ROMANS RE-EXAMINED

What is Paul really talking about in the first chapter of Romans?

 The recent shooting in Orlando has re-opened lines of dialog on social media concerning Islam, gun violence, and homosexuality, especially from Christians in my online circles.

Because of this, I wanted to focus primarily on what Paul seems to say about homosexuality in Romans and hopefully point out a few things that I think many seem to miss when they read these passages.

I’ve already written quite a bit about this topic, but with recent events being what they are, I thought it might be helpful to revisit some of this again.

Let’s start with Romans 1:18 to try to understand what Paul is really talking about here. I think it helps to actually start “from the top”, as it were.

In verse 18, Paul starts to talk about a group of people and this is how he identifies them:

"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness.."

Who is he talking about here? He’s talking about “godless” and “wicked” people, in general.

In v. 21 he says those same people's thinking, "became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened".

Then he says in v. 22 that those same people "claimed to be wise but became fools".

And in v. 23 he says that they: "exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles."

That is idol worship. In summary, these wicked and godless people denied the knowledge of God and began to worship idols.

Because of this:

"Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another." [v.24]

So, because they denied God and worshipped idols God's response was to give them over to "shameful desires of their hearts...for the degrading of their bodies with one another."

Please Note: Sexual intercourse in pagan temples was quite common in the worship of idols. This is what Paul is referring to here, and he continues to describe this in verse 25:

"They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised."

This is all about idol worship and it involved sexual intercourse. What Paul is condemning here is the use of sexual intercourse as part of the worship of created things, or idols.

Lust is lust. Ritual pagan sex qualifies as "degrading their bodies with one another" whether gay or straight.

Now, Paul continues his progressive thought by saying, in verse 26:

"Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts."

Ok, wait...because of what? Because these people, who were engaged in worshipping idols, started degrading their bodies with one another in ritual sexual intercourse: "God gave them over to shameful lusts."

So far, this would be bad no matter if the sex were gay or straight.

There’s a lot more to point out, but let me pause here a just a moment to say this:

I don’t know anyone who is gay due to the effects of worshipping idols through sexual intercourse.

Do you?

Maybe those people exist, but I would venture to say that the majority of people who identify as being gay today did not end up that way because they used to engage in pagan sexual practices in the temples of Zeus or Artemis.

I don’t even know any gay people who feel attracted to people of the same sex due to denying that God exists. In fact, just the opposite, I know many people who identify as gay who profess saving faith in Christ and who even demonstrate the heart and character of Christ. They do not engage in "shameful desires of their hearts" any more than my straight Christian friends do. They also do not “worship and serve created things rather than the Creator”.

Having said that, let’s go back to Paul and continue the study.

After this Paul says,

"Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error."

Please try to follow the flow of Paul’s statements here:

There were people who denied God. They started to worship idols. That worship involved sexual intercourse. That intercourse aroused unnatural lusts. The end result was a judgment within their bodies for denying God and engaging in pagan ritual sex rites.

Keep in mind: anyone who is "inflamed with lust" is in sin - whether gay or straight. But Paul's entire flow of thought begins with a discussion about those who deny God, worship created things rather than the creator, engage in ritual sexual intercourse as part of that worship, and then...BECAUSE OF THESE THINGS, God has judged them and given them over to their lusts.

Let me ask you: What if Paul’s descriptions here went like this:

*People denied God

*Those people worshipped idols

*They worshipped idols by engaging in male/female sex acts

Would you conclude that God hated male/female intercourse?

Why not? Isn’t that what people do when he goes on to describe their acts of homosexual intercourse?

If we don’t read Romans 1 as a de facto condemnation of straight sex [and the majority of the chapter is about straight sex], then why do we read it as a condemnation of gay sex acts?

Could it be because we have a bias against gay sex that we don’t have against straight sex?

If we lay aside our inherent bias against gay sex, we can see that Paul's entire point is that the denial of God and the worship of idols through sexual intercourse [gay or straight] is what is "shameful" and not the type of sexual intercourse itself.

Sexual intercourse in the worship of idols is evil. This is Paul’s entire point.

Straight sex is not evil. What matters is the context. Is it between two people who love one another and who also love and trust in God? Then it isn’t what Paul is speaking of here in Romans 1.

My point is simply this: Romans 1 doesn’t try to provide any commentary on whether or not gay sexual intercourse is “good” or “evil”.

Paul's purpose in Romans 1 isn't to explain why homo/hetero sex itself is wrong/right. His point would be exactly the same if he were describing straight sexual intercourse used in pagan ritual worship.

Does that make sense?

That same judgment they received would come equally to those who engaged in gay or straight sexual intercourse if it was for the purpose of pagan idol worship.

Believe it or not, there really are Christians who ARE gay, and they DO worship God and they DO love Jesus and they do NOT engage in fornication and they are NOT consumed by their lusts.

So, this passage does not apply to them.

In conclusion, I wish that I could introduce you to the gay and transgender Christians I know. If I could, you might find that these are not "perverts" or “abominations”. Instead, you might see what I have seen, which is an exceptional grace for people who shun them and marginalize them.

They are quick to even forgive family members who shame them. They are obedient to Jesus to pray for those Christians who slander them and call them names [like "pervert" for example] with tears in their eyes and pain in their heart.

I’ve seen Jesus in the lives of my gay and transgender brothers and sisters over the last few years in deeper and more profound ways than I believe I have ever seen in many of my straight Christian friends.

I hope to learn from them how to love and forgive and walk in grace and mercy towards everyone, even those brothers and sisters who cannot accept them for who they really are.

Peace,

Keith
**
READ MORE?

*THE NEW SAMARITANS
*OUR MISSED OPPORTUNITY
*BLESSED ARE THE EUNUCHS
*A LOVE THAT'S BETTER THAN SEX

A Love That's Better Than Sex

In our previous post, I shared a promise that God makes to those who are non-heterosexual, that they would be given a name and a monument that is better than sons or daughters in His Church.

Jesus and Paul affirm that those who are “eunuchs for  the sake of the Kingdom” are partakers of this promise if they remain celibate and devote themselves to the concerns of Christ.

But where does that leave the lonely disciple who longs for physical love?

Whether gay or straight, those who are single and celibate in the Body of Christ must wrestle with a very real need to love and to be loved by others.

Jesus knows this. He already knows what we need before we ask, and so He has a plan to address this need. What Jesus has in mind involves a complete redefinition of family and friendship.

“Who are my mother and sisters and brothers?”, Jesus asks.

Are they not those who love Him and put His words into practice?

In his ekklesia, everyone finds a safe place to be who they are, without shame. In the Body of Christ, everyone finds a friend who will lay down their life for them. In the Church that Jesus builds, everyone discovers a house full of mothers, brothers, and sisters who all embrace them, welcome them, and love them – not only in words, but in action and in truth.

The community of Christ is designed to provide everyone with a family that won’t forsake them; with brothers and sisters who will bear one another’s burdens; with deep friendships that are stronger than death, and better than a wife or husband, or sons or daughters.

In the Temple of the Holy Spirit, the Father has promised that everyone – especially those who are alone – will be cherished, and valued, and profoundly loved.

Granted, not every church fellowship has fully realized this yet.

But when the church fails to do this, everyone suffers. Not only the single and celibate, but those who are married suffer, too. Because everyone in the Body of Christ is intended to be welcomed, and at home, and embraced, and loved.

In the Jewish culture there is a concept of “Shalom” that extends to include everyone in the community. If there is even one person who does not enjoy “shalom” – which means having the food, clothing, shelter, warmth, and love, that every human being requires – then none of us has “shalom”.

In the Body of Christ, we are meant to ensure that everyone in our community is loved. Jesus commanded us to love one another. Paul told us to bear one another's burdens. John told us to lay down our lives for our brothers and sisters.

If one of us in the Church doesn't have love, then none of us really has it.

"If anyone....sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person? Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth." - 1 John 3:17]

This means loving one another as Christ has loved us. It means opening our homes if need be. It means sacrificing our free time. It means sharing our meals, and our hearts, and our money, and anything else that is necessary to meet the needs of everyone in our Church family.

If we don’t live in His love, and experience His love, and share His love freely among those within His Body, how can we call ourselves the children of a God who is love?

-kg


**

IMAGE CREDIT: Scott Laumann

**
READ MORE?

*NOT A SIN?
*THE NEW SAMARITANS
*OUR MISSED OPPORTUNITY
*BLESSED ARE THE EUNUCHS

BLESSED ARE THE EUNUCHS

When God established rules for who could – and who could not – enter into or serve within the Tabernacle, and later the Temple of God, He made a curious prohibition against those who were castrated, or who “had their testicles crushed”. [See Lev. 21:20]

These people are more commonly referred to in the Scriptures as “eunuchs”.

Later, through the prophet Isaiah, God made these eunuchs a promise:

“Let not the eunuch say, “Behold, I am a dry tree.” For thus says the Lord: “To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose the things that please me and hold fast my covenant, I will give in my house and within my walls a monument and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off.” [Isaiah 56:3-7]

This promise to give these people, who were formerly outcast, a place of honor in God’s House was never fulfilled under the Old Covenant.  

So, was this promise left unfulfilled? Not at all.

When Jesus is responding to the Pharisees regarding divorce, his disciples throw up their hands in exasperation after hearing Him say that a man may not divorce his wife other than for the sin of adultery. They exclaim, “Why even get married, then?” To which Jesus replies:

“Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother’s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it.” [Matthew 19:11-12]

Curiously, Jesus seems to make a statement that he realizes will be difficult for His disciples to wrap their minds around. “Tuck this one in your back pocket for now,” he seems to say. “This won’t make any sense to you now, but later on this concept will become more clear.”

What is a eunuch? Is it simply someone who has no interest in the opposite sex? Or in marriage? Is it someone who has no functional genitalia [as in Lev.21:20]? What is the difference between a eunuch who is “born that way” and those who are “made eunuchs by men” and “those who made themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom”?

Jesus bookends this statement with the warning: “Not all men can accept this. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it.”

Whatever a eunuch might be, we see that the promise made by Isaiah is still in effect. Jesus honors those who are eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom. In the context of his dialog with the Pharisees and the Disciples, Jesus seems to place the emphasis on those eunuchs who choose not to marry – not to participate in the normative practices of the culture – but who instead devote themselves totally to the Gospel and the Kingdom of God.

Keep in mind that, in Jewish culture, a woman had no value apart from child-birth. A man without male children was a disgrace and most likely cursed by God. Even the “Chosen” status of the Children of Israel was tied to giving birth to the Messiah. How could anyone choose to disengage from that most natural and holy endeavors as being married and having children?

As we’ve already noted, that promise in Isaiah to eunuchs being granted a “monument and a name better than sons and daughters” was never fulfilled in the Old Covenant “House of God”, but it was certainly fulfilled in the New Covenant “House of God”, which is the ekklesia, or Body of Christ.

Who was the first non-Jewish convert baptized into the new Temple of God? A eunuch from Ethiopa. [See Acts 8:27]

When the evangelist Philip met this man he was reading from Isaiah 53:7-8. Imagine this eunuch’s surprise after his baptism when he, no doubt, continued on reading in the scroll and discovered the promise of God to him - and to every other eunuch - a few chapters later in Isaiah 56:3-7.

Who else has made themselves a eunuch for the Kingdom of God?

Well, Jesus, for one. He abandoned his identity as a potential husband or a father, in the natural sense, to embrace the title of Bridegroom for a people who would become his Bride through faith in Him.

Paul was also a “eunuch for the Kingdom” who remained celibate for the sake of the Gospel, and urged others to do the same:

“To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single as I am. . . But I want you to be free from concern. One who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord; but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife, and his interests are divided. The woman who is unmarried…is concerned about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit; but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how she may please her husband. This I say for your own benefit; not to put a restraint upon you, but to promote what is appropriate and to secure undistracted devotion to the Lord.” [1 Corinthians 7:8, 32-33]

What of those who embrace their natural identity and who become fathers and mothers, or husbands and wives? Those labels will vanish and fade away in the age to come:

“For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.” – Jesus [Matt. 22:30]

But for those who do embrace this calling to become eunuchs for the Kingdom, there is a promise that is eternal and that will never be taken away.

Jesus gives us three categories of eunuchs: Those who were “born that way”, those who “were made that way by men” and those who “are eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom”.

Eunuchs who are “made that way by men” are undoubtedly those who were castrated. This tells us that the Ethiopian eunuch, and the eunuch who lived and served in the Temple [see 2 Kings 23:11] were both “born that way from their mother’s womb”.  How do we know this? Because if they had been “made that way by men” [i.e. “castrated”] then they wouldn’t have been admitted into the Temple, according to the prohibition commanded in Leviticus 21:20.

So, what does it mean to be someone who is a eunuch “from their mother’s womb”? Many believe that this would be a reference to what we would call someone with a same-sex attraction. Why? Because these people did not exhibit what would have been seen as a “normative” sexual orientation. They were men without passion for women, and women without interest in taking a husband and bearing children as most women would be expected to do. At a minimum, these enuchs are “non-heterosexuals” who do not have any interest in fulfilling their culturally accepted gender roles.

The third category that Jesus mentions is someone for whom the expected sexual norms and usual gender roles do not apply. Furthermore, it is someone who has embraced a new identity in Christ to become a eunuch for the Kingdom.

This is what Jesus did. It’s what Paul the Apostle did and urged others to do. 

What greater calling can there be than to become, like Jesus our Lord and the Apostle Paul, one of the eunuch’s for the sake of the Kingdom of God?

Granted, not everyone is “born this way” and few of us are “made this way by men”, but there are several who do not value traditional marriage as much as others do. There are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Christians for whom the traditional role of husband or wife, or mother or father, is not an option. Whether by sexual attraction or by lack of opportunity, these men and women are on the outside of the cultural norms and sexual identities that our society has imposed upon them.

Rather than endure the shame that is often tied to this classification, these people are among an elite tribe of human beings who have been given a promise, and a monument, and an everlasting name that will be, in the House of God, one of honor and of high esteem. Our Lord Himself has identified with them and stands beside them as one who is on the outside of normative cultural expectations for gender and sexuality and identity.

I know that many who are Gay and Christian want nothing more than to find another person to share their life with. This is a common, human desire. My hope is to share another possibility that they might consider embracing – a promise from God to step into a place of exceptional service for their Lord and King.

As much as we might not want to believe it, celibacy is not a death sentence. For many in the Kingdom of God, it is a high calling and a position of great honor.

Is there anyone, today, who has abandoned their normative cultural – and natural – identity as a husband or a wife? If so, they may now embrace the example of Jesus and of Paul the Apostle who served as “eunuchs for the Kingdom” and experienced the promise of God through the prophet Isaiah to receive a “a monument and a name better than sons and daughters” and “an everlasting name that will not be cut off.”

Let those who can receive it, receive it.

-kg

**
READ MORE?

*NOT A SIN?
*THE NEW SAMARITANS
*OUR MISSED OPPORTUNITY
*A LOVE THAT'S BETTER THAN SEX