In the previous post (The Need to be Affirmed, August 28, 2023), I commented on the notion of affirming and nonaffirming churches when it comes to same-sex sexual behavior.  Some churches are affirming and some are not.  Some theologians are affirming (e.g. Peter Gomes) and some are not (e.g. Kevin DeYoung).  Preston Sprinkle is a theologian who has studied scripture and he claims that he does not have any agenda.  He does admit that the Word of God has been used a lot to bash the LGBTQ+ community and he is not interested in doing that.  He has seen the pain that this causes.  However he also knows that The Bible is a powerful written source for all Christians because God has worked through people to produce a Divine Document that guides us in life.  His position “in a nutshell” is “I stand on truth and I stand on love” [9]*.

He has focused on Scripture from the Old Testament in the first part of Chapter Two of his book (entitled “Holy Otherness”).  He found some support for God’s preference for opposite sex marriage in Genesis 1 and 2 but not what I would describe as “overwhelming” strong support. 

Maybe nonaffirming Christians will be able to support their viewpoint with passages from the New Testament?  Sprinkle turns to Scripture from the book of Mark and parallel Scripture from Matthew.  He also turns to Ephesians and First Corinthians.

Mark 10: 2-9 and Matthew 19: 3-11 deal with Jesus being tested by the Pharisees.  They want to know His stand on the lawfulness of a man divorcing his wife.  Jesus refers to the Law of Moses.  Of course Jesus knows God’s word.  It is interesting that He argues for the permanency of marriage by referring to Genesis 1-2.  In particular He uses the “one flesh” metaphor to support the idea that man should not separate what God has joined together.  He also uses the Scripture that God “made them male and female.”  Nonaffirming Christians point to these Mark and Matthew Scriptures as evidence that sexual difference is a necessity in marriage, but Sprinkle does not agree.  He points out that Jesus is trying to make a point about divorce, not opposite-sex marriage.  “If Jesus didn’t think that sexual difference is essential for marriage, then His quotation of Genesis 1: 27 (which discusses sexual difference) is unnecessary and superfluous” [37].  So why does he include this reference in his argument supporting the permanency of marriage?  Sprinkle feels that the Jews of Jesus’ day probably felt superior to women, leaning heavily on the Genesis 1:27 “God created mankind in His own image”.  Jesus wanted to highlight the value of women by referring to the whole quote from Genesis 1: 27 “male and female He created them.”  This was not done to highlight the need for the difference of the sexes for an appropriate marriage.  It was done to show that women are equal to men.

Following this, Sprinkle turns to Ephesians 5: 21-32. The passage focuses on wives submitting to their husbands “as to the Lord”.  This passage of Scripture highlights relationships in marriage with the parallel being man’s relationship with Christ as the head of His church.  What makes this Scripture relevant to the same-sex issue is the discussion of male and female difference.  Even though men seem to have the “upper hand” with the controversial phrase “wives should submit to their husbands in everything,” Jesus goes on to say that women should be cherished.  That Scripture “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife and the two will become one flesh” [from Genesis 2: 24] occurs in verse 31.  Does its use support opposite sex preference in marriage?  Sprinkle sheds doubt on that idea.  As explained in “The Need to Be Affirmed,” the emphasis is on leaving an established family unit and creating a new family unit rather than anatomical complementarity in the sex act.  Ephesians is thought of as a passage that focuses on the superiority of men, but in Bible times, this passage is considered ground breaking regarding equality of the sexes.  One should not look at it through 2023 eyes.  “Compared to other “marriage manuals” in Paul’s day, this passage is radically egalitarian….No one in Paul’s day would have read this passage and thought he was demeaning women.  They would have been shocked, actually, at the excessive demands of the husband” [38]. 

First Corinthians 11: 2-16 seems to be similar to Ephesians in that it refers to relationships within the church.  Much of this Scripture focuses on the role of the church in the lives of men and women.  Paul talks about hierarchy of Christ as the head of man and man as the head of woman.  Respectful behavior is discussed at length with many words of advice on the actual proper covering of the head.  There is so much opposite sex reference that one might infer that opposite sex behavior is surely forbidden.   Sprinkle writes “this passage is not clearly talking about marriage…. What is clear, and the only point I want to make, is that the equal-yet-different relationship between God the Father and God the Son parallels in some way the equal-yet-different relationship between men and women [38].  With all the writing about male and female, is Paul pointing to the need for opposite sex relations?  Sprinkle feels that nonaffirming Christians do not need to make Paul say more than he is saying.  If this passage is saying negative things about same-sex relations, it is obscure at best. 

Sprinkle says the focus on sexual difference in First Corinthians seems to be more about “showcasing” the unity and diversity of the Triune God than anything else.

By the time we get to the end of Chapter 2 of his book, do we have passages that provide solid support for nonaffirming Christians?  Sprinkle thinks not: “None of the texts we have looked at were written to refute same-sex relationships” [40]. ). 

As I stated in the first paragraph of this post, Preston Sprinkle is a theologian who has studied Scripture and he claims that he does not have any agenda.  He is not looking to affirm the practice of homosexuality.  He is also not looking for evidence to support a nonaffirming stance against homosexuality. 

He is trying to be a man in the middle.  He does not like using God’s word to condemn a group of people if the evidence is not there.  He does not like twisting God’s word to affirm a group of people if the evidence is not there. 

He does know the Word of God has been used a lot to bash the LGBTQ+ community and he is not interested in doing that.  He has seen the pain that this causes.  However he also knows that Christians are in an untenable position:  “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.  The second is this:  Love your neighbor as yourself.  There is no commandment greater than these.”

Can we truly do the Greatest Commandments if our neighbor is homosexual?

Truly?   It seems that Sprinkle has serious doubts that we can do that… 

*from his book People to Be Loved: Why Homosexuality is not Just an Issue.