A theological musing. If you come to the conclusion that, whilst wanting still to give the highest possible emphasis and authority to scripture, far more of it is culturally bound than you first thought, have you become a liberal by default?
I have come to that conclusion. I wonder where it will lead me? I almost hope it will cause an open discussion (disagreement) in the church so that we can talk about it more often. My church is holding together the liberals and the evangelicals by not talking about things.
On the particular debate (sexuality, wouldn't you know it) we have a small, but vociferous minority who want to affirm monogamous, same-sex relationships and, at minimum, would like to hear someone from the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement (or someone sympathetic to that cause) put their case. On the other we have had several meetings and talks where the case for sexual relationships belonging solely inside heterosexual marriage has been made forcefully, although not necessarily convincingly, with the regular, traditionalist, conservative evangelical members nodding along.
Our current Archbishop of Canterbury has said that he is not convinced a homosexual has to be celibate in every conceivable circumstance, although conceivable might have been a poor choice of word since by definition such sex is not going to end in conception.
So for the record, I don't think the Bible can be used to gay-bash across three millennia of cultural change. The important things in such relationships are the 'exclusion of all others' and 'for life' bits.
3 comments:
utterly abhorrant. God made made for woman. end of story! the anus isnt designed for a male sexual organ, nor is the vagina compatible with another vagina. even nature teaches us that 'likes' do not match and cannot create life through natural means. people like Tilley are heretics as they reject the fundamentals oof the faith. heaven help him in the day of judgement.
Thanks for the comment. Sorry you felt you had to remain anonymous.
Just out of interest do you take the view that organs are only designed for a single 'natural' purpose?
Does that make anal sex wrong between consenting married hetero-sexuals in your view?
And therefore, for instance, is oral sex wrong too because the mouth is not 'designed' for that? I respect your opinion but I'm interested in how it maintains consistency.
Good points well made, Steve. The church needs more people making these good points well - perhaps then those who feel condemned and abhorred wouldn't be leaving in such droves... People don't usually stick around for theological fisticuffs, they assume that God thinks the same as the 'christians' and simply walk away from the whole lot.
Post a Comment