Comment on Streak's Sin Post

I originally wrote this as a comment on Streak's Blog, specifically his post, Streak's Blog: Sin. I felt bad that it was so long so I posted it here instead.

Streak
Excellent post. Ahhhh. Sin, sin, sin. Ain't it a great topic! The problem is, whatever your take on sin, Jesus wasn't too big on anyone sitting around figuring out who ELSE was doing it (Or how can you say to your neighbour, “Let me take the speck out of your eye”, while the log is in your own eye?) I love your comment that the sinless churchgoer. My recent church experience has been so refreshing. Church has once again become for me a lifeboat for sinners. Man, it's a great place to be! You look around the room at all the wounded people who are so glad to be there to fellowship with other world weary travelers. There's no time for judgement- we don't even want to mention the word because we're so glad to know we're going to miss it that we don't want to mention it too loudly unless maybe you want to hear the story, too. Matt 7:47 says, "Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven—for she loved much. But he who has been forgiven little loves little." Does this mean there isn't right and wrong? Of course not, but a healthy view of what's our job and what's God's would go a long way toward bringing a little peace and healing to a road-weary world. Remember "Come to me all you who are weary...."?

Well, regarding sexuality, there's an excellent article that directly addresses this issue. It also is quite informative about Biblical interpretation, Biblical sexual attitudes, and the role of modern discovery informing our theology. Wink's not exactly a darling of the Fundies so hopefully this won't prompt any flames from passing anonypussies. Anyway, I think it's one of the best articles I've read on a responsible Biblical interpretation of sexual orientation. It's long so I've posted a couple tidbits:

Homosexuality and the Bible by Walter Wink

The punishment for adultery was death by stoning for both the man and the woman (Deut. 22:22), but here adultery is defined by the marital status of the woman. In the Old Testament, a man could not commit adultery against his own wife; he could only commit adultery against another man by sexually using the other's wife. And a bride who is found not to be a virgin is to be stoned to death (Deut. 22:13-21), but male virginity at marriage is never even mentioned. It is one of the curiosities of the current debate on sexuality that adultery, which creates far more social havoc, is considered less "sinful" than homosexual activity. Perhaps this is because there are far more adulterers in our churches. Yet no one, to my knowledge, is calling for their stoning, despite the clear command of Scripture. And we ordain adulterers.

Approached from the point of view of love rather than that of law, the issue is at once transformed. Now the question is not "What is permitted?" but rather "What does it mean to love my homosexual neighbor?" Approached from the point of view of faith rather than works, the question ceases to be "What constitutes a breach of divine law in the sexual realm?" and becomes instead "What constitutes integrity before the God revealed in the cosmic lover, Jesus Christ?" Approached from the point of view of the Spirit rather than the letter, the question ceases to be "What does Scripture command?" and becomes "What is the Word that the Spirit speaks to the churches now, in the light of Scripture, tradition, theology, and, yes, psychology, genetics, anthropology, and biology?" We can't continue to build ethics on the basis of bad science.

In a little-remembered statement, Jesus said, "Why do you not judge for yourselves what is right?" (Luke 12:57 NRSV). Such sovereign freedom strikes terror in the hearts of many Christians; they would rather be under law and be told what is right.