The reason conservative Christians invariably give for asserting that homosexuality is an egregious sin against God is that the Bible says it is.
“God said it; I believe it” is the conservative Christian’s credo. And it’s an understandable one. It’s easy enough to deride Christian conservatives for taking the Bible too literally — but believing words is, after all, what we all most readily do with them. Especially if we think those words come from God. Talk about your well placed source.
Oh, sure, it’s Paul rather than Jesus who in the Bible says anything at all about homosexuality — but (for now) we can put that aside. The fact remains that the language in the Bible that condemns homosexuality (or at least the way that language is most typically translated into English — but can we please stop quibbling?) is unequivocal. Its forceful clarity simply leaves no room for debate about its meaning.
And again: fair enough. Christians look to the Bible — and particularly, of course, to the New Testament — for direction from God on how they should live, and in what they should believe. And they try to make their lives worthy of what they find there. That’s not a dynamic anyone should too readily scoff at. Cliche or not, it is a large part of what built America.
But here’s my question: If you’re going to look to the Bible and words of Jesus for critical input on how to live your life, then don’t you need to very assiduously attend to the actual words of Jesus? Especially when he’s perfectly clear on a particular issue (which, let’s face it, doesn’t happen nearly as often as Christians are wont to pretend it does), right? If you’re trying to live your life in obedience to Christ, then you’re all about anything Christ actually says, right?
Christ said it; you believe it. If you’re a Christian, that’s your deal. And if you’re a conservative Christian, then you most certainly look to Jesus for guidance about anything in your life that’s of particular importance to you.
Like, for instance, money. Talk about your core life issue, right? Who doesn’t care about money?
Here is what God incarnate, Jesus the Christ, said about money:
“Sell your possessions and give to the poor.” (Luke 12:33)
“You cannot serve God and Money.” (Matthew 6:24)
“Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal.” (Matthew 6:19)
“It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” (Luke 18:25)
If anywhere in the Bible Jesus is more clear about anything than he is about money, I’d like to learn of that thing. Talk about slamming shut the door on the wiggle room. And that’s not the mortal Paul giving financial advice, either. That’s Jesus. That’s the very God of Gods, being as clear as language allows him to be.
I don’t see how it’s possible to avoid the conclusion that there is something very definitely wrong with any Christian who is not himself as poor as the proverbial church mouse pointing to the Bible as grounds for his condemnation of gays and lesbians. How can any self-respecting Christian take literally what Paul said about homosexuality, and at the same time ignore or seriously waffle on what Jesus Christ himself said about money?
![John Shore on The Huffington Post](http://johnshore.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/huffpost.jpg?w=120 "John Shore on The Huffington Post\")
{ 71 comments… read them below or add one }
« 1 2
Came over from your post today about the last 5 years
In Bible study/small group a couple of weeks ago, I asked about the money thing…
The answer I got was that it’s about priorities. According to the leader of this Bible study, if you place God as your top priority, then money isn’t bad and you can have money, be wealthy, etc and still be saved/get into heaven.
I don’t really think that’s quite right for the reasons and verses you posted here. If you’re serving God, you give it ALL. Not this.. oh it’s okay for me to live a cushy life with all the latest gadgets and gizmos because God’s still #1 in my heart! It still smacks of hypocrisy to me. If we are blessed to have wealth, I think Jesus summed it up by saying we should sell our belonging and give it to the poor. What a world of economic equality that would be!
The only question for me is, Do you believe in God? Nothing else matters. You either do or you don’t. You can’t pass judgment on anyone, for anything. God loves us all equally.
The way I understand it is that Paul was not judgmental towards gays. Now in Chapter 1 of Romans he talks about certain sins and he mentions gays, however, in Chapter 2 , and I am paraphrasing, ” What, like you are perfect and have never sinned, you have no right to judge anyone.” Not only that but in Colosians Chapter 2 Paul clearly states that the decrees against us, meaning the law of Moses/ Ten Commandments, were nailed to the cross and erased and we are no longer being held accountable to them. He goes on to say then to let no man be judging you in anything. I think a lot of People take Paul out of context in the first chapter of Romans and seem to want to SKIP chapter 2. I have NEVER heard chapter 2 focused on in the church when I went. One of the reasons I quit going. No clear answers on anything and if you disagreed with the pastor of that church or that CHURCHES popular view you were automatically ostracized and labeled a sinner or a trouble maker. The treated you as if you exorcising the fact that God gave you a brain to study things HONESTLY and logically is the way of the world and not GOD”S way, when in fact it was not the doctrine of MAN”S way. I at least can honestly say that I don’t understand why any man wants to be gay. It out right weirds me out and creeps me out a bit because like anyone, the first thing that comes to mind is what they may or may not be doing in their privacy with another person of the same sex. The ONLY reason it does is because I’m a straight man. It has nothing to do with whether it is a sin or not. I have no right to judge a person for being who they are .I have a very good friend who is gay and i would defend him from anyone who might try to harm him if we were in a public place and someone attacked him. He would do the same for me. I may not get his preferrence, it may weird me out and I am honestly still working on fully accepting that people live that lifestyle because of what was beat into my brain as a kid. However ,Christ would not hate them. He said come to me as you are, not get straight and then we’ll talk. Heck the only thing he would say is go and sin no more. Would he mean stop being gay? of course not. The clay can not say to the potter, ” Why hast though made me thus?” I honestly hate that I have a small problem accepting gays. I want to have that kind of unconditional acceptance towards ALL people no matter what. I’m working on that because I care a lot about my friend but in order for me to be a true friend I need to fully accept that part of his life just as he needs to fully accept that I am straight. Anyway, I’m not perfect. Far from it. The best place to start is just being honest with yourself. IF you have a problem with gays ( people in general not you John), then ask yourself why. There is nothing wrong with you if you have a problem with it just as there is nothing wrong with NOT having a problem with it. So the issue isn’t whether or not it’s a sin or not, I believe it’s more of whether or not you have a problem with it or not and why or why not. IF you allow the yourself to be honest with yourself and the father about your prejudices I believe that is when the real work begins.
another the truth:
youtube.com/watch?v=JNl-joC2MAY
hey man love these posts! the only thing i'd like to give some push back on is the line you keep drawing about quoting paul rather than jesus.
it seems to me a bit of a silly distinction to make since both jesus and paul are simply being quoted by someone else entirely and then those quotes are being copied and transcribed over and over again for centuries.
the faith you put into the scriptures isnt in paul, or mathew, mark, luke, or john; but rather in the idea that the God who is big enough to create the earth from scratch is big enough to maintain control over the word he wants to communicate to us. so whether are quoting mathew/mark or paul/peter a christian believes he is actually quoting God. obviously that is what a christian must believe since his entire belief system is dependent on the bible's words…
Sorry John. While I find some of your writings about Christianity terrific, I have to agree with Sharon that reading the bigotry that inevitably follows your posts is mind-numbing and soul-destroying. Much more so than me being gay. I, like Sharon, am out of here.
Bruce
Bruce,
I’m a straight Christian woman who feels sick to my stomach that you have to deal with this – I can barely read this myself (I’m sorry to stir this up again). There is no way I will ever begin to understand what you experience on what I imagine to be a daily basis. But I want to tell you that I’m sorry. It’s wrong. It’s so BEYOND wrong, those who do this in the name of a loving God send me into this rage that can translate to paralysis, and then you and others are left to deal with them.
There are a lot of us who are doing what we can to shut this kind of homophobia and bigotry down. It will never be enough, but it’s about time we start apologizing on behalf of those with whom we share this Christian tent and try to clean up our own mess so you don’t have to.
That same logic used by Mr. McWilliams could be used to justify racism. We see Jesus using racial epithets calling a non-Jewish woman a dog, I know the context of the situation was to test her faith but its still "possible" that he wouldn't condemn it. Yes Jesus said you must love your neighbor/enemy as you love your self using the good Samaritan as an example but you don't need to hate some one to know you are superior to them. Paul said that we are all one in the body of Christ but we can ignore Paul because Jesus never condemned it.
Yes homosexuals have many lifestyles like heterosexuals many of which are sinful from a Christian perspective. Homosexuality (the desire) itself arguably isn't condemned by the bible but homosexual sexual activity. Many apologetic Christians say that they should live lives of celibacy, but the progressive Christian idea is that they can be sexually active as long as they are in a monogamous relationship but that's bunk because the idea isn't entirely biblical. Like I said in another post instead of trying to use the world to influence the church leave the church.
1) "…you don’t need to hate some one to know you are superior to them." Perhaps not, but juxtaposed with "Yes Jesus said you must love your neighbor/enemy as you love your self using the good Samaritan as an example…" the question that immediately comes to my mind is, how loving is it to regard oneself as superior to someone else (a supposed beloved, for instance)?
2) "Homosexuality (the desire) itself arguably isn’t condemned by the bible but homosexual sexual activity." Perhaps, perhaps not. There is some controversy over how some of the "clobber verses" have been translated.
3) Also, I'm not advocating ignoring Paul. Paul was right on about some stuff. But Paul was a man. A mere mortal man. A man of his time and capable of making mistakes. Furthermore, I don't believe we have the original manuscripts available for any of the books of the Bible. What we have are copies of copies. Mistakes could have been (and probably were) made. The copiers (mere mortal men themselves) also might well have seen things and said to themselves "Oh, he didn't mean that!" and changed them. And that doesn't even get into the translation issues.
4) "Like I said in another post instead of trying to use the world to influence the church leave the church." I actually did that but God called me back.
1)
-I never said I advocated racism, just saying that it could be justified by Jesus' lack of message against it. Similar to homosexuality.
2)
-Not as much as you think, I'll elaborate more on 3.
3)
-I think the translation issue is blown out of proportions by progressive Christians. I had a friend who would tell everyone that there was a different Bible for different denominations and the Catholic Bible was not only the most accurate translation but the shortest (you know that's BS). I own a Catholic Bible and the KJV and other variations therein (NRSV,NIV,etc.) The translations aren't that much different. Its not like we're comparing the Bible to the Quran. Though I haven't read a Greek or Aramaic translation of the Bible we can probably look at the traditional methods of how the older Churches translate the Bible instead of using secular modern reason to say “Oh, he didn’t mean that!” or "well, were smarter than they are now so lets fix this" I think that's the bigger issue.
4)
-I can't speak for God but remember to "lean not to your own understanding" I think secular reason is what causes division in the church, along with bigotry on the other end of the spectrum.
"Oh, sure, it’s Paul rather than Jesus who in the Bible says anything at all about homosexuality"
This is the logic taken by most "Christians" who condone that lifestyle, but it should be considered that just because Jesus never spoke out against this issue doesn't mean he would condone it. That can go for actions like dressing "sexy", racism (something Paul covered) etc. Jesus (perhaps) didn't have to address these issues to the Jewish community from which he spoke to because they went without saying. Its interesting that Paul doesn't really condemn homosexuality in the roman epistle so much he addresses it as erroneous actions corrupt people do. There are "sins" nowadays that aren't necessary to be taught. As Joyce Meyer said "I don't have to tell you not to kill or not to steal…"
1) Homosexuality isn't a "lifestyle." It's a state of being. Homosexuals have many lifestyles, just like heterosexuals. They can be celibate, in committed partnerships, serially monogamous or out and out promiscuous, just like heterosexuals.
2) "…just because Jesus never spoke out against this issue doesn't mean he would condone it." True, however there are at least two instances in which Jesus interacted with people who were quite possibly in homosexual situations without condemning them. For instance, the slave of the Roman Centurion whom Jesus cured may well have been "a body slave, a young man who would wash, groom and take care of the personal needs of his master–including sexual ones." (Quoting from "Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do" by Peter McWilliams.) Also, it's possible that the "man carrying a jar of water" in Mark 14:13 was either a eunuch or an effeminate male, as carrying water in Israel was "woman's work." Since this is the man Jesus had lead his disciples to the upper room in which the "Last Supper" was held, it seems that Jesus did not condemn the man. Again, I'm borrowing this example from Peter McWilliams (same book as listed above.)
So many “Christians” are hung up on Paul they should call themselves “Paulists” instead.
Mr. Shore:
First, let me say that I am a Christian and no, I am not wealthy. I struggle to keep a minimum balance in my checking account and on several occasions, cried out to God for help when the world came crashing down on my shoulders. While I find your post intriguing, I also find it a bit misguided. It is very easy to pick a particular scripture, take it out of context and change it’s meaning. Is that not what Satan did when he tempted Jesus; take the word (which he knew so well) and try to make it something else?
Luke 12:33 taken by itself may lead you to believe that to be a Christian is to live in poverty for altruistic reasons. That could not be further from the truth. Taken in context, we are told not to worry about how we will eat or live. In Luke 18:25 the ruler wanted to know how to be as “good” as Jesus to get into Heaven. Jesus admonished him by telling him that no one (not even HE) was good; only God is good. But if the ruler indeed wanted to be as “good” as God, he should give all he had to the poor THEN follow Him. Jesus makes the point that we must give what we value most to inherit the Kingdom. In Luke 18:29 Jesus brings the point home by saying that the true wealth of eternal life will come to those willing to sacrifice everything.
Quite frankly, God wants us to put HIM first! If we put God first (before wife, husband, lover, child, work, car, vacation, etc.) it is HIS joy to provide for us what we need. God may not give all of us that mansion on a hill, the Ferrari to put in it’s garage or a bank account big enough to choke a horse but, he will give us what we need. Praise God! I have a roof over my head, my car gets me from A to B without complaint and I have enough to make my way in life.
Mr. Shore, what it all boils down to is this: What do YOU value most? Are YOU willing to give up all that YOU have to be a Christian? If you can’t, why ask the rest of us to? It was never God’s intention for you to “put on ashes and sackcloth” What can you gain by living in poverty for the sake of religion? Is that not what Jesus detested of the Pharisees? God has blessed you immensely with a career and the talent to do it well so you can enjoy the fruits of your labor: that is HIS blessing to you! To put it succinctly, I leave you with this:
Jeremiah 29:11, “For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, “plans to Prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future”.
Funny how the bible wasn’t written until 200 years after the alleged death of Jesus too.
Hi John,
I am enjoying and being challenged by your writing. While the hypocrisy you point out is true, i think regarding homosexuality, a more direct hypocrisy than money is divorce.
thank you! that is my very biggest pet peeve. condemning gays while saying nothing about divorce which Jesus mentions 3x!
I'd like to suggest David Platt's new book Radical, which targets this topic. Or you could watch the amazing sermon series the book is based on:
http://www.brookhills.org/media/series/radical/
Great! This is such a touchy subject to preach on, but I'm going to follow your lead in my next newsletter.
Just so we are all clear, in Luke 12, Jesus was NOT referring to the ‘rich religious young ruler’ but rather ALL OF THOSE DISCIPLES WHO CHOSE TO FOLLOW HIM. It had MUCH more to do with the teachings and establishments of Jubilee then it did “holding their wealth closer then God”. Its amazing to me that when we talk about the mandate from Jesus to sell everything, we respond with “well, that was ONLY to that ONE GUY”, when in reality, that one guy was just another guy He commanded with such an exercise of faith.
Using Scriptures out of context as a way to substantiate one's position regarding a subject is (at least) ignorant or (at most) dishonest.
It's this ignorance or dishonesty that allows Christians to place a greater significance on the sin of homosexuality.
In any case, it's just sad…
There are lots of points I would like to raise, but since I'm pressed for time at the moment here's one. I wholeheartedly agree that Christians should give much much more than they do. However, Christians, especially conservative Chistians, do give quite a bit more not just to religious causes but to secular causes as well (http://www.mint.com/blog/trends/charity-who-cares/ …look about halfway down) than those who are not conservative Christians.
John,
An interesting piece of hypocrisy in 'fundamentalist' Christians you pointed out there.
What is worth noting (and which we all tend to, rather conveniently, ignore) is that EVERY SINGLE PERSON LIVING IN AN INDUSTRIALISED COUNTRY IS RICHER THAN ANYONE in the bible.
While Solomon had more colourful metals lying around than I, I can travel all over the world with minimal outlay. Not to mention having the best entertainment in the world at the flick of a switch (Nero had to burn Rome for chuckles – I can watch Gladiator if I'm up for a little toga action). ECT.
We often compare our wealth with the Donald Trumps of the world without realising that we have a life much richer than that of the rich young ruler.
Ric – You just hit on the number one reason why I despise the relationship between Evangelicals and the conservative/Republican/tea-slurping/whatever-they-call-themselves-these-days activists.
I am so tired of hearing people moralize about some group of wicked sinner (TM) while hoarding wealth, keeping down the alien among us, asserting that it's fine to let poor kids go hungry or without health care, etc., etc..
Daniel – We agree that every word of God is flawless. We just happen to disagree about whether or not the Bible we’ve ended up with in America today is, in fact, all God’s word.
While I appreciate that the comparison wasn't your intention, the reason it's "pretty much unavoidable," just as you said, is because people make it all the time.
Pedophilia is a psychological disorder. Mental illness isn't a choice, you're right. But it's also not a sexual orientation. Pedophiles can be straight, gay, bi, whatever. Allowing one's mental illness to go unchecked to the extreme physical and psychological harm of children simply has nothing to do with one's sexual orientation.
(Yes, I'm aware that homosexuality was once classed as a mental illness. However, the criteria for mental illness requires that something be harmful to the individual or those they interact with. There is no scientific evidence that being gay meets those standards, and that's why it was removed from the DSM.)
http://www.globalrichlist.com/
We here in the USA are among the top 10% most wealthiest people the world has ever known.
We do not give even 10% our wealth away to the poor … much less all of it.
Truth is most churches give 10% of their <10% away to the poor, often proudly. I've heard the stat from more than one pulpit. <1%.
We are storing up (hoarding) our treasures. Like John, I have developed a deaf ear for the wealthy conservative shouting about the sins of others while suffering from this particular plank-in-eye disease.
ps. John, I love the picture you found to make that not-so-thinly veiled reference.
That wasn't my intention. I was trying to suggest that ASIDE from the differing issues of monogamous consent or forceable rape, people have seemingly no choice in the matters of sexual attraction. That was as far as I wanted any comparisons to go…I did preface that the thought would be controversial BECAUSE the comparison you cited is pretty much unavoidable.
Friends, chose what you want to believe about God, chose which books you want to throw out, chose which passages you want to discard on the basis of culture. When you leave the Biblical standard of inerrancy (Proverbs 30:5), the scripture has ABSOLUTELY NO authority. The authority comes from the fact that it is the word of God. I am not here to debate. I am telling you that you must choose between YOUR view and GOD'S view. Then be prepared for the consequences.
Comparing raping a child to a monogamous relationship between consenting adults is intellectually dishonest, Tim, and highly offensive to boot.
« 1 2
{ 3 trackbacks }