catapult magazine

apparently the editorial staff at the [i:00d6f85f83]lariat[/i:00d6f85f83], baylor university’s school newspaper, caused quite a ruckus with a recent editorial promoting gay marriage. the president of the college responded with his own editorial and roberto riverais offered his opinion at the wilberforce forum web site.

i haven’t had a chance to read the original editorial or president sloan’s response, but mr. riverais’ opinion was annoying.

what do you think?

Your argument seems to rob Scripture of any prophetic voice for today. I know we want to avoid the pitfall of timeless truths, but does Scripture contain any norms that are not so culture-bound as to have no voice today? Who will decide? The modern, enlightened person? Are we really to buy the argument that if something Scripture says is not acceptable to the modern, enlightened person, so much the worse for Scripture? It would be "foolish" to apply it? Aren’t we treating Scripture like a switchboard of commands and norms, each of which we can turn off if we find it unacceptable? Doesn’t this reflect the spirit of autonomy?

Again, we’re surfacing a problem without solving it. No one wants to apply all Scriptural commands in a simplistic, unreconstructed way. But neither do we want to place all of Scripture on the procrustean bed of the modern mindset—lop off the feet if it doesn’t fit.

There is a way across Lessing’s ditch (the cultural divide), and the way is to acknowledge that we are not autonomous free thinkers but God’s creatures, all of us made in his image. There is not endless, infiinite diversity, but genuine commonality in the midst of diversity. God has not only created us, but also entered into the drama himself. He’s directing a story. THe point is not to make God’s story relevenant to our modern culture’s story, but to make our stories relevant to the grand drama of God’s redemption (which is precisely what Christ does when he works through the Spirit to work faith in our hearts in association with the preaching of the Word). Either we have a place in God’s story as his people, who (no thanks to ourselves) are being renewed in the image of God and whose stories are taking on gospel dimensions, or we set ourselves against God’s story and try to create our own story, hoping for an end of our own design. But the end is not open for negotiation. As I said before, God is coming to judge the nations in his righteousness. If that idea is unpalatable, so much the worse for those who find it to be so. They’ve missed the hope held out.

I guess the problem with saying that Scrpture’s homosexuality is merely a cultural phenomenon is the way Scripture speaks to the issue. It specifically says that along with other obstinate sinners (adulterers, etc), homosexuals will by no means enter the kingdom of God. Homosexuality is not part of God’s drama; we can’t direct our stories along that line. This is not to say that those who struggle with and fall into homosexuality will not enter the Kingdom. If they repent and turn to Christ, they have abundant hope, in this life and in the next. It is to say, though, that if they prefer homosexuality to Christ, they will not enter the Kingdom. If they refuse to turn and insist on writing their own story (insist on going their own way), they will not enter the Kingdom.

Given the way Scripture speaks to the issue, it would seem the burden of proof is on those who want to say Scripture now permits homosexuality to show why we can ignore this warning.

We’re going in circles and I don’t think any of my arguments will change your mind. The best way to overcome the bias with which you are approaching the Bible is by making friends with someone who is gay. Might be hard to make that happen though, considering your prejudice will turn away any self-respecting homosexual. I know you’re taught in seminary to be very certain about your theology and about how to interpret scripture, but just be careful not to become one of those people who would judge Jesus for being too relativistic and tolerant of sin. People are more imporant than rules.

I think you’re probably right that we’re going in circles, Dan, though I want to reiterate that this has been a valuable discussion for me. In the end, it does seem like we’ll have to agree to disagree on this issue.

Also, I receive your challenge about befriending a homosexual. People do change the tenor of arguments. I hope you know that I would not talk to a homosexual about this issue the way I have been talking on here, though obviously my bias would be substantially the same (though, again, my approach would be different). It changes a lot of things when you’re addressing a real person who is there and struggling with real pains and agonies.

I hope you also know that I take Scripture seriously is precisely because people are more important than rules, and because God is the most important Person. God’s Word is not somehow detached from real people and their needs, and the reason we know that is because Jesus did not tolerate people’s sins but died for them. When he ate with sinners, prostitutes, tax collectors, and other social outcasts, it was not because he was the sort of nice guy that simply overlooks people’s shortcomings. He ate with them to give them hope of forgiveness of sins and freedom from sin’s dominion, and then he sealed that hope with his own blood. God’s grace towards us was bought at a high cost, and we do an injustice to Christ’s blood when we minimize the seriousness of sin.

I hope that a homosexual would find that hope in the context of a genuinely loving friendship, and I freely confess I need God’s grace to be such a friend to homosexuals.

To be competely frank, a gay person is going need God’s grace to befriend someone with your prejudice as well. But we believe in miracles right?

But I enjoyed the conversation as well. I’m afraid i haven’t done a good job of representing the perspective of pro-gay Christians. Perhaps there are others with another perspective?

I’ve really enjoyed reading the discussion. I’m not great at arguing theology, and I grew up with the assumption that homosexuality was sin, but gay friends that I have made in the last few years have really affected my opinions. I have two very good friends/colleagues who are in monogamous relationships (not with each other) and have been for over twenty years. The thing that makes these relationships remarkable is not that they are same-sex relationships, but that are beautiful, committed, loving, respectful relationships. Indeed, Cliff and Bill are amazing, lovely people and display such wonderful love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control that I simply cannot condemn them or their behavior. It would be ridiculous to do so, and you’d know what I meant if you could meet them.