What Convinced You? Part 2 of 3 in a series on the Bible and same-gender relationships. Long ago, in the ancient land of Canaan, a family is on a journey. With their packs on their backs, they make a slow climb up a long hill. At the top, they pause to catch their breath, and look down the other side. They see a wide plain below, with low weedy undergrowth. It s a desolate place. And in the distance, they see the scorched ruins of a small city burned to the ground. What happened here? the boy asks his father. It was a long time ago, comes the reply. This land used to be beautiful and productive. That city was home to many. But then it was destroyed. What was its name? asks the son, and how did this happen? It was called Sodom, the father answers, and you don t want to know. But the boy does want to know, and so his father tells him the story. Of how the city was prosperous but wicked, so wicked that God sent angels to destroy it. Of how Abraham, their ancestor, had pleaded with God on behalf of his nephew Lot, that the city might be saved for the sake of just ten righteous people. But God and the angels couldn t find even 10, and so the city was destroyed by fire and sulfer raining from the sky. The boy presses for details, and so the father tells him the story of what happened to Lot that night: (Genesis 19) When the angels, appearing as men, left Abraham and went into the city, Lot met them at the city gate and invited them into the protection of his house for the evening. But the word spread through the city that Lot was hosting foreign men in his house, and soon all of the men of the city, young and old, showed up at Lot s house. They called to Lot to bring out his guests, that they might know them. But Lot refused, tried to reason with them, then offered a terrible bargain to defuse the mob. But the mob was determined to have the strangers, and so they pushed Lot aside and began to break down the door. At this point, the angels intervened. They pulled Lot back inside, and struck the entire mob with blindness. Then the angels explained to Lot why they had come: For we are about to destroy this place, because the outcry against its people has become great before the LORD, and the LORD has sent us to destroy it.
At first light, the angels led Lot and his family out of the city and sent them away, with strict instructions not to look back. When Lot and his family were a safe distance away, the fire and sulfur rained down from the sky, and Sodom was no more. The boy is quiet as he listens to the story. And then he asks, So what happened to Lot and his family? The father points: See that rock formation, the tall one with the crystals? That s Lot s wife. She turned back, longing for her life of comfort in Sodom. And so she was turned to stone, the pillar of salt. We must never go that way; the wickedness of Sodom can never be repeated. I m taking a bit of artistic license with that story, but that s a fairly realistic guess at how the story of Sodom was passed down through the Hebrew generations. Throughout Genesis, the stories seem to be answering specific questions: where did we come from? How did the animals get their names? Why are there so many languages? Where do rainbows come from? Not to say that Bible stories are made up stories for children, not at all. Just that that s how stories were passed on, with details like the rainbow and the pillar of salt that was Lot s wife making the stories memorable and connected to the things and places of regular life. These weren t just history stories told because they happened, they were stories with a purpose. In the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, the purpose is two-fold. One, obviously, is that God deals harshly with wickedness. In bargaining with Abraham God showed that God s desire is to be merciful, but when wickedness reaches a certain point, watch out. That s central to the identity of the ancient Hebrews. The other is equally central: the people of God are to be separate from other nations. This was Lot s downfall: he was lured by the lush pastures near Sodom, then moved closer until he was actually living within its walls. Even though he didn t, apparently, participate in the wickedness of Sodom, he very nearly shared its fate. And his wife, fully seduced by their lifestyle, did not survive. This was the calling of Israel as God s People: they were God s treasured possession, a holy nation, set apart from the wickedness of the world.
The wickedness of Sodom is not explained in the Genesis story. It s simply stated that their sin was grave, and that the outcry against them, from whom we re not told, was great before the Lord. Over time, the story has passed into legend and the sin of Sodom has come into our culture as the very specific sexual act of sodomy. But that s not confirmed in Genesis, or anywhere in the Bible. (see Ezekiel 16:49-50; Jude 1:7) In the story, the behaviour of the men of Sodom was at best a mass orgy, or worse, a brutal gang rape. It seems in the story that this is something they d done before, but it s not clear if this is the precise behaviour that God for which God destroyed the city, or if this was just one example of how far gone the city was. In my understanding, Sodom and Gommorrah represent generic wickedness: this is what happens when you rebel against God. When you give yourself to evil, you become capable of anything, even this unthinkable violation of hospitality rights to rape another man s guest. That s the difference between us and them; the tribes surrounding us are wicked, but we are a holy nation, set apart unto God. At least, that s what Israel tries to be, how they understand their calling. This emphasis on being set apart is also the basis for the Laws of Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. After the Exodus from Egypt, the Hebrew people moved into the land of Canaan, which was already occupied by many different tribes. For Israel to survive, they needed a strong identity, something to keep them from simply fading into the existing peoples. And (if I may go so far), something to justify the violent taking of their lands. That identity was their religion. It was the story of God s mighty arm bringing them out of Egypt and meeting them in the desert, and the system of laws that kept them distinct and separate. These things made them Chosen and Holy. This is the emphasis of Leviticus 18 and 20. In both of these chapters, the lawgiver lists numerous sexual prohibitions: None of you shall approach anyone near of kin to uncover nakedness: I am the LORD. That s a euphemism for sex, and the shame of exploiting it. The list names the various relatives whose nakedness you shall not uncover, 11 verses long.
Then it continues, 19 You shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness while she is in her menstrual uncleanness 22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. 23 You shall not have sexual relations with any animal and defile yourself with it, nor shall any woman give herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it: it is perversion. And then comes the rationale for these laws: Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, for by all these practices the nations I am casting out before you have defiled themselves.... 26 But you shall keep my statutes and my ordinances and commit none of these abominations 28 otherwise the land will vomit you out for defiling it, as it vomited out the nation that was before you. 29 For whoever commits any of these abominations shall be cut off from their people. 30 So keep my charge not to commit any of these abominations that were done before you, and not to defile yourselves by them: I am the LORD your God. The reason these are prohibited is tied to possession of the land, and more, to the identity of the people: I am the Lord YOUR God. The prohibitions themselves are grounded in that awareness. In ancient Israel, the act of sex was tied exclusively to the purpose of procreation. Men were circumcised, again to set them apart, marked in that specific part of the body because in the act of reproduction, men shared in the creative, life-giving work of God. That s why men with crushed or missing testicles weren t allowed into the Temple (Deut 23:1). In Genesis (ch 38), the story is told of a man who was killed by God because he spilled his seed on the ground during sex with his wife, so that she would not conceive. This is why sex with a woman who was menstruating was against the law. And that, I m convinced, is why same-gender sex was also taboo. Sex was a Godlike activity, sacred because it could produce life, produce heirs and future generations, and carry on the identity of God s Chosen Nation. Anything outside of procreative sex was a selfish abuse of God s gift, using the sacred for personal pleasure, defiling the image of God in man. That was the abomination. And that was what those nations did and are doing. But not us: we are separate and holy, the People of God. Fast-forwarding through history, that question of identity remained central to the nation of Israel as they were continually competing against the nations around them. Who are we, what holds us together and sets us apart? It always came back to
religion, to being God s Chosen People. Through the centuries there were competing visions of what that meant, from the priests who emphasized sacrifices and festivals, to Kings and lawyers who emphasized rule-keeping, to prophets who emphasized Justice and caring for the poor. And so, Jesus of Nazareth joined in that tradition when he came to 1 st Century Galilee announcing his own vision of the Kingdom of God. Now that s an entirely different sermon series, so I ll summarize. In short, Jesus described a new identity for God s People, one not based on ancestors or nationality but on obedience to God. And obedience was defined not by rule-following, but by following the new teachings of Jesus. And those new teachings were not about purity and separation, but grounded in love for God, love for neighbour, love for the least likely of people. And again, to summarize, this new identify of the People of God grew. And as it grew, it started to reinterpret the old ways. Jesus said you have heard it said but I say to you about many of the old Laws. And in practice, he was remarkably flexible with the rules. This woman with an unclean menstrual condition? Jesus touched her, and welcomed her wholly into the Kingdom. That woman caught in adultery? Jesus literally saved her, offered her a new start instead of cutting off her life. That loose woman with five husbands? Jesus talked with her, took her seriously. That prostitute? Jesus accepted the gift bought with the profits of her unclean work. And it wasn t just Jesus. It was his followers, too: that foreign eunuch turned away from the Temple? Baptized on the spot by Philip. Those Greek converts and their needy widows? Embraced and cared for, right along with the Jewish grandmothers. Those other Gentiles and their unclean food? Engaged by Peter, who, gulp, learned to eat right alongside them. You get the idea. As this new Kingdom spread, the new People of God found themselves in a surprisingly similar situation to their spiritual ancestors. They were a new people, fresh from this salvation experience with God, charged with a powerful vision of the Kingdom of God, yet surrounded by a world of competing cultures and religions including their own Jewish heritage. In light of Jesus, who are we now? What does it mean to be the People of God? What holds us together and makes us different?
I see that as the big underlying question behind most of the New Testament writings. And especially for Paul, as he worked out the theology behind the new vision lived out by Jesus and the disciples. This is what Paul s up to in his letter to the church in Corinth. Paul is really upset with the Corinthians because many of them seemed to float back and forth between the values of the church and the practices of Greek culture as it suited them. They chased Greek philosophical wisdom, they used the Greek law courts to settle their disputes, and, especially, their sexual ethics weren t much different than their neighbours. And Paul is upset about that, particularly with one case where a man was sleeping with his father s wife. Paul is outraged that the church hasn t done anything about it, and he demands that this man be removed from the church: (1 Cor 5) 11 I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother or sister [c] who is sexually immoral or greedy, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber. Do not even eat with such a one Drive out the wicked person from among you. At first glance, it seems like Paul is pointing back to the Old Testament patterns of holiness: be separate from the nations by stomping out impurity and cutting off impure people. But that s not where Paul is going with this. Instead, he s laying out an entirely different standard for morality and ethics. The verses that often get the most attention in the gay marriage debate: (1 Cor 6) 9 Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers none of these will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And this is what some of you used to be. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. Don t miss the forest for the trees. At first glance, this is a list of sins and people argue all day long about what the specific words translated as male prostitutes and sodomites mean. But this isn t a list of sins. This is a list of sinners. It s not a list of prohibited activities, don t fornicate, don t commit adultery. It s a list of identities: fornicators, idolaters, adulterers.
And this is what some of you used to be. Sinners. That was your identity. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. Now you have a new name, and that makes all the difference. In other words, it s not your behaviour that should set you apart, it s your identity. It s who you are in Christ. Paul makes this same point again in a very similar piece from 1 Tim 1: 5 The goal of the Law is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. 6 Some have departed from these and have turned to meaningless talk. 7 They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm. 8 We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine. This the glorious good news of the blessed God which was committed to my trust. Again, this is a list of sinners, people for whom the Law was written. But Paul is turning the Law on its head. The Law is not made for us (those in Christ). The law is made for lawbreakers and rebels, etc That s not us! The glorious good news of Jesus is that we are not that (lawbreakers), we are this, the pure heart, good conscience, and sincere faith. That is our identity, we are righteous because of our identity in Christ, not because of what we do or don t do. And so Paul is not pointing back to the Leviticus laws, Paul is undoing them entirely. Jesus did this in practice; now Paul is doing the theological work to match. To be the People of God is not to keep the Law, it s to become something else. As I quoted from Paul in Romans last week, there is no condemnation for all who are in Christ. Seriously, no condemnation. We have a new identity, righteous whether we behave that way or not. Of course Paul isn t saying we can just do whatever we want, though. Paul is still making the case that this man who is sleeping with his father s wife needs the discipline of the church what that discipline should look like under this new law-
less identity is yet another different sermon for another day. But Paul s point is still about avoiding sexual immorality, but with a different rationale and a very different set of standards. (1 Cor 6) 12 All things are lawful for me, but not all things are beneficial. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be dominated by anything. 15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Should I therefore take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! 16 Do you not know that whoever is united to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For it is said, The two shall be one flesh. 17 But anyone united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. Our behaviour matters to Paul, but not because of the Law. Back to what I said about the sexual laws in Leviticus: they were about protecting the act of sex exclusively for procreation, because in procreation humans share in the image of God. When 2 humans become 1 flesh, we make new life and so, momentarily, are like God. But Paul short-circuits that process. The image of God doesn t come through being joined with a partner, but in being joined directly with God. Anyone united to the Lord becomes One Spirit with him. Anyone, not just husband and wife, can be united to God in Christ. Anyone! This is the gospel of Jesus. And so, our behaviour flows not out of an external commitment to a set of rules, but out of an internal union with God. 18 Shun fornication! Every sin that a person commits is outside the body; but the fornicator sins against the body itself. 19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple [f] of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God, and that you are not your own? 20 For you were bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body. That s the new standard of sexual ethics. Does this behavior flow out of the Spirit of God in you? Is it actually beneficial? Does it glorify God? As Jesus did, I think Paul is reinterpreting the old Law and not lowering but seriously upping the standards. It s a lot more flexible and user-defined, but it s a lot tougher. Try that with your own sexual practices, habits, and thoughts: are they self-serving or do they flow out of the self-sacrificing love of God? And, more than that, Paul goes on in 1 Corinthians to broaden the definition of body, to not just mine, but the faith community. We are the Body of Christ: do my
sexual thoughts and practices serve the whole community? What does that look life in my life for my sexuality to be beneficial to the entire church? But wait, this sermon isn t supposed to be about my sexuality, it s supposed to be about same-gender attraction. What are the implications for same-gender sex? To me, Paul s theology takes away the authority of the Leviticus sexual prohibitions. Even if Leviticus 18 and 20 are talking about ALL same-gender sex and there are serious problems with that view that I won t get into today even if they are, there s a new set of standards and purposes for all of life, including and sexuality. Sex isn t just about reproduction anymore, in fact reproduction is really low on the New Testament priorities. Sex doesn t bring us to the image of God, the Spirit of God lives in us already and our sexuality flows out of that. All things are permissible, I think Paul really means that. But what practices are beneficial? Is my sexual activity, and yours, is it good for our partners, our children, our church community? That s the new standard, Likewise, whether or not the terms in 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Tim 1:10 should be translated as sodomite or homosexual or homosexual prostitute is of limited value. Paul s point is that those terms are an old identity that is swallowed up by Christ. I think Paul would say that there aren t gay Christians and straight Christians, there are just Christians. And again, the question about sexuality that matters for Christians is whether our sexuality, for all of us, glorifies God and benefits those around us. It comes back to this question of identity: What does it mean to be the People of God? What distinguishes us from everyone else? It s not our sexual ethics which is a good thing since the stats say the church is not much different from the rest of society. With Paul, I say that it s our identity in Christ, the Spirit of God living in us. I know that s really churchy language. So I m glad that Paul goes on to describe this reality as a people that don t just focus on the rules, they focus on living for the good of others. As a church that values all its members. As a community that begins and ends with love:
4 Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant 5 or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; 6 it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. 7 It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. 8 Love never ends. This is the Spirit of God. May it live in each of us today.