I believe there is good news, but we won’t get to it by picking political sides or reactionary arguments. If Jesus has good news for the entire world, it will include everyone in the spectrum of sexual preferences and behaviors. The good news is for singles, marrieds, divorced, abusers and the abused, lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, Transsexual, Transgender, Intersex, Queer, Questioning, 2-Spirited, Allies, cheaters and virgins.

I do not expect everyone to agree with my understanding of the Scriptures, but let me make my case. I believe that there is common ground for everyone when it comes to sexuality and the gospel. The primary question is not ‘what does God have to say about this or that behavior and orientation, but rather what does it mean to follow Jesus?’

Is there a common path of discipleship or does it have different rules for different people? If we are to see the common path, it will be found in the Scriptures. Let’s start with the notion that God created sexuality and part of His image is reflected there. Before we address LGBTTQQ2SA orientations, let’s look at the majority of the world who identify as heterosexual. I believe there is common ground across the spectrum, but first let’s start with the most frequent sexual understanding.

Matthew 19:
“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

God created male and female with a desire for sexual union. The power of sexual intercourse includes God’s plan to bond them as husband and wife.

When the Pharisees and disciples heard Jesus say this, they wanted to know about divorce and remarriage. They understood that the ideal and reality were not always matching up.

If male/female marriage is God’s plan why do marriages fall apart and people hook up with another? Why do people cheat on their spouses? Is it okay to be joined together and then separated and joined to another?

The image of God in sexuality is expressed in faithfulness. God is one God and monogamy illustrates the sacred union found in the Godhead. Marriage is all about oneness. Jesus responds to the questions about divorce and remarriage by addressing the hardness of heart that causes people to fail at the promises of monogamy and fidelity.

Who accepts the heterosexual model of monogamous marriage? Heterosexuals who are married or want to be are most likely to accept this word. But what if you are not there?


steve green said…
Hi Kev, I hope you will allow this post. It's very difficult to hide one's true feelings. I often think of this in the reverse argument. How would I cope if I was told being hetrosexuality was wrong, bad, or a sin, and that I could 'desire' to be hetrosexual but could not act on it. The seed of my sexual desire gets planted early in my development. The seed of my social norms gets taught to me early in my childhood. If I am told my whole life that I am only to like the opposite gender, either through parenting, politics or religion, that will travel with me, even if I am able to follow the curvy path of my heart, for there are no straight lines in love. Additionally, to assume that sexuality is only between a married man and woman, the first time around, is out of sync with the nature, and our experience growing up, in any culture. While one may choose to believe this very narrow definition of 'approved' sexuality, it is highly unlikely many of us could live up to the expectations. And for that matter, the Bible presents a sexual pornacopia of practices, behavior and willy-nilly run-ins in the narratives. For God to, all of a sudden, select this narrow definition of what humanity should abide by seems even out of reach of His/Her/God's care and concern.

"The plague of mankind is the fear and rejection of diversity: monotheism, monarchy, monogamy and, in our age, monomedicine. The belief that there is only one right way to live, only one right way to regulate religious, political, sexual, medical affairs is the root cause of the greatest threat to man: members of his own species, bent on ensuring his salvation, security, and sanity." ~Thomas Szasz
Kevin Rogers said…
Hi Steve,
I appreciate your thoughts and certainly am not one to fear diversity. I simply make the case for it means to follow Jesus in the curvy path of the heart.
I don't think that God 'all of a sudden' selects a narrow definition. That point is made in Genesis about the man and woman becoming one flesh. That's part of the 'very good' created order and we need to respect it as such. My message is to followers of Jesus who want to pursue fidelity, monogamy or celibacy. I believe that heterosexual marriage and celibacy reflect the same value. The sexual drives are good, but so much more than an appetite seeking to be filled.
Many wonderful, compelling arguments can be made that present other views. I am not opposed to viewpoints, but must build my own from a high view of the Bible as God's revelation to us.
steve green said…
Dismissing the position I presented with the 'high/low' view of scripture is flawed. For instance, consider the following argument regarding the length we should keep our hair. Yours is longer, mine is short (except for my beard). What does the Bible tell us about our hair?

Party A wishes to suggest that Paul as a human person, is not simply an unbiased conduit of the divine Word of God but is, at times, influenced by other political or cultural factors (after all, what human person is not so influenced?). In order to illustrate this point, Party A points to 1 Cor 11.14-16, wherein Paul argues that ‘nature’ teaches us that it is disgraceful for men to have long hair or for women to have short hair. Surely, Party A says, this is not God’s general and eternal rule for how we wear our hair; rather, in this passage Paul is revealing one of the ways in which he has been influenced by his own historical context. Therefore, Party A concludes that there are times when properly respecting Paul means not applying what he has said to our contemporary context.

At this point Party B objects. No, Party B says, Scripture — whether written by Paul or anybody else — is the divine Word of God and means the same thing for us as it meant at the time it was written. If Paul makes a statement to one of his churches regarding the length of hair worn by men and women, then this statement must apply equally to us today. To do otherwise, Party B asserts, is to diminish the authority of Scripture — as though we can pick and choose which commandments to follow! Therefore, Party B concludes that Party A must have a ‘low view’ of Scripture, whereas Party B holds to a ‘high view’.

Just a friendly, food for thought post for discussion purposes.
Mark Marcotte said…
We are biologically determined to be heterosexual , aside from biblical position !
Mark Marcotte said…
We are biologically predetermined to be heterosexual , aside from biblical position !