Homosexuality: A Way Forward?

Last updated on: December 19, 2016 at 12:06 am by Scot McKnight

Homosexuality: A Way Forward? 2016-12-18T18:13:18-06:00 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.

In the now-irreplaceable volume edited by Preston Sprinkle, Homosexuality, the Bible, and the Church, two — yea, four — views are presented, two affirming and two traditional, and each of the authors responds with admirable civility and firm difference to each of the others. The four authors are William Loader and Megan DeFranza as well as Wesley Hill and Stephen Holmes.

Last week the post examined the view of Loader and this week the focus is Megan DeFranza. DeFranza has a lengthy book on intersex — Sex Difference in Christian Theology. While at times there are signs she is conversing with those who know all the debates, she backs up and summarizes her entire argument, and then very helpfully moves into a discussion of how to be “faithfully improvising” in our ethics today. (Well chosen expression, even if one will focus on faithfully and another on improvising.)

If Loader thinks the Bible is unequivocally against same-sex behavior and even same-sex desire and that, consequently, Christians will need to move forward on the basis of knowing more and having different experiences, DeFranza’s approach is more along the line of restricting the sense of the biblical passages as well as the need to rethink what we think of faithful, monogamous, consensual same-sex relations along the lines of how the church has thought, say, about slavery.

She opens with a good discussion (even if brief) of intersex sexuality and of “eunuchs from birth” and how such awareness — of which we are more aware today — should complex-ify our approach.

I will clip her own words for they are as tight a summary as one could possibly provide of her chapter.

Genesis 1 and 2 do not need to be read as providing an exclusive model of what it means to be human. The creation narratives speak in broad categories. Just as most animals fall into the classification of land animal, sea creature, or creature of the air; so most humans fit into the category of male or female. … Adam and Eve can be understood as the majority story … 90 [This theme of the majority comes out of knowing that there were eunuchs from birth and other non-majority sexuality themes in the ancient world.]

This “majority story” then forms a ground for seeing heterosexuality as the majority, not the exclusive, story.

The story of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19 and its parallel in Judges 19 describe gangs threatening to rape men and angels when in fact it is only a woman who suffers sexual violence at their hands, violence which led to her death…. . These stories warn of judgment upon sin—certainly the sin of sexual violence. They teach nothing about marriage. 91

In #3, DeFranza concludes that exploitative same-sex relations are behind the NT prohibitions and not consensual, faithful monogamy of same-sex partners.

There were many different ways of practicing “heterosexuality” and “homosexuality” in the ancient world, and many of them were not the ways we are familiar with today. … In the same way, just because the Bible condemns certain kinds of same-sex sexual acts does not mean that all same-sex sexual acts are therefore out of bounds. 91

It is possible to read the prohibitions in 1 Corinthians 6 and 1 Timothy 1 as proscriptions of decadence, lack of self-control, and exploitation, including the sexual exploitation of enslaved persons and prostitutes. 91

Leviticus 18 and 20 may stand behind the creation of the term arsenokoitos in 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy. … It is difficult to discern the rationale behind the prohibition, given how same-sex relations were understood to dishonor a man by treating him as a woman and the lack of understanding of sexual orientation as we are beginning to understand it today. 91

She has made a case for seeing sexuality in the ancient world as about maleness and femaleness, about aggression and passivity, and that to be a good male is to be the dominant penetrating partner; any male permitting himself to be penetrated is acting the part of a woman. This is not how sexuality is understood today.

In #5 the limitation of Paul’s horizon for who was involved in same-sex relations comes to the fore.

The condemnations in Romans 1 are part of a rhetorical “sting operation” intended to stir up judgmental ire against “godless” Gentiles which turns on those doing the judging, proving all need redemption in Christ. Given the epistle’s audience and rhetorical force, the apostle could very well have had in mind the excesses of the Roman aristocracy and imperial court, including the sexual exploitation of enslaved persons, as examples of the extreme forms of sin to which one can fall when one rejects God. 91

More importantly, it provides no guidance for those Christians who have not rejected God but nevertheless experience same-sex attraction. 92

She makes a case for seeing marriage in the ancient world as patriarchal and hence the use of such metaphors for God and the church etc all emerges out of a patriarchal worldview. Hence her claim opening #6.

Contemporary Christian marriage is not “biblical marriage” of the Old or New Testament. In both testaments, heterosexual marriage functions as an analogy based on ancient patriarchal marriage illustrating God’s covenant faithfulness, sovereignty, and condescending love for “his” creaturely “bride.” … Christians can learn what metaphors based on ancient social structures teach about our relationship to God while working to reshape those same structures to better reflect Jesus’ ethic of neighbor love. 92

Big issue for her at the level of ethical debate is how to move forward. How?

There is no recognized ecumenical council to deliberate on such matters for us. [SMcK: I would contend there are small such councils, that is, denominations. Such councils then function with some authority and these deserve to be factored into her discussion.]

Instead, we must listen to the voice of the Spirit as we study the Scriptures and sift other sources of wisdom from the tradition(s) of the church, human experience, and our growing knowledge of the human body and sexuality gained from science, psychology, sociology, etc. 94 [SMcK: Who is the “we” here?]

To move forward, we need to consider three points of common ground.

Human beings are created for communion with God and with other people. 94

Because of sin, we need help to keep our promises. Human sexuality points to sexual relations in general rather than directly to marriage, but most cultures have found it wise to limit sexual activity to publicly recognized (legal) relationships in order to reduce community conflicts which tend to arise from jealousy, quarrels over paternity and responsibility, etc. 95

A Christian theology of marriage recognizes that humans are made for communion and that our sexuality brings us into particular relationships which, because of sin, need to be governed by public vows which hold couples accountable and enable communities to support their unions and arbitrate when vows are broken. 96

Uncategorized

Previous Post

December 17, 2016

Weekly Meanderings, 17 December 2016

Next Post

December 19, 2016 Blue Christmas (Michelle Van Loon)

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

What city was Paul imprisoned in before writing to the Philippians?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Rome Jerusalem Corinth Antioch