Science and Falsehoods in the Modern Age Part III: The Other Turtle: Christ like discipleship for the modern age.

The other Turtle: Christ like discipleship for the modern age.Up until now I have been utilizing logic and science to discuss the issues; however, this fails to include people who approach the world from a Christian theological perspective. Thus, it seems imperative to see what bible and theology has to say on the matter of Trans rights.

I do not want to be a hypocrite and engage in falsehoodism myself. So I want to be clear I am not theologian or preacher. At best, I am an amateur dabbler in theology. I have had the opportunity of studying LDS theology at BYU and Seventh Day Adventist theology at Loma Linda University. Christianity has a long history of the uninitiated providing amateur exegesis. Indeed, holding scripture as ultimate authority has the side effect of providing authority to anyone capable of reading said scripture.

So with that in mind, I would like to thank you for reading/caring about my little foray into scripture. Before I dive into it, I would like to let you in on a few my assumptions. Today I will be focusing solely on the teachings of Jesus. Anything spoken by other people – say the apostle Paul (a man who never met the living Jesus) - is suspect. My suspicion is based by the idea that religions are institutions built up around a great teacher – typically posthumously – and by their very nature these institutions and people will deviate from the original teachings, often in ways that serve the people/institution and their unconscious cultural biases. As such, the most pure source of information is the teachings of the founders themselves. I am aware that these rules cut out all the scriptures that condemn homosexuality. I consider this a consequence of my logic not the intent of it. Put frankly, I am arguing that passages of scripture speaking against homosexuality are the result of cultural bias and NOT the intent of Jesus’ teachings. I feel my logic is sound and I am standing by it.

I hate to disappoint the gentleman pictured above but Jesus never said that. There is not a recorded passage of scripture cannon or apocryphal in which Jesus leans over to Peter and says “You know who I really can’t stand? Those Gosh Darn Homo-sex-uals.” The way I read the Bible, Jesus was actually really into loving neighbors and love in general. There is actually an astounding dearth of statements from Jesus himself regarding queer people, the sanctity of gender, and/or sexual purity culture in general. The silence on this subject is astounding indeed damning. If queer people are the moral threat that we are made out to be, one would think that an all knowing God would have provided at least one warning about “them queers.” As far as I can tell, Jesus took more issue with barren fig trees and money changers than he did with Queer folk. Let’s consider what Jesus did actually teach.

When asked what the great commandment was Jesus declared “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” (Mathew, 22:37-40). If we are to take Jesus at his word, love is the central purpose of his teachings. Jesus wanted us to follow God out of love-not obligation or responsibility. Furthermore, Jesus hoped that we would love our neighbors.  As we recall from the story of the Good Samaritan (Luke, 10) when Jesus says neighbor he more or less means any other human being. There are no qualifiers here. He did not say except them queers or those gosh darn libtards. Or you don’t have to love them if they teach things that contradict God’s laws. Nope, He said love everyone period end of story. 

Some of my favorite narratives of Jesus’ life are his interactions with the religious elites of his time. Indeed, Jesus called the religious leaders in his community “whited sepulchers” (Mathew 23:27) and warned his followers to “beware of [their] leaven” (Mathew 16:6). Put in modern terms, Jesus felt like the religious establishment of his time were hypocrites who spread their filthy doctrine until it corrupted the whole community. I wonder what he would say about the religious establishment of our time?

Often Jesus’ interactions with these folks centered around “the law”, the strict set of rules established for Jewish behavior. On one occasion, a teacher accosted Jesus and his apostles for picking and eating corn on the Sabbath day. Jesus replied by using the scriptural example of David eating bread from the temple. He then makes the statement “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath” (Mark, 2:23-28). I believe what he is saying here is that “the law” is a tool intended to help “Man” rather than something that mankind must mold themselves into. So if we pull things together, we might consider Jesus saying that love supersedes “the law.” I think Jesus cared much more how we treated our fellow humans than how closely we followed theological dictates. If we can accept this supposition then I believe that Jesus would not advocate queer bashing of any kind. Jesus would be much more concerned about loving his queer neighbors than forcing them to follow “the law.”

There are very few instances of Jesus speaking specifically about sexual morality. Perhaps the clearest example to me is when he was confronted with “the woman taken in adultery” (John 8:2-11). While Jesus was teaching in the temple, the religious elites brought him a woman taken in adultery. As a trap they presented him with “the law” which dictated that she be stoned to death. This was it-Jesus’ big moment to make a definitive statement on sexual immorality to be recorded for all generations. What statement did he make? The first thing Jesus did is focus on the woman’s accusers. “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.” Rather than congratulating them on having found a sexual deviant he tells them to worry about themselves. This is a repetition of a theme Jesus has touched on elsewhere, “cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also” (Matthew, 23:26). I believe Jesus is doing more here than telling these folks to mind their own business. Rather I believe that Jesus is teaching all of us an important lesson about how to live our religion. Jesus is telling them they need to be more concerned about their own sins than their neighbor’s sins. He is admonishing them to “Be the change you want to see.” He is suggesting that true religion is a solitary path in which an individual focuses on perfecting themselves rather than perfecting all their neighbors. The way I read the Bible, Jesus is constantly fighting against the rigid law focused approach of his contemporaries and encouraging us to focus on ourselves while treating others with love and compassion.

Equally important/fascinating is the way Jesus deals with the woman herself. Again, this is the big moment for posterity. Jesus can show us all just what to do with sexually immoral people. Unlike modern Christians, he did not exile her so as to eliminate her bad example. He did not forbid children to speak of her or parents and teachers to mention her to children. He showed no concern that this woman’s lasciviousness would impact the community, rather he is tremendously lenient.  He tells here “Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.” The only admonishment he had for her was “sin no more.” That is it - go about your business and do better. Taken together, Jesus’ reaction here both to the religious leaders and to the woman herself are clear. Mind your own business, walk your own Christian path, and let your neighbor walk theirs.  Love and people are more important than rules! This is how that looks in action. This is what Jesus is teaching. In word and in deed.

There is one last area in which I feel it important to watch Jesus’ example: Politics. Below you will find one of my favorite Jesus stories which begins with a crafty religious leader asking

“Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Caesar, or no?”

Jesus answers:

 But he perceived their craftiness, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me? Shew me a penny. Whose image and superscription hath it? They answered and said, Caesar's. And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's. And they could not take hold of his words before the people: and they marveled at his answer, and held their peace. (Luke 20:22-26)

For a long time I loved the way this demonstrated Jesus’ quick wit and unending ability to best his opponents at intellectual chess matches. However, looking deeper Jesus is saying many important things. He is saying if you use Caesar’s money you should pay Caesar’s taxes – play by the rules. Jesus is acknowledging the authority of worldly institutions.  Jesus is saying he believes in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. This is not a small thing. To this day, many Jewish people reject Jesus’ claim to be the Messiah because he did not overthrow the Roman government. The expectation was that the Savior would enact a political uprising and establish God’s kingdom on earth Ruled by God’s law. Instead, Jesus said “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36). I find it profound that this is Jesus’ message to Pilate. Again, this is Jesus’ big opportunity to stick it to the man. This is the time for him to call forth Egyptian style plagues and overthrow the unwelcome foreign ruler. This is Jesus’ opportunity to sermonize on the corruption of the government and the wickedness of governments that fail to recognize “The Law.”  Instead Jesus answers “My kingdom is not of this world” and subjects himself to an unjust execution. 

“Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's” --- “My kingdom is not of this world.” Jesus himself is arguing for a separation of church and state here. He is acknowledging that his teachings are spiritual in nature and belong to “another world.” He is also acknowledging and subjecting himself to the authority of a godless foreign government. Jesus is speaking of different turtles’ different ways of knowing. According to this point of view, there is a spiritual/theological way of knowing and there is a scientific “worldly” way of knowing. Each way of knowing can co-exist with the other so long as they render unto one and other their due. Science should not speak towards theology and theology should not dictate the practice or application of science.

Taking all of this as whole, I am arguing that the solution for the current quandary is a Christ-like disciple in the modern age. A true Christian disciple is one who follows Jesus’ teachings and example in an effort to emulate the great teacher. Someone who recognizes that love is the central component of the teaching and that treating others with love is one of the primary dictates of discipleship. Inherent in this understanding is that loving people is more important than ensuring that people follow God’s rules. True disciples ought to be focused on perfecting their own personal walk with Christ while allowing others their own personal Journey. True disciples will understand that their theology speaks of a higher spiritual path and law and that their calling is to be “In the world and not of the world” (John, 17:16). Finally, Christian disciples render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and work to change the world by letting their light so shine (Matthew 5:16). Jesus did not change the world by imposing “the law” on folks through legal means. He did so through teaching and example. Disciples who seek to emulate him ought to do likewise.

From this perspective, the current attempt by the “Christian Right” to ban queer books, outlaw speaking of queer people in schools, and to write laws dictating the practice of medicine is not Christian at all. It’s a usurpation of religion in the name of political ends.  

Tune in next time for the exciting conclusion to this series in which I try to tie up all of my lose ends and make a cogent argument for how Queers and Christians can and ought to co-exist peacefully.