A Response to the Reformation Project
Alan and Greg continue their response to the Reformation Project (the movement to change Christians��� minds about homosexuality) in this month���s issue of Solid Ground. (You can read Part 1 here.)
The article addresses several of TRP���s talking points (taken from the Reformation Project���s regional training conference in D.C. last year), including:
���Experience shouldn���t cause us to dismiss Scripture, but it can cause us to reconsider our interpretation of Scripture.���
���Sexual orientation is a new concept���one the Christian tradition has not addressed.���
���The New Testament points toward greater inclusion of gender and sexual minorities, including those who do not fit neatly within binary categories.���
���The Bible does not teach a normative doctrine of gender complementarity.���
Here���s an excerpt regarding that last point:
Scripture, TRP is claiming, is actually silent on the idea that males were made by God as the appropriate sexual complement to females (the ���normative doctrine of gender complementarity���). Rather, ���the focus in Genesis 2 is not on the complementarity of male and female, but rather on the similarity of male and female, over and against the created animals. The ���one flesh��� union spoken of in Genesis 2:24 connotes not physical complementarity, but a kinship tie.������
Eve was a suitable helper for Adam because she was human, not animal���true enough. But that is not the whole of it. God also said, ���Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth��� (Gen. 1:28). Complying with this command requires more than a species kin relationship. It requires the ���male and female��� genders mentioned in the verse right before it. Indeed, the reproductive system is the only human bodily function that requires uniting with a human being of the opposite sex to fulfill its purpose.
When a man leaves his parents, he cleaves to���becomes one flesh with���his wife (Gen. 2:24), not just to another human he is ���kin��� to. This is the kind of one-flesh union God had in mind, the only union capable of fulfilling the ���be fruitful and multiply��� creation mandate. That���s why there is not a single instance in Scripture where a pair of men or a pair of women are described in a ���one-flesh��� union.
Read the rest of ���A Reformation the Church Doesn���t Need, Part 2.���
