Episode 14: Matthew Vines – The Bible and The Gay Christian

Episode 14 Matthew Vines – The Bible and The Gay Christian Transcript

***This transcript has been generated with a software service and may not be fully accurate. Please advise our team of any serious errors by emailing media@thebiblefornormalpeople.com***

Jared  

You’re listening to The Bible for Normal People, the only God-ordained podcast on the internet! Serious talk about the sacred book, I’m Pete Enns!

Jared  

And I’m Jared Byas!

Intro  

Jared  

Hello, normal people. Thank you for hanging with us today. Our topic is the Bible and the Gay Christian. We’re talking with Matthew Vines, who is the founder and executive director of the Reformation Project, which is a nonprofit dedicated to reforming Church teaching on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Pete  

Right! And he’s also the author of a book that came out, what, maybe two, three years ago, I think, 2014, “God and the Gay Christian,” which is his very, I guess, bridge building book on how to help people see, let’s say, the complexities of biblical interpretation, when it comes to the issue of human sexuality. And, I found this—one reason I’m very excited to have Matthew on the podcast is because, this is an issue that I think a lot of Christians keep coming back to, because so many complex things intersect here. It’s philology, that’s a boring way of saying, just what words mean in Greek and Hebrew, and what those words mean in their ancient context, and what are ancient assumptions and how does all that factor into how we read the Bible. And throw into the mix things like, the function of the law in the Old Testament for Christians today. Throw into the mix, the history of interpretation of these texts, both, you know, before the time of Christ, and certainly in the church thereafter. And how that has influenced how many people understand some of these texts. It really is sort of a roller coaster ride of interpretation, and theology, and philology, and it’s almost like, it’s a topic where a lot of these issues just come home to roost. In a way that’s also of such practical and personal importance to many people.

Jared  

Yeah. And I think that’s the important thing too, also in this, is one thing that’s interesting to me: it’s so clouded in a lot of emotion. Maybe rightly so, in personal relationships. There’s a lot at stake in a lot of these, so the emotions are high. But at root, like what you said, is it also comes down to some of these practical biblical interpretation and tools and resources and comes back to what is the Bible, and what do we do with it? So, thinking through that lens, it helps us to maybe keep our emotions in check, but also then deploy them when it’s important to do so. So, I think it’s a helpful topic. Alright, let’s get into our conversation with Matthew Vines!

Intro  

Matthew Vines  

I don’t—so in Romans 1, I’m not saying Christian should, you know, tutt tutt and not want to take Paul seriously, I think we should want to take Paul seriously. But we also have to recognize Paul’s not talking about gay Christians in Romans 1. Paul is talking about people he says, “abandon or exchange” heterosexual sex, you know, in what he describes repeatedly as you know, lustful desires.

Intro  

Pete  

Alright, Matthew, thank you for being on the podcast!

Matthew Vines  

Thank you so much for having me!

Pete  

Absolutely! You know, I’ve noticed, you know, I’ve listened to some of your YouTube stuff and read your book, “God and the Gay Christian,” I’ve noticed that you’re really like, ironic. So what’s wrong with you?

Matthew Vines  

Oh, what do you mean? 

Pete  

You need to be on the attack, man. That’s the only way you get things across in the Christian world, don’t you know that?

Matthew Vines  

I’m not sure that—that’s actually right! 

Jared  

Pete  

No, you’re probably right, trust your instincts on that one. That’s something I would do, but I’m glad you’re not, so. [Chuckles] Anyway, well listen, let’s get right into this here. You’ve had a journey, obviously, and you and your book, you talk about your family and your journey with your family coming out to them and having discussions, especially with your dad, and maybe just get us—help us understand yourself a little bit better and your journey by maybe talking about that process with your family because I think a lot of listeners haven’t had that same experience that you’ve had.

Matthew Vines  

Right. Well, in many ways, everything that I’m doing now is very deeply shaped by my family and my experience growing up, so it is worth going into some detail about. I was raised in, I was born and raised in Wichita, Kansas in a conservative, Presbyterian Church there. And my parents were both lay leaders in our church. Our church was pretty much the center of our friendships and of our life outside of home. And for me and my older sister, my… our faith in Jesus was the most important thing that my parents wanted to share with us. So we were very involved in church from a young age. And I, one of my very first memories actually, at age three, asking Jesus into my heart, to be my Lord and Savior. 

Matthew Vines  

And so I didn’t have some, I don’t really remember very much of not being Christian, I just feel like that was kind of in my DNA from the outset. And also, I would say, my parents did a really good job of living out their faith in ways that made it really appealing. And just, it was easy for me and my sister to see on a regular basis how my parents’ Christian faiths, made them better people; made them more inclined to love, and grace, and compassion, and forgiveness. And that was an easy thing to also want to be at the center of my life. So that was kind of the background in terms of our family and church.

Pete  

And then in college, you you took a leave of absence, you were what, maybe at Harvard for a couple of years. Is that right?

Matthew Vines  

Right. So I graduated from high school in Wichita. And then I went off to Harvard for college, which was a little bit of culture shock, but in many ways, good, in some ways, not as good. But one of the best differences was how completely different the environment was on campus at Harvard, when it came to LGBTQ issues. Well, that’s almost a misnomer, they weren’t issues in many ways, at least, it didn’t feel to me, it just was. And there just were openly gay professors and students. There just were, you know, married same-sex couples in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and it wasn’t controversial. Which, was a radically different experience than the environment that I had been raised in growing up. And even though I, by the time I’d left for college, I felt somewhat conflicted about my Church’s position, on the topic of same-sex relationships, it was still a transformative experience for me to get to be in a setting where all of those arguments that people will make against gayness or, you know, same-sex marriage are able to be put to the test every day, up against the reality of people’s lives. And once you’re able to do that, those arguments start to feel really unpersuasive. 

Matthew Vines  

So that, for me was, was very helpful, I got involved in the conservative Christian Fellowship, you know, at Harvard, of course, I sought out the only places that would not be accepting if I came out [Scoffs]. But it’s because I wanted to have a community that would support me in my faith. And that’s where I found most continuity with the faith that I had learned in, in church and at home growing up. But by the end of my first year at Harvard, I had really done, I really come around in terms of feeling, not only that the church that I’ve been raised in was wrong on this topic, but feeling passionate about it, and seeing this as an issue of human dignity, and justice, and equality, and wanting to be an advocate. 

Matthew Vines  

But that all, I had to do that entire 180 before I could even ask myself then, the next semester, whether or not I might actually be gay, which unfortunately, I realized very quickly, the answer was yes. And I was not pleased about that, even though I already had changed my mind, had already studied the topic, I already didn’t think there’s anything wrong with being gay, I just didn’t want to go through that, because it just presents so many obstacles in terms of everybody who’s ever been a part of your life for the most part, and how they’re going to respond to that. And I didn’t want to deal with it.

Jared  

So, your process and your experience was sort of this intellectual or maybe social process and experience, and then it was kind of personalized. And the question came to you, “Maybe I’m gay,” or the question came, “Am I gay?” So is that, right? So the mindset shifted around this, whether it was—so what were the arguments that made you change your mind specifically? Were there examples? Experiences? Teachers? How did you change that mindset first?

Matthew Vines  

Well, one argument that I have long made in the years since I’ve been doing this work publicly, that I tend to hear the most about from people is when I refer to Jesus’s teaching, in Matthew 7 in the Sermon on the Mount, where he’s talking about trees and their fruit. And he says that good trees cannot bear bad fruit and bad trees cannot bear good fruit. And by their fruit, you will recognize them and he’s referring to false teachers or false prophets. But that basic principle that we should be able to look at the fruit of a person or position, and that tells us something significant, is something that I’ve really taken to heart.

Matthew Vines  

Because what I experienced just from getting to know more at the time, just gay people, was realizing the Church’s position is incredibly harmful to gay people, and I’ve seen the tears and the destruction and the rejection, and the incredible turmoil and trauma that—that’s inflicted on so many people. So that sat incredibly uneasily with me, and really made me want to go back to the biblical text to ask whether or not what my church had told me, really lined up with what was there to be found with a deeper study of scripture. And that’s where my freshman year, even before I had even come out to myself, I just realized, as I was looking through the biblical text, I was like, I don’t think that this is quite as clear cut as people back home at church imagine that it is. And the consequences of their position are so devastating, that—that should seem to be pretty weighty, if it’s not that clear cut.

Jared  

Well let’s jump into the biblical text. I mean, The Bible for Normal People, why we’re here, but also, you know, growing up also kind of conservative, Evangelical, for me, I think that’s really important, because there’s a lot of times a confusion, or I would say argument, that, “Oh, you had an emotional experience, and so that changed-“

Pete  

Yeah, subjective or whatever-

Jared  

“-How you viewed it, it’s subjective, you were around bad influences,” and so these sorts of things. But you mentioned, it changed how you read the biblical text. And I think that’s the stumbling block for a lot of people on this particular, in this particular area. So let’s jump into that and maybe mention, Matthew, the first, what was the first, if you can remember, kind of compelling “Aha” moment you had from the scripture itself, that helped you start to change your mind about this?

Matthew Vines  

Well, there were several, so I’ll just say one that comes to mind. I remember going—to backup in time a little bit—when I was 15. I was in high school, and Kansas was going to be voting on a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. And I remember I had heard some people at school for the first time saying more sympathetic things about gay marriage and how they thought that this amendment was wrong and was discriminatory against gay people. I kind of thought about it. And I went to my dad, and I was like, so you know, Dad, how are you going to vote on this amendment? He said he was gonna vote for the ban. And I said, well, you know, don’t you think that’s discrimination, against gay people? And he said, well, you know, maybe it is, but he actually then, pulled out his Bible and opened it to Genesis chapter 19, with a story of Sodom and Gomorrah. Where you have these Angel visitors in the form of men. who go into the city of Sodom, and then the men of Sodom, threatened to gang rape the men, and then God destroys the city with fire and brimstone. So my dad just kind of read that to me, closed it, and said, well, you know, that’s why we’re against gay rights, because he or these men wanted to have sex with other men, and they were punished for it, because that’s wrong. 

Matthew Vines  

And I remember the time feeling like I don’t—that doesn’t feel quite right to me, like, I don’t really see the same thing there. But I didn’t have… I didn’t know enough, I was just kind of like, “Well, okay, that doesn’t really sound persuasive to me, but I get that that’s where you’re coming from.” And then when I was studying this in more depth, and actually, once I had come out to my dad, and he had committed to—even though he didn’t agree at the time—he’s still committed to study this issue further with me, and to actually really go back and look at scripture more carefully. And that was the first passage where he then had an “aha” moment himself and began to realize that some of the things he had imagined about that text didn’t look quite the same once his lens for reading the text was not just, “Can I find anything related to same-sex behavior?” but then his governing question at that point was, “Matthew, my son is gay, and would like to have the type of relationship that I have with my wife with another man.” Is that type of relationship spoken to in this text? And suddenly gang, the threatened gang rape of men by men, didn’t seem to be as pertinent to that question, as it had been when he was just looking for anything related to same-sex, anything. 

Matthew Vines  

So I would say that was a really important point for my dad, at least, and it was looking at things like that. I guess it’s just that question of, you know, what are the questions that you’re asking when you’re approaching the text? And for me, as those questions started to change, I think I was able to look more deeply at some of those passages.

Pete  

Well, you know, what I think… provides the energy that a lot of people feel about this issue. It’s similar, it’s not the same thing, obviously, but it’s similar, to things like evolution, the Bible is quote, “so clearly against,” something that a lot of the fear seems to be generated by this fear of losing this controlling text that helps you understand the nature of life. But what you’re doing—forgive me, you know, if I’m wrong, tell me that—you’re actually trying to look at it more carefully. The text itself. So let’s stay with Sodom and Gomorrah, what sort of things did you find there through, not just, you know, morning devotions, but you actually studied these texts-

Matthew Vines  

Right.

Pete  

-And found some things that you found were actually eliminating an interesting about what that story meant in its context. So help us and our listeners understand what you’re seeing there, because for a lot of people, this is a slam dunk issue, of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Matthew Vines  

Right. And it’s interesting, because there are plenty of other people who can’t imagine how anybody could think this is about gay people without being some foaming at the mouth, you know, bigoted person. And so, when I try to help, especially people who are LGBTQ affirming, what I try to help people see is that, there may be people who still look at this text as a warrant for their opposition to same-sex relationships, but more out of a superficial engagement with the topic than out of any malicious intent. 

Jared  

Hmm.

Matthew Vines  

So, you know, I kind of described in brief the story, do you want me to go into any more detail about the story itself? 

Pete  

Yeah! Absolutely, yeah, yeah. 

Matthew Vines  

Okay. So you know, in Genesis 18, you have God come to Abraham and Sara, promises that they will have a child. Sara laughs ff course, and then denies it. And God then tells Abraham, that he is that, you know, he’s heard the cries about the wickedness of Sodom, and so he is going to destroy Sodom, and Abraham bargains with God, not to destroy the city of Sodom, if God can find at least 10 righteous people there, he gets God down from 50 to 10. But of course, as we find out, that’s still too high a number, God then sends his two Angel visitors in the form of men, nobody wants to let them into their home for the night, except for Lot, Abraham’s nephew, who, of course, is not a native from Sodom. He’s, you know, it takes a foreign transplant who’s the only person who’s going to show any hospitality. He lets them in shows them that courtesy and hospitality. But then it says, “All the men, from every part of the city of Sodom, both young and old, surrounded the house and called out to Lot,” who, you know, “Bring out the men who came to you tonight so that we can have sex with them.” Lot says no, you shouldn’t—you can’t do anything to these men, for they’ve come in under the protection of my roof. But, you can have my virgin daughters, which is pretty disturbing to read. And something I think a lot of modern readers and Christians today wish would have come up later on, you know, when Lots described as a righteous person. 

Pete  

Matthew Vines  

As like, oh, you know, he had, that was pretty big, pretty big misstep right there. But the point is, that Lot is specifically saying—and then of course, the angels blind the men, aborting their attack plan, and Lot and his family flee, God destroys the city with fire and brimstone. But several points to notice. One, God was already planning to destroy the city of Sodom in Genesis 18. We’ve already heard about their wickedness and kind of general terms. So, the idea that there’s just a single sin of Sodom, first of all, isn’t consistent with what the rest of scripture says about the sins of Sodom being rather, you know, multi-layered, but… So what we’re seeing with the threatened gang rape, I think is more just a particularly egregious illustration of the depravity of these people. 

Matthew Vines  

But you have all of the men from every part of the city who are threatening to participate in this gang rape, so some people don’t imagine that Sodom was like the “gayborhood,” or something of the ancient Near East.

Matthew Vines  

Which, of course, is not really the case, because in fact, in ancient societies, gang rape of men by men was a common tactic of humiliation, and of domination in warfare and other hostile contexts. I mean, that still happens in modern contexts in jails, and other settings. But it was certainly used for, you know, purposes of humiliation. It’s not about primarily, you know, romantic interest or attraction. It’s not like people were like, you know, on Tinder, and we’re like, “Oh, we all want to swipe right, but we don’t believe in consent, and so we’re going to do it in a horrible way.” It has nothing to do with that kind of, you know, interest or attraction. 

Matthew Vines  

But, on top of that, you have every subsequent reference to Sodom and Gomorrah in the Bible, there are more than 20 References after Genesis 19 and not a single one says that the sin of Sodom was related to same-sex behavior. In fact, Ezekiel is the most explicit, Ezekiel quotes God in 16:49, saying, “Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom, she and her daughters were arrogant, overfed, and unconcerned, they did not help the poor and needy.” There are plenty of other texts that talk about the general depravity of Sodom. But that you know, Jeremiah 23, links with adultery, idolatry, power abuses. Amos and Zephaniah compare it to oppressing the poor, as well as pride and mockery. There are two texts in the New Testament that do refer to sexual sin in general, in reference to the sin of Sodom, one is Second Peter 2 Verse 7, which says that “Lot was greatly distressed by the central conduct of the wicked,” and one is Jude 7.

Pete  

Pete  

Jude, yeah, and those two texts are connected. 

Matthew Vines  

Right, right.

Pete  

They seem to be relying on each other, one on the other. So they’re almost like one text at that point. But anyway, yeah, go on. 

Matthew Vines  

Right, and so Jude says that Sodom and Gomorrah, quote, “gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion.” So some translations will render perversion differently, some even say unnatural desire, which is why some people then try to say, aha, that’s a reference to same-sex desire. But the phrase there is “sarkos heteras,” literally meaning different flesh. And so in all likelihood, it’s more plausible that refers to the attempted rape of angels, given that Jude 6 refers the nephilim of Genesis 6. It talks about the angels who did not keep their positions of authority, but abandoned their proper dwelling. And so once again, in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, you have sort of attempted human/angel sexual contact. 

Matthew Vines  

But, the point is, even if there had been specific references to same-sex behavior that were more clear cut in scripture, what we’re talking about is an attempted or a threatened gang rape. That’s just completely different than the question of same-sex relationships that are based on consent, much less mutuality, commitment, love. And so, it’s just a completely different question. And I think, again, if Christians are going to the Bible and asking, “Where can I find anything related to same sex anything? And are they positive or negative?” Then they’re gonna say, “Aha, here’s one, and it’s really negative.” 

Matthew Vines  

But that is not a thoughtful, or appropriate way to be engaging scripture on this question. That is never how we think about opposite sex. You know, it’s nothing that we think about heterosexuality, “Is let’s find every verse about heterosexuality and then-” Sorry, I should get a drink of water. [Chuckles]

Pete  

That’s fine.

Matthew Vines  

“Let’s find in every verse that heterosexuality and then just wait them and we have, you know, 300 positive ones and 400 negative ones. So it’s probably like, okay, but leans toward bad.” That’s not a thoughtful way to approach these questions. You have to be a little more contextual. No one would ever suggest that sex between a man and a woman has some uniform moral valence, and it just is a morally good thing or is a morally bad thing. 

Matthew Vines  

Sometimes, [Scoffs] it can be morally good. Sometimes it can be morally bad, there’s quite a spectrum of how we look at that based on context based on relationship based on consent based on a whole range of factors. And if people are going to apply that level of nuance to thinking about heterosexuality, there’s really no reason why we shouldn’t apply the same nuance to thinking about same-sex issues and to thinking about gay sexuality. So the question is not just what are all the same-sex behaviors that you can find referenced? But what types of same sex behavior are referenced in scripture? And do those have a meaningful similarity to the types of committed loving relationships of many same-sex couples today? And certainly the story of Sodom and Gomorrah does not.

Jared  

Right. So let’s maybe jump over to a text like Leviticus 18, which I think is probably the most used. And within that there’s often kind of a negative argument, which is, “Oh, sure, that does condemn it, but you know, you also have in Leviticus not eating shrimp and not mixing different types of cloth and your clothing.” So that’s kind of a negative, kind of argument of saying, “Hey, don’t pick and choose,” but is there a—what would you say Leviticus 18 and 20 are really speaking to in this context, then?

Matthew Vines  

Are you—so you’re saying is there a positive?

Jared  

Is there you know, you’ve talked, I think, rather well and convincingly about the deep, the deeper meaning of Sodom and Gomorrah and what does the rest of the Bible actually attest as the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah, and it is in hospitality, not taking care of the needy, that’s pretty explicit. But with a text like Leviticus 18, you know, I’ve mostly only heard the negative argument. Oh, well, you can’t pick and choose but not kind of a positive exegetical approach of what is the text talking about, then?

Pete  

Yeah, why do those texts not condemn what we think of today as same sex relations?

Jared  

Right. 

Matthew Vines  

Right. Okay, so there are a couple of layers to that. One, some people will argue, “Oh, well, this doesn’t condemn modern day, same-sex relationships, because it was really about cultic temple prostitution.” I don’t agree with that.

Jared  

Okay.

Matthew Vines  

I think that that’s trying to create distinctions without really sufficient textual support for them. I do think, based on, especially the scholarship of Saul Olyan, and Daniel Boyarin, that these passages and Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 are blanket prohibitions on male same-sex, anal intercourse. It’s not specifically about some temple prostitution somewhere, but it’s a prohibition of that act, categorically. There are then sort of two ways of engaging with that. One, and I think it’s particularly relevant for Christians, we do have to ask what is the place of the Old Testament law in the lives of Christian believers, and it’s not the same as it was for the ancient Israelites. The old law—I mean, not to say that it doesn’t matter or is irrelevant, I think it does matter and is relevant, but it’s relevant in different ways. And it’s just not the case that we can import wholesale the sexual prohibitions or codes of the Old Testament and say, “Aha, that’s whatever Christians should consider to be sexual immorality pornea in the New Testament. “

Jared  

Mhmm.

Matthew Vines  

Some people will try to argue, “Yeah, you know, yes, you have these ceremonial prohibitions, but it’s the moral prohibitions that are the ones that haven’t changed.” But again, I think that’s also trying to create a distinction that isn’t really in the text itself. And there are other sexual prohibitions as well, even in Leviticus 18, like the prohibition of having sex with a woman during her menstrual period, and Leviticus 18:19. The Christians mostly would not feel comfortable, just kind of, you know, taking and saying, “Aha, yes, we also consider that to be a grievous sin.” Most people don’t look at that that way. And so I think the first and most important question, in some sense is just—and maybe that’s more of the negative argument, but it is acknowledging that there is a difference in how Christians should be reading and living by the Old Testament, the Old Law as compared to the ancient Israelites. 

Matthew Vines  

But there’s another question that I think is pertinent because people will ask, “Well, you know, if the purpose of the law was something that hasn’t changed, then it’s something Christian should still live by.” And I think that that’s a fair principle to guide us in a lot of questions. The problem is that again, what is the purpose of a law? That’s something that’s subject to our own debate and interpretation, but I don’t think that means—but I still think we should engage in that effort.

Matthew Vines  

So one argument that people will make, they’ll say, the purpose of this law of prohibiting male same-sex relations is that men and women were made for heterosexual union, and therefore same-sex unions violate God’s divinely intended gender complementarity. I actually don’t think that—that is the most persuasive reading of why that law existed for several reasons, but I won’t go into all of them. One is that the Old Testament law says nothing about female same-sex relations, which should, in theory, be just as objectionable as male same-sex relations, if that’s the issue, that, you know, heterosexuality was God’s intent. And it’s also not true that the Old Testament law just doesn’t talk about women. Because actually, the same chapters specifically have laws that women are not supposed to have sex with animals. Which you would think also wouldn’t be an issue that comes up that much. But [Chuckles] that, you know, it’s not to say that women’s sexual agency is completely, you know, just ignored, and that’s why that doesn’t come up. 

Jared  

Yeah. Mhmm.

Matthew Vines  

But I think what’s much more plausible, especially based on early interpretations of these texts, and on contemporaneous literature and law codes, is that the fundamental problem with male same-sex intercourse was that it subverted the patriarchal gender norms on which, all ancient societies rested. That men are to be dominant in sex, and women are to be submissive. So for a man to have sex with another man, specifically, anal sex, is for a man to treat another man’s masculinity as though it is femininity. And in a society that sees femininity as the equivalent of you know, every vice you can imagine, that’s a horrific thing, if the core of what you’re trying to hold on to is a patriarchal societal order. 

Matthew Vines  

So I think that—that’s also because if you look at the Talmud, you know, the early rabbinic commentaries in the early centuries AD, it’s really interesting because it distinguishes between anal sex between men and other sexual acts between men. And it said they said that only the former is prohibited in Leviticus, and that the other same sex acts between men they still didn’t look upon positively but they didn’t see them as—as serious a violations. Because they didn’t symbolically subvert the patriarchal order in the same way. And so I think that’s much more plausible, as the reason behind these prohibitions is around the patriarchal context. 

Matthew Vines  

So then that raises more of a hermeneutical question for Christians today, which is, what is the status of patriarchy in the church? What is the status of patriarchy in the kingdom of God? And what should Christians believe about patriarchy? Obviously, there are, you know, two dominant camps in the church today, your complementarians, who are, you know, believe that patriarchy is God’s design, and egalitarians who don’t. I am any egalitarian, so I don’t believe that patriarchy is part of God’s design, and I would look at that through, you know, looking at what is the sort of blueprint that we see in the New Testament, not only in how Jesus treats women, but also what Paul says. Not just in Galatians 3 about our, you know, all our baptismal status before God and that basic equality that we have before God. But also, you know, just basic things, even in the Pauline epistles that cut against the grain in a more egalitarian directions, compared to, you know, what you see in First Corinthians 7 about how it’s not just the husband who has authority over the wife’s body, but the wife also has equal authority over her husband’s body. That’s not to say that there are not still patriarchal elements that we see reflected in the New Testament, there are, but I think we need to look at you know, what is the trajectory that we’re seeing within the New Testament? And what is the ultimate blueprint of the kingdom of God that we see described in the New Testament? And that’s one in which I think patriarchy is overcome in Christ. So that’s what I think-

Pete  

So-

Matthew Vines  

Oh sorry!

Pete  

No, no, I guess I just wanted to sort of recap a little bit of what you’re saying here. I mean to, sort of cut to the chase, it’s not a matter of proof texting, it’s a matter of trying to understand these passages in context, and then employing, what I think I remember correctly, you call a redemptive hermeneutic?

Matthew Vines  

Right. I mean, that’s also not my term, what I actually—so one thing that I did when I was studying this was, I had learned the Bible. So I learned the Bible, in an Evangelical church. I learned the Bible from theologically conservative Christians who didn’t affirm same-sex relationships, and I basically always was willing to go back and say, and take the tools and principles that I learned in those communities, and just apply them in a way that I thought was more consistent to this topic. And so that’s then what kind of yield a lot of these conclusions. So redemptive hermeneutic, this actually goes back to a book by William Webb from 2001, called “Slaves, Women and Homosexuals,” which, you know, is a little bit of a painful title with that last word. But, it’s also—I’m not going to endorse the book, across the board, I have some methodological issues with it, I also think that a full third of it is just completely wrong, I think there are good ideas in the book, some good principles in the book, and also, part of the reason why I like those principles is because I have seen those principles be embraced by a lot of Christians who are not affirming of same-sex relationships. And so I know that people are… that plenty of people support this way, this approach of looking at scripture, and I just want to encourage them to kind of see it through on this topic.

Pete  

And that, and that approach is looking at, let’s say, you use the word trajectory, the trajectory of scripture, where we have sort of a conclusion that we have to come to, which is centered around the gospel and Jesus, right? Is that what you mean by that, like looking at the whole thing? And then maybe it’s a bit simplistic, but asking a question like, “What would Jesus do in a situation like this? What does this gospel hermeneutic demand of us in this situation?” Am I reading you correctly there? 

Matthew Vines  

Well, that’s maybe a more sophisticated way of putting it. I think sometimes even the most basic way of putting it is just the acknowledgement that you can’t just pick any verse in scripture, and assume that context doesn’t matter in how we should be interpreting and applying it today. So I just know, I almost… I’ve met very, very few Christians who don’t acknowledge the necessity of interpretation. And that there are- That there is cultural specificity in a lot of scriptural texts that influence how we live them out today. It’s just a question of—so I have, I’ve found very little disagreement with that basic idea, in principle, it’s a matter of, kind of, what gets to fall under that umbrella-

Pete  

So why do you think it’s so hard for people to not apply that principle to this issue?

Matthew Vines  

Oh, gosh, you know, I think about this a lot. I think-

Pete  

I’ll bet you do!

Matthew Vines  

Yeah. 

Matthew Vines  

And I actually, I don’t feel like I have the answer. I think there are many different reasons that contribute together to people’s depth of anxiety and strength of feeling around this topic. So you know, that’s there are a lot of theological, psychological, cultural factors going into that. What I try to do in my work is to strain out what I see as the, I guess, the noble versus the ignoble reasons behind that. So, I think that there are plenty of reasons why people oppose same-sex relationships that I can have respect for, even if I disagree with. Whereas there are other reasons people oppose same sex relationships that I don’t have respect for. 

Pete  

Matthew Vines  

So, if you oppose same-sex relationships, because you think that that’s the equivalent of people having sex with animals, or because you think that gay men are more likely to be pedophiles, I don’t have respect for that, because I think that those opinions are fundamentally rooted in bigotry. But, if you oppose same-sex relationships, because you feel a deep sense of anxiety around the authority of scripture in your community, and you’re concerned that if we affirm same-sex relationships, we’re going to throw out all of Paul. I have respect for that concern. And so I want to engage people on that in a respectful way. So I don’t, you know, I think there’s an admixture of both the noble and ignoble reasons for it. And so even if you successfully engaged all of the more noble reasons, that doesn’t necessarily eliminate, right, everybody’s opposition, but I think it does some really important work. 

Matthew Vines  

And, I also think that the more respectable reasons for people’s opposition end up giving cover to the less respectable reasons, because they all kind of go on–it’s kind of like, honestly, with support for Trump. So people will say, well, if I can find one Trump supporter who doesn’t base their support for him and bigotry, then you should think more positively of everybody who has this opinion. Which [Scoffs] is just like, well, you know, that’s not—you can always find some people who will be a more friendly presentation of something. But that can be dangerous when it’s used to then obscure a lot of things that should just be more actively, you know, called out-

Pete  

Mhmm.

Matthew Vines  

-And opposed for, for being morally wrong. So I guess that’s what I try to do, I try to be focusing on those things that are more respectable and to be engaging people in good faith, because even though not everybody is going to meet me there, I always, there are always people who will.

Jared  

So I have—I’m gonna try to summarize what you said, and maybe put it in a different way. Tell me if you would affirm this or not. It sounds like when we come back to the hermeneutics of a text like Leviticus 18. What I heard you say was, there’s some ambiguity, not about what it says, but about how we… what it means, if that makes sense. So there’s that ambiguity of how do we apply this? And I guess, one of my questions would be, would you affirm that there’s this idea of this… The idea of same sex relationships can’t be untangled from the political and social implications of that in the ancient world, in such a way that even maybe for Paul or others, if we were to ask, at the time, they would be, kind of Leviticus 1, “Yeah, we were opposed to that sexual act, “but the reasons might be because there’s no imagination, or there hasn’t been that trajectory of the idea of like you said, with your dad, of that realization that, hey, maybe some people are sexually attracted to the same-sex in a way that I’m attracted to my wife. That apart, from patriarchy wasn’t really even a possible thought back then. Would that be fair to say?

Matthew Vines  

I think so. And it’s certainly true that the dominant paradigms are thinking about same-sex attraction and behavior in antiquity, were quite different than the dominant paradigms in the church today, even in the non-affirming church today. They acknowledge that there is such a thing as gay people, and that that’s not something that you, you know, it’s not just a switch that you can flip on and off. And it’s not just something that people kind of, you know, choose because they were having a wild night of the party. And that—that’s all that’s being discussed in the church is how far can people go in their wild nights at the party? Right? If that’s all they were being discussed, this would not be an issue in the church, then no one would care about it, and very few people would be passionate about, you know, creating greater acceptance for that. 

Jared  

Yeah, yeah, tying it—I mean, just what Pete talked about earlier, there’s some parallels maybe with the evolution issue, where sort of scientific discoveries or knowledge that we grow can sort of force us to maybe look at the text in a different way. Is that the case here? Like studies in sexuality around orientation, that’s creating new categories that wouldn’t have applied in the biblical arena.

Matthew Vines  

Right. And I think that there’s actually another similar parallel would be the issue of geocentrism versus heliocentrism. And the invention of the telescope in the early 17th century, that then forced Christians to completely change the way that they were interpreting the scriptural texts about the sun, the moon, the stars, and the place of the earth in the universe. That’s not something that happened overnight, but over time, that just became undeniable that we now have this new information, we can see things that prior Christians could not see, and that causes us to realize that the way we’ve been interpreting these texts isn’t right. And so we have to look at again, and that doesn’t, that’s no, you know, you don’t have to think poorly of anybody, you don’t have to think you’re smarter than people who came before you, you just got a telescope and other people don’t. You know, with evolution, you have similar scientific discoveries. 

Matthew Vines  

I think the difference with this topic is this is so much more personal. Less about, “Oh, have you read this, you know, fascinating study.” It’s not like there was some book like “Origin of Species,” you know, its publication totally changed the conversation. It’s about individual lives and stories, and sons and daughters and, you know, who are coming out and sharing their stories, and there’s just an incredible level of pain and suffering, that so many more Christians have been becoming aware of that, I think it’s just—so there’s a level of personal connection to this-

Pete  

Matthew Vines  

-And there isn’t to the ones that are more scientific.

Pete  

Well, you know, what I’m seeing here, I mean, I’m trying to summarize here and use some language to describe what I think you’re doing. You’re talking about trying to interpret biblical texts well, and properly trying to account for things like their context. But you’re also sort of looping around to things like the human experience. Whether it’s the subjective experience of how you’re treated, or the human experience about what we’ve come to know about things like the Earth is not the center of the universe, right? Or issues that go into the complex discussion of human sexuality. So I—I’m trying to say something here—is that a fair description? You’re looking at, not simply like, “Hey, let’s look at what this text really says,” the question is really been driven by the experiences that we have as human beings, whether their subjective personal experience or dealing with, let’s say, the realities of the increase of knowledge about certain things.

Matthew Vines  

Yeah, I think so, I just try to be careful about how I talk about, you know, increase in knowledge-

Matthew Vines  

-Because I think what a lot of Conservative Christians are almost trained to hear is well, you know, “Those biblical authors, they were just pretty benighted, and thank goodness, you know, that we’ve learned so much more than them, and as a result, who really cares what they think.” And that’s not at all the message that I want to promote. Because my—even though I think it’s true, that what we’re talking about today with sexual orientation, with gender identity, is not what Paul was talking about in Romans 1. The point is not to then discredit Paul.

Pete  

Yeah. 

Pete  

Yeah, and once you leave the world of proof texting—which is really the assumption that the biblical writer and you agree. That’s really what proof texting is, you’re sort of on the same page, and you know, you’re talking about the same thing. But once you leave that, it seems like you really are on a journey of some kind of discovery that engages history, and context and the perennial hermeneutical interpretive challenge of bringing these horizons together of ancient and modern. That’s just an ongoing task, it seems. And there are a few issues that I think illustrate the complexities of that more than the question of same-sex relations and LGBTQ issues. That these issues just come to the fore, I think very, very quickly.

Pete  

Right.

Matthew Vines  

It’s simply to say, “That’s not what he was talking about.” And so I don’t, so in Romans 1, I’m not saying Christian should, you know, tut tut and not want to take Paul seriously, I think we should want to take Paul seriously. But we also have to recognize Paul’s not talking about gay Christians, in Romans 1! Paul’s talking about people he says, “abandon or exchange” heterosexual sex, you know, in what he describes repeatedly as, you know, lustful desires. People who are overwhelmed with lustfulness, who were having sex with people of the opposite sex, who then go off and have sex with people of the same-sex. And that’s very consistent with how a number of ancient writers talk about same-sex behavior as similar to gluttony or drunkenness, advice of excess that anybody might be prone to. 

Matthew Vines  

And that made sense at the time given the most prominent forms of same-sex behavior that were widely practiced and accepted in ancient societies. Which could involve adult men having sex with you know, male slaves, or teenage boys or, you know, you name it. But where there’s always a difference in status, whether it’s a difference in class, a difference in age, there’s going to be a clear difference in status that allows even same-sex behavior that was accepted in antiquity to mirror the hierarchical relations that were at the basis of all kinds of sexuality, including up opposite sex sexuality. And so that, you know, so it’s not, so some people say like, “Oh, so you’re just saying that, what, you know, either Paul was really ignorant or-” 

Matthew Vines  

No! Paul was just describing something that was consistent with what people were aware of and what people were experiencing. Paul simply wasn’t even speaking to the question of sexual orientation to gay Christians in the church, who are, you know, wrestling with their sexual orientation and wanting to live that out in a committed monogamous relationship. And so I think that we can affirm with Paul that sexual behavior that is motivated by lustful self-seeking is wrong! And that Christians do not affirm that.

Matthew Vines  

No, absolutely!

Jared  

And I would also, just, I respect Matthew, you know, your careful attention not to be dismissive. And I think a lot of my friends who would be more liberal in their theology or progressive in their social stance, often, that’s one of my critiques is that belittling or dismissive sort of posture, and really trying to engage people and understand that it’s maybe that we’re just different in how we look at the text. And we have different hermeneutical styles, and it’s not always that I’m more knowledgeable and more enlightened than you, but understanding our differences and engaging them on a peer to peer level. So I really, I really appreciate that. 

Jared  

We are coming, actually, to the end of our time, Matthew. So I have one last question for you. Just a broad question here around what would you say to someone who just isn’t there yet in how they’re reading the Bible, specifically? What advice would you have for those people who are seeking to understand, they have a true spirit of openness to engage the text at a different level, at a deeper level, what would be some points that you would make?

Matthew Vines  

I would say a couple of things. One, I would say really engage seriously with the, you know, the best affirming arguments and resources out there. One book that I highly recommend is called “Bible, Gender, Sexuality” by Jim Brownson. It’s a New Testament professor at Western Seminary in Holland, Michigan. And it’s a more of a seminary level texts than my book is, but it’s an excellent resource. And whether people agree or not, I do think that people owe it to LGBTQ people to really put in that effort at that level of study, to really be seriously considering, prayerfully considering, the best arguments and resources out there. 

Matthew Vines  

But another piece of this goes beyond the whole question of study, and that is to, my appeal to people would be to, make sure that they are staying in relationship or being in relationship for the first time with LGBTQ Christians, in their own communities, and elsewhere, and making sure that they are really paying attention to the stories and the testimonies and the voices of LGBTQ Christian. Because the fruit of the church’s rejection of same-sex relationships and of LGBTQ people is poisonous. It is so destructive and toxic to people’s faith, their relationship with God, the relationship with other people, their sense of self worth, and of dignity, it is so destructive to the church’s witness in the world. And at the end of the day, it just doesn’t make sense that—that is coming, that—that kind of poisonous fruit is coming from a good tree. Those things cannot go together, and I think that the more that people are really meaningfully in relationship with LGBTQ Christians and really seriously trying to walk in our shoes and trying to not just walk one mile with us, but walk two, that something that is, that is ultimately very hard to deny.

Jared  

Thank you for that. So you know, Matthew, as we as we end here, is there anywhere online that people can find you if they want to learn more about you, learn more about your work, where would we point people to?

Matthew Vines  

Well, you can follow me on Facebook or Twitter. But another place, of course, I would recommend is to go to ReformationProject.org. The Reformation Project is the nonprofit organization that I run. And I founded it a few years ago. We run training conferences and programs all across the country working to equip and empower Christians who want to make their churches more affirming of LGBTQ people. And we specifically focus on providing them the theological tools and resources that they need to be more effective advocates and allies in this conversation. So I would highly encourage anybody, you know, go to our website, sign up for our mailing list, you can get some of our resources online. And you can also follow the Reformation Project on Facebook, on Twitter, on Instagram, to get to know, you know, get to see what we’re up to. And even if you’re not in a place of being affirming, and of agreeing, I still think it would be great! You know, we’d still love to have you following along. And you know, seeing what we’re up to and the stories and the what we’re putting out into the world. 

Jared  

Alright! So there you have it, folks, the ReformationProject.org. Thank you again, Matthew, for joining us for the conversation! 

Pete  

Yes thank you, Matthew!

Matthew Vines  

Thank you so much to both of you!

Jared  

Have a good night!

Matthew Vines  

Bye!

Outro  

Jared  

Thanks for listening, be sure again to check out Matthew Vines, his book, “God and the Gay Christian.” You can find him online, again, he said Facebook, but also check out the Reformation Project at the ReformationProject.org. You can follow me on Twitter @Jbyas.

Pete  

And you can follow me on Twitter and Facebook also @PeteEnns. And you can check out what I’m doing on my website, TheBibleForNormalPeople.com. Some of the books I’ve written, you can sign up for my newsletter, which would be awesome, and look at my speaking schedule, etc., etc.. And most importantly, there we continue some of the same kinds of discussions that we’re having on this podcast.

Jared  

Thanks again, everyone. We hope you join us next time!

Outro