The Truth Is Out There – Mark Replies

Editor?s Note: Because Brock and I both tend to be a bit long-winded, here?s a Cliff?s Notes version of our conversation so far:

– Brock insisted homosexuality is a sin because Leviticus 20:13 says so.

– Mark provided a simple, contextual, logical, and Scriptural argument that conclusively proves Leviticus 20:13 says no such thing.

– Brock, perhaps recognizing that Mark?s argument was impossible to refute, crossed his arms, poked out his lower lip, and said, “So? I still say homosexuality is a sin!”

Brock,

My heart goes out to you, because I?ve been exactly where you are today.

Once upon a time, I, too, was a starry-eyed, twenty-something, wanna-be preacher. Like you, I was under the influence of church leaders who cared more about preserving their power than pursuing the Truth. They ignored the cultural, historical, and linguistic context of Scripture, and called that “taking the Bible at face value.” They taught me to reduce Scripture to Scrapture ? to rip out little bits of the Bible, ignore their context, and force them to support what I had already decided must be true.

At the seminary where I worked, the Dean of Education warned me, “Mark, we?re not here to teach these young men how to think. We?re here to teach them what to think.” That?s the poisonous message of Christian fundamentalism: “Turn off your hearts and brains, kids, and do as you?re told.”

Eventually, your church leaders will tell you to stop talking to me. Here’s why: they don?t want someone with your potential to know and speak the Truth, because when you do so, you threaten their precious sense of personal power. I hope you?ll stick around, though, because, as Fox Mulder used to say:

Both Fox and Jesus urged believers
to search for the truth.

And, as a certain wandering Jewish preacher used to say, “The Truth will set you free.”

That said: let?s resume our pursuit of Truth. Brock, if you?re going to get to the Truth of what the Bible has to say about homosexuality, you have to come up with something better than: “It’s sinful because I say so.”

I?m disinclined to be happy with “Because Brock Says So” for at least two reasons.

First, while I understand that “Because Brock Says So” will make a fabulous bumper sticker for folks at your church, my Bible lacks a book called “The Gospel According to Brock.”

Second, what Brock says in one place frequently contradicts what Brock says in another.

Here?s an example: earlier, you wrote, “I simply take what [the Scriptures] say and accept it as truth.”

Well, Brock, in Leviticus 20:13, the Scripture (in this case, the New Life Version) says “If a man lies with a male as if he were a woman … they must be put to death,” period. In order to be consistent, you must either:

a) embrace that plain and simple language and start slaughtering The Gays at your church (in which case I?ll bet the congregation loses its organist and at least half the men in the choir), or

b) explain why that passage may not actually teach what it appears to teach at first glance.

When you lobbed Leviticus 20:13 at me like some Scraptural hand grenade, I launched a detailed investigation of what that passage really means. I backed up my conclusions with evidence (none of which, by the way, you bothered to address): Leviticus 20:13 is part of a holiness code that must, if we are to be consistent, taken in its entirety, or rejected in its entirety. You don?t get to pick and choose little scraps of it and enforce them as you see fit.

So … when confronted by a dubious teaching, I did what any responsible student of the Scriptures would do: I checked out the Truth for myself.

By contrast: WWBD? (What Would Brock Do?)

1) Brock would change what the Bible says. For someone who claims “all Scripture is God-breathed” (something the Bible teaches) and “written by God” (something the Bible doesn?t actually teach), you play pretty fast and loose with the Word.

Where the Bible plainly says, “must be put to death,” you substituted the phrase “worthy of death.” Brock, I checked fifteen different translations and the Original Hebrew text of Leviticus 20:13. All clearly call for execution; none say ?worthy of death.?

You hoped I wouldn?t notice your little switch-a-roo, didn?t you? (In fact, the drooling, slack-jawed “devout Christians” asleep in the pews at most fundamentalist churches probably wouldn?t spot it.) But I did! In fact, I even know why you made the switch.

2) Brock would switch from a literal reading to a figurative one, because a literal one doesn?t suit his purposes. Having sneakily changed “put to death” to “worthy of death,” you then jumped from the literal reading you espouse (“I simply take what [the Scriptures] say and accept it as truth”) to a figurative one (“Ah, you see, here, where God says ?worthy of death,? He just means ?spiritual death!? That God guy! He?s such a kidder!”).

From here, Brock, that looks inconsistent at best … and dishonest at worst. You?ve cited a verse out of context, changed what it says, and then switched from a literal reading to a figurative one, because the literal words didn?t suit your purpose. If that?s not reducing Scripture to Scrapture, I don?t know what is!

So here?s where we are, Brock:

– You?ve insisted homosexuality is a sin.

– You?ve cited one out-of-context Scrapture that says no such thing.

– When I called you on it, you went so far as to change what that verse says … and then went from the literal reading you claim to love to a wildly symbolic and metaphorical reading of the text.

– And finally, without so much as a scrap of Scrapture to back up your claims, you went on to make a rambling call for The Gays to change their sexual orientations because people should be willing to give up anything, anything at all, for Jesus.

Which leads me to some parting questions:

1) Can you point to a single place in Scripture where Jesus Himself called on The Gays to give it all up for Jesus? For that matter, can you spot one single place where Jesus has anything to say about The Gays?

2) Do you, in fact, have any Scriptural basis at all for your teaching that homosexuality is sinful? (Because, so far, you?re pretty much just asking us to take your word on that one.)

If you can?t do these things, Brock, the honest thing to do is to back down and say “Ooops, I just repeated what I was told, and didn?t check it out for myself! I retract the statement.”

We?ll forgive you for it. Heck, I used to make the same mistakes myself.

A record-setting number of MadeByMark visitors and I await your reply.