How should we view the Bible?

Many people wonder, what exactly is the Bible?  Is it the Word of God or does it merely contain the word of God?  What does it mean to say that the Bible is inspired?


I think Christians are right to get into these kinds of discussions, but not to the point where they divide congregations and denominations.  Here's my take on the issue.


Imagine you are on a journey with friends, it's a really hot day and you see a billboard ahead.  It says "Ice cream - 1 mile ahead".  You could investigate the poster.  You could study the fonts, colours, message, images, size, what it tells you about the author and ice cream.  But the poster is not the point, is it?  If you never get beyond the poster, and follow the directions you'll miss out on the ice cream!  


When Jesus was here there were a group of people who studied the Bible in great detail.  The Bible was their focus.  He said to them, "You search the Scriptures because you think they give you eternal life. But the Scriptures point to me! Yet you refuse to come to me to receive this life." (John 5:39-40)


Please don't misunderstand me, I do think that studying the Bible is important!  We have to know our Bibles - that's how we discern truth from falsehood.  But we have to get past the Bible to Jesus - the one who gives us life.  He is the goal.  The Bible shows the way to get there!


Image: Google Images

Celibacy

When I was a young Christian I had been taught that gay men ought to be celibate.  There was nothing wrong with being gay or lesbian, but being intimate with another man (or woman) was always sinful.  Many Christians assume that this is a very compassionate view to take.


This view stands in contrast to the position that just being homosexual is sin.  Men and women who buy into that spend vast amounts of time and money on "reparative therapy" to become heterosexual.  I was once subjected to that by a counselor - and it gave me such hope!  Why?


These two views have very different outcomes.  In one I am condemned to life alone, if not condemned for who I am.  The other offers hope that change is possible (as Exodus International is fond of saying).  The obvious problem is that if sexuality is even partly rooted in biology, then it is not possible to change from homosexual to heterosexual.  This makes the Exodus position untenable.  It seems change is possible... to fake.


But someone might ask, can't God cure me?  Of course he can!  I do believe that it is even possible that some gay men have been cured by God - maybe the self loathing and hate was too much for them.  Our God is loving and compassionate.  But the question of cure assumes that there is something to be cured of!  If sexuality is innate then no sexual orientation is sinful - although any deviation from heterosexuality is of course a result of the fall.  But then so is being deaf or blind, and no one argues that being deaf is sinful!


So, if being gay is not a sin - there is only one question to ask.  Is it okay for two gay men who love each other, and commit to each other for life, to live as a married couple, and to express their love in sex?


For this we must turn to the Bible for answers.  There we see no condemnation of gay sex within the context of a loving relationship.  Instead we see that we are to live out our faith in love (Galatians 5:6).  It is better to marry than to burn with lust (1 Corinthians 7:9).  


It took me years to come over to the view I now hold.  I used to passionately defend the view that gay men must be celibate.  But the Holy Spirit is always teaching us new things.


Christians around the world are changing their minds on this issue.  Churches which once would not have thought twice about excommunicating a gay man now ordain partnered gay men.  You see, Christians have been wrong on many things in the past.  Slavery.  Women.  Geocentric-ism.  It's not that the Bible has changed - but the Holy Spirit has shown us that we didn't understand what He meant!


I believe that today, God is doing the same with homosexuality.  


Image: Google Images

New Look!

I've been thinking my blog needs a fresher look for a while now.  Here's what's new:

• I've changed the look of the page
• I've added some of my favourite books
• I moved the links and added kiva - it's not a random ad, I think kiva is amazing!

If you have any comments, suggestions etc - feel free to let me know!  Likewise if there is anything you'd like to see covered in new posts, let me know!


For now, I hope you enjoy.

The Long Silence

I first heard this in Church years ago.  I've posted it as interest value though I don't know who wrote it!

The Long Silence

At the end of time, billions of people were seated on a great plain before God's throne. Most shrank back from the brilliant light before them. But some groups near the front talked heatedly, not cringing with cringing shame - but with belligerence. 

"Can God judge us? How can He know about suffering?", snapped a pert young brunette. She ripped open a sleeve to reveal a tattooed number from a Nazi concentration camp. "We endured terror ... beatings ... torture ... death!" 


In another group a Negro boy lowered his collar. "What about this?" he demanded, showing an ugly rope burn. "Lynched, for no crime but being black !" 


In another crowd there was a pregnant schoolgirl with sullen eyes: "Why should I suffer?" she murmured. "It wasn't my fault." 


Far out across the plain were hundreds of such groups. Each had a complaint against God for the evil and suffering He had permitted in His world. How lucky God was to live in Heaven, where all was sweetness and light. Where there was no weeping or fear, no hunger or hatred. What did God know of all that man had been forced to endure in this world? For God leads a pretty sheltered life, they said. 


So each of these groups sent forth their leader, chosen because he had suffered the most. A Jew, a negro, a person from Hiroshima, a horribly deformed arthritic, a thalidomide child. In the center of the vast plain, they consulted with each other. 


At last they were ready to present their case. It was rather clever.Before God could be qualified to be their judge, He must endure what they had endured. Their decision was that God should be sentenced to live on earth as a man. Let him be born a Jew. Let the legitimacy of his birth be doubted. Give him a work so difficult that even his family will think him out of his mind. Let him be betrayed by his closest friends. Let him face false charges, be tried by a prejudiced jury and convicted by a cowardly judge. Let him be tortured.  At the last, let him see what it means to be terribly alone. Then let him die so there can be no doubt he died. Let there be a great host of witnesses to verify it.


As each leader announced his portion of the sentence, loud murmurs of approval went up from the throng of people assembled. 


When the last had finished pronouncing sentence, there was a long silence. No one uttered a word. No one moved. For suddenly, all knew that God had already served His sentence. 

Is MCC a Cult?

I was watching one of Rev. Troy Perry's sermons online when another video caught my eye. It was called Queering Christ and the subtitle included the words "Metropolitan Community Cult". The video was published by Battling Christian and is also linked to a blog site (Journal of a Battling Christian).

Erik, the man behind Battling Christian admits to struggling with sexuality himself. He says, interestingly in the past tense, "At the time I was going to either deny my faith and pursue homosexuality, attempt to accommodate my faith to meet my desires or end my life". This is a struggle.  I and many other gay Christians know what he is going through.

Erik has studied gay theology (the study of what the Bible says on same-sex relationships). He concluded that people who say a man can have a relationship with Jesus and another man, are wrong. That's fair enough. I have no issue with people who (having thought it through) disagree with same-sex relationships. But Erik goes one step further and asserts that the Metropolitan Community Church (MCC) is a cult. Why?

Erik says that there are 3 things cults have in common.

1. They claim a link to the Biblical Jesus
2. They twist Scripture
3. They have secret beliefs

Erik claims that MCC meets these criteria and therefore is a cult. Really?

Like Erik I come from a conservative Evangelical background. I have not abandoned that - I still think of myself in those terms. I was brought up in a Presbyterian Church (Erik's denomination) but switched to the Baptist Church over the issue of baptising babies. Later I started attending an MCC, and now MCC is my main Church though I still frequently go to a Baptist Church. So I know something of what MCC believes, and how this compares to other mainstream Christian Churches. So I would like to challenge Erik's view that MCC is a cult. I would also like to challenge his criteria for a cult as I think he is missing one important factor - which most people recognise as being "cultish". Specifically to "avoid independent thinking" (to borrow the Jehovah's Witnesses terminology). He also discusses MCC in the same breath as JW's and Mormons so I will be making references to them as well (see also other posts on my blog about them)

His first criteria is only half true. Not only do cults claim a link to the Jesus of the Bible, so do all legitimate Christian Churches. So we can ask if a Church is Trinitarian, does it accept Jesus claims to be the one true God, equal to the Father and Holy Spirit? MCC's statement of faith says, "Christianity is the revelation of God in Jesus Christ and is the religion set forth in the Scriptures... We believe in In one triune God, omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient, of one substance and of three persons: God, our Parent-Creator; Jesus Christ, the only begotten son of God, God in flesh, human; and the Holy Spirit, God as our Sustainer". So, MCC maintains the same view of Jesus as Christians have held for 2,000 years.

Secondly he says that cults twist Scripture. I agree with that one, but this raises the question - how do we know who is twisting Scripture? It is telling that the JW's made their own version of the Bible, and the Mormons read the Bible through "Modern Scripture" - and both through what their organisations teach. If a JW or Mormon sees a verse, he is told what it means. "Independent thinking" is discouraged. MCC does not do this. Our Churches have Christians from a variety of backgrounds in our congregations. We hold varying beliefs on issues like creation/evolution, the end of the world etc. But on the core doctrines (Jesus, God, the Bible, salvation by grace through faith, etc) we agree. But we all hold to the Bible as our standard. MCC's statement of faith says, "the Bible is the divinely inspired Word of God, showing forth God to every person through the law and the prophets, and finally, completely and ultimately on earth in the being of Jesus Christ."

Differing opinions on side issues (divorce, women in ministry, same-sex relationships) do not mean a person has joined a cult. It is worth noting that the Church of Scotland (which is Presbyterian) has recently agreed that gay men currently in training can be ordained, and is considering opening this to all future ordinations as well. Has the Church of Scotland become a cult, too?

Finally Erik maintains that MCC must have secret beliefs. It's hard to argue with this one, since it's impossible to prove the non-existence of a non existent belief! All I can do is to give you my testimony, MCC is very up front about what it believes. Specifically that God loves us all, that he came here in the person of Jesus to pay the penalty for our sins so that we don't have to. Jesus died and rose again, and now intercedes for us before the Father. The Holy Spirit indwells all who trust Jesus for forgiveness. We try to follow God by seeking his will (through study of the Bible and through prayer). God calls us to a life of personal holiness, prayer and outreach. There are no "insider secret beliefs" in MCC.

Where MCC diverges (though many other Churches agree with this, and many Christians within Churches that officially don't also accept this) is that we not only believe that faithful monogamous relationships are fine (whether straight, gay, lesbian), we campaign for it. We also campaign for social justice across the board.  We do reject much of what the gay community stands for in terms of promiscuity, just as we reject heterosexual promiscuity.

It is true that there are some liberal elements in MCC, but that is true of every Church. But for Erik to brand MCC a cult because he disagrees with what some people in MCC say is wrong. I would encourage Erik to cease slandering MCC, and to have an open honest dialogue about what the Bible says, because that is what matters. Churches make mistakes, people make mistakes, but we always need to go back to the Bible. It alone is our standard.

My final point is simple. I encountered the Holy Spirit in the Presbyterian Church and in the Baptist Church. The same Holy Spirit is active in the Metropolitan Community Church as well. How could that be so unless the people there are also the Body of Christ?

Image: MCC Logo, from Google Images, Logo (c) Metropolitan Community Church www.mccchurch.org

Sodom and LGB people

This is perhaps the most misunderstood verse in the debate on gay and lesbian relationships.

"...before they retired for the night, all the men of Sodom, young and old, came from all over the city and surrounded the house. They shouted to Lot, “Where are the men who came to spend the night with you? Bring them out to us so we can have sex with them!” (Genesis 19:4-5)

If our question is whether God condemns gay and lesbian relationships, is a verse which is clearly about gang rape relevant? That's right, gang rape - not two men who love each other.

This passage tells us a lot about what God thinks of sexual abuse, but nothing about two gay men who love each other and want to spend their lives together.

Image: Google Images

Romans and LGB People

Many Christians recognise that the Old Testament Law does not apply to Christians, and so their "go to verse" in the New Testament is Romans 1:27. It reads (in the New Living Translation):

And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved.

They say that this clearly says that gay sex is wrong. But read it more closely... Lust - not love. My question to any Christian is this: are love and lust the same thing? I've yet to meet the Christian who said "yes"! So, this verse talks about lust between two men, it says nothing about two gay men who love each other.

Image: Google Images