today in the National Catholic Reporter. It’s mainly about how the Catholic church treats people who have been divorced and remarried, not specifically about LGBTQA issues. But I think it applies there as well. The author writes about Jesus: “…his pastoral approach invites us to set legalism aside and consider the vision of the human person that underlies the Gospels’ whole moral praxis.”
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/what-does-jesus-really-say-about-marriage-and-divorce
Thanks Joe. I like that approach. The local church my family attends really understands the divorce issue quite well.
divorce care
This is a great quote from that article Joe:
“”Rejecting something is easy, but recognizing and giving value to all that is positive, even when dealing with [ambiguous] experiences, is an exercise in intellectual honesty and spiritual charity.”
Each side should begin by not pressing and insisting their firm belief and position on the other side, especially if done angrily and with indignation, intolerance and impatience. – See more at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2014/10/25/why-christianity-needs-gay-people/#comment-15623
I was primarily thinking of the “civil,” scholarly exchange between Matthew Vines and Al Mohler. Both sides cite the same verses in the OT and NT and explain them in opposite ways, with both sides insisting that their interpretation is the correct one.
But what do you expect them to do, Ben? Should Matthew say, well I’m not really sure if God love gay people. Maybe God really does hate them. Maybe God does want us to exclude them from the blessing of marriage, the right to equal treatment and maybe we should keep the gays out of any real or meaningful leadership role in the church. Maybe God wants me to be open to such things…
I commend Matthew for having convictions. Certitude can be a problem yes, but certainty in the love and grace of God will eventually lead to good things.
Similarly, Mohler (and others like him) firmly, strongly and resolutely believes that it is most loving to address and call out what they believe is a sin, punishable by eternal damnation, so that they might repent.
I’m not trying to argue whether or not homosexual union is a sin or not, but simply addressing the fact that those who regard it as a sin will also regard it as being most loving to point that out (lovingly), since many today might no longer regard it as a sin.
Just saw this amazing video. Passing this along for any of our friends at ubf or elsewhere who are gay and may be struggling. This is awesome. This expresses all that I want to say in my fourth book:
Tim Keller’s explanation of how homosexuality and the gospel intersect is sort of confusing (can anyone decipher what he’s saying?): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTwugmG4hoA
Short response: Keller is using the questioner’s delicate sensitive provocative issue of “will all homosexuals go to hell” and turning that into emphasizing and preaching the gospel.
What he said at the end of the video is what the vast majority of faithful law abiding, Bible believing Christians fail to realize, that is, that self-righteousness is what gets you to hell, not homosexuality. I think that’s brilliant.
But can’t we argue that lawlessness or antinomianism separates one from God as well? If he argues that living a homosexual lifestyle goes against the will and design of how God made us, as he does in The Meaning of Marriage, then how can he say that it does not put one in danger of going to hell? That’s why I’m confused; he seems to be contradicting himself.
Or put another way, if living a homosexual lifestyle is a sin, and if one refuses to address this issue through a gospel paradigm or way of thinking and believing, then could we say that they are living according to what is right in their own eyes? Isn’t this the heart of self-righteousness?
And just to clarify, I am putting forth the statements above for the sake of argument; I don’t espouse those views per se. I simply want to find a consistent and cogent way to reason through this issue.
Personally speaking, I am on the fence but leaning toward the traditional view of the debate. It seems obvious to me that a homosexual orientation is a product of the fall. It just so plainly goes against the teleology or design of mankind.
But still, I would not be one to condemn those living a homosexual lifestyle to hell; I’m struggling as to how to relate to them as fellow image-bearers who are dearly loved and sought after by God. Additionally, because sexual orientation is seen as an intrinsic property of personhood, though this is debatable, one has to approach this issue very wisely and compassionately. As a result, most gays think that because Christians are against homosexuality, then they hate the entirety of who they are. And honestly, many Christians do come of sounding this way (and I’m thoroughly guilty of this). So we have to examine ourselves both from a psychological and theological point of view so as to see why this is so.
David, you are correct. It is tough for me to listen or learn from Keller. It would be easier to listen to MacArthur. Keller seems to believe what MacArthur’s gospel says but doesn’t want to come right out and say it.
The line of thought you present, David, is a good articulation of what we are left with if we leave out the surrender to grace aspect of the gospel. MacArthur clearly has a law-keeping gospel message and leads many into a cocoon. Keller’s version lacks the new wine element that Jesus had in his gospel.
David,
“But can’t we argue that lawlessness or antinomianism separates one from God as well?”
> Yes we can argue that.
“If he argues that living a homosexual lifestyle goes against the will and design of how God made us, as he does in The Meaning of Marriage, then how can he say that it does not put one in danger of going to hell?”
> Keller can’t actually. He backed himself into a corner.
“That’s why I’m confused; he seems to be contradicting himself.”
> Keller is contradicting himself. At least MacArthur has few contradictions.
Should have said *fewer* contradictions.
Ben,
“What he said at the end of the video is what the vast majority of faithful law abiding, Bible believing Christians fail to realize, that is, that self-righteousness is what gets you to hell, not homosexuality. I think that’s brilliant.”
I think that’s merely clever human thinking. Self-righteousness does not get anyone into hell. Is there some passage of Scripture that would lead you to that conclusion?
Google has a better “gospel” than MacArthur or Keller and much of the church…
Some of N.T. Wright’s thoughts on homosexuality:
http://youtu.be/YpQHGPGejKs
and gay marriage:
Great conversation between Rob Bell and Andrew Wilson on homosexuality within the church: