Human Sexuality and Corporate Worship: Just the Tip of the Iceberg

What does human sexuality or sexual preference have to do with church worship services you might ask. But this is exactly the question Hillsong faced 2 years ago. There were a couple of talented Christian men leading worship at the New York campus. When it came out that the two were “courting” each other, all Evangelical hell broke lose. Outrage, condemnation and questioning of the denominations commitment to Christian principals. In other words, everything that conservative Christians seem to do best.

This is from an older Sojourner’s post that I contributed a number of comments to and interacted with some pretty upset Christians.

The problems that conservative American-flavored Christianity faces in our post-modern society revolve around the conservative conflict with pluralism, diversity, inclusivity, freedom of individual expression and a world view that rejects legalism. The handwringing over SSM and inclusion of our Gay and Queer friends and neighbors incorporates all of these conflicts.

Predictably, the comments used in the post against SS relationships fall under the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah, comparisons to drunkenness, bestiality, incest and an appeal to God’s “moral law.”
The following excerpts from the Sojourner’s post’s comments illustrates this.

Cindy: “You do not know your Bible. Please go read it. GOD is very, very clear on this. It’s an abomination unto him. He destroyed the cities Sodom and Gomorrah because of its practice and other evil deeds. The men in that city were actually going to gang rape the Angels that were sent to tell Lot to get the heck out of there! Of course you can do the research yourself to find it throughout the Bible where it goes against the very nature, essence, Word, and obedience of GOD.”

Me: “Cindy, where in the Bible does it say S & G were destroyed because of homosexuality? Look as hard as you like, the Bible simply does not make that claim. The view that these cities were destroyed because of a bunch of Gay men is a presupposition first promulgated by the Western (Catholic) church and is not supported in Scripture. The men of those cities broke ancient rules concerning hospitality of strangers/foreigners in one’s town and the Bible clearly states as much (Ezekiel 16:48-50), as well as adultery and lies (Jeremiah 23:14, 49:17-18, 50:39-40, Lamentations 4:6) and in general, shameless sinning (Isaiah 1:9-10, 3:9, 13:19-22). Note Isaiah is comparing Babylon to S & G for sin in general, no mention of same sex interaction.

One must look at the socio-political situation in those cities at the time Lot and his wife and two virgin daughters moved into Sodom. In general the various cites in the plains were aligned with various different kings, who were at odds with each other. Things were dangerous and hostile. At one point S & G were taken captive as spoils of war and treated brutally. Then the tide turned and they won their freedom again. So when the angels arrived in Sodom, the men of the town did not recognize them as being on their side and assumed they were enemies. In ancient Semitic times what you often did with your enemies was rape them, not for sexual pleasure, but to show dominance, to disgrace them by treating them as a woman.

Note too, that Jesus describes the sins of towns that treated the disciples poorly as greater than the sins of S & G (Matthew 10:1-15, Luke 10:1-12), no mention of SS interaction but those towns rejection of the Gospel. Now, if you want to make it about homosexual behavior you will not find support in early Jewish thought but can find support within the Quran, which ties it to homosexual rape in particular.

It is curious, that within Jewish culture, where there were so many constraints on sexual behavior that they “missed” an opportunity to clearly define S & G’s sins as sexual, but did not.”

Christian: “You sound like a Democrat…” (honestly, he got me on that one)…”What does Christ say???” He then produces a list of “sins” from the Old Testament, claiming because Jesus and the Father are “one,” the list is Jesus’s list!

Me: “Christian, I am not quite sure why that is your name as you are obviously Jewish. You have quoted exclusively from Levitical Law. As a Gentile Christian I never was, nor will be under those laws. They were a covenant between YHWH and the Jews, read the Pauline letters to get a better grasp of this Kingdom truth. If you are Christian, then it seems to me that you have erroneously created a new set of Laws to follow, borrowing heavily from the old ones. Kingdom living under the New Covenant is not based on legalism but on a relationship with God built on love, not rule keeping. Now, if you want to understand SS relationships from a Christian standpoint you really need to keep to the New Testament.

Paul talks about SS relations in a few passages, but only in Romans does he go into detailed description about who these people are who engage in SS activities. He starts by clearly addressing Pagan Rome and its idolatry v. 18-23, God delivered them over to sexual impurity v. 24-15 (Roman orgies come to mind). Next Paul describes a downward spiral that includes SS activities v. 26-27. But, watch closely. Verses 28-32 describe who these people are. They do not acknowledge God, filled with unrighteousness, greed, evil, wickedness, envy, murder, quarrels, deceit and malice. Gossipers.slanderers, arrogant, proud, inventors of evil, unloving,etc..

Now if you can make a blanket accusation that all Gays are these things then you would be guilty of breaking the 9th commandment, bearing false witness. Modern day Gays are quite normal in most regards so the accusation of Paul’s does not fit. He was addressing a particular group of people at a particular time who were behaving quite badly. The problem for conservatives is that they take a specific situation that had specific people in mind, then generalize it to apply to all Gay people, regardless of their decency. We have seen that done repeatedly by conservative leadership such as James Dobson, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell. This is shameless slander on their part, and quite unchristian.

But Paul doesn’t end there. Chapter 1 was setting the stage for the following chapters where he lambasts the Jews and their legalism and self righteousness. Understand that Paul makes no distinction between sexual orgies and religious self righteousness! In Paul’s thinking, both are equally displeasing to God. In fact, chapter 1 is not even his main point! Legalistic, religious self righteousness is, and he goes to some length to discuss it. The fact that so many conservatives stop with the passage on SS activity, just underscores my belief that they fail to understand that chapter 2 is actually addressing them!

Hopefully I have given you a new perspective to ponder. God bless.”

Joe: “So, are you saying that Paul is saying that homosexuality is sin as well as the other sins that he mentions. The people who condemn the homosexuals are also addressed as being sinners themselves. It just proofs the point, doesn’t it? Homosexuality is sin and unless you repent from it, including all the other sinners, and follow Christ as Master and Lord they will ALL die and burn in hell forever.
The hypocrite included. So, we are in agreement, liars must repent, receive Christ as Lord and allow Him to deliver you from lying/stealing/adultery et.
There is no such thing as a Christian murderer, liar, adulterer et. “Go and sin NO MORE”.”

Me: “Joe, I think you’re not getting my point. Paul is describing a particular bunch of people, involved in very bad specific behaviors that don’t fit today’s LGBTQ community. What the church has been guilty of over the centuries, is taking a specific incident in the Bible directed at a particular group of people at that time and generalizing it to apply to different people than it was originally intended to describe. The average Gay person simply does not fit the description in Romans 1, although some conservative leadership attempts to do so.

What conservatives like Preston Sprinkle and Kevin DeYoung have attempted to do is acknowledge the extreme perversion and abusive sexual activities involving the orgies, young boys and slaves, but attempt to throw committed, loving SS relations into the mix as well, because Paul must have known about them and therefore have had them in mind too. Besides being conjecture, thus would not fit the extremely negative description Paul gives of these people. They do this with Jesus as well, only somehow have turned his silence on the issue into a condemnation of Gays!

But bear in mind, as I have pointed out, the purpose of Romans 1-3 is not to point out homosexuality as bad. Paul used the corruption and degradation of Rome, well known to his readers, to criticize the legalistic, unloving behavior of the conservative religious people of his day, something that, ironically, seems to be totally lost on Evangelicals in their dealings with Gays.”

(Note: In my use of Romans 1 I have followed the traditional view that it is Paul speaking. More recent scholarship questions that view and sees the 1:18-32 as Paul quoting a popular Jewish polemic against Roman culture which he then turns into criticism of the Jewish religious leadership for their lack of charity and their self righteousness. I am leaning towards that understanding now because of the curious change of the Greek grammar between the first and second chapters, going from third person to second person use of pronouns.)

A few concluding thoughts. I keep running into Christians who compare the loving consensual relationship between two same sex adults as equal to bestiality, incest or alcoholism. Why do Christians make this comparison? They are not the same, are they? But in doing so, it makes the condemnation of a loving relationship somehow more justifiable, doesn’t it? It’s really a straw argument used to justify hatred for others who are different.

The Bible as a book of rules to follow for all time, (it’s actually many books by different authors written to different cultural circumstances). When Christians start with the assumption that the Bible is a “book” written by God that lists a number of things to do or not do to garner God’s favor one is thinking as a primitive, never quite sure what side of the scale they are on. So the task becomes to determine that you are on God’s good side, then condemn everyone else as being on His bad side. The easiest way to do this is follow the example of the Jews: create laws that divide the sheep from the goats. It is an outgrowth of tribalism, not the inclusive nature of the Gospel and is counter active to the universal trajectory of Scripture in general.

Finally, and Southern Baptists in particular hate this argument, the example of slavery and the Bible. The Bible permits slavery in both the OT and the NT. The SB denomination was created when the Baptist denomination sought to condemn slavery. SBs still have a hard time facing racial bigotry and hatred as illustrated by the difficulty recently coming to a consensus disavowing the Alt-Right. (1) Was the church wrong about slavery? The answer is apparently, yes. What Christians find harder to admit, is that the Bible was wrong about slavery. “Wait, what? No, we simply interpreted the Bible wrongly. The Bible can’t be wrong, it’s God’s Word.” No. The Bible is clear. There is nothing inherently wrong with owning another human. It’s actually more clear about this issue than that of SS relations. So the problem arises, what do you do with scripture that conflicts with Christ’s teaching? That conflicts with what we know about the love of God? We grapple with Scripture, seeking to interpret and apply it in a manner that fits the over-all trajectory of Scripture. This is what the church ultimately did with slavery and now needs to do with SS relations.


Author: socalkdl

Like so many Evangelicals of late, I have grown weary of the so-called "Culture Wars." I can agree with Philip Yancey in his "Vanishing Grace: Whatever Happened to the Good News," that grace within the church seems to be a vanishing commodity. Although still connected to the Evangelical church I have often felt distant and removed from portions of its theology and interaction with a Post-Christian society. A few years ago I felt it necessary, for my own spiritual health, to step back and "deconstruct" my theological belief set. I had become too enmeshed in the Evangelical "bubble" to honestly and critically assess my conservative theological doctrines. What has followed in the past few years is my own journey of rediscovering the Bible, and, above all, rediscovering God. It has become a journey that still surprises and delights me. Not everything is new. The faith first delivered to me by the Evangelical church has been reaffirmed. The Good News is still the best deal out there. But there have been new discoveries as well. It is my hope that my posts encourage your own questions and reassessments. It is my conviction that, because we see through a mirror darkly, there are questions that are valid to ask, and that we should not be afraid to ask them. God bless you in your own spiritual journeys. Kirk Leavens

5 thoughts on “Human Sexuality and Corporate Worship: Just the Tip of the Iceberg”

    1. I was unaware that I had given the impression that I did not understand verses 1-27 of Romans 1. I think, perhaps, it is you who misunderstand my interpretation of the first chapter. The problem with translating an ancient, dead language such as Koine Greek into English is that sometimes the translators have to guess at the meanings of obscure words. And usually there is an agenda (prior systematic theological framework) they bring to the translation. This is the case in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. The Greek word arsenokoitai first appears in Paul’s writings. There is no other occurrence of the word in Paul’s day or in previous Greek writings. A similar compound Greek word is used in the Septuagint, where it is translated as “male cult prostitute.”(1) There have been countless debates over how best to translate it and no consensus has been reached. There was a Greek word that definitely meant men who were sexually active with other men, “paiderasste,” but Paul did not use that. More than likely Paul uses it to refer, once again to male cult prostitutes who saw both male and female clients.

      Likewise, the translation of malakoi is up for debate as well. It meant, literally, soft and was used to describe men who were weak, like women. We need to be careful not to impose our modern stereotypes of Gay men into the translation of the Greek text. In Roman culture of the day it meant men of weak moral character, more interested in making themselves attractive (to either sex) than to more manly pursuits. (2) As is much of Biblical views on sexuality, it is couched in misogynistic terms, women are inferior to men.

      So the problem for myself and many other Christians is that we see a historical endeavor by the church to build a doctrine of intolerance, exclusion, discrimination and hatred based largely on unclear or misinterpreted Biblical texts and social stigma attached to same-sex attraction.

      But I have a question for you. Would you own another human being if there were no laws against it? And if not, why?


  1. I have been reading some of your interesting post. I must say I am “out on the fence” a lot with SSM, as to if it is an “unforgivable sin” which I do not believe, or do “we” (Christians) just have it all wrong. To be honest, I do not have the answer for myself. This is the reason being.

    I was raised with a family who had two gay children. One a son and one a daughter. The son died of aids, which was the most horrible death I have ever seen, barring none. We mourned for him and at that moment it did not matter if he was gay or straight. We loved him and were going to miss him, and still do to this day.

    I remember when I tried out for cheerleader in junior high, (he was in high school) I looked up and there he stood watching me try out and telling my brother, “She’s got it.” That is one of the most loving memories I have in my life.

    His sister is the same. I could call her at any time during the day or night and she would be here.

    When I think of the ministry of Christ and all of those he healed. All of those He loved, I am sure there were homosexuals in the crowd. Many followed Him. As those crowds gathered such as the Beatitudes, I do not see Him turning anyone away. I do not see where He told anyone, “You are a homosexual, a drunk, an adulterer, etc…” would you please leave, so I can continue on?” Christ embraced all, and He embraces all of us today, in spite of ourselves.

    I do believe God created man and woman to become one flesh, one so we could procreate. However being that said, I have seen many gay couples adopt children, and these are children who have grown up in nothing but love. These are children who would not of had a home, otherwise.

    So this is how I deal with it all as being a Christian and a Catholic Christian at that.

    I grew up with them, and I love them. I will continue to love them regardless. As far as the “state of their souls.” I leave that in the hand’s of God, where “ALL” souls should be left, as I do with myself and every other sinner on this earth.

    We have got to get out of this “mentality” as Christians, of judging souls and seeing someone else’s sin so greater than our own. If one sees homosexuality as sin, that is fine, but is it not a sin for married couples to have adultery relationships as well???? It is not a sin to have “sex” out of marriage?

    Yet, when these people sit beside you in Church, “all is well.” That makes no sense to me. That is saying the sin of homosexuality is greater than the sin of adultery. I do not think God looks at it that way.

    We are called to “love” and as you say, “Bring the Good News to others.” If Jesus did not turn these people away, nor should we. That is just how I feel about it. God Bless, SR

    Liked by 1 person

      1. You humble me and I thank you. I never judge a soul of anyone. However, being that said, I do “discern sin.” That is mostly for myself, if I want to get myself drug into it or not. I think we all must “discern sin” which is to “judge wisely,” but for me that is for myself not the soul of another.

        I am kind of like you, “drawing away from a few things.” For me, Christianity is making God awfully hard in this day and time. I always say, “There is nothing meaner then a mean Christian.” I think history proves my point on that one.

        I am a Catholic and am sent many times to “hell” bc of it. I love my Church and I love the people in it. That is not to say that it does not have a “checkered past,” I am the first to say it does. What Church doesn’t, especially one that is 2000 years old? If people could only get it through their heads, at best we are so imperfect. If this would not of been the case, there would have never of been the need of Christ for us all. He is the one who satisfied the wrath of God for all of our sins.

        I believe that is why He took His wounds to heaven with Him. When God becomes so angry with us Jesus shows Him His wounds, and says something like this, “Father, remember these.” God has to stay true to the Covenant at that time, which the Cross gave to us.

        I was attacked last week by a fundamentalist and I noticed you are going to do some post on them. I did three on them last week. I am looking forward to your post, as I am just now learning about them. Would love some more knowledge, as I was clueless until the attack came.

        You hang in there, I know people like us seem as a “dying breed” whenever it comes to being a Christian. Many Christians do not like us anymore. Those of us who want to show and give the love of God to others. I know that is not the “in” thing to do anymore, but when have I ever cared about being in the “in crowd.” Never! 🙂 God Bless, my friend and praying for you. SR

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s