We continue with Brian Blount on homosexuality and the New Testament.
Other philosophers, such as Plutarch, argued that love between a man and woman was natural. Sexual activity between people of the same gender was considered dehumanizing because it was unnatural. By "unnatural" they meant, of course, that it had nothing to do with procreation, the condoned purpose of sexual activity between men and women. The two primary secular concerns with same-sex activity, then, were the unreasonable motivation of lust and the unnatural quality of the acts...
For Paul, sexual activity between persons of the same sex was a direct result of idolatry, the human acceptance of false gods or a false understanding of their own relationship before the gods. Paul was thinking of individual, separate actions as God's punishment for idolatry. He was not thinking, nor was he prepared to think, in terms of relationship. He was thinking what humans did and not what God had created, a person predisposed by reason of biology or social learning toward relationship with other persons of the same gender. For him the issue was one of controlling behavior, not running from or living out one's human identity.
Here we see again the focus on "what is done." There is no consideration of the relationship. There is no consideration to the fact that this is who these folks are, shall we say....by nature. When we can begin to focus more on the relationship between homosexuals rather than individual sexual acts (for we don't focus on those acts among heterosexual who are in a loving relationship) we may be able to bring everyone into life relationships that are wholesome and full and responsible. We would do well to focus on good relationships...and building up faithfulness to partners...and building up the family of all people, rather than letting our fears about what is not like us be the power that leads us. We do well when we help one another live "out one's human identity" so that we are able to deal with one another truthfully and honestly and with respect. We would do well to ask how we all can walk together as followers of Jesus rather than picking up stones and being ready to discount and reject other's mere being. At that point, we then, all of us, can talk about the "life" into which we are all invited to enter as people who live within the Reign of God.
Connection: It is not easy to trust how someone else lives. When we are self-centered, we may not even be open to any type of conversation or dialogue. A good exercise may be to relax, remind ourselves that God Reigns, and then be available to entertain something more than our own perspectives and world view.
Just as you, out of love for us, call us into a deeper and deeper relationship with you and our neighbors, O God, we are to be a people who are empowered to enter into relationships that take work and respect and stay focused on the holy life of all your people who encompass more diversity than most of us are willing to accept. Remind us of your love and the love it brings to life among us. Amen.
Friday, December 7, 2007
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Monday 10 December 2007
We start the week by continuing Brian Blount's comments on "The New Testament and Homosexual Behavior.
Paul was inspired by God's Word in a world where sexuality was understood in a radically different way from how it is understood today... No one talked in terms of a genetic predisposition or early social conditioning and learning, or a way of life, or a nurturing, caring partnership of two people... Paul was very much speaking from and with his surrounding culture in an accommodating rather than a prophetic way. Philosophers of the day, such as Seneca and Dio Chrysostom, considered same-sex activity to be driven by dehumanizing lust. They recognized, of course, that lust was not just a problem for same-sex activity but that it plagued relationships between men and women as well. To them because sexual activity was always motivated by lust, it therefore always had to be avoided.
It is important to note that when a new word or a new idea is brought into a group of people, it is often done slowly...without tipping the boat...without pushing something down the throats of people, and with some sense of what will fly and what must be "accommodated" in order for just the first edge of newness to be considered. Paul was bringing a new word to the world. Even to day - it blows the lid off of things when it is opened up to the fullness of its gracious presentation. The radical notion of the Reign of God doesn't make out well among us. We all need some "buffers." So, how do you talk about sex and sexuality within a culture that cannot go there...or is only able to go there in a particular way and within certain boundaries. Well, maybe you don't talk at all. Then again, maybe you touch on it as part of a greater argument. Then again...maybe you deal with it as only you know how...under the rules and guidelines, taboos and restrictions, and the understanding of the day that are a part of the culture. In that time, it may all be helpful to move into the domain of the graciousness of the Reign of God. But today, in our understanding of sexuality, rather than help to move us into that Reign, we are stuffed within a box...all of us. The sex wins out over the Word. Odd.
Connection: Maybe this is where we learn to listen. Like, "Tell me how you get to that understanding because that is not where I am and I need to listen to you." This is not easy - at least not for me. But it may be valuable in many ways throughout this day.
Open up our hearts, O God, and shake us up so that we can listen to others and yet also lift up our voices so that we may all interact with a bit of integrity even as we disagree...or agree. Amen.
Paul was inspired by God's Word in a world where sexuality was understood in a radically different way from how it is understood today... No one talked in terms of a genetic predisposition or early social conditioning and learning, or a way of life, or a nurturing, caring partnership of two people... Paul was very much speaking from and with his surrounding culture in an accommodating rather than a prophetic way. Philosophers of the day, such as Seneca and Dio Chrysostom, considered same-sex activity to be driven by dehumanizing lust. They recognized, of course, that lust was not just a problem for same-sex activity but that it plagued relationships between men and women as well. To them because sexual activity was always motivated by lust, it therefore always had to be avoided.
It is important to note that when a new word or a new idea is brought into a group of people, it is often done slowly...without tipping the boat...without pushing something down the throats of people, and with some sense of what will fly and what must be "accommodated" in order for just the first edge of newness to be considered. Paul was bringing a new word to the world. Even to day - it blows the lid off of things when it is opened up to the fullness of its gracious presentation. The radical notion of the Reign of God doesn't make out well among us. We all need some "buffers." So, how do you talk about sex and sexuality within a culture that cannot go there...or is only able to go there in a particular way and within certain boundaries. Well, maybe you don't talk at all. Then again, maybe you touch on it as part of a greater argument. Then again...maybe you deal with it as only you know how...under the rules and guidelines, taboos and restrictions, and the understanding of the day that are a part of the culture. In that time, it may all be helpful to move into the domain of the graciousness of the Reign of God. But today, in our understanding of sexuality, rather than help to move us into that Reign, we are stuffed within a box...all of us. The sex wins out over the Word. Odd.
Connection: Maybe this is where we learn to listen. Like, "Tell me how you get to that understanding because that is not where I am and I need to listen to you." This is not easy - at least not for me. But it may be valuable in many ways throughout this day.
Open up our hearts, O God, and shake us up so that we can listen to others and yet also lift up our voices so that we may all interact with a bit of integrity even as we disagree...or agree. Amen.
Friday 7 December 2007
Today we move into a section of Blount's work that deals with biblical authority within a present day issue - homosexual behavior.
The New Testament's words on homosexual behavior are also clear. They are words of condemnation; I don't try to deny that. I don't think anyone should. But they are words out of a particular context. Our context is so significantly different that I don't think the words are any longer living, but are, rather, dead words if we try to read them without contextually understanding them today.
I think this is such a wise beginning to this discussion. We cannot deny that the words are there. Yes, the word "homosexuality" isn't actually used...but any of us know what the images are meant to portray - to a point. Ah...now that is important. To a point...we know what the words portray. It carries a legitimate culture picture. But the picture is caught in time and does not move out of that time into our time quite as easily as some claim. We must be able and willing to engage in a conversation about the changes of context and the way that change helps us to determine if a word is alive or dead. If the conversation does not happen, we will remain locked in our corners and never meet up with one another. That may seem to bring some peace but it is really nothing more than avoidance...and that, is never peace. We must grapple with the notion that the text does say what is says...but...what is being said in the day it was written and what can it be saying in the day of you and me who are reading it now. In many ways, the conversation we are going to be having in the next week in these devotions will be quite in line with what Blount brought forth in regard to interpretation and contextualization among the African American slaves.
Connection: We must enter into conversation with those who do not read like us. We must remember that the word has life within the dialogical action of a community where each side is honored and yet there may be disagreements. That is not an easy place to be. But it is necessary.
Living Word, do not let us hinder your Spirit as we look to the Scriptures to find this Word that brings us rest and truth. For it is in the truthfulness of your life-giving word that we begin to take part in the new creation that we do not control. Come, Holy Spirit, come. Amen.
The New Testament's words on homosexual behavior are also clear. They are words of condemnation; I don't try to deny that. I don't think anyone should. But they are words out of a particular context. Our context is so significantly different that I don't think the words are any longer living, but are, rather, dead words if we try to read them without contextually understanding them today.
I think this is such a wise beginning to this discussion. We cannot deny that the words are there. Yes, the word "homosexuality" isn't actually used...but any of us know what the images are meant to portray - to a point. Ah...now that is important. To a point...we know what the words portray. It carries a legitimate culture picture. But the picture is caught in time and does not move out of that time into our time quite as easily as some claim. We must be able and willing to engage in a conversation about the changes of context and the way that change helps us to determine if a word is alive or dead. If the conversation does not happen, we will remain locked in our corners and never meet up with one another. That may seem to bring some peace but it is really nothing more than avoidance...and that, is never peace. We must grapple with the notion that the text does say what is says...but...what is being said in the day it was written and what can it be saying in the day of you and me who are reading it now. In many ways, the conversation we are going to be having in the next week in these devotions will be quite in line with what Blount brought forth in regard to interpretation and contextualization among the African American slaves.
Connection: We must enter into conversation with those who do not read like us. We must remember that the word has life within the dialogical action of a community where each side is honored and yet there may be disagreements. That is not an easy place to be. But it is necessary.
Living Word, do not let us hinder your Spirit as we look to the Scriptures to find this Word that brings us rest and truth. For it is in the truthfulness of your life-giving word that we begin to take part in the new creation that we do not control. Come, Holy Spirit, come. Amen.
Thursday 6 December 2007
Today is the last piece in the section on the living word among African American slaves. Bount wants to make sure we heard that the scriptures were not simply dismissed when they spoke a word about slaves that was a dead word for them.
This doesn't mean that the New Testament text lost its sense of authority for the slaves. But it does mean that their perception of God in their midst was more authoritative. The text must be in line with God's being and God's agenda of liberation. Where it is not, the text, because of the frailty of the humans who composed it, must be challenged and, if need be, resisted as much as the system of slavery it was purported to support. In this way the slaves were perhaps the first biblical critics in America to read so aggressively from "in front of th text" that they could recognize the text for what it really was, the words first century human writers employed in their attempt to convey the Word of the eternal God.
The text stays vital and yet how it is read and how it is received comes into play so that it can be taken as a word that is either alive or dead at the time of the reading. If a passage is so out of tune with what is the context of the day of reading that it cannot be accepted within the realm of the great "agenda of liberation," then we need to look at it again and come to grips with how or if it is still able to speak to us. Again, we must remember that we are talking about specific texts becoming dead words - not all of Scripture. In fact, as we read here, the African American slaves knew the whole book...and what they read in the whole story that brought them life and hope and vision was not being heard in these texts that were locked in the slavery of the mindset of the day of writing. The powerful word of Scripture brings about a new world, and yet, we must continue to stay focused on what is the power that comes from this word...what makes it alive...what then, causes it to be quite dead and lost among us.
Connection: Remember that this way of looking at Scripture is not the way some would like to hear it. So, how do we talk about this faithful encounter with Scripture that is not willing to buy the message in each verse hook-line-and-sinker? Obviously there are folk out there who find it very difficult to question anything in the "book." And yet it is necessary.
Lord of the Living Word, we are fed by the Scriptures and we are encouraged for new life as we encounter the stories of your faithfulness through the ages in the lives of our ancestors. Today as we continue our faithful journeys we long to hear that life-giving word that will always be a word of life and liberation and a call to faithfulness. Amen.
This doesn't mean that the New Testament text lost its sense of authority for the slaves. But it does mean that their perception of God in their midst was more authoritative. The text must be in line with God's being and God's agenda of liberation. Where it is not, the text, because of the frailty of the humans who composed it, must be challenged and, if need be, resisted as much as the system of slavery it was purported to support. In this way the slaves were perhaps the first biblical critics in America to read so aggressively from "in front of th text" that they could recognize the text for what it really was, the words first century human writers employed in their attempt to convey the Word of the eternal God.
The text stays vital and yet how it is read and how it is received comes into play so that it can be taken as a word that is either alive or dead at the time of the reading. If a passage is so out of tune with what is the context of the day of reading that it cannot be accepted within the realm of the great "agenda of liberation," then we need to look at it again and come to grips with how or if it is still able to speak to us. Again, we must remember that we are talking about specific texts becoming dead words - not all of Scripture. In fact, as we read here, the African American slaves knew the whole book...and what they read in the whole story that brought them life and hope and vision was not being heard in these texts that were locked in the slavery of the mindset of the day of writing. The powerful word of Scripture brings about a new world, and yet, we must continue to stay focused on what is the power that comes from this word...what makes it alive...what then, causes it to be quite dead and lost among us.
Connection: Remember that this way of looking at Scripture is not the way some would like to hear it. So, how do we talk about this faithful encounter with Scripture that is not willing to buy the message in each verse hook-line-and-sinker? Obviously there are folk out there who find it very difficult to question anything in the "book." And yet it is necessary.
Lord of the Living Word, we are fed by the Scriptures and we are encouraged for new life as we encounter the stories of your faithfulness through the ages in the lives of our ancestors. Today as we continue our faithful journeys we long to hear that life-giving word that will always be a word of life and liberation and a call to faithfulness. Amen.
Sunday, December 2, 2007
Wednesday 5 December 2007
We continue with a living word from the perspective of the African American Slaves.
Professor Jacquelyn Grant is correct in her assessment of what is gong on here when she writes, "What we see here is perhaps more than a mere rejection of a White preacher's interpretation of the Bible, but an exercise in internal critique of the Bible." In other words, if the biblical words on slavery were the last word on slavery, they were too dead a word to keep living for them.
The Word "too dead to keep living for them." That is a powerful notion and can seem almost offensive. And yet, if the word destroys life, how can it be the Word? Such a word is and must be 'dead among us' for it is antithetical to what is known among us as the "Living Word" - Jesus in the flesh. I was just wondering - imagining - what this Living Word would be among us today. Part of that imagination is to settle for a Living Word that would be no different from that of biblical days. It would be a word radically alive and life-giving even if people were resisting the freedom with which this life is given away to all. Are we content with being a lynching people with a word that cannot bring life. Never! Never must we use the Word to create an atmosphere of death and fear and coercion! We must listen to the voices around us who continually call for the Living Word to really bring on the new life.
Connection: Listen for the offer of new life...listen for the voices that try to dismantle it. It is a discipline that is greatly needed among us.
Come, O Lord, and stir us up so that as we walk through this day we will come to know your voice as times change and your loving presence seeks to persist among us. Amen.
Professor Jacquelyn Grant is correct in her assessment of what is gong on here when she writes, "What we see here is perhaps more than a mere rejection of a White preacher's interpretation of the Bible, but an exercise in internal critique of the Bible." In other words, if the biblical words on slavery were the last word on slavery, they were too dead a word to keep living for them.
The Word "too dead to keep living for them." That is a powerful notion and can seem almost offensive. And yet, if the word destroys life, how can it be the Word? Such a word is and must be 'dead among us' for it is antithetical to what is known among us as the "Living Word" - Jesus in the flesh. I was just wondering - imagining - what this Living Word would be among us today. Part of that imagination is to settle for a Living Word that would be no different from that of biblical days. It would be a word radically alive and life-giving even if people were resisting the freedom with which this life is given away to all. Are we content with being a lynching people with a word that cannot bring life. Never! Never must we use the Word to create an atmosphere of death and fear and coercion! We must listen to the voices around us who continually call for the Living Word to really bring on the new life.
Connection: Listen for the offer of new life...listen for the voices that try to dismantle it. It is a discipline that is greatly needed among us.
Come, O Lord, and stir us up so that as we walk through this day we will come to know your voice as times change and your loving presence seeks to persist among us. Amen.
Tuesday 4 December 2007
Today we continue with how the African American slaves insisted on a living Word - from "The Last Word on Biblical Authority" by Brian Blount.
And then there was the group of slaves in Georgia, in 1833, who listened to a white preacher go on and on about Paul's text on Philemon: "...According to the report...half of the Negro group walked out with the point of the sermon became clear, and the rest stayed mostly for the purpose of telling that they were sure there was no such passage in the Bible."
Of course, it is in the Bible. It's your bible and my Bible, and it was in the slaves' Bible. but they contested it! They walked out on it! Why? Because theirs was the living Bible.
For those who long for the word of life that is a promise for new life, you cannot sell them or offer them a dead word. After awhile, they will leave...and so should any of us. It is quite common for me to talk on the phone to someone who cannot go back to church...or cannot go to churches where the preacher is so stuck in a context 'from of old,' that they will not and cannot begin to see and hear the word as a living and breathing reality from which communities are brought to this new life in Christ. When a community that gathers around the word is unwilling to listen again to the word that offers life to all, and they insist on reading for their own benefit and against others, it is time to walk out. Blessed are they who have been able to stay and have, because of their persistent faithfulness, transformed a congregation and helped them see the joyous life of a word alive for all.
Connection: We put our GLBT brothers and sisters through this kind of single-minded reading of the Bible. So few passages become such a focus to the life of a community that the doors are more likely to be shut than open. Imagine what would happen if we took the rich to task for our wealth as being quite contrary to following Jesus. Hmmm?
Your Word, O Life Giving Lord, continues to interrupt our world and pull us into new places so that as we engage our world we will be a part of a living word that really has the power to create new life. To you we give our thanks and praise and ask for your ongoing presence among us. Amen.
And then there was the group of slaves in Georgia, in 1833, who listened to a white preacher go on and on about Paul's text on Philemon: "...According to the report...half of the Negro group walked out with the point of the sermon became clear, and the rest stayed mostly for the purpose of telling that they were sure there was no such passage in the Bible."
Of course, it is in the Bible. It's your bible and my Bible, and it was in the slaves' Bible. but they contested it! They walked out on it! Why? Because theirs was the living Bible.
For those who long for the word of life that is a promise for new life, you cannot sell them or offer them a dead word. After awhile, they will leave...and so should any of us. It is quite common for me to talk on the phone to someone who cannot go back to church...or cannot go to churches where the preacher is so stuck in a context 'from of old,' that they will not and cannot begin to see and hear the word as a living and breathing reality from which communities are brought to this new life in Christ. When a community that gathers around the word is unwilling to listen again to the word that offers life to all, and they insist on reading for their own benefit and against others, it is time to walk out. Blessed are they who have been able to stay and have, because of their persistent faithfulness, transformed a congregation and helped them see the joyous life of a word alive for all.
Connection: We put our GLBT brothers and sisters through this kind of single-minded reading of the Bible. So few passages become such a focus to the life of a community that the doors are more likely to be shut than open. Imagine what would happen if we took the rich to task for our wealth as being quite contrary to following Jesus. Hmmm?
Your Word, O Life Giving Lord, continues to interrupt our world and pull us into new places so that as we engage our world we will be a part of a living word that really has the power to create new life. To you we give our thanks and praise and ask for your ongoing presence among us. Amen.
Monday 3 December 2007
Brian Blount continues to write about the last word on Biblical authority with a look at interpretation within the community of the African American Slave.
...they realized that human beings interpreted (God's) story and put God's holy Word into their own contextually influenced human words. So when the slave owners talked about the Bible saying that slaves ought to obey their masters, the slaves resisted not just the slave owners but the biblical words and the biblical authors themselves.
Here's a wonderful piece by Howard Thurman about his grandmother's outlook on scripture.
"My regular chore was to do all the reading for my grandmother - she could neither read nor write... With a feeling of great temerity I asked her one day why it was that she would not let me read any of the Pauline letters... 'During the days of slavery," she said, "the master's minister would occasionally hold services for the slaves....Always the white minister used as his text something from Paul. At least three or four times a year he used as a text: 'Slaves be obedient to them that are your masters..., as unto Christ.' Then he would go on to show how, if we were good and happy slaves, God would bless us. I promised my Make that if I ever learned to read and if freedom ever came, I would not read that part of the Bible."
Here is an illiterate woman who knows instinctively that a last word is too dead a word to keep living for her.
It seems as though we can come to the point when the word is not a living word. It is dead. It is meaningless. It is offensive. It is offensive not merely to the hearer, but to the essence of the Scripture. I would offer the comment that the Good News is not able to be heard because something other than the Good News is being offered up to the people. People can hear the absence of Good News. It is lifeless and it reflects the present life context rather than the expansiveness of the Reign of God. When this kind of word is given power over any of us, it does not create life. I would say that it resists new life - if not trying to completely kill it off. What is particularly powerful about the story of Thurman's grandmother is that the "word" served as a prostitute that could be owned by the master and therefore serve the master rather than create a community of the true Master of the Reign of God that continues to cause life - new life - to spring up even when the status quo attempts to rest on last words.
Connection: We have all heard these "last words" and we know how they halt life. We probably all have friends or relatives who have been slammed by such a word and have, like Thurman's grandmother, resisted its perpetuation. May we be so bold to walk through the day within such an empowering freedom.
By your Word, O God, we come to face our own lives with an openness that invites us to question what is being said. Within those questions, our conversations with you are allowed to blossom and grown because we are not merely individuals reciting the word rather than living it. For you Word, we give you thanks and ask for your encouraging Spirit to open our minds and hearts to you alone. Amen.
...they realized that human beings interpreted (God's) story and put God's holy Word into their own contextually influenced human words. So when the slave owners talked about the Bible saying that slaves ought to obey their masters, the slaves resisted not just the slave owners but the biblical words and the biblical authors themselves.
Here's a wonderful piece by Howard Thurman about his grandmother's outlook on scripture.
"My regular chore was to do all the reading for my grandmother - she could neither read nor write... With a feeling of great temerity I asked her one day why it was that she would not let me read any of the Pauline letters... 'During the days of slavery," she said, "the master's minister would occasionally hold services for the slaves....Always the white minister used as his text something from Paul. At least three or four times a year he used as a text: 'Slaves be obedient to them that are your masters..., as unto Christ.' Then he would go on to show how, if we were good and happy slaves, God would bless us. I promised my Make that if I ever learned to read and if freedom ever came, I would not read that part of the Bible."
Here is an illiterate woman who knows instinctively that a last word is too dead a word to keep living for her.
It seems as though we can come to the point when the word is not a living word. It is dead. It is meaningless. It is offensive. It is offensive not merely to the hearer, but to the essence of the Scripture. I would offer the comment that the Good News is not able to be heard because something other than the Good News is being offered up to the people. People can hear the absence of Good News. It is lifeless and it reflects the present life context rather than the expansiveness of the Reign of God. When this kind of word is given power over any of us, it does not create life. I would say that it resists new life - if not trying to completely kill it off. What is particularly powerful about the story of Thurman's grandmother is that the "word" served as a prostitute that could be owned by the master and therefore serve the master rather than create a community of the true Master of the Reign of God that continues to cause life - new life - to spring up even when the status quo attempts to rest on last words.
Connection: We have all heard these "last words" and we know how they halt life. We probably all have friends or relatives who have been slammed by such a word and have, like Thurman's grandmother, resisted its perpetuation. May we be so bold to walk through the day within such an empowering freedom.
By your Word, O God, we come to face our own lives with an openness that invites us to question what is being said. Within those questions, our conversations with you are allowed to blossom and grown because we are not merely individuals reciting the word rather than living it. For you Word, we give you thanks and ask for your encouraging Spirit to open our minds and hearts to you alone. Amen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)