The gay Christian apologetic (“Gays, Christians, and gay Christians,” Andrew Marin, part 3)

Andrew Marin, Part 1

Andrew Marin, Part 2

This is the post all about the way that gay christians interpret the Bible.  I’m always into learning something I havent’ been exposed to before, so I was really looking forward to this chapter on the gay apologetic.

I think that one of the best things about Andrew Marin’s work, Love Is an Orientation, and something seldom found in discussions on homosexuality and faith, is that you won’t find him taking shots or sounding bitter toward either side.   You find Marin provocative to all sides, but hostile to none.  While his book is replete with sad stories of the failure of the church to love, and also replete with studies, findings, and apologetics which my make light work in rupturing your view, you will have to understand that Marin has a lot of hope for the Evangelical church.  In fact, if I had to guess (and this is only my guess), I suspect that Marin himself still falls in that traditional conservative view on homosexuality, but I get the feeling he’s transcended the well-worn fighting points, and comes across rather likeable.

His chapter on the gay apologetic was one of the most well written affirmations of homosexuality I have ever read (which is made especially poignant when he can lay out the case for the other side with equal clarity- I love that in a writer).  Marin bases much of his understanding of the gay apologetic off the work of Dr. Mel Wright, a former speechwriter for Billy Graham until Wright came out of the closet.  Wright is a gay Christian, whose work has aided in the conversion of thousands, if not millions to Christ.

Scripture is entirely central to both the gay-affirming and gay-condemning sides of the debate.  Those with the traditional Christian view tend to assume that gay-affirming theology ignores Scripture, but we need to get over this immature assumption (i.e. different beliefs= no respect for Scripture) if we are going to have an intelligent conversation.  Undeniably, scripture does address homosexuality in six different verses throughout the Bible.  However, according to Marin, the gay-affirming hermeneutic assumes:

“…the passages in the Bible that condemn same-sex relationships are not referencing long-term, committed monogamous relationships.  Rather, the Bible is talking about inhospitality, heterosexual rape, pagan ritual sex and orgies, and pederasty (men having sex with boys.)  They also believe that translations and interpretations of the Bible are unclear relative to the hermeneutical historical-cultural/transcultural analysis of homosexuality.”

The problems with thinking Scripture is clear on the matter of homosexuality are many, but even the most basic, surface level observations are hard to get around.  Yes, the Law forbade homosexuality, but so did it condemn eating lobster and shaving your beard.  In the New Testament (since we are privy to dismiss the OT when it gets complicated), the word “homosexual” does not exist.  Are we tracking? Because that sentence merits re-reading; no word used in the Greek actually translates directly as “homosexual,” which means you are automatically working with a translator’s slant (or agenda) if you use one of those gay-clobber passages with the word “homosexual,” staking your fight on unsure footing.  One term often translated varyingly as “homosexual” or “homosexual offender” is arsenokoites.  It is a term that Paul seems to have invented, as we have the term on record in no other ancient literature.  This term, as with another oft mistranslated/simplified-as-“homosexual” term likely (not certainly) refers to homosexuality, but a particular type of homosexual act(often suggested is the profession of “call boys” for one term, or the practice of gay pedophilia for the alternate term mistranslated).

The story of Sodom and Gomorrah is a favorite among the traditionalist camp to point to the sin of homosexuality.  However, two big problems with this are that (1) nobody in either camp argues Sodom’s sexual sin was negligible (as depicted in Genesis 19, isn’t gang rape, regardless of orientation, always bad?) and that says nothing of homosexual relationships at large, and (2) the Bible is very clear about why destruction came to Sodom (spoiler alert: it wasn’t because of the gay sex!).  Ezekiel 16: 49-50 reads:

“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.”

Now, think about all those pundits and pastors you hear imploring us to turn from sin, especially lettin’ the gays take over, lest America become like Sodom and take the fiery first of a pissed off god.  Well, I would argue that America is remarkably like Sodom already.  No, we haven’t sanctioned gay gang rape, but are we not arrogant, overfed, unconcerned with the poor and needy?  I mean, we are the best county, with our fat kids and *yay!* capitalism and all! The harping on the Sodom story is easily seen by the gay community as yet another example of the traditional Christian community settling for a seemingly willful ignorance of Scripture.  Why not unapologetically dive into the text an deal with context intentionally?

Beyond this, there are many interactions that the gay apologetic points to in Scripture.  Some argue that the passages on Naomi and Ruth, and David and Jonathan, are hinting at something beyond mere friendship.  Particularly interesting to me is Jesus healing of the Roman centurion’s servant.  The Greek word for servant used here, pais, has a significantly different connotation that the generic term for servant, doulos. A pais was a “very special servant,” and in generally refers to homosexual partner/servant common for Roman solders to own.  Jesus never addresses homosexuality in Scripture, but this would have been a perfect place to do so.  Nevertheless, he heals the pais with little explanation which (regardless of his intent) Jesus undoubtedly knew would be interpreted as a blessing of the homosexual union by inquisitors watching the seen play out.  Perhaps Jesus should have given us a bit more evidence speaking to his stance on homosexuality, but you gotta love the way he just transcended the debate, don’t you?  What an example!

My outlining of the gay/lesbian apologetic here is very brief.  It barely scratches the surface of the scholarship done, and there is a wealth of work in circulation for anyone interested in further study.  Beyond books, Marin suggests simply speaking with a gay pastor of gay Christian if you want to learn more.  Just ask what it’s like to be them.  Ask what they believe and how they arrived at some position, and then shut up and listen.  Marin tells of the shock he felt the first time he invited a gay Christian friend to his church.  The gay Christian friend sang the same songs Marin did, raised his hands the same, closed his eyes the same, felt the same depth in the worship experience.  Things like this are hard to swallow when you’ve always assumed “gay” and “Christian” are mutually exclusive terms, but conversation with “the other” always has a beautiful way of breeding new understanding. Whereas pontificating has it’s way of shutting out rational open-mindedness (alternately known as humitily), real conversation converts both of you in some way or another in ways that merely waiting for your chance to argue does not.

That is why pontificating and arguing against the other (and the other, for me and much of the church, has been the GLBT community) has failed, and will continue to fail so miserably.

a quick story about grace (and homosexuality, 300 dollars, marriage, TVs, and bible studies)

Libby and I received a shocking gift yesterday. A neighbor living two houses down from my parents house told my mom about this spare TV that he’s been wanting to give away. And as Libby and I are en route to completely furnishing our apartment by pillaging Goodwill and give aways, we jumped at the chance. I had never met this neighbor before, but after meeting him for less than five minutes, we were graciously walking away with his free TV. My mom stayed behind to chat with him for a moment, and Lib and I were shocked when she came back…

This neighbor lives two doors down. The house between ours and his is a strong Christian family, as is the house on his other side. As are houses across the street and all around. Our streets are regularly blocked up by massive lines of minivans making the weekly pilgrimage to Grist Mill road for Bible studies with like-minded cohort. He is a homosexual. People say all sorts of malicious things about him here. I’m sure they say things like “we love him, we just hate his sin,” but we know how that goes. One of the first things my mom was told when moving into the neighborhood was that there were two men living near who were probably more than roommates. Just making sure you know, thanks. On our same street, there is a family that works with a ministry here in Little Rock that focuses on building family. This family also disowned their child when he came out of the closet. Needless to say, it takes a lot of bravery and confidence to live with so people like this around. This neighbor was a blessing to my mom when my brother came out of the closet, being an ear to listen to who really understood the issue, and new what to say and what advice to give far more than anyone in my mom’s circle up to that point.

I didn’t even catch his name, to be honest. But I would like to get to know him better.

…When my mother came back to the house, she said we wouldn’t believe how gracious he was, that giving us a free TV wasn’t enough for him. She hands me three hundred dollars, a gift from someone I barely knew for five minutes. Seriously, other than my own parents, this makes him officially the biggest material supporter of our soon-coming marriage. What selfless grace. And nobody on our street is just extravagantly well to do. He is an interior decorator in a tumbling economy, but he wanted to bless us. When my mom pressed him on why he was so kind, he simply replied that he loves it when a young couple falls in love and plunges ahead into marriage, and he believes they should get all the support we can give them. I happen to agree, but I am not so gracious with my resources.

I hope I can be more like him one day, giving so freely in resources, love, and support.

the big giant Gay

When I was growing up, I was sure that “the Gay” was a Satanic (and/or Lib’rul) plot to use the biased media to catch our children with a sexual trend that would collectively give God the finger, or something like that. Abortion had simmered as our issue to rant about after 30 years of losing the culture war, and so we had a new battle to fight: the big giant Gay, who apparently didn’t read his Bible very well.

The other day, that topic somehow came up. Libby and I were over at a friend’s house, and she was telling Lib and I about a sermon series they were doing at their church, with this past week’s topic being homosexuality and the church’s position on it. I had a million questions to ask, but I kept my opinions to myself. But when specifically inquired of, I opened up a bit. It’s a hard matter for me, and a personal one at that. My brother is gay, as are several friends. I used to even think that it was clear-as-day in Scripture, but then I learned some more stuff about translation and hermeneutics, and we all know learning can mess up what you thought was simple. I spent most of my life up to now believing the Gay was categorically unacceptable, but have learned a lot more about the issue in recent years. My position on such things generally comes to a decisive “uhhhmm…” followed by a “I don’t know” or “people are complicated, not issues” or something like this.

We had a spirited, but very friendly and engaging, conversation that night. If we are addressing scriptures, I explained that context is everything regarding Old Testament passages, and that things don’t get much clearer in the New Testament. I explained that the word “homosexual” is not actually a good translation of any of the Greek words in the “clobber passages” used in the issue, meaning that wherever you see “homosexual” in your NT, you immediately know you are dealing with an imperfect translation at best (which raises all sorts of questions about bias, agenda, hermeneutics, etc.). We talked for about an hour about all sorts of issues wrapped up in this (buy me a drink and we will talk about how Acts 10 screws up any position anyway). But really, what I come to in those conversations is that I just don’t care to check a position as if I’m selecting a choice on a ballot. I’ve got people who are going to read this that think I’ve abandoned God by saying that, and I’ve got people on the other side who will think I’ll giving in to close-minded ignorance by not taking more of a stance. But really, the conversation is just not that interesting to me. Here’s a few reasons why.

1. What I think doesn’t really matter. Having a firm, unchangeable stance will alienate people rather than engage. And maybe this will change when I am actively pastoring a church in the future, but I still think it is simply not my place to pontificate on certain issues. Share and discuss, yes, but not to pontificate abstractly. And if I do, I’ve just made myself fairly well alienated from anyone I wish to engage (be it the uber-snob Lib’ruls or the take-America-back-for-God Fundamentalists, who both need saving).

2. At the very least, we can all agree that homosexual relationships are every bit as wrong as heterosexual relationships… being that sin is when there is a lack of health, or a codependence, a nonthriving drive in the relationship. People are not issues. If you ask me if I think a heterosexual relationship is healthy, I’ll ask “Which one? Who are you talking about?” Because a lot of heterosexual relationships, married or otherwise, are deeply unhealthy. So if we don’t make blanket statements about heterosexual couples, is there some reason why we can’t approach the homosexual ones in the same way? The fact is that there are an enormous number of heterosexual and homosexual relationships that are deeply destructive and wrong. I’m much more interested in talking to someone about whether or not they are thriving, healthy, not codependent, in their relationship, be it to a man or woman.

3. When you deal with people, there are no fine lines anyway. Libby brought this to light for both of us when she began to speak of how there isn’t any easy way to define “homosexual” in the first place. Which sounded odd, at first, but I think she was hitting on something brilliant. There are a lot of people, male and female (though I suspect this is somewhat more commonplace with the latter), who develop friendships with the same gender which are so close that a codependence or romantic interest emerges. Or maybe, sans romantic attraction, the friendship is simply too close to be healthy. There is no precise “moment” at which this happens, no precise moment at which the relationship turns homosexual. So even if you firmly believed homosexuality was wrong, you can’t draw a firm line. Again, people are complex beings, and relationships are all the more complex. Most people in the camp saying it’s wrong will affirm that it is more than just the sex part that is evil; it is also any predicating romance. So where does attraction begin? Where is friendship blurred into (if suppressed) attraction? It’s just so complex.

So if you pontificate, you ostracize. People are way complex, and if we focus on talking about health and sin and reasons and need, rather than positions, we bypass the divisiveness. And anyways, if you are one who firmly believes that homosexuality is wrong, then you would expect to find so much sin and unhealthiness in the relationship that it would become apparent to whom you speak and engage with that the relationship is wrong, due to personal (as opposed to abstract) sin. So what’s so controversial about approaching it this way? Pontificating is not interesting to me. Conversation is very interesting.

I say, let’s get off our soap boxes and grab a beer for conversation instead (or coffee if you swing that way).

—–

P.S., this seems like an appropriate moment to plug a link for a friend of mine who is a lesbian and a Christian, Adele Sakler. Given that I am a heterosexual male, she probably has far more to say on this than I, and you should check out her blog.