finding affirmation: [part 3] bring it to the table

[part 1]

[part 2]

I want to return to that last conversation a minute.

“Personally, I really wish I could be affirming, but...”

Most of my life, I believed that attitudes like this one were exclusively problematic for their potential to bring an agenda that would corrupt our interpretation of scripture.

But not too long ago, I began to process this question:

What if that agenda isn’t MY agenda?

See, if I’m being honest, I’m not the most empathetic person in the world. The instinct toward compassion and empathy I see in my wife puts me to shame. It comes more naturally to her.

No, my compassionate empathy isn’t innate, but has developed through exploring and imitating the life and teachings of Jesus -- who constantly extends surprising welcome and compassion to people who were seen by the religious community of their day as unclean outsiders. More often than not, Jesus pushed the boundaries of love, justice, and inclusion to such extremes the crowds turned violent against him for his perceived heresy.

I have spent much of my life among those crowds, finding myself inside the commonly accepted standards of church & culture, while maintaining the exclusion of those predetermined to be on the outside.

That only began to change when I let myself consider and be transformed by the radical movement of Jesus. As a result, I am different than I once was. I feel different than I once felt.

So if the empathy inside of me is really just an encapsulation of what I understand to be the character of Jesus, why would I not let that be an influential consideration in how I understand the rest of the Bible?

In fact, to try to discern and interpret the rest of scripture while holding back my understanding of the character of Jesus would be like trying to untangle a knot with one hand tied behind my back.

Now I’m not saying there are no other considerations or that our empathy should be our primary consideration. And I'm not saying that our feelings are always correct or that all of our feelings come from the work of God in our life -- we should certainly always be asking ourselves whether the way we feel is consistent with who we see Jesus to be.

But if you consider your own compassionate empathy, and it reflects your understanding of Jesus, then I encourage you to bring that to the table of interpretation, not hide from it.

For too long, we’ve been told our feelings don’t belong. 

For too long, we’ve been told not to bring compassion to an interpretation party.

But maybe embracing the boundary-shattering compassion of Jesus is exactly what’s needed to see God’s movement in our world clearly.

**************

Note: As usual, this is a blog post about the need to take complicated interpretation seriously, not a public space for anyone to publicly debate the status of my LGBTQ brothers & sisters. There will be zero tolerance for that.

finding affirmation: [part 2] why now?!

[part 1]

Note: This blog series is just an introductory conversation about my experiences surrounding LGBTQ affirmation, not a deep dive into the topic. I'm writing this primarily for those who have only casually thought about the topic, without deeper exploration. If you are someone who has spent time exploring the depths of the scriptures and the arguments on both sides of LGBTQ inclusion & affirmation, and --through that exploration-- have found yourself in a non-affirming position, this post is not for you.

---------------------------------------

As someone who is theologically affirming of my LGBTQ neighbors BECAUSE of my exploration of scripture, not in spite of it, another statement I hear all the time is this:

“Personally, I really want to be affirming, but I just can’t get past the literal words on the pages of the Bible. It’s too big an obstacle.”

And the response in my head is usually: “Ok. But why?” 

Or more accurately, “Why now?”

Usually the conversation partner has already gone beyond the literal words on the page quite often in their interpretation of scripture.

They usually: 

• support war for causes they perceive to be just, instead of turning the other cheek as Jesus taught

• attend churches where women aren’t required to be silent, in contrast to Paul’s teaching

• embrace braided hair for women, allow haircuts for their daughters, and don’t protest the man bun

• defend themselves in court if sued

• believe it is proper for slaves to resist, protest, and fight for their freedom

And all these interpretive choices have usually been made without much hand-wringing.

I’ve never heard someone say, “I don’t pray with my head covered, but I wrestle with that 1 Corinthians 11 passage daily.”

No. In so many other circumstances, the need for interpretation is considered a normal part of understanding scripture.

But here, the literal words, apart from any deeper study & interpretation, often get presented as an insurmountable barrier.

Why now? Why on this issue, differently than the others?

Here, any effort to do historical, cultural, & textual exploration to inform interpretation (as are common for these other topics) is often construed as pursuing an agenda.

Why now? Why on this issue?

What is different about this issue that causes so many to embrace different standards for interpretation than they have already embraced regarding other issues?

I’ll leave that answer to our own self-exploration.

Now, I don’t assume that everyone who dives deeply into the interpretive process on this topic will come to the same conclusion I have. It’s complicated. I believe there are good people that will explore the depths of this and come to decisions I disagree with.

All I ask is that we try to apply the same standards for interpretation to understanding this issue that we have to the other issues throughout scripture. And either the literal words on the page are an insurmountable obstacle, or they’re not. 

But if they sometimes are, and sometimes aren’t. I have to ask...

Why now?

-------------

Final note: Once more, this is a blog post about the need to take complicated interpretation seriously, not a public space for anyone to publicly debate the status of my LGBTQ brothers & sisters. There will be zero tolerance for that.

finding affirmation: [part 1] are you serious?

I try to take the Bible seriously. I am also theologically affirming of my LGBTQ neighbors.

This is BECAUSE of my understanding of the narrative of the scriptures, clarified by Jesus, not in spite of it.

More times than not, when other church people find out, I hear some form of:
“I get that, but for meeeeee....I believe the words written in the Bible when it says that marriage is between one man and one woman.”

The implication is that I (or the many others like me) have either never read those words or have read them and simply choose to ignore their existence.

The further implication is that those who are serious about the Bible follow it literally.

But here are some other words written in the New Testament:

• Women should be silent in church (1 Co 14:34-35) 

• Women shouldn’t braid their hair, or wear gold or pearls (1 Pe 3:3, 1 Ti 2:9)

• Men must pray with their head covered (1 Co 11:4)

• Women shouldn’t cut their hair short (1 Co 11:6)

• It is a disgrace for men to have long hair (1 Co 11:14)

• Slaves should obey their masters in everything (Col 3:22)

• Give to anyone who begs from you or asks to borrow (Matt 5:42)

• If anyone sues us, we must not resist but must give them even more than they ask for (Matt 5:40)

• If our eye causes us to stumble, we must gouge it out and throw it away (Matt 5:29)

• Anyone who calls someone a fool will be in danger of the fire of hell (Matt 5:22)

• We should not resist evil people when they try to hurt us, instead when they hit us we should turn the other cheek to them so they can hit that too (Matt 5:39)

Most people I talk with don’t take these very clear words very seriously literally.

And I’m not saying they should.

Because the Bible needs interpreted. We need to understand context and culture and examine the whole picture. And we make those choices every time we read the Bible.

Every time we choose NOT to take something literally, that’s a choice of interpretation.

And every time we choose TO take something literally, that’s ALSO a choice of interpretation.

It’s not taking it more seriously. It’s just coming to a different interpretation.

Now I’m not saying all interpretations are correct. And I’m not going to argue with you right now that MY interpretation is correct. And what we’re definitely not going to do is publicly debate the souls of friends.

All I’m asking is that we stop playing the game that acts like everything is as simple as reading the words on the page. 

And then maybe sometime we can grab coffee and discuss the rest.