Questions

… To Decide if Same-Sex Partnerships Do Good or Harm

This section really isn’t that long – honest! But if you just want a quick summary of my main points please click here.

Sex and Marriage – Biblical Standards and Purposes

Scripture’s teachings are “for our good always” (Deut. 6:24, KJV). So, if same-sex marriage meets the Bible’s age-abiding standards and purposes for sex and marriage it’s reasonable to assume it’s is a good thing. If so, it should meet Jesus’s ultimate test for correctly understanding Scripture – the test of love – doing what’s for our good, not our harm.

In my earlier section on Bible, Sex & Marriage, linked here, I explained how the concept of marriage and sexual ethics evolved over the Old Testament, but was then revolutionised by the New Testament’s teaching. (For those wanting to dive even more deeply I will link here my two lengthy essays, Evolution of Sex and Marriage in the Old Testament and The New Testament’s Sex and Marriage Revolution.)

As explained earlier, I believe Genesis 2 showed us the following essentials required for suitable marriage partners:

a similar intellectual and spiritual kind, i.e. made in God’s image (basically a human being!)
partners who can help each other do life together
partners who can form the closest of lifelong kinship bonds

I believe this passage also showed us that before the Fall the original God-designed marriage model was of fully equal partners. It was only after the Fall because of human sin and the curses resulting from the Fall in Genesis 3:16 that the marriage model became unequal and patriarchal - a man lording it over his submissive wife.

This patriarchal marriage model was codified by the Law. As in other ancient cultures, this confirmed females as effectively their father’s property to be later sold to their husbands in marriage. Nearly all rights vested in the husband, who through divorce could in theory abandon her at will.

But in Matthew 19 Jesus pointed us back towards the original far better, equal marriage model. And in 1 Corinthians 7 Paul continued the revolution by radically declaring a husband’s body belonged to his wife as much as hers belonged to his. Paul had to respect the civil law of his day which still made women subject to their husbands. But in Ephesians 5 he describes a way of doing patriarchal marriage, required by civil law, in a Christ-like way. However, as he explains in Galatians 3:28, ultimately “in Christ … there is no male and female”. This did not abolish gender but it recognised sex/gender equality - that ultimately should be realised in giving men and women equal roles, abolishing the patriarchy. Men no longer have any more right to rule over women in marriage than they do in the workplace, in government or the church.

And personally I’m very happy to serve under a great female pastor in my church and an excellent female managing partner at work!

My pastor Penny above. Sadly, though flattered by the request, my work boss, Jo, has a rule that she doesn't allow her image to be associated with anything religious or political.

Society and civil law have now (in theory at least) embraced full equality of the sexes in all aspects of life, including marriage. Eve’s curse has been lifted. Alleluia! And there is therefore no longer any spiritual, social or legal reason why marriage (or any other aspect of life) has to involve the traditional gendered complementary roles of a man and a woman. But the key principle within Ephesians 5 still holds good as a guide for marriage today: “submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.” (Ephesians 5: 21)

The New Testament’s sexual ethics

The New Testament also sets some important principles of sexual ethics.

Two of these principles are summed up by Paul in 1 Thessalonians 4:3-7. I’ve referred to these as “the Thessalonian principles of sexual ethics”:

“It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control your own body in a way that is holy and honourable, not in passionate lust like the pagans, who do not know God; and that in this matter no one should wrong or take advantage of a brother or sister. The Lord will punish all those who commit such sins, as we told you and warned you before. For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life.” ‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬

So Paul’s two key principles here are:

learn to control your body sexually in a holy and honourable way, not in passionate lust
do not take sexual advantage of another person

Paul gives us further key principles of sexual ethics in 1 Corinthians 6 and 7.

In 1 Corinthians 6:16 Paul talks of forming a “one flesh union” when you have sex with another person and therefore you should not have sex with a prostitute (even though it wasn’t on the Levitical banned list). Paul seems to be saying in having sex with a prostitute a man is physically becoming one with her in a way that should only happen between marriage partners – physically becoming “one flesh”. As James Brownson points out in Bible, Gender, Sexuality, your sex with a prostitute does not actually make you married to her. It cannot completely fulfil what’s required to make the one flesh union of marriage. In fact, sex with a prostitute is an awful parody of marriage because you should not act out with your body what you’re not prepared to do with the rest of your life.

As Paul sees it, the “one flesh” union of marriage extends to a sexual union because it’s a physical demonstration of that closest of ties. It’s a bit like taking holy communion is a physical demonstration of being part of Jesus’s body. Therefore, in contrast to the Old Testament, Paul, like Jesus before him (see Matthew 19), discouraged both divorce and polygamy. Sex should be an expression of a permanent bond between two people – as it was in the beginning with Adam and Eve.

So, Paul’s writings certainly see sex as something that should be kept within marriage between two people. But what may come as a shock to some is that Paul considered sex within marriage should be enjoyed for its own sake and to prevent sexual immorality but not in order to make babies.

You won’t find a single verse of the New Testament that tells us sex is for making babies! This contrasts with the Old Testament which, after the Fall, saw the primary purpose of sex as baby making, to expand God’s kingdom on Earth by increasing his chosen people. By contrast, as we’ve seen, in the New Testament God’s new people are added to by spiritual not physical birth (Luke 8:21, John 3:3-8).

Some traditionalists bristle when it’s asserted that a key reason for marrying is to have a proper channel for sex and avoid sexual temptation (Mike Winger certainly seems to). It no doubt doesn’t sound spiritual enough. But this is exactly what the Bible itself tells us. In 1 Corinthians 7 Paul is very pragmatic about sex and marriage (as he is about so many things). He is very clear on this point as part of his rebuttal of those arguing against marriage:

“ ... since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband. The husband should fulfil his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. I say this as a concession, not as a command. I wish that all of you were as I am. But each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that. Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.” ( 1 Corinthians 7:1-9)

The Bible’s ethical standards and purposes for sex and marriage which same-sex partnerships must meet

I believe Scripture sets the following ethical standards and purposes for sex and marriage which, I hope, most traditionalists and revisionists should agree with. (For further detail please look at back at my earlier section, Bible, Sex & Marriage, linked again here):

Marriage should be a Christ-like, servant-hearted relationship where each partner submits to the needs of the other
It should involve two equal, compatible soulmates
The marriage partners should help and support each other in doing life together
It involves a permanent, covenant-bonded union of closest kinship of two people
Sex should be kept for marriage to help confirm and strengthen the “one flesh” union between the two partners
Sex should also be enjoyed within that relationship to help discipline and control sexual desires to comply with the two Thessalonian principles of sexual ethics
Those principles are to control your body sexually in a way that is holy and honourable, not in passionate lust, and to not take sexual advantage of another person.
Whilst God no longer expects or requires marriages to produce children, the marriage relationship should be a suitable place to bring up any children of the relationship.

These are, if you like, the Bible’s qualifying standards for marriage. If the evidence shows that same-sex relationships generally are incapable of meeting these scriptural standards then we should reject them as harmful and clearly against God’s will. But if the evidence shows most same-sex partnerships do meet these standards then it’s a very strong indication they may well be for our good and acceptable to God. But it’s not conclusive. Remember doing good or harm is Jesus’s ultimate test of love for how we should interpret and apply Scripture. If overall same-sex partnerships do meet these scriptural standards we would reasonably expect such relationships overall do good and prevent harm. But, it is still possible that, despite meeting these standards, overall such relationships cause harm rather than good - either for the partners themselves or others.

10 key questions to test if same-sex relationships do good or harm

The above points and my overall analysis of Scripture’s teaching led me to the following key questions. I believe the answers to them should determine whether same-sex parrnerships overall do good or harm and therefore whether they meet Jesus’s ultimate test for correctly applying Scripture – Christ’s law of love.

Do most gay people have similar sexual desires to straight people which can lead to sexual immorality or other sin?
Do most gay people share the same general need to do life with a marriage partner?
Or do all gay Christians, at least potentially, have the gift of celibacy?
The central question: can and do same-sex partnerships fulfil Scripture’s essential purposes for marriage? Equal, compatible soulmates, helping and supporting each other, permanently covenant-bonded in a close kinship union, within which sex can be enjoyed to help cement the relationship and help discipline and control sexual desires and providing a suitable place to bring up any children of the relationship?
Or is there anything fundamental about sex and marriage that same-sex couples can’t fulfil without harming themselves or others, including any children of the relationship? If so, what?
If same-sex marriage is unacceptable to God, when gay Christians struggle with their sexual desires does God heal them “straight” so they can enjoy heterosexual marriage or gift them with celibacy?
If not, how does that fit our picture of God in Jesus and his promises to his people?
Can and do people in same-sex partnerships become Christians and bare spiritual fruit?
Can and do churches which oppose or promote same-sex "marriage" thrive and grow?
Does opposing or supporting same-sex "marriage" have a positive or negative effect on the gospel’s reach?

If the answers to these questions lead to the conclusion that same-sex partnerships overall do good and prevent harm then they meet the ultimate biblical test of Christ’s love. If so, despite what we’ve previously believed, we should fully embrace and actively support covenanted same-sex partnerships as marriage in alignment with God’s will.

Conversely, if the answers show same-sex partnerships overall do harm rather than good then they fail the ultimate biblical test of Christ’s love. If so, despite what we’ve previously believed, we should reject and actively (but lovingly) oppose same-sex "marriages" as not really marriages at all.

What answers will the evidence give us? That’s what I’ll explore in my final section.