Evidence to the contrary notwithstanding, I think there is a place for thoughtful engagement over the “clobber passages.”
Yep. The Clobber Passages. Those six (or eight, depending on who you’re talking to) passages in the Bible that appear to “clobber” the idea that God could ever love gay people just the way they are.
As a liberal and an advocate for full LGBT inclusion in the life of both the church and the culture, I often run into a line of questioning (particularly on social media and the comment threads on blog posts I write—oh, the comment threads … boy howdy!) that goes something like this:
“How can you call yourself a Christian and still be for … you know … Gays? Don’t you believe in the Bible?”
I can’t tell you how many literary interactions I’ve had that began with something very much like, “You can’t believe that stuff and still believe the Bible.” It happens. (Like here or here or here).
To which I respond with as much dignity as I can muster, trying hard not to sound like a third grader: “Can too!”
What happens next is predictable.
“Well then, what do you do with __ (fill in the blank with Genesis, Leviticus, Romans, etc.)?”
So, I begin my spiel: “You must realize that the world of the Bible and the world of twenty-first century suburbanites are different worlds … ” And off I go.
But as I’m writing to my newest interlocutor for what seems to me at this point like the 37th time, I get a hollow feeling in my stomach. Even if I were the Albert Einstein of Biblical exegesis and hermeneutics, even if I could come up with some kind of seemingly airtight Thomist proof for my position, even if I could make the angels sing and the Begonias bloom on command (which, by the way, if it needs to be said, I am not and I cannot) I would still never be able to convince my conversational dance partner of the truth of my arguments … that the world out of which the Bible emerged could never have anticipated the world we inhabit.
I often despair, convinced that even making these arguments is pointless, since I’m never going to convince the person with whom I’m arguing.
Having said all that, though, I am beginning to think that having a well-reasoned response to the “You-can’t-be-a-Christian-and-still-believe-the-Bible-doesn’t-condemn-gay-people” argument is worthwhile … especially now.
Why do I say that?
Lisa Murkowski.
Yesterday, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) came out in support of same gender marriage.
Big deal, you say. Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) did something very nearly like it a few months ago.
I know. But as someone commented on my Facebook page yesterday after I’d posted a link about Lisa Murkowski, “It feels like we’re reaching critical mass.”1
[As I write this, an announcement has just been released that the leader of Exodus International (an organizational leader in “ex-gay” treatment) is apologizing to the Gay community for years of abuse. Another article announces that Exodus International is shutting down altogether.]
I know right?
I think there can be no denying the obvious indicators that we are reaching critical mass, a sociological tipping point2 on the issue of embracing the full inclusion of LGBT people.
But here’s the thing: This kind of cultural shift doesn’t take place in an intellectual and moral vacuum.
What do I mean?
Well, even though the current is shifting, that doesn’t mean everyone will automatically turn around and swim in the other direction … just because everyone else appears to be doing so. In fact, the cultural trope of hyper-individuality (Thank you, Baby Boomers!) stands explicitly over against the facile adoption of “what everyone else is doing” (c.f. your mom’s favorite incredulous question: “You wouldn’t jump off a bridge just because your friends did, would you?”).
Consequently, and even if it’s for their own peace of mind, people who are making huge alterations in their thinking patterns need the fortification of good intellectual and moral reasoning. Most folks can’t just turn on a dime; they need good reasons to change.
All of which we know instinctively, right?
But here’s part of the psychology behind such a change: When things are moving so rapidly, many people who don’t want to be left behind are looking for intellectual and moral reasons to do what everyone else is doing. Those reasons need some substance, of course. But if you can provide them good reasons, many people who find themselves in the midst of a great cultural shift, are looking for reasonable justification that will give them permission to change their minds.
Exhibit A: Lisa Murkowski. Murkowski, who has long opposed same gender marriage, admitted in March that her views on the issue have been evolving. The reason she gave yesterday for changing her mind involves an Alaskan military couple who are lesbian. These two women have taken in foster children, prompting Murkowski to observe that “our government does not meet this family halfway and allow them to be legally recognized as spouses.” Our inability to recognize these fine women’s relationship as legitimate gave Sen. Murkowski the reason she needed to change her mind.
Now, I’m not saying that Sen. Murkowski’s shift is a cynical ploy to get on the right side of history. Far from it. In fact, I take her at her word, believing she genuinely means what she says about the change in her thinking. I’m just saying that when the cultural pressure to change reaches a certain point, many people will start listening to stories, Biblical arguments, scientific data that they were able to ignore before.
People need reassurances that they’re not jumping off a bridge into uncertain waters.
Lisa Murkowski needed the story of that lesbian family. Other people are going to need reassurance that they can simultaneously believe the Bible and that God doesn’t hate gay people.
So, I think refuting the clobber passages is an essential enterprise now more than ever–not because it will convince those determined not to hear, but because it promises to give support to those searching for a new way to think.
Photo credit: Flickr / agent_mikejohnson
- “In social dynamics, critical mass is a sufficient number of adopters of an innovation in a social system so that the rate of adoption becomes self-sustaining and creates further growth.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass_(sociodynamics)) ↩
- “In sociology, a tipping point is a point in time when a group–-or a large number of group members–rapidly and dramatically changes its behavior by widely adopting a previously rare practice.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping_point_(sociology)) ↩
Derek, I should add, you mention the shift in politicians to change their beliefs to suit the current political trends. This has been going on for 40-50 years and it is not a recent development. It began with taking God out of school, then out the workplace, out of legal tender, etc. This is not a new trend or critical mass for Christians. Judeo-Christians have been pulling their kids out of public schools, scouts, or churches for years and starting up new organizations. This exodus and religious silencing is nothing new to us older folks. This recent domino effect (last… Read more »
Derek, this is a good topic right now. I’m glad you mention Romans, because in Paul’s letter to the Romans he describes what’s happening in the world around him with us sinner-types. (yes, that includes all of us..the Bible is crystal clear that sin applies to all) Paul talks about how sinners strayed from God’s law of faith and rejected God. And people stopped conforming to His word and started conforming to man’s word. Christians are clearly instructed not to judge or disobey His laws or manmade laws. This is where most Christians have problems with ‘marriage’ and ‘lawmaking’ not… Read more »
To those of us who are not believers, the claims of Christians who say “we are not bigots, we are trying to follow a higher law” look false and disingenuous. Put most simply: I do not believe you. I do not believe the “higher law” claim is truth. Why? Because it too conveniently avoids other, much clearer “higher laws” in the Bible. For instance, the Bible clearly and directly condemns, both in the Old and New Testaments and in VERY clear language, divorce. Jesus says absolutely nothing about homosexuality but says, repeatedly, that a man who divorces and re-marries is… Read more »
“Never argue with a fool – they will drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.” Kudos to the author of this article for TRYING to communicate some sort of common sense to the dogma-centric sheep out there though. There are people who will never get it. You’ll never convince them. Make peace with that. Organised religion has lost me I’m afraid, due to many reasons above and beyond this topic. I’m not gay. Or male. I am a supporter of mercy, integrity, compassion, humour, energy, kindness and Love. And yes, I do believe in God. Just… Read more »
People tend to decide first, and rationalise second. And I’m convinced the apparent swing is motivated more by a fear of growing irrelevance than any kind of conviction. I know I’m going to be watching the rhetoric coming from Christian quarters like a hawk over the next few years – and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if, as per slavery, those who were against this social change will be downplayed or even dropped altogether (“they weren’t really ‘true’ Christians, of course the Bible is pro-gay marriage even though we collectively interpreted it to mean the exact opposite for the… Read more »