The Core Blog: Authority, Homosexuality, and a Piss-Poor Epistemology

Over the next few weeks (and months) I'm going to be thinking (and talking) a lot about Scripture, personal conviction, and the teaching work of the Holy Spirit. What I have to say today may seem dis-jointed, but only because it's intended to lead into other things.

Before reading on, you may want to download a PDF of a transcription of theologian N.T. Wright's lecture on Biblical Authority. Although it's 19 pages long, and scholarly in nature, it's quite down-to-earth.

As I was reading this document, I began to think about how each of us arrives at our convictions. And I realized that no one really believes something just because someone told them it was true. The exception to this is the groundwork for worship. Sound confusing? Keep reading.

Little kids tend to believe everything their parents say because they worship their parents. And when you're little, that's not a bad thing. But have you ever heard someone say, "That's what I believe because my pastor said so."? It's getting less and less common, for sure, but it reveals an attitude of worship toward one's pastor. The word for the way people know and understand things is called epistemology, and this is one example (pardon the phrase) of piss-poor epistemology.

Obviously, we are called to worship God. And therefore, whatever he speaks directly to us is something we should believe wholeheartedly. And you may infer from this that I'm going to say something about literal belief in the words of the Bible, but don't make any more assumptions... and keep reading.

If we're paying attention, we all get the sense from reading the Bible that God is talking to someone else besides us. In the Old Testament, it's the Israelites. In the New Testament it's a variety of Jews and Christians from the Mediterranean region. You don't have to disrespect the timeless, inspired nature of the Bible to wonder which of these million or so words God has really intended you, personally, to obey.

And even if you've figured that out, what responsibility do you have, if any, to tell other people what they're supposed to do? Has God really called us to make these kinds of determinations on others?

It looks like I'm in danger here of descending into a bog of abstraction, so I'm going to put a face on the question. What should a Christian do when he (or she) meets an actively gay Christian? Let's suppose the two of you have the opportunity to get to know one another, and you develop somewhat of a rapport.

You worry about your friend, and his lifestyle, so you've decided it's time to say something. But what? Here is what I would say, if it were me (and this will probably change, but for the here-and-now I like it.)

I would talk to my friend about his relationship with God. I would ask him about his desire to really obey God and live a life that's pleasing to Him. I would ask him if he is willing to obey God, even if obedience is painful or inconvenient. I would ask him if he believed that God is the creator of sex and sexuality, and if he has the right to guide us in our expressions of it.

You may think, once again, that you know where I'm going with this, but you'd probably be wrong. Most people would have difficulty answering "yes" to every one of these questions. If he says "no" to even one of them, then homosexuality is not the issue. The issue is his orientation towards God... that he has acquired a misunderstanding of God's dominion, or has never acquired a worshipful stance towards God to begin with.

If he does, in fact, answer "yes" to all of them, then I would ask him if he believes that what the Bible (particularly Romans chapter 1) says about homosexuality applies to him. If not, I would ask why not... and I would press him to make sure he's not just skewing the words to his own advantage (after all... he said he was willing to obey God even if it's painful.) But if he has honest doubts about the scripture, or consistent reasons why he doesn't believe he is bound to those words (even if his reasons aren't academically sound) I would simply tell him what I believe and why, and ask if I can pray for him. I would tell him that I worry, not only about his physical and psychological health, but about his spiritual health.

But here's my divergence: After that I would leave it alone. After all, my friend would never believe me just because I said so, unless he worships me. But if I continue to see evidence that my friend really longs to obey God, and makes sacrifices to do so, but does not see the Scriptures about homosexuality in the way that I do, I would respect his spirituality, and continue to pray for him. Because seriously... aren't we all rejecting some facet of Scripture every day, quite intentionally at times? Do you think a man whose children are unruly should be exempt from serving as a pastor? Do you think a woman who sports jewelry and short hair and a loud voice should be ineligible to teach Sunday School? If God, at some point, convicts these two people to make a change, then that's his business, but until then, we can respect their spirituality and their position in the Kingdom of God.

By the way, I'm not trying to equate homosexuals with incompetent parents or short-haired women. But we've got to come to terms with the way we excuse ourselves so often in regards to Scripture, while condemning others. Often we settle in to accomplish whatever scriptural requirements we find personally manageable, and then set about judging everyone else based on that standard.

But the point is... what's in the heart? You can't argue with that. (For man looks on the outward appearance, but God looks on the... what?) And, in fact, we can have some sense about what's in a person's heart. It just gets frustrating when we realize that God is the only one who really knows.

Labels: bible, doctrine, guidance

3 Comments:

At 4:56 PM , beloved268 said...: Hey, you were right... I did enjoy this post. There are a number of things you said that bear deeper exploration, particularly your insight on worship. HUGE. I just finished According to Plan by Graeme Goldsworthy, which helped me get a clearer picture of the theology of "the word of God", as it relates to the Father, Son, and Spirit, and the way they reveal God to us. One of the conclusions that stunned me was how clearly sin and righteousness are tied up in "the word of God". In Genesis 3, we have a clear theology of sin. Here portrayed, sin, at its very essence, is a three-fold process whereby we doubt God's word (v. 1), deny God's word (v. 4), and then discard God's word (v. 6). Before this, we see that God created by His word. Later, we see that God sets standards by His word, and then judges by His word. At the pinnacle of redemptive history, God became His word in human form. Since then, He has hidden His word in the hearts of believers. And all along, He has made sure that it gets written down so that people don't forget.

So it's very insightful that you say that children trusting the word of their parents (or spiritual children trusting the word of their pastors) are ascribing worth to them. Now, I would hesitate to condemn those who are children, either physically or spiritually, for whom they trust, to a certain extent. Rather, I believe it is the job of the pastor (and even parent) to equip their "children" to learn to eat, drink, think, and care for themselves, at "age-appropriate" stages. When you have a church full of spiritual children ("baby Christians"), it's because they had patronizing pastors and not empowering pastors. We need pastors who know how to empower! And this involves not only delegation of responsibilities to people, but walking alongside of them, instructing, encouraging, admonishing, and modeling. Too many leadership paradigms neglect one or the other of these essential components to empowerment.

But you weren't primarily talking about leadership. :-)

Your frustrations with practical hermeneutics are clear and understandable. I share them! But I know beyond the shadow of a doubt that adopting an attitude of skepticism whereby we glean from the scriptures whatever we want and thereby form them in our own image is destructive and dishonoring to God. And that is essentially what we do when we say, "I can't make sense of this passage, therefore I can interpret this other passage however I want". Or we reason that the ambiguity we encounter somehow lets us off the hook when it comes to obedience.

But you did a good job of clarifying the distinction between your obedience to your convictions and your application of those convictions to others, which I applaud. The one admonition I would offer is to "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15, emphasis mine). In other words, don't let ambiguities keep you from pressing forward in seeking greater depth of understanding of scripture. In the meantime, cling to what you know deep inside is true, and do your best to express your convictions to others in a coherent and humble manner, as I believe you illustrated in your example above.

Lastly, the nature of Christian fellowship needs to be explored. It is obvious that Paul in 1 Cor. 5:9-13 understands that he is talking to a group of sinners, and indeed speaks of himself as a wretched sinner. Therefore, we cannot interpret him to be saying that the Church can only consist of morally perfect people and that people who sin must be removed. So we have to seek a deeper understanding of what it is that churches must do to maintain purity within the fellowship. Do I have an answer for that? At this moment, no. I do know that our responsibility to love those in our fellowship extends beyond a one-time conversation. But that's about all I know. So there are unanswered questions. Let's work hard to find them, and in the meantime, seek the guidance of the Spirit, along with what we do know absolutely to be true.

Peace, brother.
At 2:06 PM , warbird2010 said...: Each of you are so well spoken, so well written. It's a tough call. We each have our favorite NINE commandments, or less, but aren't afraid to call others out on their transgressions. But short of the one-on-one contact we must be committed to in order to compassionately share the gospel, when do we not stand up against organized immorality?

Jim
At 11:02 PM , Anonymous said...: The real message of Romans chapter one lies in chapter 2, verse 1. Paul was not writing a treatise against homosexuality (whatever that meant in his day) but rather an indictment that all of his readers are judged because they judge others.