A Coin's Edges

Heads or Tails.

Let us hear what the Spirit is saying to the churches.

Remind us what we are to say and do as light to others.

In your mercy, hear our prayers.

Amen.

We've discussed the legality of same-sex equality, dealing with non-believers, and the UMC's missed handling of the internal oppositions to the Book of Discipline. Last but certainly not least (as there are many others), we were encouraged to get some understanding; honestly, I believe many of us fail in the latter (us being inclusive of everyone).

I realized in preparing the confirmation bias entry that I had in fact presented what seemed to be partial understanding. Being that I strive to be fair and balanced (or at least balanced when unfair) I thought it robbery to not present a slightly different perspective. This won't be the "other side" of the coin in this debate (i.e. People against homosexuality and same-sex marriage), as much as it will be about the edge of this coin. That is the goal; prayerfully we get there.

Me, Personally...

In my own personal study time when I have come across a verse that seems to have any same-sex implications, I grab a couple of commentaries to see what might be going on. Usually this is to get a better foundation in the cultural understanding at the time the letter (book of the Bible) was written. At one point I never thought I'd seriously use commentaries b/c I felt reading the Bible alone seemed sufficient. Then there are the books about homosexuality and intentionally engaging in the lives of gay people and their families.

Three topics we haven't touched on at #imdatruthblog: 

• Biblical historical references to Sodom & Gomorrah 
• An Overarching theme of Marriage in the Bible
• Homosexuality and the Black Church

My personal studies continue and I didn't want to just rehash what everyone else was saying, because you can find all of that online, especially if you want to confirm what you already believe to be true. Let me just say there are equally as convincing and truthful arguments on both sides. I feel there's a middle ground that holds the absolute Truth; that's just me. Perhaps this entry will touch on that middle ground in a positive way.

My reasoning for doing this: I have come to notice many people are not aware of the spectrum of Christian voices in this conversation (this is based on my perception). I wholeheartedly believe some still think it's an "us vs. them" zero sum game.

There are 3 types of Christians in this debate:

• Conservatives who tend to be more fundamental/literal with the Bible (e.g. Bible Thumpers)
• A lot of people know those who will quote scripture and stop there
• Liberals who tend to be more progressive in their view and interpretation of scripture (e.g. Social Gospel: Matthew 25)
• Some of this provides for great thought provocation
• Challenging the way you think about God and your faith is a good thing
• Moderates who pull from both thought pools and believe we can be progressive in certain areas even though it may not be ideal, especially when dealing with those outside the church

Understand that there are nuances and a variety of persons within these given categories. They're meant to be abstract as possible and concrete when necessary for discussion. There are also those who distinguish between homosexual acts (i.e. Acting based on the orientation) and homosexuality (i.e. Being a gay person).

The Point of it All
We hear it all the time. Bigot! Sinner! Hopefully you know the media is grossly biased. Interviews are often setup in an "Us vs. Them" format. Soooo much redundancy and no fresh perspectives. By now we should know that God hates no one and to invoke his name in any hateful or derogatory manner shows that you not only don't know God; you don't know yourself or love your brother. Disagreement is not intolerance nor is it hatred or anti- this or that. Everyone is guilty of that and I do see a particular increase of accusations coming from the side of those in support of marriage equality. Those who think like Westboro Baptist are few in number and we'd do well to not give them as much "air time" as we do.

When I seriously read Romans 1 (and by serious I mean, that I wasn't reading in order to be closer to saying I finished reading the Bible again), an introduction to a book filled with theology, I knew in my mind that one of the many often quoted scriptures used against homosexuality was coming up. Instead of being closed minded (i.e. I know what I believe) or performing eisegesis (i.e. Reading an interpretation/bias into the text), I just read it as is and tried to understand the context.

The first thing I noticed was this idea of idolatry, not just in imagery but also in action, which I figured to be forms of worship towards the idols, whatever/whoever they may be (v23-24). The next thing I picked up on was this idea of worshiping/serving the "creature rather than the Creator"(v25). At this point questions arose, "What does this mean?" "What are the potential forms of worship?" and of course this had to be understood in the specific cultural context at the time. In moving on (v26-27), a drastic change occurs where natural processes are exchanged for unnatural ones. I understood this to obviously mean homosexual acts. But what is "the due penalty for their error"? So in understanding the context thus far, I know that there's idolatry in serving a creature instead of God, homosexual acts, and a penalty for error (which seems to only be on the men and not the women).

Then came the commentary and further understanding with answers to the questions I had. Basically, Rome had a lot of things going on that were displeasing to God, which is why the Apostle Paul was sent (one of many) to spread the Gospel. In my research I found that there were temple prostitutes (as a result of cults and the like) of both sexes, power was demonstrated through sex, which as a man was seen as shaming to be on the receiving end of such an act (my newfound understanding of the penalty for their error and not so much STDs as unlearned people might think). Although I could imagine as a male temple prostitute (or slave) being on the receiving end as part of an act of worship is not too far strung or overreaching. Interestingly enough this gave me some clarity as to why the Roman Catholic Church would want to cover up scandals of molestation abuse. It's eerily familiar in this regard. Also, it was not uncommon for soldiers to rape and pillage in a conquered town; the rape being inclusive (regardless of gender). And if I remember correctly, they might go as far as having sex with a corpse.

Beyond this there are other points and/or inferences you may be able to draw, but you'd also have to cross check that with other books in the Bible as well as being sure to take those into context and understand the cultural implications at the time. For as much as I do see and read in this short excerpt of text, there is just as much that I don't see.

National Discussion because right now it's not happening...
If we sincerely approached this as we do other discussions (e.g. Faith vs. Science, etc.) we would be able to not only remove some of the bias, we'd do ourselves and our neighbors a lot of good. There are so many topics that can be talked about in relation to this, some of which are being conducted by people of faith and non-people of faith, but in the equivalent of silos; further indoctrinating and entrenching ourselves in what we already believe without wanting an understanding of what others think. That's no fun! Where's the learning in that?!

Here's a run down of what could be discussed:

• Sexuality
• Categories, Gender Roles/Stereotypes, Masculinity/Femininity, etc.
• What does it mean to be effeminate and does this include boys who like pink or figure skating?
• Human Dignity
• Is it okay for legislation to be passed which encourages modern day "stoning" of anybody?
• Marriage
• What is marriage?
• Parenting
• How should we raise our children?
• Do we still talk about sex or is that left up to the schools (again)?
• Parents who have gay children.
• Mistake Made vs. Biology
• Abuse
• Why it happens and the long term effects
• LGBT inclusivity (especially in churches)
• What does it mean to be inclusive?
• How does inclusivity look?
• The Black Church and Homosexuality

Honorable Mention: Sagging Pants and the Jail Culture

How the Black Church Can End this Debate
Is there a difference between discussion and debate? I mean, they are the same in my mind when done correctly. I believe discussions in and about the Black Church would go a long way since some are saying "gay is the new black" and that the "Gay Rights Movement" parallels the Civil Rights Movement. I've always felt that the Civil Rights Movement never ended and in effect we are fighting for civil rights in some way or another. There's also that prevalent topic of discussion: Gay Men and the Music Ministry. Because we're so hush hush about a lot of things in America, especially in the black community. I've not been involved in a sincere conversation; always heard whispers. I am aware that there have been books written about homophobia in the black community, but I'm not aware of any discussions which have taken place in the last decade.

Personal Reflection:
I gotta be real with you. I feel like I'm on the edge of this debate. Not neatly fitting into a party "for this" or "against that". Much of this has to do with what I feel is a very unique perspective, which is somewhat uncommon given my recently enhanced background. As we tend to do in the world of categories and identities, I'm a Christian who happens to be black, male, and of the heterosexual orientation. I grew up in what is becoming more the conservative "melting pot of Florida" where you can shoot whoever you want (more on that later this month), to go on and be educated in post-baccalaureate studies in the city of Pittsburgh, arguably as I've put in certain conversations "one of the gayest cities" in the United States. No pun intended; I take pride in saying that. Let me not forget to mention, I've been heavy on diversity and inclusion since (at the latest or possibly earliest) 2005 when I became an AmeriCorps member. I was charged to make things better for my country and as a man of faith I strive to improve life for all citizens of humanity.

And with that, I'm on the coin's edges; most likely in the ridges.

I think Jesus was more of a moderate, possibly left of center in today's terms. Can't prove it, but the above photo always makes me laugh. A lot of life is a mystery. Perhaps it was intended to be so. A comment a brother in Christ left on a social media site recently summed up why I'm writing this. It's a portion but I believe the most important part. He's commenting on this idea of biblical obedience and how we have people on "both sides of the aisle" (a pretty funny pun when you think of its references to the church and politics), who are living in obedience to what the Bible says:

My hope and prayer is that people may use the scriptures
as an entry point to the dialogue rather than the closing argument.

You start with scripture. You end with scripture. What goes between all of that?

Why?

The quick skinny:

• A lot of things we're arguing about have separated us for foolish reasons.
• Redundancy in conversation without fresh insights/perspectives gives me headaches.

What does this mean for me? #theReader 

Try to get some understanding of where you "fit" in the midst of all this and the ongoing conversation. Are you doing enough? Too much. Maybe nothing at all. Does it even matter (to you)? Are you able to articulate why you believe or feel the way you do? I mean, can you actually back it up, or is it a line you use?

For further insight: Read-Am I an Ally?, Millennials Invent Religion, A Core Issue?, Let the Tolerance Begin

Other New Testament Scriptures: 1 Corinthians 6, 1 Timothy 1, Jude

This is F.U.N. (For Ur Needs)  Use your KEYS

• Know that no one in a family agrees on everything
• Expect to be misunderstood
• Your salvation should be worked out with fear and trembling (Phil 2:12)
• Stay alert!

Challenge

• Know why you believe and feel the way you do.
• Be able to explain it.