Progressive errors on LGBT

[William Thornton]

1) Do not dismiss the traditionalist-cited passages as “clobber verses,” deployed with malice in order to harm gay people.

2) Do not dismiss whole authors (Paul) or sections (Old Testament) of Scripture as if good contemporary folks know that they have little to say to our enlightened modern world — at least, not if you want to be taken seriously by traditional Christians.

3) Do not dismiss people who cite the Bible against your view simply as fundamentalists or biblicists or some other derogatory phrase.

4) Do not dismiss traditionalist Christian sexual ethics as simply part of an overall anti-body, anti-sex, anti-woman, anti-pleasure agenda.

5) Do not simply point to broad themes of liberation, justice or inclusion of the marginalized as if those important biblical imperatives ipso facto invalidate the need to deal with the texts cited on the traditionalist side.

6) Do not assume that the issue is settled by making claims to being “prophetic.”

7) Do not just say that it’s time for Christians to “catch up with the culture” or stop falling “behind the times.”

[Dave Roberts]

is there perhaps a via media (middle way) to be found. Can we love people without clobbering them and care for people without endorsing their every whim?

[Mrs Haruo]

I find it hard to take a lot of "traditional Christians" very seriously. Especially the ones that teach that a hammer, screwdriver and adjustable wrench are "masculine tools".

[William Thornton]

The list above is David Gushee's, , not mine. I'm not sure what he thinks of screwdrivers.

[Haruo]

I think it's a good list; it inculcates the king of charitable civility I strive for.

I am a bit embarrassed for the NRSV translators if they chose to render "ἀρσενοκοῖται" as "sodomites".

[Tim Bonney]

[Tim Bonney]

As to the list above, I find that some progressives do some of the things listed but by no means all progressives and by no means the whole list. So it falls into the category of stereotyping progressives in my mind. You can't deal with all progressives as a group any more than you could say, "all Baptists" or "all Methodists" believe or do. If you are going to talk about the theological issues around homosexuality you have to deal with individual viewpoints and not some list that someone claims we all agree with. Progressives are too diverse a group for the above list to even come close to being universally applied.

[Lou]

I happened upon this article whilst browsing my Twitter feed this morning, which I think is on point here. The writer--a fellow I'd never heard of--presents a very thoughtful, cogent, and delightfully non-shrill argument about why so many Christians are unwilling to change their (traditional) views on homosexual marriage. Worth the read, IMO.

[Haruo]

[Tim Bonney]

[Lou]

[linda]

I'll add another to the list. Please stop telling those of us who are traditionalists on this issue that that would change if we just got to know, listen to, and understand a gay or lesbian person. Or if one of our kids came out as gay.

UMM, no, we are not that sheltered or in the dark. Many of us have gay children or family members or friends, just as we have straight friends and family that may break sexual rules. And we still hold to those rules, also.

The issue is not that we do not care about the person. It is that we believe the Bible forbids certain actions. Gay or straight.

As to the bullying of gay kids into suicide? I believe it is possible and probably has happened.

I believe it is also possible that when a gay person commits suicide, it may be their own guilty conscience hounding them. I see it as no different than any other sin in that sense. If I know God forbids something I really really really like and want to do, and I also know society has always frowned on the action and seen it as twisted an immoral, I face real choices. I can give up the act, make peace with God, and fit into society. I can rationalize away the Scriptures, try to change society, and see if that works for me. Ah, no, probably will live me guilt ridden and embarrassed. Or I can decide to just give up--aka suicide.

And let's be really careful with the word "bullying." It exists and it is cruel and inhumane, and needs to stop. But simply saying gay behavior or desire is a sin or as the teens around here might say, sick, is not bullying. At very minimum it is expressing an opinion, and last time I checked, we still get to do that. Even if our opinion is right, wrong, kind, mean, or hurts someone else's feelings.

Otherwise, what leg do we stand on when someone decides they are offended and hurt and bullied if we say we believe Jesus is Lord?

[Tim Bonney]

[Ed Pettibone]

[Lou]

[Tim Bonney]

Thanks Lou for your reasoned response. I confess I don't see them often this is issue from traditional folks. That's my experience for what its worth.

I think you've had a fairly unusual experience, but then I have served most of my ministry in conservative parts of the US. Nearly every experience I've had it has largely been gay persons or those who support them who have been attacked rather than those who have traditional belifs about homosexuality.

[Tim Bonney]

[Tim Bonney]

On the same subject Ed, my basic objection to the way most of these arguments run is that most arguments forget human beings that are often harmed in the process of church and denominational fights over this issue. Sure straight people feel hurt. They feel hurt that their church is changing or that didn't win a vote in a denominational or church setting.

But no straight person was ever actually harmed by two gay people getting married. Seldom are straight people in positions where they'll be actively descriminated against.

It is like the racial issue (which I know you don't like compared to this.) White people really can never quite know what it is like to be a black person profiled for their race. Being stopped for "driving while black" is a huge issue in areas with large black populations. But you don't hear about people being stopped because they were white male anglos.

So often while we bandy about what is and isn't sin and have high level theological discussions we can easily forget the suffering of others. Call that all wet if you like.

[Lou]

[Tim Bonney]

Interesting Lou. I'd not expect that in Texas.

Just for the record, my passion for this issue has developed and grown over the years for several reasons. My own research into the New Testament has led me to believe that Paul is primarily talking about temple prostitution and pedophilia rather than what we know of as homosexuality. I don't dismiss the Bible at all, though Williams list might accuse me of that. I just don't see the Bible saying what some others believe it says.

Secondly I've become convinced that homosexuality is natural. It is found in nature in other species of animals as well as human beings and I do not believe it is a choice. I believe it is how gay people have been created by God.

And finally, over the years as I have heard the stories of gay people I have become further convinced that this is not an issue of sin but an issue of a in born orientation which they can no more help or change than I can change the color of my eyes or my racial makeup.

There are certainly folks here who completely disagree with me, probably most on a Baptist forum.

[Sandy]

I don't understand the need for hostility between people, whether they be activists in the GLBT community, or conservative Christians. I do not see what is gained by that, for either group. I tend to lean toward an interpretation of the Biblical text as defining homosexual behavior as sinful, and marriage as between a man and a woman, as Jesus declares. But, there's also nothing in the Bible that allows for bad, rude, or hostile behavior.

[William Thornton]

I thought Gushee did a good job with the list. If not All individual progressives employ the entire list, Trads certainly get slapped with all of them in time.

[Ed Pettibone]

[KeithE]

As I have long stated herein, I believe all homosexual acts are sinful and some/many hetreosexual acts are sinful.

But
1) The extreme sourness that many supposed Christ-followers have towards this brand of sin (as easy mark minority) and other so-called sinners is what really teed off Jesus. 'Woe to you, you brood of vipers', is a lot harsher statement from Jesus than 'go and sin no more'. He called for gentle correction not loud or public denounciation. This is straight (no pun intended) reading the Gospels (if you bother to read in a balanced manner consistent with its emphases of Jesus's teaching).

2) Paul also (secondarily imo) condemned many other sins when calling out homosexuality - read it all!. Leviticus (tertiary at best) also did not single out homosexuality for special scorn.

3) As for civil treatment of LGBTs, they deserve every right of a straight person (except perhaps the right to be hired by non-enlightened religious organizations who believe falsely they employ "pure" employees)

From St Tropez, French Rivera, where my heterosexual urges will be tested.

[Ed Pettibone]