Here’s some more info about the concept for a book God and I sketched out today (October 8, 2008)
Title: “gods of Metal – Hearts of Stone: a pastor reads the clobber passages”
Chapter outline:
1) Strange bedfellows: how incest, child sacrifice, man-sex and bestiality are linked together in Leviticus 18 and 20 (hint: it’s not about sex)
a) Unpacking Leviticus 18 – incest laundry list followed by unlikely trio (preamble & postlude)
b) Leviticus 20 adds and deletions – embedding the trio and the new order of the list
c) Where else Molek appears: Jeremiah, Isaac, and Moses (Ex 22)
d) Where else bestiality appears: Dt 27 (another 10) and the tauromorph (Ex 32 and 1 Ki 12)
e) The needy of Ex 22 and Dt 27 and Lev 19
f) Lev 20 and the punishment that fits the crime (see also Dt 27 curses)
2) Stranger in a strange world: the girls that didn’t make the list (and why we don’t notice them)
a) Daughters unprotected – adultery and property rights – this is a different world
b) Rethinking the list – when is this happening? Vulnerability and sleeping with the enemy.
c) Dishonor in Lev 18 and 20 – who is harmed and who cares
d) Rape and its aftermath
e) Sodom and Dinah – and restoring Benjamin
3) Unlocking the adjective code: man-sex and other detestable abominations in the Hebrew Bible (looks are deceiving)
a) Review of the adjectives used in Lev 18/20
b) The consistent link between “detestable” and idolatry
c) Other (surprising) detestable things
d) Why detestable? (and why even asking that question makes all the difference)
4) (Not) idol chatter: how the Ten Commandments bless the beasts and the children (and why we should care)
a) Something here about child and animal sacrifice?
5) Through a glass darkly: Tamar and the abundance of bronze at the tabernacle gate (ask the dogs and whores whose it is)
6) Exchanging glory: how reading Romans 1 and Leviticus 18/20 makes sense of man-sex (don’t skip the intro!)
a) Draw on some other exchange passages
7) The Sin of Sodom: Ezekiel’s wheel and the dust on Jesus’ sandals (why reading trumps assumptions)
Id’ love to know what you think.
Peace,
Bo
Friday, December 19, 2008
Notes for Luke 7:36-50
Key Verse: Luke 7:47 “I tell you, her sins—and they are many—have been forgiven, so she has shown me much love. But a person who is forgiven little shows only little love.”
Of all the Gospels, Luke’s account most troubles those of us who consider ourselves to be among the privileged/blessed caste of society. When young Mary sings her “Magnificat” to her cousin, Elizabeth, she celebrates that with the birth of Jesus (and God’s calling to her to give birth to the Messiah), God “has done mighty deeds with His arm; He has scattered those who were proud in the thoughts of their heart. He has brought down rulers from their thrones, And has exalted those who were humble. He has filled the hungry with good things; And sent away the rich empty-handed” (Luke 1:51-53). He has Jesus preaching not on a Mount, as in Matthew 5-8, but on a level plain—where Luke includes not only the blessings for the poor but a series of woes (curses) for the rich, well-fed and comfortable (Luke 6:17 and 24-26).
Luke surprises us. Where Matthew (5:32) allows men to divorce their wives in cases of sexual immorality, Luke (16:18) makes no allowance for such an exception. Only Luke includes women among the disciples of Jesus—and names them (8:1-3). Matthew repeats Mark’s story of Jesus’ invitation to the young man to “go, and sell your possessions and give to the poor” in order to inherit/obtain eternal life (Mark 10:21; Matthew 19:21). But in Luke, Jesus invites the disciples and everyone in his “little flock” to do this (Luke 12:33). And in Acts 2:44-45, Doctor Luke reports that the post-resurrection followers did not think that Jesus was merely speaking metaphorically!
Luke records more parables (28—compared to 23 in Matthew and 9 in Mark)—and more parables not found in the other Gospels (15!). These include challenging teachings of Jesus that stretch self-proclaimed insiders to comprehend a larger and more inclusive Kingdom of Heaven: the Good Samaritan (10:30-37), the Rich Fool (12:16-21), the Great Banquet (14:16-24), the Lost (prodigal) Son (15:11-32), the Rich Man and Lazarus (16:19-31), and the Pharisee and tax collector (18:10-14).
Luke alone begins Jesus’ ministry with his rejection in Nazareth, when he read from the scroll of Isaiah and proclaimed the ancient prophecy that “the Spirit of the Lord had anointed me to proclaim Good News to the poor... freedom for the prisoners (and oppressed), and recovery of sight for the blind” had been fulfilled as they heard him read it (Luke 4:14-21). And in chapter 24, the Gentile doctor Luke, who traveled with Paul on his missionary journey, concludes his Gospel with a post-resurrection story of how two unknown disciples encountered the risen Lord Jesus when they invited a stranger to join them for supper (Luke 24).
In 7:36-50, Luke profoundly edits the story of Jesus’ anointing found in Mark 14:3-9, Matthew 26:6-13, and John 12:1-8. He completely alters the location, time, and characters, retaining a bare skeleton (reclined, woman, alabaster vial of perfume, Jesus, denarii, and anointed), into which Luke inserts a story similar to a parable found in Matthew (18:23-24) but not Mark, the theme of which (in Matthew) is: “forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors”.
Luke’s version compares the reception Jesus receives from his Pharisee host and a “woman in the city who was a sinner” who crashes the party with perfume and tears (in a story that parallels the parable of the Pharisee and tax collector in Luke 18:10-14. Jesus reproves the Pharisee for the inhospitality that reveals the poverty of his love, and blesses the woman whose faith (and grateful response to God’s forgiveness) has saved her.
The Pharisee mocks Jesus as a poor prophet for refusing to treat the woman with contempt. Yet Jesus, who has in the previous passage commented on the character of the prophet John, proves by his interpretation of what their respective actions demonstrate about the state of their hearts that he is indeed a true prophet, worthy of our welcome (see Luke 4:24) with water, a kiss, and anointing oil.
Questions for Reflection
If you invited Jesus to your home for dinner, what kind of welcome would you give the Son of God? Who would you have the most difficult time accepting as a party crasher in desperate love with Jesus?
What sin in your life can you offer to God for forgiveness and healing? Can you imagine what your life would be like if you accepted God’s invitation to be free? What do you think Jesus would prophecy about you? About Skyline Church?
Luke loves to tell stories about dinner parties that bring together unlikely guests and nourish them all with blessings. When have you attended such a dinner? What happened? How did you encounter Jesus?
Of all the Gospels, Luke’s account most troubles those of us who consider ourselves to be among the privileged/blessed caste of society. When young Mary sings her “Magnificat” to her cousin, Elizabeth, she celebrates that with the birth of Jesus (and God’s calling to her to give birth to the Messiah), God “has done mighty deeds with His arm; He has scattered those who were proud in the thoughts of their heart. He has brought down rulers from their thrones, And has exalted those who were humble. He has filled the hungry with good things; And sent away the rich empty-handed” (Luke 1:51-53). He has Jesus preaching not on a Mount, as in Matthew 5-8, but on a level plain—where Luke includes not only the blessings for the poor but a series of woes (curses) for the rich, well-fed and comfortable (Luke 6:17 and 24-26).
Luke surprises us. Where Matthew (5:32) allows men to divorce their wives in cases of sexual immorality, Luke (16:18) makes no allowance for such an exception. Only Luke includes women among the disciples of Jesus—and names them (8:1-3). Matthew repeats Mark’s story of Jesus’ invitation to the young man to “go, and sell your possessions and give to the poor” in order to inherit/obtain eternal life (Mark 10:21; Matthew 19:21). But in Luke, Jesus invites the disciples and everyone in his “little flock” to do this (Luke 12:33). And in Acts 2:44-45, Doctor Luke reports that the post-resurrection followers did not think that Jesus was merely speaking metaphorically!
Luke records more parables (28—compared to 23 in Matthew and 9 in Mark)—and more parables not found in the other Gospels (15!). These include challenging teachings of Jesus that stretch self-proclaimed insiders to comprehend a larger and more inclusive Kingdom of Heaven: the Good Samaritan (10:30-37), the Rich Fool (12:16-21), the Great Banquet (14:16-24), the Lost (prodigal) Son (15:11-32), the Rich Man and Lazarus (16:19-31), and the Pharisee and tax collector (18:10-14).
Luke alone begins Jesus’ ministry with his rejection in Nazareth, when he read from the scroll of Isaiah and proclaimed the ancient prophecy that “the Spirit of the Lord had anointed me to proclaim Good News to the poor... freedom for the prisoners (and oppressed), and recovery of sight for the blind” had been fulfilled as they heard him read it (Luke 4:14-21). And in chapter 24, the Gentile doctor Luke, who traveled with Paul on his missionary journey, concludes his Gospel with a post-resurrection story of how two unknown disciples encountered the risen Lord Jesus when they invited a stranger to join them for supper (Luke 24).
In 7:36-50, Luke profoundly edits the story of Jesus’ anointing found in Mark 14:3-9, Matthew 26:6-13, and John 12:1-8. He completely alters the location, time, and characters, retaining a bare skeleton (reclined, woman, alabaster vial of perfume, Jesus, denarii, and anointed), into which Luke inserts a story similar to a parable found in Matthew (18:23-24) but not Mark, the theme of which (in Matthew) is: “forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors”.
Luke’s version compares the reception Jesus receives from his Pharisee host and a “woman in the city who was a sinner” who crashes the party with perfume and tears (in a story that parallels the parable of the Pharisee and tax collector in Luke 18:10-14. Jesus reproves the Pharisee for the inhospitality that reveals the poverty of his love, and blesses the woman whose faith (and grateful response to God’s forgiveness) has saved her.
The Pharisee mocks Jesus as a poor prophet for refusing to treat the woman with contempt. Yet Jesus, who has in the previous passage commented on the character of the prophet John, proves by his interpretation of what their respective actions demonstrate about the state of their hearts that he is indeed a true prophet, worthy of our welcome (see Luke 4:24) with water, a kiss, and anointing oil.
Questions for Reflection
If you invited Jesus to your home for dinner, what kind of welcome would you give the Son of God? Who would you have the most difficult time accepting as a party crasher in desperate love with Jesus?
What sin in your life can you offer to God for forgiveness and healing? Can you imagine what your life would be like if you accepted God’s invitation to be free? What do you think Jesus would prophecy about you? About Skyline Church?
Luke loves to tell stories about dinner parties that bring together unlikely guests and nourish them all with blessings. When have you attended such a dinner? What happened? How did you encounter Jesus?
No Room in the Inn this Christmas
This Advent Season at Skyline, I reflect on the ways that the debate over the morality of sexual/affectional orientation and gender identity are playing out in our country and in the church - and especially here at home at Skyline Church. While most people seem to agree that homosexual persons should be tolerated (I am among those who call the church to go beyond toleration to respect) and not condemned or judged - many Christians believe the Bible (and God) condemns homosexuality as a sin, and that people who disagree with them have traded scriptural morality and the faith in favor of popular, politically correct liberalism.
Newsweek magazine published a Dec. 6, 2008 cover story by Lisa Miller about homosexuality, the Bible, and gay marriage. The article provoked a predictable storm of responses representing a full spectrum of outrage and agreement - including many who recognized the need for thoughtful exploration and conversation. You'll find a great follow-up article with comments from a United Methodist and Baptist pastor representing both "sides" here.
Yet even in that debate, the underlying assumption is that we must choose between fidelity to the "clear" judgment of scripture (which - this logic assumes without question - condemns homosexuality) and soft-hearted, "anything goes" compassion toward and acceptance of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered persons and their "lifestyle" (which - it goes without question in this logic - is sinful and depraved). As a pastor and theologian who believes that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality, I find this presumption on the part of those who disagree with me a ploy to end the conversation before it even begins.
In his excellent book, What Christians Think About Homosexuality: Six Representative Viewpoints (Bibal Press, 1999), L.R. Holben surveys six (not just two) Christian points of view on Homosexuality, each of which draws on biblical and theological perceptions. While I certainly acknowledge that not all scriptural interpretations are equally faithful, to argue de facto that an interpretation contrary to the one you hold is invalid or immoral seems to me to be more self-serving than an honest pursuit of faithful understanding.
In our community conversation about how God calls us to live at Skyline, we seem to agree that homophobia is bad, and that we should treat homosexual persons "just like everyone else", regardless of what we believe scripture teaches about homosexuality. For some (including most who hold to a conservative understanding that the Bible condemns homosexuality), that agreement should render the rest of the debate moot. In fact, they express great fear about having the conversation at all. Shouldn't it be good enough that we are nice to one another?
Of course, some of these people disagree about what being nice means. Some argue that while they agree we should not bar the doors to LGBT folk, we should prohibit them from joining (until they repent and change or become celibate), or if we allow them to join, we should prohibit them from doing some things that heterosexual members can do (like lead, teach, or preach) because they are a particularly stubborn form of sinner. Here, of course, lies the problem (if you happen to be a homosexual follower of Christ, or a pastor who loves and respects them).
The common theme for everyone in this camp is not only an exclusive claim to faithful (moral) scriptural interpretation, but a refusal to acknowledge that LGBT persons are marginalized in the church at all. These persons of faith question the need for labeling anyone in our welcome statement because they perceive that singling out LGBT persons accords them a kind of unfair, privileged status in our church (or that it promotes "pro-gay theology" or the "homosexual agenda"). Some even argue that if we specifically welcome LGBT persons, then they (who are heterosexual) will not be welcome in our church.
As a pastor here, I believe that God is calling me to invite our church to consider another way to live together before a watching world. I'm not deluded enough to think that my understanding and interpretation of scripture would convince everyone at Skyline to agree with me that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality - but I do hold onto the hope that we could all acknowledge that the sparse scriptural foundation of a traditional Christian condemnation of homosexuality is not as clear as we have been taught to believe. If so, I pray that we could live out scripture as a community of Christ followers where there is no more Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male or female, black or white, gay or straight - where we could simply all be Christians - one in Christ Jesus.
When Paul wrote the verse I've paraphrased in Galatians 3:28, he used specific labels to paint a picture of a more whole community of faith - Gentile, slave, female. He followed a scriptural tradition of naming the nameless and marginalized in order to ensure their place in God's Kingdom, just as Jesus did in the beatitudes on the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5:3-12, following in the tradition of the prophets (see, for instance, Zephaniah 3:12) and the lawgiver, Moses (see Exodus 23:9-11).
Jesus recognized the need to call attention to the fact that the community that called itself by God's name had become unfaithful in closing the doors to the kingdom to lepers, tax collectors, the poor, children, women, and of course, Samaritans. In one of his most pointed parables about God's judgment, Jesus used a series of labels to name the people with whom he particularly identifies in our world: the hungry, the thirsty, the stranger, the naked, the sick, and the imprisoned (Matthew 25:31-46).
And in our own time? What could be more relevant to our faith practice that the way we will live together as an Advent community - a community that acknowledges differences in our gender identity and sexual orientation, not as deviations from some perceived norm (like heterosexuality), but as yet another example of the extraordinary diversity of God's good creation. What could be more appropriate during the season when we remember the Holy family could find no welcome in the inn - than that we experience in our own embrace of a "stranger" a "welcome home" from our awesome and living God?
Pastor Bo Gordy-Stith
Third Week of Advent, 2008
Newsweek magazine published a Dec. 6, 2008 cover story by Lisa Miller about homosexuality, the Bible, and gay marriage. The article provoked a predictable storm of responses representing a full spectrum of outrage and agreement - including many who recognized the need for thoughtful exploration and conversation. You'll find a great follow-up article with comments from a United Methodist and Baptist pastor representing both "sides" here.
Yet even in that debate, the underlying assumption is that we must choose between fidelity to the "clear" judgment of scripture (which - this logic assumes without question - condemns homosexuality) and soft-hearted, "anything goes" compassion toward and acceptance of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered persons and their "lifestyle" (which - it goes without question in this logic - is sinful and depraved). As a pastor and theologian who believes that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality, I find this presumption on the part of those who disagree with me a ploy to end the conversation before it even begins.
In his excellent book, What Christians Think About Homosexuality: Six Representative Viewpoints (Bibal Press, 1999), L.R. Holben surveys six (not just two) Christian points of view on Homosexuality, each of which draws on biblical and theological perceptions. While I certainly acknowledge that not all scriptural interpretations are equally faithful, to argue de facto that an interpretation contrary to the one you hold is invalid or immoral seems to me to be more self-serving than an honest pursuit of faithful understanding.
In our community conversation about how God calls us to live at Skyline, we seem to agree that homophobia is bad, and that we should treat homosexual persons "just like everyone else", regardless of what we believe scripture teaches about homosexuality. For some (including most who hold to a conservative understanding that the Bible condemns homosexuality), that agreement should render the rest of the debate moot. In fact, they express great fear about having the conversation at all. Shouldn't it be good enough that we are nice to one another?
Of course, some of these people disagree about what being nice means. Some argue that while they agree we should not bar the doors to LGBT folk, we should prohibit them from joining (until they repent and change or become celibate), or if we allow them to join, we should prohibit them from doing some things that heterosexual members can do (like lead, teach, or preach) because they are a particularly stubborn form of sinner. Here, of course, lies the problem (if you happen to be a homosexual follower of Christ, or a pastor who loves and respects them).
The common theme for everyone in this camp is not only an exclusive claim to faithful (moral) scriptural interpretation, but a refusal to acknowledge that LGBT persons are marginalized in the church at all. These persons of faith question the need for labeling anyone in our welcome statement because they perceive that singling out LGBT persons accords them a kind of unfair, privileged status in our church (or that it promotes "pro-gay theology" or the "homosexual agenda"). Some even argue that if we specifically welcome LGBT persons, then they (who are heterosexual) will not be welcome in our church.
As a pastor here, I believe that God is calling me to invite our church to consider another way to live together before a watching world. I'm not deluded enough to think that my understanding and interpretation of scripture would convince everyone at Skyline to agree with me that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality - but I do hold onto the hope that we could all acknowledge that the sparse scriptural foundation of a traditional Christian condemnation of homosexuality is not as clear as we have been taught to believe. If so, I pray that we could live out scripture as a community of Christ followers where there is no more Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male or female, black or white, gay or straight - where we could simply all be Christians - one in Christ Jesus.
When Paul wrote the verse I've paraphrased in Galatians 3:28, he used specific labels to paint a picture of a more whole community of faith - Gentile, slave, female. He followed a scriptural tradition of naming the nameless and marginalized in order to ensure their place in God's Kingdom, just as Jesus did in the beatitudes on the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5:3-12, following in the tradition of the prophets (see, for instance, Zephaniah 3:12) and the lawgiver, Moses (see Exodus 23:9-11).
Jesus recognized the need to call attention to the fact that the community that called itself by God's name had become unfaithful in closing the doors to the kingdom to lepers, tax collectors, the poor, children, women, and of course, Samaritans. In one of his most pointed parables about God's judgment, Jesus used a series of labels to name the people with whom he particularly identifies in our world: the hungry, the thirsty, the stranger, the naked, the sick, and the imprisoned (Matthew 25:31-46).
And in our own time? What could be more relevant to our faith practice that the way we will live together as an Advent community - a community that acknowledges differences in our gender identity and sexual orientation, not as deviations from some perceived norm (like heterosexuality), but as yet another example of the extraordinary diversity of God's good creation. What could be more appropriate during the season when we remember the Holy family could find no welcome in the inn - than that we experience in our own embrace of a "stranger" a "welcome home" from our awesome and living God?
Pastor Bo Gordy-Stith
Third Week of Advent, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)