I’ve noticed that the first thing people tend to do when they begin to study the so-called "clobber" passages in the Bible is turn to secondary sources. They read what others say, both pro and con, and they depend upon another’s interpretation of these key passages to determine what their own take on them will be. The only problem with this approach is that if that person’s exegesis or scholarship is called into question, then one’s own basis for interpreting the text is called into question also; you’ll have built your house on the sand of human authority (1 Cor. 2:5).

There is a new lack of confidence among Protestant Christians that the average believer may competently interpret God’s Word. Hence, in nearly every Bible nowadays the notes to the text take up almost as much room on the page as the text itself. Even the most straightforward passages, that seemingly even a child could figure out--and perhaps, as Jesus suggests in Mark 10:15, only a child--will have extensive annotation. I fear that most readers do not distinguish between what God’s Word says and the interpretation of that word by the very human authors of the study notes—they set aside the Word of God in order to follow the traditional interpretations of people (Mark 7:9-13).

We have been cowered into thinking that unless we possess a linguist’s knowledge of Hebrew and Greek (and some would add Aramaic and Latin!) or a classicist’s grasp of the history and sociology of the ancient world, then we cannot possibly interpret the Bible accurately. When we come to the "clobber" passages the problem is exacerbated by the fact that so much depends upon the accurate interpretation of key Greek and Hebrew words within the highly complex socio-historical context of the biblical writers.

The Perspicuity of Scripture

The foundation of the Protestant Reformation is that God’s Word is our sole authority in matters of faith and practice. Attendant upon this foundation is the principle that God’s people can understand God’s Word. After all there isn’t much use in having the Bible as our authority if we can’t know what it means. This principle is known as the perspicuity of Scripture, which simply means that the Bible is clear in its meaning and able to be understood by the average Christian. Indeed, as I alluded above, even Christians whom we would think to be handicapped in their ability to understand the Word often show a more profound grasp of it than the most learned biblical scholar.

How can this be? Paul makes it clear in 1 Corinthians 2:6-16 that our knowledge of God’s Word does not come from merely using the tools of our human intellect, however useful they may be, but rather it is the Spirit of God who brings understanding to our hearts. Paul says that the person who approaches God’s Word only with the powers of her or his human intellect cannot understand it (1 Cor. 2:14; cf. Rom. 8:7). However, even the simplest of believers can understand the deep mysteries of God because these are revealed to us by the Spirit of truth (1 Cor. 2:10; John 14:17) just as Jesus promised (John 14:26). Indeed, Paul tells us that even the simplest believer has the mind of Christ and can judge or understand the meaning of God’s Word (1 Cor. 2:15, 16).

Now there is an error to avoid in the liberty of this principle. This is the misunderstanding that just because each individual believer possesses the ability, by the power of the Holy Spirit, to understand God’s Word for themselves, the church and human reason possess no authority. Nothing is more obnoxious than some nut standing up with his or her Bible to defy the pastor or to dispute some new scientific discovery because "it’s not in my Bible." When the Reformation fathers asserted that even the simplest believer is able to understand the Bible, they did not mean that we were to become autonomous from the church or other human beings.

There is a proper authority in both the church and in human reason and this serves all believers in assisting them in their understanding of God’s Word. But though both the church and human reason possess competent and God-given authority, theirs is an authority exercised in submission to the authority of the Word of God. When our pastor preaches we pray that he or she is anointed by God’s Spirit to help us to understand the meaning of his Word (Acts 8:30, 31). Similarly, we don’t just casually read God’s word, rather we search the Scriptures, using all the gifts of our human intellect and all the insights of human knowledge that God may have granted us. Even so, we humbly pray that God may lead us into all understanding (2 Tim. 2:15; cf. Eph. 1:8; Mark 12:33; Luke 24:45).

At the beginning, when I discouraged you from running to secondary sources, I didn’t mean that you shouldn’t use the standard tools of Bible study, such as a concordance, a Greek or Hebrew interlinear Bible or other such helps. Augustine, who evidently struggled with his Greek, recommended comparing several different versions to get a sense of the best translation. Nor did I mean that you shouldn’t study the works of those who have faithfully passed on to us the faith of the apostles (2 Tim. 3:14, 15). Yet, the Bible has authority over all of these and, by the gift of the Holy Spirit, we can be confident that we can understand the meaning of God’s Word for ourselves; we have the mind of Christ (1 Cor. 2:16).

So Many Different Interpretations!

If the Bible is so clear to believers how come there are so many different opinions about what it means? Indeed, there seems to be as many different interpretations of the Bible as there are denominations! Like most overly broad generalizations, this isn’t true. First and foremost, from one denominational extreme to the other, all true Christians adhere to the same basic necessary truths of the faith. C. S. Lewis discusses these Christian basics in his wonderful book, Mere Christianity. A concise summary of them may be found in the Apostles’ Creed. Secondly, some who would seem sharpest in their doctrinal disagreements are closest in heart in their actual Christian walk. Ask Mother Theresa or Keith Green (when you get to heaven) who their righteousness is and they’ll both say, ‘Jesus.’ Third, in those areas where the Bible has not spoken, we may proceed in Christian liberty without anyone badgering us with ‘thus saith the Lord’ (1 Cor. 7:12). The old Anglican slogan sums it up best: In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity. But, obviously, on many points, and some of them central to the faith, Christians have arrived at very different understandings even though each side claims that their own particular interpretation is as clear as day in Scripture. While we affirm the leading of the Holy Spirit in our interpretation of Scripture, we must also confess that there is another dynamic at work in us--sin (Rom. 8:5-8; 2 Cor. 4:4). In her wonderful study of the notoriously difficult writings of Gertrude Stein, Judy Grahn writes, "For years I thought: ‘She is difficult,’ until one day it occurred to me to say it the other way: ‘She is easy. I am difficult.’ Suppose it is not that she is veiled and obscure, but that we, her readers, are." Paul says the very same thing about God’s word (2 Cor. 3:13-4:6). It is not that the Scriptures aren’t clear, it is that we come to them with hearts veiled in sin and unbelief: "But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away…but whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away" (2 Cor. 3:14-16; cf. Rom. 2:17-24). Plainly, the Scriptures are sufficient, but our sinful hearts and fallen human intellects are not. To the extent that we all continue to trust in our fleshly understanding (Proverbs 3:7), we will continue to misunderstand God’s word and be divided in our interpretations of it. These divisions are not because God’s Word is unclear to believers, but "an enemy has done this" (Matt. 13:28).

Love and Interpret As You Will

In his great work on biblical interpretation, On Christian Doctrine, Augustine set forth the main principle of biblical interpretation: We may be confident that we have arrived at a correct interpretation of the text if our interpretation leads us to love God and each other. He writes: "Whoever, therefore, thinks that he understands the Divine Scriptures or any part of them so that it does not build the double love of God and of our neighbor does not understand it at all." We may approach the Bible securely when we do so "from a pure heart, and a good conscience, and an unfeigned faith" (1 Cor. 13:13). Therefore, the first principle of proper biblical interpretation is: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind" (Matt. 22:37). And the second principle is like it: "Love your neighbor as yourself" (Matt. 22:39). Practice these two things and then you will interpret Scripture accordingly.

Gay-Friendly Interpretations

As a son or daughter of God, sealed with Christ’s Holy Spirit, you, gay, lesbian, bi, or transgendered Christian, have the mind of Christ as much as any other Christian. Therefore, you are as competent as any other Christian to read and understand God’s Word. What if your interpretation of the ‘clobber’ passages differs remarkably from the traditional understanding of the church? First, does your interpretation cause you to differ from other Christians in the essentials of the faith? Not at all. Does it make you differ from them in your Christian walk? Not if you acknowledge the Lordship of Jesus Christ over your life. But, obviously, it does cause you to hold a position different from theirs on homosexuality, does it not? True enough, but that is precisely an area where you believe the Bible has not spoken—the area of homosexual orientation (as opposed to same-sex acts). Therefore, who are they to badger you with ‘thus saith the Lord,’ when it is a plain fact of Scripture that the Lord has not said anything--no matter that everyone else has had plenty to say!

Some Basic Helps

That’s why I urge you to practice in Christian liberty your right and responsibility to read and understand the Bible for yourself through the leading of the Holy Spirit. Depend upon the authority of the Word of God and the promise of Christ that he would send his Spirit of truth to lead you into all understanding (John 16:13). Here follow some very basic helps that have usefully served Christians along the way:

It Means What It Says and Says What It Means

Elder Bill Byrd of Freedom in Christ Evangelical Church teaches, "The Bible says what it means and means what it says, but a superficial reading of the text isn’t really looking at what the Bible says. Literalism doesn’t always get what the original author actually meant." The great Reformed theologian, Charles Hodge, explains, "The words of Scripture are to be taken in their plain historical sense. That is, they must be taken in the sense attached to them in the age and by the people to whom they were addressed. This only assumes that the sacred writers were honest and meant to be understood." (emphasis mine)

Sometimes we come to the Bible all hyped up and wary, looking for hidden meanings and secret codes, as if it were the intention of the biblical writers to trick us or to keep hidden from us the truth that God intended for us to know. Just the opposite is true! Scripture is God’s revelation (Rom. 16:25-27; Eph. 1:9; Col. 1:26). "Reveal" is the opposite of "hide." He wants us to know him and how we may be in relationship with him. We should read the Bible like we would read any other book, expecting that the sacred writers intend for us to understand what they are saying. The plain sense of the text is usually the correct sense in which to interpret it. And when it’s not, that’s also usually very clear.

We get into trouble when we try to interpret a passage apart from the historical and cultural context of the biblical author and his intended meaning. A good example is how the New International Version translates the Greek word "arsenokoitai" in 1 Corinthians 6:9 as "homosexual offenders." Whatever Paul might have meant by this word—and we aren’t going to discuss that here—we know that he cannot have possibly meant "homosexual offenders" because the very word "homosexual," was only coined approximately 100 years ago. Therefore, how could Paul have meant "homosexual" when describing behavior practiced in the 1st century? Well, if he is describing same-sex behavior between two men, isn’t that the same thing? That would be no. There are two millennia of difference separating same-sex behavior in the classical world and the modern concept of homosexual orientation. The only way to understand what Paul meant is to understand the historical and cultural context in which Paul wrote. When and where is the biblical author writing? Who is the biblical author writing to? What did he intend them to understand? These are the questions we must ask when reading a book of the Bible. Don’t project your own modern perceptions back onto the Bible.

Here, in particular, we may feel the need for "expert" opinions and scholarly helps. Avail yourself of them by all means. But, really, a very general knowledge of history and a little common sense will serve you almost in as good a stead. For example, when Paul wrote about the relationship between husband and wife does anyone really think he had in mind the modern American household? Of course he didn’t. He had in mind the ancient Graeco-Roman household as seen through Jewish eyes. When modern Christians try to enforce the standards of ancient Roman households within the modern American household some rather odd aberrations result. But don’t get me wrong. In no way am I suggesting that the truth of the Bible is only relative to the time in which its various books were written. Truth is truth. But we cannot fully grasp that truth and apply it to our time, unless we have truly understood it as the author meant it within the context of his time.

Another well-known "clobber" passage can serve as a good summarizing example of everything I have been saying: Romans 1:26, 27. Most gay-friendly interpreters really stand on their heads on this one and stretch the limits of the average reader’s credibility. If we start with the sound principle that we should read the text in its plain sense and if we believe that Paul intended us to understand what he was saying, then the text’s most obvious meaning is also its correct meaning. Second, we have to place the text within its literary and historical context. Paul is writing a letter of instruction on the Christian faith to a community of Jewish believers in Rome. In the immediate context of Romans 1, Paul is establishing the just wrath of God against all of humanity because they have turned from the truth of God to idolatry. And it is within his discussion of idolatry that he discusses same-sex behavior as an extreme example of how people have turned away from God. Even a scant knowledge of ancient Greece and Rome let’s us know that in those societies same-sex acts were commonly performed in the context of idolatrous worship—worship which any God-fearing Jew like Paul would have found abominable. Therefore, Paul says that such idolatry is under God’s wrath.

Twisting Scripture

Was Paul talking about believers with a homosexual orientation who are involved in covenanted relationships?—that simply cannot be read back into Romans. Paul would have had no clue about sexual "orientation"; or experience of covenanted same-sex relationships among those who worshipped the true God. But then is what he is saying relative only to the 1st century world? No, because as any of us who have experienced the bathhouse, the bushes, or the backroom can testify men are still "inflamed with lust for one another" in a context where they put sex before God and worship it as their true meaning or ultimate reality. And, sadly, they receive the "due penalty for their perversion" in the forms of sexual disease, alcoholism and drug abuse, and lives of isolation and loneliness.

Which reminds me of something else Augustine said about interpreting the Bible correctly: Don’t twist Scripture to justify behavior that the Holy Spirit has convicted you is wrong. Unfortunately, you sometimes hear gay Christians correctly claim Romans 1:26, 27 doesn’t apply to their sexual orientation, but then go on to say that it also doesn’t apply to the sinful sexual behavior frequently exhibited in the urban gay community. But it does, Blanche, it does. Scripture steps on toes sometimes. If you don’t like it, then walk righteously in the Lord (Micah 6:8). But don’t try to pretend that Scripture doesn’t say what it clearly does say.

Scripture Interprets Scripture

Dr. Joseph Pearson in his marvelous seminar, "Christianity and Homosexuality: Reconciled" urges us to hold in mind the whole Bible while simultaneously attending to its various parts. When we do this, we won’t get caught advocating some pet doctrine that is only supported by a single verse in one book, because we will keep in mind what the entire Bible has to say on the subject. Does the Bible contradict itself? No, we misinterpret verses out of their proper context within the whole of Scripture. Charles Hodge clarifies: "If the Scriptures be what they claim to be, the word of God, they are the work of one mind, and that mind divine. From this it follows that Scripture cannot contradict Scripture. God cannot teach in one place anything which is inconsistent with what He teaches elsewhere on the same subject."

This rule is called the analogy of Scripture and it helps us to interpret difficult passages by comparing them with passages that are clearer and easier to understand. Hodge continues, "Hence Scripture must explain Scripture. If a passage admits of different interpretations, that only can be the true one which agrees with what the Bible teaches elsewhere on the same subject." When you hear someone teaching that gays must be saved by works, that they must change before they can come to Christ, quoting 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, keep in mind the whole of the New Testament teaching of Paul. "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast" (Ephesians 2:8, 9).

Our Faith in Jesus Interprets Scripture

If someone comes to your door with a Bible and shows you in Scripture that Jesus is not God, don’t believe it. Scripture won’t contradict the faith that we have received in Christ. Our faith is based in God’s Word and therefore, God’s Word cannot be contrary to the fundamentals of our faith. If we come to a passage that seems to contradict our faith, we know that we have not rightly understood what God’s Word is saying to us. This rule is known as the analogy of faith and it helps us to interpret problem passages by interpreting them in light of the truths of our faith. It is closely aligned with the rule of the analogy of Scripture cited above, because often a truth of our faith to which there is only a dim allusion in one verse, will be clearly presented in another. In this way, Scripture interprets Scripture to help us rightly interpret our faith in Christ according to Scripture.

Gerald Bray in Biblical Interpretation wrote: "Jesus offers himself as the comprehensive, and indeed only, key to understanding the Scriptures." For example, with the two disciples on the road to Emmaus, Jesus "beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, he expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself" (Luke 24:27). Elsewhere, John records Jesus saying: "You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life" (John 5:39, 40). Our faith in Jesus the key to our understanding God’s Word, we can only rightly interpret it through Him.

The Fundamental Things Apply

Now, of course, for some of us the gospel has been presented in such a way that we think that our fundamental faith in Christ includes all sorts of peripherals, which it doesn’t. Things like our manner of baptism, how we view the Lord’s Table, how our church is governed, the gift of tongues and the morality of homosexuality. Indeed, the amount of time spent preaching on the minors, it’s no wonder we start thinking that they’re the majors. But our particular denomination’s distinctives are not part of the fundamentals of our faith in Christ.

Before you Baptists and Catholics start sputtering, let me be clear. I didn’t say these things aren’t important to the church or to God, although sometimes they aren’t. I didn’t say that any particular denomination’s distinctives are or are not Scriptural. I’m just saying that they aren’t fundamental to our faith. Even if we believe Scripture fully supports our particular church’s position, we cannot deny that Brand X church up the street is also Christian, if they affirm the fundamental truths of our common Christian faith. And that’s true even if it’s that "homosexual" church.

In fact, by applying the rule of the analogy of faith we see that we misinterpret Scripture precisely to the extent that we make what is peripheral central to the gospel—because then we are misinterpreting the gospel message. Therefore, when you try to tell me that I can’t be a Christian unless I’m full immersed baptized or have spoken in tongues or have been made straight, you are misinterpreting the Scriptures in the light of our faith in Jesus.

If you aren’t clear on what the fundamentals are, read the Apostles’ Creed.

Is King David My Type?

Brace yourself! I’m going to contradict myself. Earlier I said one of the very most fundamental rules for interpreting Scripture correctly is to read it according to author’s intention within its historical and cultural context. That’s still true, but…"the word of God is living" (Heb. 4:12). The new covenant between God and humankind in Christ Jesus is "not a covenant of written letters but of the Spirit: the written letters bring death, but the Spirit gives life" (2 Cor. 3:6). We might be ever so correct in our literalistic interpretation and miss how God is using his Word to speak into our lives today.

Of course, we’ve all heard some pretty nutty interpretations of Scripture, but there is a valid way for us to understand the primary context of Scripture—what the author intended to convey--within the further context of the ongoing life of the church and our own personal lives. The first step is to remain true to the primary meaning of the text—what did the author mean to say—even as we apply that original meaning to our own lives. A good example is the story of Ruth and Naomi. Lesbian Christians would be violating the original meaning of the text if they read back into this story a lesbian love affair. But when our sisters in Christ affirm the primary meaning of the text and then apply that meaning to their own lives, they validly hear within this story God’s Word speaking to them as lesbians. In the same way, gay Christian men’s "gaydar" goes into red alert when we come to the story of David and Jonathan. But we err against the text if we project back onto these men our own gay orientation. We would, in essence, be doing the exact same thing that we have already condemned Bible gay bashers for doing with Romans—reading back into a totally different culture and historical period our own understanding of what it means to be gay. But does that mean that the love story between these two men can’t be used by the Holy Spirit to help us better understand the meaning of our own holy covenants? Of course not; the Word is alive! It is totally legitimate for gay men to understand God’s Word as speaking to them through this ancient story.

G. R. Osborne in the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, writes that the Bible often uses types to reveal "an analogical correspondence in which earlier events, persons, and places in salvation history become patterns by which later events and the like are interpreted." For example, Paul writes that Adam is "a type of Him who was to come" (Rom. 5:14). Peter points out that the Flood was a type for which "there is an antitype which now saves us—baptism" (1 Peter 3:21). Similarly, we queer Christians, legitimately interpret within Scripture types which prefigure our lives. The experience of the eunuch within Israel is seen as a type of the experience of queer Christians within the Church. Initially, we were cut off from worship with the people of God (Deut. 23:1). But God promised that the eunuchs "who keep my Sabbaths, who choose what pleases me and hold fast to my covenant—to them I will give within my temple and its walls a memorial and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that will not be cut off" (Isaiah 56:4, 5). This prophecy was literally fulfilled in Acts 8:26-40: "The eunuch said, ‘Look, here is water. Why shouldn’t I be baptized?’…Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him" (vs. 36, 38). And it is still being fulfilled every time a gay, lesbian, bi or transgendered person trusts their heart to Christ today.

I Still Don’t Get It!

Now that we know these simple rules, let’s turn to Romans 9:18: "Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden." Double predestination. Well, I’m afraid that’s all the time we have today for Mr. Bible Know-It-All!

While I have absolute confidence in the perspicuity or understandability of Scripture, I know that sometimes I just don’t get it—no matter how much I study. Sometimes even the church as a whole will not be able to fully understand a given passage of Scripture. Peter himself admitted that he didn’t always get what Paul was saying: "His letters contain some things that are hard to understand" (2 Peter 3:16). Augustine believed that God intentionally made parts of Scripture obscure so that we would be motivated to study them all the more earnestly. Like swords sharpened on steel, our souls will be strengthened as we struggle through difficult passages in God’s Word. The two-edged result is 1) "What is sought with difficulty is discovered with more pleasure," and 2) We will learn a proper humility before the Holy Word of the Almighty God.

Problems start when "ignorant and unstable people distort" the Scriptures (2 Peter 3:16) trying to pretend like they’ve got it all figured out, when they don’t. Sometimes we’ll come up with some lame interpretation, which further study shows can’t be reconciled with the rest of Scripture. But then, as Augustine, no doubt rolling up his eyes to heaven, notes, "I don’t know why, but, loving our own interpretation, we begin to become angrier with the Scriptures than we are with ourselves" when our pet theory doesn’t stand up to a proper reading of God’s Word. It’s okay to say, ‘I don’t know’ and then "Be still, and know that I am God" (Psalm 46:10) while you keep meditating on his Word (Psalm 119:11).

Study to Show Thyself Approved

Queer Christians often depend upon their personal testimony to convince the church that they are accepted in Christ. It’s good to have a holy witness to give (Rev. 12:11), but unless we base our testimony upon the Word of God (1 John 5:9), the church won’t listen—why should it? We need to show them that we are not ashamed of God’s Word, because we are "rightly dividing the word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15) when we interpret it in a gay-friendly way.

We know that the Holy Scriptures are able to make us wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus (2 Tim. 3:15). "All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable…so that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:16, emphasis mine). But as Augustine points out, we won’t know it if we don’t read it: "He will be the most expert investigator of the Holy Scriptures who has first read all of them." Study God’s Word to show yourself approved by God (2 Tim. 2:15) and in this way you will be prepared to give an answer to straight Christians when they ask you to give the reason for the hope that is you (1 Peter 3:15).