Join the Gay Christadelphian Network!
Launches 1st July 2007
www.gay-christadelphians-a-response.co.uk is a website set up in response to this one. Although I don't want to start a "tit for tat" exchange with the webmaster of that site, it does raise some issues I would like to respond to.
The site is run by Chris Maddocks, and has 5 main pages:
Most of the major arguments on Chris' site are on the main page of the site.
Chris says, referring to Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, that "[t]he Bible is specific and unambiguous in its position concerning homosexual practices
". This is a common misunderstanding of what Leviticus means, and the meaning of Leviticus is addressed elsewhere on this site.
Chris claims that God's morality has not changed. This is clearly wrong.
We are no longer under the Law of Moses. The moral standards that God expects of his people have changed. That is what it means when we are not under the Law of Moses any more. As an example, Christ tells us that divorce, permitted under the Law, is not permitted to his followers.
Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery." (Matthew 19:8-9, NIV)
Here we have it: unless divorce and adultery are not moral issues, the moral standards under Christ are not the same as the moral standards under the Law of Moses.
Observation of the Sabbath was required under the Law, and working on the Sabbath day was punishable by death (Exodus 31:15). But what about life under Christ?
One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. (Romans 14:5-6, NIV)
Working on the Sabbath day was a sin punishable by death under the Law. Under Christ, it is a conscience issue. Once again we can see how morality under the Law is different from morality under Christ. These examples show that we cannot take the moral standards from the Law of Moses and apply them to life under Christ.
Romans chapter 1 is an important chapter when we consider same-sex relationships. I have expanded my exposition since Chris wrote his site, and I have covered most of the points he has made. Chris is correct when he identifies the negative language used to describe homosexual activity. He doesn't address the fact that heterosexual activity is described using equally negative language.
There is an additional major flaw in Chris' understanding that I need to address here. Romans 1 describes a process that some people have gone through. The steps include failing to honour God, becoming idolaters, sinning heterosexually, and sinning homosexually. These steps follow one after the other. Failing to glorify God occurs in verse 21. Idolatry appears in verses 22 and 23. Heterosexual sin appears in verse 24. Verse 25 mentions "worship[ing] and serv[ing] the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever." Homosexual sin does not appear until verses 26 and 27. Chris says the following:
[The webmaster of Inherit The Kingdom] may claim: "I have not failed to glorify God. I have not worship ed idols. I have not exchanged the truth of God for a lie." But think of this: his sexual activities are a) condemned by the Bible which even he admits in the case of the Old Testament, b) they are "against nature" c) they are out of marital bonds d) they are designed only for personal gratification and not procreation. Each of these makes him guilty of failing to glorify God. Each of these makes his body and his personal pleasure an idol. Each of these exchange the truth of God for a lie. ... He justifies his "shameful lusts" and perverts the Word of God for his own purposes. Can there be any worse of an idol than this? And this is exactly what the text indicates: "and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever."
In Chris' exposition, my failure to glorify God, my idolatry, and my worshipping ans serving the creature more than the creator come about as a result of my (assumed) sexual activity. In Romans 1, all of these things happen in verses 21 to 25, before the homosexual sin described in verses 26 and 27. Chris' exposition is wrong because he sees me as an idolater as a result of homosexual sin, while Romans 1 describes idol worship leading to homosexual sin.
The purpose of sex is discussed in two articles on this site, Why Have Sex? and The Meaning of Marriage.
Chris' analysis of arsenokoites is extremely weak. His argument that it can be translated as "homosexuals" is nothing more than a repetition of the incorrect "etymology defines meaning" argument. He quotes several modern English translations to support him, not realising that there are very real differences between "homosexuals", "homosexual offenders", and "practicing homosexuals", all of which are used as translations of arsenokoites. Chris also fails to address the wide range of translations for malakos, which is sometimes translated as "male prostitutes", "passive homosexual partners", or even "self-indulgent".
Same Sex Relationships and Homosexual Relationships - A Distinction highlights a peculiarity in Chris' thoughts. That page argues that I am "disingenuous" to use the phrase "same-sex relationships" on this site, because I really mean sexual same-sex relationships. Chris says, for example:
Romans 1 is not about all same sex relationships - it is specifically against Homosexual same-sex relationships! The two are not equivalent expressions at all
In the context of this website, it should be clear that the same-sex relationships discussed are sexual and romantic same-sex relationships. Chris calls me "disingenuous" because a phrase that I use may have another meaning in another context. Context is essential for understanding any language.
The Bible and Same Sex Relationships was written before my own page on Biblical Affirmation. That page addresses the majority of points that Chris makes, although there are two I want to mention here.
Chris states that "Jonathan loved David as a brother". Chris does not provide any other examples of this sort of brotherly love in the Old Testament, which is hardly surprising as loving a non-relative as you love your brother is a concept introduced in the New Testament. In contrast, I provide several examples of how David and Jonathan talked about each other using the vocabulary that ancient Hebrew spouses used for each other.
Chris' superficial understanding of Leviticus 20:13 is evident here as well, asserting without proof that it prohibited all homosexual sex. This is not the case.
The Parable of Heterosexual Marriage is the most interesting page on Chris' site. All of the points it makes are addressed in the articles The Meaning of Marriage and Why Have Sex?
On Questions and Answers, Chris' seems to have got me confused with someone else. For example, he says:
[The webmaster of www.inherit-the-kingdom.org] was counselled to re-think his conduct both privately, then again privately by his ecclesia - but he refused. In his response to the present writer, [he] has made it clear that he is not willing to discuss either the site or its contents. ... We have dealt with [him] in a proper manner, by making private entreaties first. To this he was unrelenting, and so the matter has been elevated to an ecclesial level.
Although I have discussed this site with several Christadelphians, with varying degrees of privacy, I haven't been asked to rethink my conduct by any of them. There has been no ecclesial-level discussion involving me regarding this site. I also have not refused (or implied that I am unwilling) to discuss this site and its contents with Chris. I don't know who Chris thinks I am, but he is obviously wrong. If the individual was "unrelenting" it was probably because it was the wrong individual.
Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world
Matthew 25:34, NIV