Back to basics: A look at homosexuality and Christianity

This is tough thing to write, because I know people will care. There are so few subjects I write on that many people care about, which is strange when you think about it, because my primary areas of interest are salvation and Jesus and all things that are very close to the heart of Christianity. Yet, as much as I hear positive things in my day-to-day life from loving members of the churches I serve I know that this piece is much nearer to where peoples' emotions live. To be honest, that concerns me, but the locus of the culture wars are always somewhere. What's important to admit firstly is that these are matters secondary to the faith. I think that's sometimes hard to hear for those who see the stance toward gays in America as cruel and oppressive; and I think that's hard to hear for those who see the acceptance of gays as undermining the biblical principles on which their faith is founded. But I believe it nonetheless to be entirely secondary to the primary message of the Gospel, which is something like: you are saved by grace through faith apart from works of law (because of Christ dying on the cross and rising again).

With that said, I am cautious to add another opinion to this mess, though I do so because too few have brought us back to the basic presuppositions we bring to the gay marriage debate. One side wants to make it all about love and acceptance, which is unfair, because one can certainly love a person while believing their actions to be unhealthy or sinful. The other side wants to make it all about God's law, which is unfair, because scripture only gives us a partial--and hardly timeless--view of what the law demands.


Those opposed to gay marriage on Christian grounds usually assume that they start and end with scripture, but in fact I don't think this is the case. I believe all of us start with a simple assumption that governs everything else that we believe. That assumption stems from the question: "Is homosexuality a choice?" If you believe it is, then you can very well turn to scripture and find moral answers in the holiness code of Leviticus and the words of Paul in Romans 1. If you are operating under this assumption, then I believe you are faithful in your interpretation, even if my experience with people who are gay has been quite the opposite (I should say at this time that many people assume they look at scripture first to decide that homosexuality is a choice, but nowhere does the Bible suggest that to be the case. Instead, what they mean when they say this is that they have decided homosexuality is a choice because it makes the law appear less cruel in that it allows them to avoid dealing with a God who created people who are bent toward sin). However, if you believe that homosexuality is not a choice--and based on my experience this is where I land--then it is more complicated, since the clear meaning of scripture clashes with at least my experience.

Many advocates for homosexuality have made the argument that since we have decided many other laws from the holiness code (of Leviticus) are outdated, so too homosexuality must be. This is itself a generalization that is unhelpful. Each law is different and was encoded for a different purpose. All were written, in the case of the holiness code, for a specific time in the early Hebrew history, but that does not mean that none of them apply today. The Ten Commandments still stand strong in this day, for example. We must ask ourselves specifically why each law was written, and what purpose that may hold today. In the case of the Ten Commandments we can discern that God was giving us timeless rules to live by, though to be fair none of us do a very good job with the first one. That is not reason enough to get rid of them, however, and so we hold firm to these as moral yardsticks. In the case of wearing fabric made of two different fibers, however, this was a law that seems silly to us today, because it was part of a larger context of purity laws that distinguished the sons and daughters of Abraham from other peoples. So, when it comes to the prohibition of male-on-male sexual acts we have to ask ourselves where that falls on the spectrum. Truth be told, we're undecided. That's why this is something that is still up for debate. I believe what I believe and others believe differently. Naturally, I think I'm right, but so do you. This is not a place to claim divine authority when your neighbor has passion in equal terms and believes in God just as strongly.

One thing that many Christians do not understand--or even sometimes believe--is that the word of God is still alive today, but I do. God's word comes in three ways--through Christ, through scripture and through the Holy Spirit. On the topic of homosexuality, Christ tells us nothing, scripture tells us something unfavorable about sex acts, but the fact that this has become a point of contention both inside and outside the church suggests that the Holy Spirit may still be doing something with this issue. That may sound like a cop out, but how else are we to determine the Holy Spirit's activity but to trust in some of what is happening in our world--even if we should remain vigilant to forces contrary to the gospel? There is always the possibility that we are part of a corrupt culture that will be punished for our actions, but the fact that there are otherwise faithful people on both sides of these hot-button issues suggests to me that we are simply struggling together to find God's will for us. As much as we often point to the contentious debate and trolling on the internet surrounding homosexuality there is much going on that is respectful and hopeful that, no matter the outcome, we can still live together as people of Christ. (I look at Mere Orthodoxy as a blog that believes differently on this subject than I do but engages it in, I believe, a faithful way)

This all comes back to our first presupposition. Just as I believe it is not faithful to read scripture as if it is a science book, so too I believe that our experience with people should play a role in our formation of opinions. Our judgment is always clouded, and so I admit that, while I have had many positive experiences with individuals who are gay, I may be putting my own spin on something that is not as it appears to me; this is a possibility. However, I have only my own experiences to trust--and not yours--so until I see otherwise it is all I have to turn to. In that mind, I cannot believe that homosexuality is a choice, or rather, I do believe that sexuality is a spectrum and we can do little to adjust whereupon that spectrum we land. If that's the case, then I have to believe that either God has created people who are bent in a way that is rotten, and whose sexual yearnings are impure, or something different is happening here. I grant it is a possibility that people have been created with an orientation toward sin--and if you believe that I can understand why--but I err on the other side. I do this because any relationship with equal power dynamics seems representative to me of the ideal that scripture offers and Christ promotes. If homosexuals are in a relationship where one has power over the other then I believe that relationship to be unhealthy and, indeed, sinful, but I also believe the same thing about heterosexuals in the same roles.

There is scriptural evidence to the contrary and I don't want to minimize this, but I also believe that what was once prudent for a people setting themselves apart and in need of numbers is no longer prudent in a world of over seven billion. Biologically, we have changed. I realize it's strange to use biology to determine morality, but I think this is sometimes what we are called to do. When God told us in the Garden of Eden to be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth and subdue it, we have followed that to a T, except now our multiplication has run the risk of destroying our fruitfulness; our subduing the earth has decimated our vitality. And so, we are debating homosexuality as if it is a perversion of life when life is perverted all around us by powers over and against the poor and the deprived. Far be it from me to put the kibosh on a union that seems far more in line with Christ's love than a multitude of things I experience in that messed-up world.

I realize this may change few minds, and that's because we still have our presuppositions. I don't see that changing, but I wish we would acknowledge them more often. Then, we could talk across a table about what we believe, resting on the mercy of God, because--in the end--that's all any of us have.