Jesus and Homosexuality 1

Last updated on: January 26, 2006 at 6:07 am by Scot McKnight

Jesus and Homosexuality 1 2006-01-26T06:07:18-06:00 Scot McKnight

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Life is not law. For Jesus at least. The place to begin a constructive understanding of how Christians should relate to persons with same-sex orientation and think about homosexuality is with Jesus’ practice of table fellowship. Why? Because it represents how life is encountered, of how a first century person would have come to understand Jesus’ own vision for the kingdom of God. Not all would begin here. I have on my desk six books on this topic; none of them begins this way. Each of them begins either with personal story or with the historical and biblical commandments. The latter are treating the Bible, too frequently, as a law book. I do not dispute the importance of these texts, even as commandments, but I don’t think that is how we are to begin. (Eventually, we’ll get to those texts — but I think from a healthier perspective.)

Humans are Eikons; humans are people; they are not morality acts or immorality acts. That is my point. If we believe, as I do, in God’s embracing grace that awakens in us the capacity to embrace God, ourselves, others, and the world (see Embracing Grace), then we will begin each and every moral discussion with the fact that humans are Eikons of God, persons, people, relationally-charged folks whose central need is to relate to God, self, others, and the world.
So, I begin right here: How would Jesus have “treated” homosexuals? The answer to that question is incredibly simple: he would have treated them as Eikons, as human beings made in God’s image who are designed to reflect God’s glory in this world by relating to God lovingly, to themselves lovingly, to others lovingly, and to the world lovingly. They would have been welcomed at the table of discussion, they would have been invited to listen to him, to interact with him, to follow him, and to fellowship with his followers. They would have been challenged to live before God as Jesus taught. In short, they would have been loved by Jesus. Not shunned; not humiliated; not ostracized; but given a seat for as long as they cared to be with him. He would have told everyone and anyone that there was a seat (or place; they didn’t use chairs) at the table for them.
And all this in the context of relationships.
Since Jesus does not discuss same-sex orientation or practice, we are given the freedom to explore what he did say about following him in the kingdom of God. Our exploration will take as its guiding lights five central themes of Jesus’ teachings on morality: (1) each will explore what Jesus does say; (2) each will explore the logic of Jesus’ moral teachings; (3) and each will compare Jesus’ teachings and moral logic to the teachings and moral logic of those who both teach against and who teach for the legitimacy of same-sex orientation and practices for Christians. Along the way we will find opportunities to bring in the texts of the rest of the Bible.
Here’s my first consideration: What was Jesus’ table fellowship practice like? Who was it for? How did it work?
First of all, there can be no question that everyone, regardless of who they were and what they had done or how they were living, was invited to the table. Mark 2:13-17 tells us that Jesus had a dinner with tax collectors and ‘sinners’.
Second, Jesus’ own practice of table fellowship with everyone was considered shameful and unacceptable by the religious elites of his day. Thus, in Mark 2:16 the scribal Pharisees were disgusted with Jesus’ practice of associating with sinners. In Matthew 11:16-19 we see that Jesus was “labeled” for his association with tax collectors and sinners.
Third, Jesus’ act of inclusive table fellowship is not an act of political tolerance, but the creation of an alternative society around him. In other words, this is not multiculturalism or diversity for the sake of multiculturalism or diversity, but inclusion for the sake of relational, redemptive work. It is a kingdom society. The Table of Jesus embodies his vision of God’s redemptive work in this world.
Fourth, Jesus’ table fellowship has a telos: a goal. To redeem folks, to invite others into relationship with God, with Jesus, with self, with others — all in order to establish a beachhead for the kingdom of God. No one, it hardly needs to be said, would be left unchanged; no one would be unchallenged; everyone would learn at this table with Jesus that life will be given a new foundation and a new set of relationships. Everyone and everything will find its proper place in relationship to God’s new work in the kingdom; anything that challenges the leadership of Jesus and thwarts the kingdom of God will be challenged. No one comes to the table of Jesus on their own terms; the table of Jesus lives out the terms of Jesus. Those terms offend and those terms redeem.
The place to begin this discussion, in other words, is with Jesus. Jesus is the only first thing we as followers of Jesus have to offer.
If I may, I’d like to draw a significant conclusion at this point: the walls around Jesus were permeable. The walls of most churches are impermeable. Those in and those out are clear. I find the recent trend of many Christians, many of whom are “emerging” folk, to create environments where the walls are permeable to be one of the most significant features of the emerging movement and these environments have the capacity to unleash kingdom power. Jesus’ table fellowship, which is the heart of his mission, is more like coffee discussions at coffee shops or what a student calls “party evangelism” or “porch missions” than it is like “church” as we now know it and do it.
The purity code constructed by impermeable walls is inconsistent with Jesus’ own practice. It is the absolute distinction that concerns me, not the distinction.
If you are looking for a good book on table fellowship, I recommend Craig Blomberg, Contagious Holiness: Jesus’ meals with Sinners.

Kingdom of God

Theology

Previous Post

January 26, 2006

Does persistence pay in prayer?

Next Post

January 27, 2006 Politics and the Apocalypse

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Acts of the Apostles Adam Advent Anabaptism Angels Anglican Apologetics Atonement Baptism BCP Prayers Bible Biblical Studies Birds Blogging Bloglossary Bonhoeffer Books Calvinism Christianity Church Church History Coffee Colossians Commentary Recs Conversion Creation Creeds Culture Death Ecclesiastes Economics Education Embracing Grace Emergent Emerging Movement Eschatology Essays Ethics Eucharist Evangelicalism Family Fasting Fathers Fellowship of Differents Footsteps Tour Fun and Whimsical Gospel Grace Happiness Heaven Hell Holy Spirit Irenaeus James Jesus Jesus Creed Job Justification Kingdom of God Law Lectures Lent Liberalism Love and Marriage Mabanteneni Manhood Mary Miracles Missio Alliance MissioLife Missional Missional Jesus Movies and Film New Perspective Northern Seminary OneLife Origins Project Orthodox Parables Pastor's Spouse Pastoring and Leading Pastoring and Preaching Patristics Paul Paul-John Tour Pharisees Pietism Political Theology Prayer and Formation Preaching Problems for Faith Psalm 119 Psalms Public Issues Purgatory Religions Resurrection Revelation Romans Rule of JCreed Science and Faith Sermon on the Mount Sports Ten Commandments Theology Third Way Top Ten Lists Translations Uncategorized Universalism University Ministry Way Out Weekly Meanderings Wisdom Women and Ministry Work Worship Writing & Blogging Youth Ministry

Select a Month July 2021 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 0000

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was the Roman centurion who converted to Christianity in Acts 10?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Felix Nicodemus Herod Cornelius