Death Penalty, Abortion, Fertility & Infertility – These will be the topics of discussion on Sunday, February 21, 2010 from 4:30-6:00pm down in Rec. Lobby.

In preparation for our discussion, what are your initial thoughts about these hot topics?

Why do you feel that way?

Have your opinions changed over the years concerning these topics?  If so, how and why?

Are these topics related at all?  Why or why not?

On Sunday, January 31, 2010, we discussed “What the United Methodist Church (UMC) Thinks About Human Sexuality and Homosexuality.” As you might expect, this created much discussion!

CLICK HERE for official statements of the UMC on these topics.

Scripturally speaking, it was easy to affirm the UMC statements about human sexuality. As my Hebrew Bible seminary professor, Dr. Toni Craven, said in talking about the Song of Songs (aka the Song of Solomon), “It’s about sex.” Many throughout the centuries have tried to allegorize away any of the sexual connotations, but literally speaking it is about sex.

In a similar vein, 1 Corinthians 7:1-9 affirms sex within marriage, giving EQUAL conjugal rights to men AND women – each having equal authority over the other’s body.

Homosexuality proved more controversial in our discussion. Here is a very boiled down version of what the UMC says in terms of homosexuality:

• The UMC defines marriage as being between one man and one woman;
• The UMC does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching;
• The UMC welcomes gays and lesbians into the life and membership of the church, recognizing that all people are in need of ministry and God’s grace;
• The UMC deplores all hate crimes against homosexual persons;
• The UMC seeks to protect the human and civil rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender persons;
• The UMC asks for the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the United States Military Services to be repealed;
• The UMC will not allow homosexual unions to be conducted by UM clergy or in UM churches; and
• Citing again that homosexuality is not compatible with Christian teaching, the UMC says that self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be certified as candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve in the UMC.

Though not brought up in our discussion on the 31^st, some have asked in the past why the UMC says that homosexuality is “not compatible with Christian teaching,” instead of saying “not compatible with Scripture.” The issue is INTERPRETATION. Let me share with you another possible interpretation of Scriptures pertaining to this topic.

Genesis 19:1-11 recounts the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (for an interesting parallel, read Judges 19:15-30). Many say that the reason these unrighteous cities were destroyed is because of homosexuality. That is too simple a response and misses several larger issues in the scriptural text.

First, let’s backup to Genesis 18:20 where the LORD said, “How great is the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah and how very grave their sin.” The key word here is “outcry,” a term used elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible when there has been injustice and the social mistreatment of people – especially the disadvantaged such as the poor, widows, and orphans. There’s more wrong in these cities than we want to see.

Second, in this story, Lot is seen as being righteous while everyone else in the city is not. Yet, this supposedly righteous person thinks it is okay allow his own daughters to be raped instead of the heavenly visitors who have come to save him. It is sad to say it, but in that culture, women were essentially seen as being of little value. As we see in this story, strangers were more important in that culture. Hopefully no Christians today really think women are of little value, even though this story, which is used to condemn homosexuals, supports that idea.

It is also interesting to point out that the men of Sodom and Gomorrah do not want to have a relationship with the men but want to rape them.

Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 both declare that a male shall not lie with a male as with a woman. Interestingly, both verses speak only to males, not females. There is no edict against lesbianism in these passages although other verses in these contexts speak specifically to women as well as men see Leviticus 18:23 and 20:15-16. In a patriarchal culture that thought polygamy and concubinage was okay, it is not too hard to see why there is not an edict against two women.

It is also interesting to realize that sandwiched between these two passages is Leviticus 19:19: “You shall keep my statutes. You shall not let your animals breed with a different kind; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed; nor shall you put on a garment made of two different materials” (NRSV). What about the mules our forbears used to farm their land? Science has proven that one should rotate crops planted in a field to make sure nutrients can be replenished. How would our cotton socks stay up with out elastic in them? Why do we cling to 18:22 and 20:13 but ignore 19:19?

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 reads, “Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God” (NRSV). Many of our English translations ignore the two Greek words here translated as male prostitutes and sodomites. Instead of two words, many English translations just put one word: “homosexuals.” That, however, misses some very important distinctions.

The Greek for “male prostitutes,” which does not focus on relationship – only a man selling himself for sex. In ancient Greek word usage, the term translated “sodomites” is used for those who pay money to male prostitutes for you know what. Again, this gives no indication of relationship – only sex. In a similar vein, 1 Timothy 1:10 uses the Greek term translated sodomites.

The last passage for our consideration is Romans 1:26-27, but I’d encourage you to read the full context: Romans 1:18-32. In the full context, Paul’s primary concern is talking about idolatry, worshiping the creature instead of the creator. Here, we need to consider 1^st century pagan worship. Idolatry, of course, was a major part of the worship practices as was sex – often sex between persons of the same sex. There was nothing inherently in this arrangement about relationship. So, it is possible, that here Paul is talking about sex taking place in the context of pagan worship, which included idols. It may say nothing about a relationship between people of the same sex.

Interestingly, in this Romans passage, Paul calls these sexual acts between people of the same sex “unnatural.” Yet, he also says that Gentiles being able to participate in God’s salvation is also “unnatural” (aka “contrary to nature”) using the same Greek word (see Romans 11:13-24, specifically vs. 24).

Consider these alternate “Christian teachings” above.

• How do you respond?

• What difference do these alternate understandings make?

• Why do many Christians put so much energy into defending these passages while ignoring others (such as Paul talking more about “greed” or “greediness” than homosexuality)?

• John Wesley was concerned with finding a “middle road” in controversies. What do you think might be a middle road here?

As we prepare ourselves for considering these topics, I think it is important to consider how we use the Scriptures.

What makes us cling to particular teachings in the Bible while we overlook others?

Consider these:

• In the United Methodist Church, we affirm the role of women in ministry despite the fact that there are several passages of Scripture that prohibit women speaking in church or having any authority over a man.  Why are we willing to overlook this?  What is our justification for allowing them to serve as clergy if the Bible says. . . ?

• Leviticus 19:19 says (with God speaking): “You shall keep my statutes. You shall not let your animals breed with a different kind; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed; nor shall you put on a garment made of two different materials.”
  What about mules?  Hasn’t science proven that it is better to rotate crops in a given field?  How many of us have polyester/cotton blends for clothing?  Even cotton socks have elastic – another material. What is our justification for our not paying attention to these since the Bible says. . . ?

• Many affirm the death penalty, quoting “eye for an eye” passages such as Exodus 21:23-25.  What about Jesus saying in Matthew 5:38-39: “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer violently. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also.”
  Jesus – the source of Christianity – is here refuting the use of that passage.  Why do we cling to it when Jesus and the New Testament call for another way?  The Bible says. . .
  

• When looking at the Pauline letters of the New Testament, we see that “greed” or being “greedy” are not virtues we should adhere to.  In ten (10) different verses or eight (8) passages (with the word being repeated in two passages) we see Paul speak to this.  Yet, where do we check potential church members or clergy for being greedy?  The Bible says. . . .

• Gluttony has long been seen by the church as one of the seven deadly sins.  The book of Proverbs says nothing positive about gluttons.  Deuteronomy 21:18-21 says that parents can ask for such a son as this to be stoned to death.  In 1 Corinthians 11, Paul decries the church for some eating and drinking too much while others in their church are going hungry.  Gluttony is a major issue in our country, and I know of many clergy and church members who struggle with this (as I do).  Why is this not seen as a major issue?  The Bible says. . . .

For similar thoughts and questions about human sexuality and homosexuality in the Bible, I encourage you to read this document by Walter Wink a United Methodist clergy person, New Testament scholar, and theologian.

Biblical Perspectives on Homosexuality

I look forward to reading your thoughts below and seeing you Sunday!

Before we can really consider what the United Methodist Church thinks about certain things, we need to understand what informs this thinking.  This was the focus of our first session together.  Here are the handouts from this session:

Session 1 Handout

Articles of Religion of the Methodist Church

Confession of Faith of the Evangelical United Brethren

The General Rules of the Methodist Church

Albert Outler, a renowned Wesleyan scholar and former Perkins Lecturer, noted in John Wesley’s writings that he used  Scripture, tradition, experience, and reason as sources for his faith. Therefore, these sources have been termed the Wesleyan Quadrilateral. As United Methodists, we continue in the practice of holding these as sources and criteria for our faith, holding that this faith “was revealed in Scripture, illumined by tradition, vivified in personal experience, and confirmed by reason.” (The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church: 2000, 77) Let us look more closely at these sources and criteria.

Since the time of the early Christian Church, Scripture has traditionally been the overarching guidelines for the creation and furtherance of traditions and the ultimate guide by which experience was tested. The New Testament writers looked to the Hebrew Scriptures for support of the gospel – for helping to understand who Jesus Christ was. Almost 2,000 years later, the United Methodist Church still upholds the Bible as the ultimate standard for theology and the Christian life. “The Bible bears authentic testimony to God’s self-disclosure in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ as well as in God’s work of creation, in the pilgrimage of Israel, and in the Holy Spirit’s ongoing activity in human history.” (The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church: 2000, 78)  We are able to meet and better understand the Triune God through this living word.

Christian tradition has its roots in Scripture, but it is also a means for interpreting and understanding the Scriptures as certain patriarchs and matriarchs of the faith have understood them. These people, who are a part of the great cloud of witnesses, have much to teach us today. It is through these traditions that the Church has been furthered and perpetuated, and it is through these that we have the scriptural canon. These many acts are a corporate sign of the Spirit’s continued work and presence on earth and in the Church. They show us how the Church should and should not be.

God is still present and working today within the world. Not only is God working corporately, God is also working in the lives of individuals giving them experience of God. Scripture and tradition becomes a part of our experience as we grow in the faith, and our experience conditions the way we view Scripture and tradition. Yet, Scripture and tradition help us to live a more full Christian life for a more full experience of God; thus, Scripture and tradition condition our experience. Often, the experience of other people affects us in such a way as to provide guidance in our Christian experience. The Spirit works in other people, and inspires us to follow the leading of the Spirit as well. We must, however, continually compare our experience to the experience of other Christians, tradition, and especially Scripture to determine if our experience and the experience of others are true Christian experiences.

Reason is the tool by which we process Scripture, tradition, and experience – how each affects us and how they interrelate. Our rational skills are how we read and understand Scripture, and these skills are how we verify that our traditions and experiences align with the Bible. With reason we attempt to answer our questions of faith and organize our understanding of God and the Christian life. It is interesting to note that the “purpose” of the Old Testament book of Proverbs is:

for learning about wisdom and instruction, for understanding words of insight, for gaining instruction in wise dealing, righteousness, justice, and equity; to teach shrewdness to the simple, knowledge and prudence to the young— let the wise also hear and gain in learning, and the discerning acquire skill, to understand a proverb and a figure, the words of the wise and their riddles. (Proverbs 1:1-6, NRSV)

Even Scripture tries to teach skills of reason!

We must remember in looking at these elements that they are all very much intertwined. For instance, Scripture is a person’s writing about their understanding and reasoning of their personal experiences of God and their personal experiences that come out of their own traditions. Scripture becomes the foundation of and, therefore, part of our tradition, and tradition is based on a person’s or group’s rational interpretation of Scripture and their experience. When we study Scripture and tradition (which is done with reason), these elements become a part of our experience. Knowing these are all intertwined, we must continually make sure they are in agreement with our interpretation of God based primarily in Scripture.

To think about all this in visual form, consider this image.  Scripture is our foundation, but there are cracks in it as there are contradictions in it, and as John Wesley pointed out, some passages seem to make God out to be “worse than the Devil.”  Yet, it is our starting point.  Tradition has given form and structure to Christianity over the past 2,000 years.  Sometimes a wall needs to be torn down or moved, and we can see the need for this as we consider the church’s less-than-perfect history.  Experience is the “central heating and cooling system” that keeps us cool toward things we should turn from, but it warms our hearts to seek to further live out the life of faith.  Reason is the roof that helps hold all these together in tension while keeping out things that are unuseful but holding in the conditioning of the Christian faith.

Rev. Troy Sims – 1/28/2010

Do these inform your faith?  Why or why not?

• If so, how have they made an impression on your faith?
• If not, what would you add or take away?

How have you seen these inform United Methodism?

Have you seen the church mis-use these?  If so, how?

Here are links to two other portions of the Doctrinal Standards of the United Methodist Church:

• The Standard Sermons of John Wesley
• The Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament by John Wesley

Why are you a member of a United Methodist Church?

If you are not a member, why are you taking part in this study in a United Methodist Church?

What, do you think, distinguishes the United Methodist Church from other denominations?

What does the UMC do right?  Where could we improve?

What does the United Methodist Church think about a person’s personal beliefs?

Leave a reply below, and let us discuss
these questions on-line together!