Landing on the Right Side of History

The trajectory of the scriptures

For decades, those who argue for the normalization of consensual sex of any kind have warned us not to be found on “the wrong side of history.” There was a day when some Christians justified slavery from the writings of Paul. And even in the present, some beat the drum for complete servile submission of women based upon those same Pauline passages. But eventually, the Church has rightly discerned the intent of scripture and changed its views.

Even now, they could argue, in light of some vague pronouncements from the Vatican, the Church in general is moving toward acceptance of same-sex marriage. “Surely it is obvious,” the would say, “that the Spirit of God is urging us to liberate people’s preferences for sexual expression, as long as there is both covenant and consent.”

God is always at work in history. There is most definitely a trajectory. In his sovereignty, there are indeed world events which are preparing the way for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. But is the traditional view of marriage as heterosexual, monogamous, and covenantal up for grabs? Or is it sacred and unalterable?

Ministry to victims of the Sexual Tsunami necessitates a clear grasp of what the scriptures prescribe as biblical and holy in sexual expression.

Increasingly, western Christianity is shifting its view of same-sex marriage. Those six or seven Bible passages which clearly speak against it have been massaged and nuanced, making it seem that the historical context explains why the Bible says what it says. Those arguments gain greater force when we witness good men and women whom we love entering into such unions.

So where do we draw the lines? Is God really waiting for us to get with it, to catch on, to understand his true intent, even as we did with slavery and women’s rights?

The best book I know on the topic is Slaves, Women & Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis, by William J. Webb.

Context matters. We know this. And in interpreting and applying the scriptures, historical context is paramount, otherwise one finds some verses we would fear to apply literally:

If a man meets a virgin who is not engaged and seizes her and lies with her, and they are discovered,  the man who lay with her shall give fifty shekels of silver to the young woman’s father, and she shall become his wife. Because he violated her, he shall not be permitted to divorce her as long as he lives.  Dt. 22:28-29 NRSV

Certainly historical context applies here as does an understanding of the movement of scripture. No one with a daughter today would accept any price from such a person.

There are dozens of other passages as well which require context to interpret appropriately. Laws regarding kinds of clothing to wear, the covering of one’s head, the proper management of fields for farmers, the dedication of firstborn males, etc. You get the idea.

In his scholarly work, Webb lists 18 criteria by which we can determine more clearly what scriptures meant when they were written and how they may or may not apply to today.

A key tool in excavating these passages is a “redemptive-movement” hermeneutic. In short, it simply means looking at the direction and trajectory of the scriptures regarding slaves, women, and sexual minorities. This direction is discerned by comparing the scriptural prohibitions with the cultural practices of the pagan world at that particular time in history. And it is assumed that the trajectory reflects the greater will and intention of our Creator.

(Stay with me, here. Some of you are beginning to yawn! I can hear you. But this is so very important for those of us in ministry, especially for you who are counselors.)

Are there scriptures which seemingly condone the ownership and punishment of slaves? Yep. But when you consider the practices of the surrounding cultures, the Old Testament laws and New Testament instructions are far more lenient.

The Laws of Moses commanded rest for slaves on the seventh day, denouncements of slave traders, and release for Hebrew slaves after their seventh year. When slaves were set free, they were to receive provisions. These laws were incredibly different than those of Egypt and Mesopotamia. In fact, the Law ordered God’s people to provide refuge and safety for runaway slaves of other lands!

And as we observe in the New Testament, Paul’s teachings urge leniency for slaves. No, there is no abolition movement initiated by Jesus and Paul, but one can certainly see a remarkable trajectory from the Pentateuch to the New Testament toward redemption of slaves.

This redemptive movement is also seen regarding the role and value of women. There are most definitely earlier passages which imply that women were viewed as property, but again, even in the Old Testament, provision was made for women, in the absence of a male heir, to inherit family property as well as guidelines to control the cultural practice of monogamy—both unheard of in the ancient world.

Jesus demonstrated through his actions and teachings an incredibly higher degree of appreciation for the value of women. In stark contrast with the Greco-Roman world, he affirmed that adultery was valid grounds for a woman to divorce a man. Again, this would have been astounding to Gentile observers. His personal interactions with women revealed a remarkable contrast with both the pagan world and Jewish culture, so much so that a group of women followed along with him and his disciples, funding his ministry out of their wealthy husbands’ wallets.

Therefore, in line with the trajectory already set by the scriptures, the abolition of slavery and the elevation of women’s rights only make sense. We are indeed on the right side of God’s story on these matters.

But that redemptive movement is not found when it comes to sexual expression. There is nothing at all in scripture that clearly contradicts the pattern set for us in the Garden of Eden. Sex was to be limited to one man and one woman in covenant with each other. Even though polygamy was tolerated in the Old Testament, it is never cast in a positive light. Quite the opposite, actually.

If anything, the Sermon on the Mount and other teachings of Jesus tighten the restrictions on sexual behavior even further! Adultery of the heart is condemned. And when Jesus described God’s intention regarding marriage and divorce, the astonished disciples cried out, “Wowsers! It would be better to not get married at all!” (Matthew 19 The Ongley Message).

As I mentioned in Into the Light: Healing Sexuality in Today’s Church, Paul’s writings affirm the clear commands of Leviticus against same-sex intercourse. In 1 Corinthians 6:9 & 10, he lists the following as not inheriting the kingdom of God: “neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers . . .” (ESV). His usage of the Greek word arsenokoitai for “men who practice homosexuality” is a term found nowhere else in the Greek literature of his day. It is coined from two words found in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT). Here’s Dr. Kevin DeYoung’s take on it:

Paul is quite deliberately pulling from the Torah to make this new word. So he has in his mind all that was written in the Old Testament. And that’s part of the reason why we can’t just say, “Well Leviticus has a lot of strange things and so we shouldn’t pay attention to Leviticus.” Because Paul is explicitly drawing this teaching into the New Testament to coin this word which, given the context in Leviticus and how it’s used elsewhere after the New Testament, means men having sex with other men. And there is no real other interpretation that makes the best sense of the evidence both in the early Christian literature and especially in the Old Testament.

Earlier, I stated that this is important info for those who counsel. Why? Because the best counselors are empathetic and kind. It is so easy for us to bend the scriptures when we see people we care about who are in pain.

But the trajectory of God’s word, while bringing liberation to slaves and the elevation of women, does not cut corners on sexual expression.

We love people. We don’t beat them over the head with scriptures. But we don’t compromise God’s word out of compassion. Pastoral care, without truth, is neither pastoral nor caring.

God’s word is clear. It should guide and inform all of our practice in ministry to victims of the Sexual Tsunami.