Introduction: Against the Christian Oppression of Individuals on the Basis of Sexual Orientation and Identity

Posted by

Gustavo Facci  / Argentina 
The issues of sexual orientation and gender identity affect many individuals, including our family members, our friends, those in our churches and places of work. The theology and doctrine most commonly held in the evangelical church precludes full personhood for individuals identifying as homosexual and also for those who do not conform to traditional notions of gender identity and gender expression. This theology effectively results in a wide ranging oppression of these individuals that reaches far beyond the specific congregations that hold the doctrines. 

In what follows I argue that the biblical evidence and theological arguments offered in support of these doctrines are insufficient to support the oppressive stance held by many in the church, and that individuals and congregations identifying as Christian should reconsider how we relate to the many individuals affected by these issues. 

Undoubtedly, many Christians feel compelled to stand by this oppressive position even though they may be unsure of the scriptural and theological basis, even though it may seem inconsistent with other parts of their faith and their understanding of the nature of God, even though it puts them in a position of rejecting the full personhood of their own family members, friends, and co-workers whom perhaps they know to be just as wonderful, as moral, as spiritual as anyone else they know.

How tragic and unnecessary it is that our sisters and brothers, sons and daughters, friends, relatives and acquaintances choose to move out of state or across the country to escape the rejection and stigmatization of their homosexual identity, unable to enjoy family holidays and church gatherings with their partner in avoidance of the judgment, the glances, the whispers, all in deference to this oppressive teaching which, I intend to show, has the thin and questionable claim of validity based not on the Ten Commandments, or the messages of the Old Testament prophets or the teaching of Jesus, but on the interpretation of the meaning of obscure words in three verses of Paul and three passages in the Old Testament of varying interpretation.

If you sense the internal discord between this teaching which excludes, based on orientation or identity, and the rest of your faith, then I urge you to consider carefully the arguments that follow. You do not have to remain in that untenable position. And you should not be afraid to take a stand and speak up and speak out.

Here I explore these issues from a position that regards the Bible as inspired and authoritative for Christian life and practice and as a primary source of insight and guidance for the purpose of living as a Christian with ethical principles consistent with the teaching and example of Jesus. Further, the historical nature of the Bible requires the use of all available tools and methods in the close analysis of the original language texts.

Historically, there are many cases in which social norms have been defended using Scripture and have been used to oppress or to diminish the personhood and exclude individuals from full participation in the church and the community, only to be overturned or abandoned through closer analysis of Scripture and/or more subtle insight into ancient cultures as well as historical changes in ethical standards (most prominent example: slavery)(See Part 6 in this series). Ethical responsibility requires that we examine and question doctrines, social norms, and laws that bear upon the dignity, equality, and opportunity extended to individuals in the light of ethical principles that are clearly established by the witness of the Bible and the life and teaching of Jesus.

The word "homosexual" does not appear in the 1611 King James Version of the Bible. It appears only two times in the New American Standard Bible and the Greek word used (αρσενοκοιτης / arsenokoites) is not clearly defined, being rarely used in the Bible and in ancient Greek literature (Note 1). Words that are used once or twice in the Bible (known as hapex legomena or dis legomena) present a special problem of interpretation in ancient literature because the most reliable word meanings are developed from usage and context. Without an adequate number of examples of use of the word, the meaning of these rare words is highly interpretive and at the very least, subject to debate.

The preceding paragraph represents the first step in a scriptural argument of Parts 1, 2, and 3 to follow, in which I argue that the scant amount of Scripture that is used to bear directly upon the issue of sexual orientation is insufficient to support a Christian doctrinal position against homosexuality as a sexual orientation and against (what could otherwise be considered moral) homosexual romance and sexual behavior. This is an argument from Scripture texts. In Part 4, I address a widely held theological argument against homosexuality which is based what might be called the creation model of family. Part 5 makes the case, as an outcome and in light the first two arguments, for use of a priority or hierarchy of New Testament moral values to urge Christians to refrain from oppressing individuals on the basis of sexual orientation or sexual identity.

Notes

(1) New American Standard Version is considered the most literal modern translation, completed in the 1960s, revised from the ASV which was completed in 1900/1901.

Image: 
By Gustavo Facci from Argentina- Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=18572850ion