A RESPONSE TO AND EVALUATION OF RECONCILING SCRIPTURE FOR LUTHERANS

Reconciling Scripture for Lutherans: Sexuality and Gender Identity is a booklet distributed by ReconcilingWorks to give a Biblical basis for affirming the LGBTQ+ lifestyle and for fully welcoming LGBTQ+ people into the life of the church, including as rostered leaders of the church. The booklet is divided into three parts. A short introduction discusses what the authors present as a Lutheran way of interpreting Scripture. The booklet then covers eight Bible passages, which it describes as the “clobber passages” that have been “used to exclude LGBTQ+ people from the body of Christ,” and eight passages which it claims “offer inclusive and expansive understandings of the nature of God’s welcome” (page 7).

In this article I will cover two things –

First, the way in which the clear and obvious meaning of Scripture is set aside in order to get Scripture to support the LGBTQ+ perspective.

Second, the way in which the booklet never adequately addresses the fact that whenever the Bible speaks of same-sex sexual behavior, it always speaks against it.

First, the setting aside of the clear and obvious meaning of Scripture in order to get Scripture to support the LGBTQ+ perspective.

The authors begin by praising Martin Luther for rejecting allegorical and metaphorical methods of interpretation, and instead insisting “that Scripture should not be interpreted to say more than what it meant to its original hearers, writers, and readers.” Our duty is to explore “what Scripture would have meant to its original hearers in its historical context” (page 10). And yet there are multiple times when the authors twist and/or stretch the plain and obvious meaning and message of the Bible in order to get the Bible to support their agenda.

The First of the Passages Used to Exclude is from Genesis 1, which clearly states that God created humanity male and female and then said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth” (Genesis 1: 28). The traditional view of human sexuality is based upon the Biblical account of the creation of humanity as male and female. This view is supported by no less an authority than Jesus himself, who quoted this passage in Matthew 19: 4. Because God made humanity male and female, they were able to multiply and fill the earth.

And yet look at what the authors have done. They argue that just as there is not only land and sea, but also things in between such as swamps, estuaries, and reefs, and not just day and night, but also times in between such as dusk and dawn, so the Biblical account of creation could be interpreted as endorsing not just two sexes – male and female – but also a wide variety of gender identities (page 16). They also say, “We may read the description of human beings as male or female in this verse in the same way we read the description of God as Alpha and Omega – as a summary of every point along spectrum, rather than as two distinct boxes” (page 16).

But what does the Bible say? What is the clear meaning and message of Scripture? In Genesis 1: 27 it says, “Male and female he created them.” And then in the next verse, in verse 28, it says, “God blessed them, and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply.’” It is because humans are male and female that they are able to multiply. In Matthew 19: 4-5 Jesus said, “Have you not read that the one who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?” The words “for this reason” at the beginning of verse 5 mean that there is a connection between verse 4 and verse 5. It is because God made humans male and female that two people—one male and one female—are able to become one flesh. Any other interpretation—such as that the Bible is advocating for a wide variety and broad spectrum of sexual and gender identities—is reading in rather than listening to the plain, clear, and obvious message of Scripture.

The Second of the Passages Used to Exclude is from the second creation story found in Genesis 2. The authors state, “This coming together of Adam and Eve as man and woman has been used as a proof text in the argument against same-gender relationships.” The authors are correct when they say that Christians who hold to a traditional view believe that “true unity in relationships can only be achieved by male-female pairs whose differences complement each other, essentially making one whole out of two halves” (page 19).

What is odd is what the authors say in the next several sentences. They argue that the use of the language “one flesh” in both Genesis 2 and Matthew 19 recognizes a desired “sameness.” “If Adam was searching for a partner who had significant differences, or even complimentary (sic) differences, he might have chosen one of the animals whom God brought to him earlier in the chapter . . . . But rather than choosing something entirely different from himself, Adam speaks reverently about the similarities he and Eve share . . . . The characteristics that Adam was looking for in a mate had more to do with similarity and the ability to share life with someone like himself than it had to do with making up for some kind of lack in either partner” (page 19).

It is because of their bias to find support for same-sex relationships that the authors allow for only two options—the sameness of Adam and Eve, and the great differences between Adam and one of the animals. They do not allow for a third possibility—the similarities and differences, or what could be called the complementary differences, of male and female, which are able to become one flesh, and which are then able to multiply and fill the earth.

The authors also ignore the clear and obvious way in which the Biblical text connects verse 23 of Genesis 2, which speaks of the creation of two sexes, male and female, with verse 24, which speaks of two becoming one flesh. Verse 24 begins with the words “therefore” or “for this reason.” It is because male and female are two separate sexes (verse 23) that they are able to become one flesh (verse 24).

The Third of the Passages Used to Exclude is Genesis 19. I believe that the authors have made a clear and compelling case that homosexual behavior is not the sole reason for the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Rather the Scriptures are very clear that many other sinful behaviors also are the issue, including pride, greed, and uncharity (page 23). Those who wish to build a case that the Bible consistently rejects same-sex sexual behavior need to refer also to other passages of Scripture and not just the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19.

The Fourth of the Passages Used to Exclude – from Leviticus 18 and 20 – I will deal with these in the second part of this article.

The Fifth of the Passages Used to Exclude is Deuteronomy 22: 5, “A woman shall not wear a man’s apparel, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment.” The authors give two reasons why this verse should not be used as an argument against cross dressing. First, they say that some scholars believe that wearing the clothing of another gender was a common part of the cultic rituals for many of the civilizations surrounding Israel. Therefore, this prohibition essentially added another layer of protection against any kind of worship of other gods (page 27). I do not know enough about the worship life of the nations surrounding Israel at that time to be able to comment on this first argument. However, there is a major flaw in their second argument. The authors refer to the writings of a Jewish rabbi who suggested that the words used for “a man’s apparel” actually refer to armor and weapons. In an effort to minimize the loss of women who would be capable of childbearing, women were not to dress as men and go into battle (pages 27-28). The problem with that interpretation is that the verse not only forbids women to dress as men, it also tells men not to dress as women.

The Sixth of the Passages Used to Exclude is Deuteronomy 23: 1 – “No one whose testicles are crushed or whose penis is cut off shall be admitted to the assembly of the Lord.” Along with the authors I feel compassion for a man who has been forcibly castrated—either as a form of punishment (page 29) or in order to make him into a eunuch so that he would be able to care for the king’s wives or to watch over the royal treasury (page 30). I can understand the point of the authors that maybe this verse was included in order to keep “the Hebrew people from using castration as a punishment because it would essentially disconnect the offender from society as a whole, which, in that time and place, would have been almost as effective as a death sentence” (pages 29-30). I give thanks for the later inclusion of those who had been forcibly castrated in exile (see my consideration of the Third of the Passages Used to Welcome – Isaiah 56), and I give thanks that Philip reached out to and baptized the Ethiopian eunuch (see my consideration of the Fifth of the Passages Used to Welcome – Acts 8). But, as I will say in my consideration of those two passages, they do not give Biblical support for transgenderism as a sex change process which is intentionally and voluntarily chosen.

The Seventh and Eighth of the Passages Used to Exclude – from Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6, and 1 Timothy 1 – I will deal with these in the second part of this article.  

It should be clear and obvious that in their consideration of the Passages Used to Exclude the authors are not taking seriously the clear and obvious meaning of a text, but instead are using a text for their own pre-determined purposes in order to find Biblical support for the LGBTQ+ agenda. The same is also true of the Passages Used to Welcome.

The First of the Passages Used to Welcome is the book of Ruth. The authors are absolutely correct when they say that “Ruth shows great loyalty to Naomi, both in word and in action, and for it she is rewarded with a husband and a place among the chosen people of Israel” (page 42). The authors say it so well in their claim that “Ruth’s story gives us some of the most beautiful commitment poetry in the Bible” (page 42). The fact that Ruth, a foreigner, became a “part of the chosen people of Israel and a member of the lineage of Christ” (page 42) does show that “God works through outsiders to continue to bring the whole world to restoration and reconciliation” (pages 42-43). But there is no way that one can legitimately argue that the book of Ruth is intended to support the LGBTQ+ agenda and the concept of same-sex sexual behavior. The only sexual relationships mentioned in the book of Ruth are opposite-sex sexual relationships—between Elimelech and Naomi, their two sons Mahlon and Chilion and their Moabite wives Orpah and Ruth, and Ruth and Boaz. In trying to get this story to support the LGBTQ+ agenda and same-sex sexual behavior the authors have violated the method of interpretation which they have praised Martin Luther for—not trying to get Scripture to say “more than what it meant to its original hearers, writers, and readers” (page 10).

As part of their discussion of this First of the Passages Used to Welcome, the authors also mention Jesus’ actively reaching out to people on the edges of society, including Samaritans and tax collectors (page 42). But again, there is no way that one could argue that in taking these actions Jesus was advocating for the LGBTQ+ agenda and same-sex sexual behavior. In the same way, I do not believe that Jesus was advocating for same-sex sexual behavior in Luke 4 when he spoke of how Elijah was sent to the widow at Zarephath in Sidon and how during the time of the prophet Elisha, only Naaman the Syrian was cleansed of his leprosy. The authors are violating the integrity of Scripture by trying to get Scripture to say something far different from what it meant to the original hearers, writers, and readers.

The Second of the Passages Used to Welcome is Psalm 139. The authors quote verses 13 and 14: “For it was you who formed my inward parts; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.” These verses remind me of Jeremiah 1: 5, where God said to the prophet, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.”

The authors are absolutely right when they say that the verses from Psalm 139 show that “God already knows us completely, and loves us unconditionally” (page 44). They are also correct when they say that we “learn and grow and continue to change throughout our entire lives” (page 45). They are accurate in their statement that “sometimes we require or choose to do things that help make us more whole and more healthy, like getting fitted for glasses, or taking medication for depression, or having our appendix out” (page 45). So far I would agree with them. But then they go on to say that “for transgender people, these changes may include things like name and pronoun changes, hormone therapy, or gender-confirmation surgery” (page 45). They are speaking as if gender-confirmation or gender-reassignment surgery was no more than getting fitted for glasses or having your appendix taken out.

What the trans-affirming community is saying is that the “real” self is the self with the new name and the new gender identity. According to the trans-affirming community, as God was forming my inward parts and knitting me together in my mother’s womb, God knew that the name I would be given at my birth would not be my real name and the gender with which I would be born would not be my real gender. There is a total lack of Biblical support for the idea that my “real” self (which is also known to God) is something other than what God formed me in my mother’s womb to be. Psalm 139 does not support what the trans-affirming community is trying to get it to support.

I will consider together the Third and Fifth of the Passages Used to Welcome. The Fifth of the Passages Used to Welcome is the story in Acts 8 of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch. Along with the authors I grieve over the thought that this person who was seeking to be in relationship with God might not have been allowed into the temple in Jerusalem. Along with the authors I rejoice that a follower of Jesus (Philip) realized “the real-life implications of a Gospel that is meant for all people” (page 54). The Ethiopian eunuch was asking, “Can my being a eunuch and an ethnic and racial outsider keep me from being baptized?” Along with the authors I am glad that Philip answered with a resounding, “Of course not.” But the baptism and inclusion of someone who was probably forcibly castrated does not provide Biblical support for voluntarily choosing gender-confirmation or gender-reassignment surgery.  

The same thing is true of the Third of the Passages Used to Welcome – Isaiah 56, which embraces those who had been forcibly castrated in exile. This passage also does not provide Biblical support for a sex change process which is intentionally and voluntarily chosen.

The Fourth of the Passages Used to Welcome is from Matthew 22. Jesus is asked, “Which commandment in the law is the greatest?” He replies, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself’” (Matthew 22: 37-39, Mark 12: 30-31). The authors ask whether the prohibitions in Leviticus 18 and 20 against sex with animals, sex with “a man as with a woman,” and sex during a woman’s menstrual cycle show love (verse 51). Their answer is that the ancient Israelites were like other ancient cultures in believing that the amount of semen was limited. Sex with animals, same-gender sexual activity between men, and sex during a woman’s menstrual cycle would have “wasted” an opportunity to have a child. “Depriving a wife of children . . . would not have been an act of love” (page 51). However, the Bible does not base its prohibition against sex with animals and same-sex sexual behavior between men upon a limited amount of semen. Rather it is based upon creation. The one whom Adam was to become one flesh with was the one concerning whom Adam said, “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh” (Genesis 2: 23). The one whom Adam was to become one flesh with was not one of the animals, from which he was very different, but a human, with whom he shared both similarities and differences—a human of the opposite sex.  

The Sixth of the Passages Used to Welcome is the story of Peter and Cornelius, as found in Acts 10 and 11. Along with the authors, I am struck with how difficult it must have been for Peter to go to Cornelius’ house. I am glad that Peter paid attention to what the Spirit was doing, even when the Spirit was doing some “scary and life-changing things” (page 56). But there is a basic problem in claiming that the Gentile outreach of the early church supports the LGBTQ+ agenda and same-sex sexual behavior. Outreach beyond the Jewish community was fully in line with the words of Jesus to the disciples in Acts 1: 8 – “You will be my witnesses in . . . Samaria and to the ends of the earth.” And in the New Testament there is a clear change in attitude towards the Old Testament dietary laws. “The law was our disciplinarian until Christ came.” (Galatians 3: 24) But there is no way that there is a similar change in attitude in the New Testament towards same-sex sexual behavior. Rather, as we will see in the second main section of this paper, every time the Bible speaks about same-sex sexual behavior, it speaks against it.

One wonders why—with their prime method of interpretation being a hermeneutic of inclusion rather than what the passage meant to its original readers, writers, and hearers—the authors did not include the Jerusalem conference in Acts 15 as one of the passages used to welcome. If some of the other passages which they use are supposed to support same-sex sexual behavior, then why could we not say that the decision to include Gentiles within the church without their first having to become Jews also supports same-sex sexual behavior?

The Seventh of the Passages Used to Welcome is 1 Corinthians 12, where the apostle Paul describes the church as being like a body. I agree with the authors that Paul is saying that every part of the body is important, and that when one part of the body is hurting, the whole body is hurting. The problem is that the authors then use these statements to build their case in favor of the LGBTQ+ agenda and same-sex sexual behavior.

Certainly, every part of the body is important. Certainly, the pain felt by anyone needs to affect everyone. As people who have experienced the love of Christ, we need to feel compassion for all people, regardless of their sexuality and gender identity. We need to speak the truth in love, but we need to speak the truth. How can we use this part of one of Paul’s letters to argue in favor of something that Paul so clearly writes against in other parts of his letters? Again, the authors are violating their own principle of interpretation by trying to get a passage of Scripture to say something very different from what it was meant to say by its original writer to its original hearers and readers.

Having covered several examples of the amazing way in which the authors set aside the clear and obvious meaning of Scripture in order to get Scripture to support the LGBTQ+ perspective, I will now turn to the second main section of this article –

The way in which the booklet never adequately addresses the fact that whenever the Bible speaks about same-sex sexual behavior, it always speaks against it.

Here I will address the Fourth, Seventh, and Eighth of the Passages Used to Exclude. All of these passages are very clear in their rejection of same-sex sexual behavior. The authors of Reconciling Scripture are never able to develop a convincing argument to dismiss, discredit, reinterpret, or explain away this rejection. One of the things that for me is amazing about their treatment of the Fourth Passage is that they do not even really try.

The Fourth of the Passages Used to Exclude is from Leviticus 18 and 20. Leviticus 18: 22 clearly says, “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman.” This prohibition is then repeated in Leviticus 20: 13. (Please note that I have corrected the typo in the booklet, which has “like” rather than “lie” in its quotation of both verses.)

What could be clearer than that? And yet the authors never really deal with that very clear prohibition. Nor do they come up with a convincing argument to explain it away. Instead they state that “Jesus’ relationship with the Mosaic law is complex” (page 25).

They are correct when they say that Jesus made some of the commandments even more demanding (as in the Sermon on the Mount), on several occasions did not observe the sabbath commandment, and saved a woman who had been caught in adultery from being stoned. But Jesus never arbitrarily violated the letter of the moral law merely by stating that that prohibition was not valid anymore. When he acted contrary to the sabbath commandment, he always had a specific, life preserving purpose for doing so. Also, as in the time when he defended the disciples, who were being criticized for plucking some heads of grain, rubbing them in their hands, and eating them on the sabbath, Jesus cited Biblical precedent. He told of how David and his companions ate the Bread of the Presence, “which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat” (Luke 6: 4). Unlike Jesus, the authors are not able to and do not provide any Biblical precedent for their rejecting the prohibitions against same-sex behavior in Leviticus 18 and 20.

In the same way there is no way that you could say that Jesus’ challenging the crowd, refusing to condemn the woman, and sending her on her way (page 26) is an adequate argument for rejecting the very clear prohibitions in Leviticus 18 and 20. In Jesus’ saying, “Go and sin no more” (John 8:11), he was saying that the woman—as well as the man with whom she had been committing adultery—had both been sinning.

I would certainly agree with the authors that the Bible does not support modern-day violence against men who have sex with other men (page 26). It certainly also does not support modern-day violence against women who have sex with other women, men and women with gender dysphoria, and so on. But I would also want to say that the authors have done nothing to counter the clear prohibitions against same-sex sexual behavior in Leviticus.

Nor have they done an adequate job at explaining away the clear statements from Paul against same-sex sexual behavior in the Seventh of the Passages Used to Exclude – from Romans 1. In Romans 1: 26-27 Paul says, “Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another.”

Unlike the way in which the authors really did not deal with the Fourth Passage (from Leviticus), at least they try to find a way to explain away the clear meaning of the Seventh Passage. First, they try to discredit the Seventh Passage by saying that “Paul, like every other writer of his time, did not have a concept of ‘sexual orientation’ as we have today” (page 32). Therefore, they would argue, Paul did not understand that for some people it feels “natural” to be sexually attracted to someone of the same sex. But here Paul is not talking about what feels natural to me. Rather, starting with verse 20, he is talking about creation. He is talking about the natural orders of creation—the fact that God created humanity male and female. And besides, just because certain desires and attractions feel natural to me, that does not mean that they are right. It would be a very scary approach to ethics to say that if it feels natural or desirable to me, then it must be acceptable. One would never want to say that, if it feels natural or desirable to engage in pedophilia, rape, or adultery, then it must be OK.

Second, the authors argue that Paul is not speaking against same-sex sexual behavior per se, but same-sex sexual behavior within the context of idol worship. Again, that kind of interpretation has to be read in. It is not what the passage says. It is not the conclusion that a person would come to through what the authors call “the Plain Reading of Scripture.”

And then there is another line of argument that has been used by others against a traditional interpretation of this passage, which the authors of this booklet do not use. Some say that Paul is not talking here about loving, committed, consensual, same-sex sexual behavior between two adults, but instead is speaking against abusive, same-sex sexual behavior, such as between an adult and a child. The problem with that interpretation is the clear consensual language that Paul is using. “The men . . . were consumed with passion for one another” (verse 27).

The Eighth of the Passages Used to Exclude are 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10. These two verses make use of two words in Greek which are the issue here – malakoi, which literally means “soft ones” (page 35), and arsenokoitai, which is a combination of the words “male” and “bed” (page 36) – men who take other men to bed. The Greek word malakoi has been interpreted to refer to men who take the passive role in a same sex sexual relationship, i.e., who allow themselves to be penetrated.

The authors are among those who try to build a case in favor of same-sex sexual behavior by arguing that what the Bible is speaking against is abusive, same-sex sexual behavior—same-sex sexual behavior where there is an imbalance of power—not against loving, committed, consensual, same-sex sexual behavior. Therefore, they make such statements as the following. In the culture in which Paul was writing, “same-gender sexual activity existed, but long-term, monogamous, same-gender romantic relationships did not . . . . Paul wanted to reaffirm the boundaries of marriage. Although there was same-gender love in Greek and Roman cultures, it was not understood as a long-term relationship or one that could lead to marital fidelity and family” (pages 36-37).

But again, that is not the clear meaning of what is being said. Paul is not saying that it is OKto be among the malakoi and arsenokoitai as long as you are involved in loving, committed, consensual, same-sex sexual behavior, but it is not OK if you are involved in abusive, imbalance-of-power, same-sex sexual behavior. Rather he is speaking against all same-sex, sexual behavior. And the fact that in these passages Paul speaks against a number of other kinds of behavior does not eliminate the fact that he speaks against the malakoi and arsenokoitai.

The Eighth of the Passages Used to Welcome is Galatians 3. The authors begin that section by saying that Paul’s letter to the Galatians “was meant to help a community of diverse people understand how they might worship God together” (verse 59). Therefore, “in an attempt to bring the diverse Galatians together, Paul points them toward the one thing they all share—an identity in Christ” (page 59).

I was relieved that the authors did not try to argue for the elimination of sexual differences based upon Paul’s statement in Galatians 3: 28 that “there is no longer male and female.” I have known people who have made that kind of argument. Rather Paul’s point is that in terms of salvation there is no one group that has a special “in” over other groups. Paul’s main purpose in writing to the Galatians was not “to help a community of diverse people understand how they might worship God together.” Rather it was to counter false teachers and to bring the people back to an understanding that “a person is justified not by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ” (Galatians 2: 16).

The authors are right that there is an “inclusive arc that runs throughout scripture . . . beginning in the earliest history of the Hebrew people—set apart from all others with a Law to govern that separation—to the calling in of one outsider after another from Ruth, to the foreigners and the eunuchs of Isaiah, to the tax collectors and Samaritans of the Gospel, to Cornelius the Gentile centurion” (page 60). But the prohibition against same-sex sexual behavior remains throughout Scripture. It is not just part of the Law that governed Israel’s separation in the early days of their existence as a people. Rather it is based upon the creation of humanity as male and female, and it stands throughout the Bible.

The authors end the booklet by advocating for “an acceptance of differences in sexuality and gender identity” (page 60). It should be clear from a reading of this article that the authors are advocating for something that the Bible consistently does not approve.

The authors end by advocating for “a welcome for all” (page 60). The issue is not “a welcome for all.” Jesus told Nicodemus in what has been called the Gospel in a nutshell—the most famous verse in the Bible—“God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life” (John 3: 16). Jesus’ use of the word “everyone” is a “welcome for all” to believe in him and have eternal life.

The issue is not whether there is “a welcome for all.” Rather the issue is what kind of behavior does the Bible accept and what kind does it not accept. It is absolutely essential that those who hold to traditional views of human sexuality address the matter of LGBTQ+ concerns with compassion. We need to stand firm on what the Bible says, but, as the apostle Paul wrote to the Ephesians, we need to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4: 15).

Season 5 of the Netflix series Queer Eye was released on June 5, 2020.  Episode 1 features a number of ELCA pastors, including the Rev. Noah Hepler, who needed help in accepting his sexual identity; the Rev. Megan Rohr, the ELCA’s first transgender pastor; and Bishop Guy Erwin, the ELCA’s first gay bishop.  This episode lifts up the LGBTQ+ lifestyle as well as what has come to be called “Queer Christianity.”  Because of the fact that potentially it could be seen by millions of people around the world, it is important that people know what is being promoted and how they can respond to friends and family members who see the episode and might be persuaded to accept its LGBTQ+ ideas.  A link to the trailer for season 5, including episode 1, can be found here.  

Queer Eye is a series which features a team of five LGBTQ+ people, who are known as the Fab 5.  Each of them is an expert/specialist in some field, such as cooking, fashion, and interior design.  They work with individual people, giving them a makeover, redesigning their home and/or workspace, and then helping them improve some aspect of their life.  Pastor Noah is the person whom the Fab 5 help in this episode.

I will begin by commenting on the Discussion Guide, which was prepared by ReconcilingWorks and ELM (Extraordinary Lutheran Ministries).  These are two organizations which advocate for and are committed to the full participation of persons of all sexual orientations and gender identities in the life and ministry of the Lutheran church.  A copy of the discussion guide can be found here.

Good things can be said about each of the three “Ground Rules for Engagement” in the Discussion Guide.  In the First Ground Rule I agree that people are more important than definitions.  If you do not know what pronoun to use, then just call that person by name.  All you need to welcome someone and engage with them in conversation is their name.  I agree with the concern in the Second Ground Rule to build a relationship of mutual trust and respect.  A primary goal of conversation is to dismantle barriers between people.  I appreciate the point in the Third Ground Rule that as people engage in conversation they might experience a new awareness of themselves and/or someone they care about.  In any conversation we need to have an open heart and mind.  We need to be learning and growing our whole lives.  I can also understand the emphasis in the Third Ground Rule upon self care.  People need to take care of themselves – physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually – if they are going to be able to engage in these difficult conversations in a healthy way.     

But immediately below these Ground Rules there is a quotation from Scripture, which I believe is being misused.  The verse being quoted is 2 Corinthians 5: 17 – “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, they are a new creation.  The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.”  I assume that the intended interpretation is that the old that passes away is traditional views of human sexuality as well as all the guilt and shame that is being felt by those who claim to have been abused by the church and therefore are struggling with their sexual and gender identity.  I assume that the new that comes is the full acceptance of all forms of gender identity and the full inclusion of people of all sexual and gender identities within the life of the church.

The problem with that interpretation is that it does not square with other things said by the same person (the apostle Paul) to the same group of people (the church in Corinth).  Following the principle of letting Scripture interpret Scripture, we need to understand 2 Corinthians 5: 17 in the light of 1 Corinthians 6: 9-11.  These three verses in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians list several examples of wrongful behavior, including two terms that refer to same-sex sexual behavior.  Then Paul says, “This is what some of you used to be.  But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.”  We need to understand 2 Corinthians 5: 17 in terms of what was intended by the person who wrote it, not in a way that supports our own pre-determined agenda.  Being a new creation, having the old pass away, and experiencing the new does not mean my accepting my gender identity, whatever it may be, and my acting according to my desires, impulses, and attractions, whatever they may be.  Instead it refers to the forgiveness of sins, the breaking of the power of the hold of sin in my life, and my experiencing all the love, joy, peace, hope, and grace that God has to give. 

There are six things that I would now like to say about Episode 1 of Season 5 of Queer Eye.

First, I am very sorry that Pastor Noah grew up in a home and church environment that was so negative and repressive.  I thank God that there are many congregations that hold to traditional views that are not negative and repressive like the one he grew up in.  I thank God that there are many congregations that hold to traditional views not to repress people, but to bring people into the life-giving way of Jesus Christ. 

Second, we have a stunning example of what is called “queer hermeneutics” in Pastor Noah’s telling about the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded in Luke 7.  The NRSV says in verse 2, “A centurion there had a slave whom he valued highly, and who was ill and close to death.”  Following the principles of queer hermeneutics, Pastor Noah translates the word as “beloved” or “boyfriend,” meaning that the centurion and the servant were in a same-sex sexual relationship.  So rather than the centurion’s concern for his servant being an example of the caring spirit and high moral quality of this Roman soldier, which would lead some Jewish elders to speak to Jesus on his behalf, because he had shown great care for the Jewish people by building a synagogue for them (verses 4-5), those who practice queer hermeneutics twist Scripture to say what they want Scripture to say in favor of same-sex sexual behavior.

I cannot imagine that Jewish elders, who were steeped in the law, would advocate for an official of an occupying foreign army who was having a same-sex sexual relationship with a servant.  Jesus clearly defined marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman in which two people become one flesh (Matthew 19: 4-6).  And though Jesus did get into trouble with the Pharisees for breaking the sabbath, he never did cancel the Old Testament moral law, such as in Leviticus 18: 22 and 20: 13, which clearly forbid same-sex sexual behavior.  It is preposterous to me to say that Jesus did not say anything about the same-sex sexual relationship between the centurion and his servant, but instead healed the servant.  Therefore, Jesus must have been okay with same-sex sexual relationships.  Such a violation of the clear meaning of Scripture in order to promote one’s own agenda is unworthy for anyone who would claim the authority to teach the Scriptures.   

Third, in the episode one of the Fab 5 tells how he had been hurt by the church.  He still has negative feelings about the church, but he says that he would be happy to help another person who would then promote a different kind of Christianity that does not hurt LGBTQ+ people.  People who hold to traditional views of human sexuality need to realize that many LGBTQ+ people have been hurt by the church.  We who hold to traditional views need to share our views in such a way that we do not come across as angry, judgmental, and/or afraid.  It is not because we are against LGBTQ+ people, but instead it is because we care about and are concerned for LGBTQ+ people that we share our traditional views.  LGBTQ+ people need to know that we care about them.  They need to know our love for them.

Fourth, I am concerned about the way in which – in the redesign of the church – rainbow lights are placed along the side aisles, to add color as well as to celebrate Noah’s queerness.  Also, the church is decorated with flowers in the colors of the rainbow flag on the altar.  Decorations in the church are to bring glory to God, not to celebrate me.  Anything placed on the altar should be an expression of God’s great love and gift of Himself to us.  The altar and anything on the altar are not to promote a personal agenda or to point to me.  Making me rather than the Lord the focus is a form of idolatry.

Fifth, Noah explains to the member of Fab 5 that both of them had been hurt by the church.  On behalf of the church, Noah apologizes for the hurt that had been caused for the member of Fab 5 by the church’s refusing to be LGBTQ+ affirming.  As explained above, we who hold traditional views need to make sure that we communicate that it is our love and concern for LGBTQ+ people that leads us to share our traditional views.  But we also need to remember what Martin Luther said so eloquently that the Bible comforts the afflicted, but it also afflicts the comfortable.  Sometimes God’s Word will make me uncomfortable.  It will convict me of sin.  Hebrews 4: 12 says that it is “sharper than any two-edged sword.”  Objects with sharp edges can hurt.  I cannot expect that God’s Word will never hurt.  It is neither appropriate nor helpful for me to feel that I have to apologize every time God’s Word hurts someone.

Sixth, just as I was troubled by the rainbow lights in the sanctuary that celebrated Pastor Noah’s queerness and the rainbow colored flowers on the altar that promoted the LGBTQ+ agenda, so I am troubled by the wording of Pastor Noah’s sending at the end of the service.  “Go in peace.  Be fabulous in the Lord.”/”Thanks be to God.”  The purpose of the sending is to give glory to God and to strengthen my commitment to service and ministry.  It is not to focus on how fabulous I am.  Whether it is the decorations in the sanctuary, the items on the altar, or the wording of the sending, making me rather than the Lord the focus is idolatrous.

1517 (https://www.1517.org)

“We create and distribute theological and apologetic resources anchored in the central message of the Bible: that Christ died for sinners and rose for their justification. Through the proclamation of the Gospel, we aim to give assurance and consolation to Christians, enable individuals to serve their neighbors in freedom, and strengthen the church.  Our resources include a podcast network, daily articles, speakers, a publishing house, annual conferences, and an online academy.”

3DM Ministries.  (https://www.3dmovements.com)

“We are made up of men and women around the world who are following Jesus together, multiplying disciples who make disciples, and empowering spiritual families to live on mission for the sake of the lost. We are a richly diverse movement of people from different walks of life, socio-economic contexts, ethnic backgrounds, and spiritual traditions. What unites us is our love for God, our desire to live the life Jesus modeled for us, and our passion to see the good news of his kingdom come to all people.”

The Crossings Community.  (https://crossings.org)

A worldwide network of Christians dedicated to connecting the Word of God and daily life under the motto, “Crossing Life with the Promise of Christ.”  Theologically committed to the proper distinction of law and gospel.  Serves people in “crossing” their lived experiences with the promise of Christ to see how their stories fit within the gospel story.  Has an annual conference in the St. Louis area (free for seminarians), an engaging website, and a weekly Law/Gospel text study analysis of the lectionary Gospel reading that can be emailed to you or accessed on the website. 

Doxology.  (https://www.doxology.us)

Doxology provides pastors with a unique study and renewal experience, rooted in the classic art of the care of souls (cura animarum) and informed by the insights of contemporary Christian psychology.   Their primary purpose is to provide training, mentoring, and consultation services for pastors seeking to enhance their ability to help people struggling with the ever-increasing personal, family, and social complexities of contemporary life.  The retreat training environment, grounded in Holy Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions, ensures that pastors will be emotionally and spiritually refreshed and equipped by their participation.  The Center provides a safe environment for clergy to reflect on their own spiritual and emotional health and assists them to review and enhance their professional competencies and skills as servants of Christ and stewards of God’s sacred mysteries.  Doxology strengthens pastors so they can more faithfully pastor others.  Please note: Doxology does not recognize the ordination of women. 

The Moses Project (https://www.grandview.edu/the-moses-project)

Gives rural pastors a vision of ministry that will help them thrive in congregational leadership and in turn, enhance the vitality of the congregations they serve.  Designed to help rural pastors build relationships with and learn from experienced clergy who will guide them through challenges at critical, transitional phases in their early ministerial career. Through a distinct and exceptional professional development program, pastors will receive critical support, develop innovative strategies, and engage in ongoing learning and opportunities for renewal. They will build the very network that will provide them and those they serve with vitality.  Funded by the Thriving in Ministry Initiative of the Lilly Endowment, housed at Grand View University in Des Moines, Iowa, and in collaboration with the Southeastern and Western Iowa Synods of the ELCA.

Mount Carmel Ministries (www.mountcarmelministries.com)

Mount Carmel Ministries is a place of rest, renewal, and recreation where people experience Jesus.  Founded by the Lutheran Bible Institute of Minneapolis as their summer teaching ministry in 1938, Mount Carmel became independent in 1988.  They live out their mission through biblically based, Christ-centered programming and hospitality.  Their signature ministries include a summer camp for families, a Bible camp for adults age 55 and older, a Christian retreat center, and a daily devotional booklet. 

Sola Publishing (www.solapublishing.com)

Sola Publishing seeks to provide resources that reflect the integrity of the Scriptures as the Word of God, from the perspective of the historical Lutheran Confessions. The theological position that underlies the teaching materials produced by Sola Publishing is summarized in a statement called “The Common Confession.”  This is the same Common Confession adopted by Lutheran CORE and the NALC.  Sola Publishing offers a wide range of Bible Studies, Worship resources, Children and youth resources, including an online Sunday school resource called SEED, as well as books and magazines. Sola Publishing also added materials from Crossways International that are available through our website.

What Happened To Our Churches? (https://whathappened.church/blog/)

In fifty-two blogs Dr. David Luecke addresses what he sees as having gone wrong with traditional mainline churches.  Fifty years ago they were healthy, but now they are in steep decline. Luecke believes that Lutheran, as well as Presbyterian, Reformed, Episcopalian, Methodist, and United Church of Christ churches, have lost their basic spiritual energy.  It is his conviction that the only way for them to regain that energy is to pay much more attention to the apostle Paul’s emphasis upon the empowering presence of the Holy Spirit.

World Mission Prayer League (https://wmpl.org  612-871-6843)
A pan-Lutheran fellowship committed to Christian prayer as a working method of mission.  An international community of approximately 6,000 members with formal offices in the United States and Canada.  Supports approximately 120 workers serving in twenty countries throughout Africa, Asia, North America, and South America.  Its mission is to see that populations with limited or no access to the Gospel experience the love of Christ and that believers and communities of believers in the Americas and elsewhere engage in active and collaborative participation in living out their roles in the great commission.

American Lutheran Publicity Bureau (https://alpb.org)

Established in 1914.  An independent, non-profit organization that is linked by faith and confession to the Church it serves. Committed to an understanding of the Lutheran tradition as evangelical and catholic.  Affirms the Church’s scriptural and confessional foundations in order to foster renewal within the Lutheran bodies of North America, worldwide, and the wider ecumenical community. In an era in which the Church in North America must address an increasingly post-Christian and secular culture, makes the theological, liturgical and devotional resources of our confessional heritage accessible and relevant to all Lutherans as well as to friends in other communions.

First Things Journal (https://www.firstthings.com). 

Published by the Institute on Religion and Public Life, which was founded in 1989 by Richard John Neuhaus and his colleagues to confront the ideology of secularism and the position that faith has no place in shaping the public conversation or in shaping public policy.  In addition to publishing ten issues of First Things each year, the Institute hosts educational programs that promote religiously informed analysis of culture, society, theology, and politics.

CTS Media Resources (http://media.ctsfw.edu/)

Theological articles, course videos, chapel sermons, and other resources from Concordia Theological Seminary in Fort Wayne, Indiana.  No charge, but contributions are welcome.

Logia Journal: A Journal of Lutheran Theology (https://logia.org). 

A quarterly journal of Lutheran theology published by The Luther Academy featuring articles from diverse contributors worldwide on exegetical, historical, systematic, and liturgical theology. Clings to God’s divinely instituted marks of the church: the gospel, preached purely in all its articles, and the sacraments, administered according to Christ’s institution.

Lutheran Forum and Forum Letter (https://alpb.org)  

The flagship publications of the American Lutheran Publicity Bureau.  Discusses the faith once delivered to the saints as well as what is going on today in our culture, parishes, seminaries, and national churches.  For those who love the Lutheran tradition, sometimes worry about its future, and want to keep up with the news in the Lutheran church bodies in the United States as well as with what faithful Lutherans around the world are thinking and writing about worship, theology, ecumenism and more.  The FORUM Package includes both the Lutheran Forum, a 64-page quarterly journal with thoughtful articles written by a diverse group of authors, as well as the Forum Letter, a monthly 8-page lively newsletter that most subscribers read from start to finish on the day it arrives.

Lutheran Quarterly Journal (www.lutheranquarterly.com)

Discusses Lutheran church history and theology.  Appears in Spring, Summer, Autumn, and Winter issues each year. Provides a forum for the discussion of the Christian faith and life on the basis of the Lutheran Confessions.  Applies the principles of the Lutheran Church to the changing problems of religion and society.   

Lutheran Quarterly Books (http://www.lutheranquarterly.com/)

Formerly published by Eerdmans.  Emphasizes Lutheran theology and the history of doctrine, as seen in the three titles by Gerhard Forde, two volumes by Oswald Bayer, and two collections of essays on Luther’s teachings edited by Timothy Wengert.

 Modern Reformation Magazine (https://www.whitehorseinn.org/modern-reformation) and its syndicated broadcast, the White Horse Inn (https://www.whitehorseinn.org).

“We are more than a talk show and a magazine. We believe that each generation must rediscover and apply the gospel to their own time. We long to see a second reformation – a modern Reformation take hold of our churches and return them to the God-honoring, Christ-centered, Spirit-wrought places of worship they should be. Over the past twenty years, we’ve grown more hopeful that such a reformation is possible. So, we’re putting our time and resources to work toward one, helping Christians ‘know what they believe and why they believe it.’”

Pro Eccclesia (https://journals.sagepub.com/home/pre)

A quarterly journal of theology founded by Carl Braaten and Robert Jenson and published by the Center for Catholic and Evangelical Theology.  Seeks to give contemporary expression to the one apostolic faith and its classic traditions, as it works for and manifests the church’s unity by research, theological construction, and a free exchange of opinions.  Members of its advisory council represent communities committed to the authority of Holy Scripture, ecumenical dogmatic teaching, and the structural continuity of the church and are themselves dedicated to maintaining and invigorating these commitments. The journal publishes biblical, liturgical, historical, and doctrinal articles that promote or illumine its purposes.

SIMUL (https://semlc.org/simul/ and on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/St-Paul-Lutheran-Seminary-139019069505467)

SIMUL is a new academic journal launched in the fall of 2021 by St. Paul Lutheran Seminary.  Its pages feature articles by Bob Benne, Mark Granquist, Brad Hales, and many others.  It is free, online, and very readable.  It is an academic journal, with articles that are written by academics and that adhere to the highest academic standards.  They include endnotes so you can reference where the authors are getting their information. But it is also very readable, not just by pastors, but also by our church members, the disciples who move the church forward.

Lutheran Study Bible (Concordia)  

The first Bible in English to be developed with notes that are distinctively Lutheran. Notes were prepared by theologians and pastors from more than twenty Lutheran church bodies. Current scholarship, insights from Church Fathers, and rich devotional commentary help both new and mature Christians learn about God’s Word.

The New International Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

A rich, academic resource for studying the Bible.  Contains scholarship from many, well-known theologians.

The Pillar New Testament Commentaries

Designed for serious readers of the Bible.  Seeks to make clear the meaning of the text. Writers interact with the informed contemporary debate yet avoid undue technical detail. A blend of rigorous exegesis and exposition, scholarship and pastoral sensitivity, with an eye alert both to biblical theology and to the contemporary relevance of the Bible. Fourteen volumes.  Brings together some of the best biblical scholarship of our time.

Keller, Timothy.  Anything.

Videos on various subjects by the founding pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City and chairman and co-founder of Redeemer City to City, a movement that trains pastors for ministry in global cities.

For a list of Tim Keller Video/Sermons in PDF format. Click here.

Tim Keller Video Lectures/Sermons worth watching

On Preaching:

Evangelism/Christian Life – (this one is probably one of the most influential lectures I have listened to.)

Sermons

Here is the link to his YouTube page with a lot of his sermons:

https://www.youtube.com/c/Gospelinlife/videos?view=0&sort=p&shelf_id=4

Aulen, Gustaf.  Faith of the Christian Church.

An eminently accessible work by an ecumenical giant of the 20th century.  Aulen was a distinguished professor of theology before becoming the bishop of Strangnas for the Lutheran Church of Sweden.  He wrote the latest revision of this work after his retirement.  In it he focuses on key issues and core beliefs as he discusses what binds all Christians together in faith.  His most famous book is Christus Victor, which still exerts considerable influence on contemporary theological thinking on the atonement. 

Barth, Karl.  Dogmatics in Outline.

A phrase by phrase reflection on the Apostles Creed, interpreting it as the central statement of Christian belief for all time.  Emphasizes the absolute centrality of Christ.

Bauckham, Richard.  Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony.

Argues that the four Gospels are closely based on the eyewitness testimony of those who personally knew Jesus.

Bayer, Oswald.  Living by Faith: Justification and Sanctification.

Shows how the concept of justification provides a comprehensive horizon for discussing every aspect of Christian theology.  

Braaten, Carl E. Principles of Lutheran Theology.

This book has guided students in theological reflection on the landmarks of the Christian faith as interpreted in the Lutheran confessional heritage since it was first published in 1983. 

Brunner, Emil.  The Mediator: A Study of the Central Doctrine of the Christian Faith.

A thorough analysis of the Biblical doctrine of the person and work of Christ.  Shows that Christianity stands or falls by what is believed and thought about Jesus.  

Forde, Gerhard. Theology is for Proclamation. 

Constructs a whole system of theology on the model of Luther’s Bondage of the Will.  Drags systematic theology out of the study and sticks it in the pulpit so that it proclaims the Gospel. 

Johnson, Luke Timothy.  The Real Jesus: The Misguided Quest for the Historical Jesus and the Truth of the Traditional Gospels.

The first book to challenge the findings of the Jesus Seminar, the group of two hundred scholars who claim that Jesus said only eighteen percent of what the Gospels attribute to him.

Kitamori, Kazoh.  Theology of the Pain of God.

Demonstrates the limitations and problems of most Christian theology from a Japanese point of view.  Reformulates the Christian faith in non-Western terms as it expands the dialogue between Eastern and Western Christians. 

Kolb, Robert and Arand, Charles P.  The Genius of Luther’s Theology: A Wittenberg Way of Thinking for the Contemporary Church.

An introduction to two central themes of the reformer’s theology – his view on the believer’s response to God and the world, and his perspective on God’s relationship to humanity.

Lennox, John. God’s Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?

Evaluates the evidence of modern science in relation to the debate between the atheistic and theistic interpretations of the universe.

Lindbeck, George.  The Nature of Doctrine: Religion and Theology in a Postliberal Age.

Lays the foundation for a theology based on a cultural-linguistic approach to religion and a regulative or rule theory of doctrine.

Neuhaus, Richard John.  Freedom for Ministry. 

Argues that there is a necessary awkwardness about Christian ministry because we are ambassadors of a “disputed sovereignty.”  Discusses the “awkward responsibility” of being a preacher. 

Polkinghome, John and Beale, Nicholas.  Questions of Truth: Fifty-One Responses to Questions about God, Science, and Belief.

A defense of the compatibility of religious faith and science.  Contains responses from a physicist and a philosopher to questions about science and religion.

Rognlien, Robert.  Recovering the Way: How Ancient Discoveries Help Us Follow the Footsteps of Jesus Today.

Written for those who want to understand the truths Jesus taught and want to live the life Jesus lived.  Shows how Jesus’ teaching and example can shape our lives. 

Willard, Dallas, editor.  A Place for Truth: Leading Thinkers Explore Life’s Hardest Questions.

A collection of speeches from two decades of Veritas discussions. Since its founding in 1992, the Veritas Forum has provided a place for the university world to explore the deepest questions of faith and life.    

Wingren, Gustaf.  Luther on Vocation. 

An analysis of Luther’s teaching that helps us understand the relationship between faith and works. 

Zahl, David.  Seculosity: How Career, Parenting, Technology, Food, Politics, and Romance Became Our New Religion and What to Do about It. 

A thoughtful and entertaining look at the way in which people turn to all sorts of everyday activities for identity, purpose, and meaning.

“GOD IS THE RULER YET”

One of my favorite hymns for Fathers’ Day is “This Is My Father’s World.”  One of the verses goes like this:

Oh, let me not forget
That though the wrong seems oft so strong
God is the ruler yet.

This is my Father’s world.
Why should my heart be sad?
The Lord is King, let the heavens ring.
God reigns!  Let the earth be glad!

We live in a time when the wrong seems so strong.  Between the pandemic, the blow to our nation’s and the global economy, and racial strife, we wonder how much more our country and our world can take.  I was very disturbed to read a comment made by a CIA intelligence officer.  According to him, what he sees happening are the kinds of dynamics that occur in nations that are about to collapse.  How will it end?  What will be next?  How will it play out?  How long will it take?

I completely missed – because of my focus on the pandemic – May 8 as the seventy-fifth anniversary of V-E Day, Victory in Europe Day.  That is the day when the Allies formally accepted Nazi Germany’s unconditional surrender on May 8, 1945, thus marking the end of World War II in Europe.

I do not want to similarly miss the seventy-fifth anniversary of Victory in the Pacific Day.  That term has been applied to the day when Japan’s surrender was initially announced – August 15, 1945, in Japan, and, because of time zone differences, August 14, 1945, in the United States.  It has also been applied to September 2, 1945, when the surrender document was signed, thus officially ending World War II.

We know how the war ended – both in Europe and in the Pacific.  But can you imagine being a part of the massive effort to win the war, when you did not know how it would end? 

We recently observed the seventy-sixth anniversary of D-Day.  From our vantage point, we know how it turned out.  We know that the effort was a success.  It was a massive invasion that cost many lives, but it gave the Allies a foothold on the European continent.  It turned the tide of the war.  But can you imagine being a part of the invasion, not knowing if it would succeed?

We do not know how the pandemic, the economy, and racial strife will all play out.  We do not know how long it will take, how many will suffer, or how much damage will be done.  But we do know this.  That this is our Father’s world.  And “though the wrong seems oft so strong, God is the ruler yet.”  “The Lord is King, let the heavens ring.  God reigns!  Let the earth be glad!”

I would now like to turn our attention to four passages in the Old Testament that tell us what we as God’s people need to be doing at a time like this.

First, 2 Kings 19: 14

King Hezekiah of Judah received a threatening letter from the Assyrians, basically telling him that just as no other nation had survived the Assyrian assault, so Jerusalem would not survive either.  How did Hezekiah respond?  2 Kings 19: 14 says that Hezekiah took the letter with him, went to the house of the Lord, and spread the letter out before the Lord, and basically said, “God, this is beyond us.  We do not know what to do.  Our eyes are on you.”  We also need to take our whole situation and spread it out before the Lord.  Like Hezekiah, so we, too, need to say to the Lord, “This is beyond us.  The issues are so complex.  The problems are so deep and so deep-seated.  The wrong goes back for so long.  We do not know what to do.  Our eyes are on you.”

Second, Amos 5: 24 – “Let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an everflowing stream.”

I live in Arizona – out in the desert on the northeast side of Phoenix.  We are just at the beginning of the Monsoon Season – that time of year when we can experience some powerful thunderstorms.  We live about thirteen miles from where we go to church.  Between our house and the church there is only one traffic light, but there are about twenty places where the road dips down, following the contour of the land.  If we had one of those major thunderstorms on a Sunday morning, there is no way we could get to church.  There are too many places where our car would either stall in the water or even get swept off the road.

Justice rolling down like waters and righteousness like an everflowing stream is an image that speaks powerfully to me.  As a nation we need to look seriously at where people have been denied justice.  The quest for justice needs to be as powerful as the runoff from a mighty desert thunderstorm.

Third, Micah 6: 8 – “What does the Lord require of you, but to do justice, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.” 

The prophet Micah is not saying, “It sure would be nice if you would.”  Instead he is saying, “This is what the Lord requires of you.”  “Requires of you – to do justice.”  Not just to be in favor of justice, but to do justice.  To work to make justice happen.  To identify with and to advocate for those who have been denied justice.  To love mercy.  For me – during these times – loving mercy means doing something because we are concerned for those who have been most effected by the pandemic – those whose health is most vulnerable, those who are facing great personal risk as they bravely and faithfully provide care for others, those who are isolated in nursing homes and other care facilities and their families who are unable to visit them.  Loving mercy means doing something because we are concerned for those who have been most effected by the economic shut down – the poor, the long-term unemployed, those who were living from paycheck to paycheck and now have no income.  Loving mercy means doing something because we are concerned for those who have been most effected by racial strife –  victims of prejudice, good police officers who now feel vulnerable because of lack of support from public officials, business owners who had already suffered major economic setback, and now have had their place of business looted and/or destroyed.

The fourth verse says more about what it means to “walk humbly with your God.”

2 Chronicles 7: 14 – “If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin, and I will heal their land.”

Lord Jesus, heal our land.

* * * * * * *

AN ALARMING MISUSE OF SCRIPTURE

The second thing I would like to talk about is Episode 1 of Season 5 of the Netflix series Queer Eye, which was recently released.  Queer Eye is a series which features a team of five LGBTQ+ persons, who are known as the Fab 5, who work with someone and give that person a makeover in some area of life.  Episode 1 features a number of ELCA pastors, including the Rev. Noah Hepler, who needed help in accepting his sexual identity; the Rev. Megan Rohr, the ELCA’s first transgender pastor; and Bishop Guy Erwin, the ELCA’s first gay bishop.  This episode lifts up the LGBTQ+ lifestyle as well as what has come to be called “Queer Christianity.”  Because of the fact that potentially this episode could be seen by millions of people around the world, it is important that people know what is being promoted and how they can respond to friends and family members who see the episode and might be persuaded to accept its LGBTQ+ ideas.  A link to the trailer for season 5, including episode 1, can be found here.

One of the things that should be most alarming to Christians who take seriously the authority of the Bible as the Word of God is the way that this movement, called “Queer Christianity,” views, misuses, and misinterprets Scripture.  Hermeneutics has to do with how we interpret the Bible.  It is alarming how those who follow the principles of “queer hermeneutics,” as illustrated in this episode of Queer Eye, interpret the Bible. 

I urge you to read my full article so that you will see how advocates for “Queer Christianity” do not listen to and follow the clear and obvious meaning of Scripture.  Instead they use Scripture in order to get Scripture to support their LGBTQ+ perspective.  And I urge you not only to read my full article, but to share it with others.  This is not just a matter of different views of human sexuality.  Rather what is at stake is the authority of the Bible as the Word of God and the foundational principles of the Christian faith.  Click here for a link to the full article.  

LIST OF CONFESSIONAL RESOURCES

Finally, for your summer reading, I would like to refer you to the List of Confessional Resources which Lutheran CORE has prepared.  Many thanks to all the pastors who have contributed to this list of books, videos, commentaries, ministries, and movements.  Click here for a link to this annotated bibliography of confessional resources.

If you have a resource that you would like to see added, please let us know.  May you be blessed by and during your summer reading.

Blessings in Christ,
Dennis D. Nelson
Executive Director of Lutheran CORE
dennisdnelsonaz@yahoo.com
909-274-8591 

Dear Friend in Christ –

“The Last Full Measure” is a 2019 American war drama film that tells the story of William H. Pitsenbarger, a U. S. Air Force Pararescueman who was killed while aiding and defending a unit of soldiers who were being pinned down by enemy assault.  Before his death he helped save over sixty men. 

During a rescue mission on April 11, 1966, Pitts (as he was called) willingly chose to leave the relative safety of the rescue chopper to aid people on the ground when he saw how bad the situation was below.  While others on his team declined to go, Pitts willingly put himself at risk.  After saving many, he was ordered to take an opportunity to escape on the last helicopter out of the combat zone.  But he stayed behind in order to defend and save many American lives, before making the ultimate sacrifice in one of the bloodiest battles of the Vietnam war.

His being willing to come down into a place of great danger reminds me of how Jesus was willing to leave the halls of Heaven in order to come to earth, even though He knew that He would be despised, rejected, and crucified here.  Jesus was willing to go through hell for us because He did not want to go to Heaven without us.

But there is also a brief moment of dialogue – which is included in the trailer for the movie – which speaks to me of how I have responded when people have asked me, “Why are you – and other people in Lutheran CORE – still fighting for orthodoxy within the Lutheran church today?”  One of the soldiers asked him, “Why are you here?”  Pitts responded, “Because you are here.”  The battle really was not his.  He was a part of the Air Force.  The people being attacked were in the Army.  He could have stayed in the relative safety of the helicopter.  But he willingly came down because of what was happening – because he could offer what was needed.

Many times people have asked me, “Do you really think you can get things to turn around?”  I always reply, “It would take a mighty intervention and work of the power of God to get things to turn around.  But I am here – and I continue to do the work of Lutheran CORE – because people need to be alerted to what is happening.  People need to be warned of how Biblical faith and moral values are being compromised.  And we need to be there for people when they do become aware.”   “Why are you here?” Pitsenbarger was asked.  “Because you are here,” he answered. The rescue work of William H. Pitsenbarger reminds me of the work of Lutheran CORE.

“Why are you here?”  “Because you are here.”  Among our newest efforts is the work that we are doing to develop a support system for orthodox ELCA students at ELCA seminaries.  We have orthodox pastors who are available to talk and pray with orthodox students.  We have a list of orthodox pastors and congregations that are willing to serve as internships sites for orthodox students.  Please pray that the ELCA seminaries will be willing to allow that to happen.  We are developing a list of Biblically and theologically faithful resources – books, newsletters, websites, etc. – to recommend to students.  Members of our board are writing responses to various publications from ReconcilingWorks in order to demonstrate in a clear and compelling way that the LGBTQIA+ agenda is in violation of the clear teaching of Scripture.  We are very grateful for the seminarians who are giving us help and guidance in knowing how we might be able to make connections and build relationships with other students.  Please pray that God will bless these efforts.

Thank you to all who are supporting our partnership with the NEXUS Institute, a program of Grand View University in Des Moines, Iowa which is giving high school youth the opportunity to study the Bible and theology, engage in ministry, and consider a church-related vocation.

Your support also enables us to keep on doing the following –

• Provide a system of support for orthodox ELCA pastors

• Offer ministries specifically designed for these days of the COVID-19 pandemic – two new Facebook groups as well as a list of congregations that are livestreaming and/or posting recordings of their worship services

• Through our Congregations in Transition ministry initiative provide (mostly retired) Lutheran pastors who have been trained to be coaches for congregations where the pastor either already has or soon will be retiring or resigning to take another call

• Hold our annual Encuentro – a day of fellowship, inspiration, and resources for pastors, lay leaders, and congregations that are already involved in or are considering becoming involved in Spanish language and/or bi-lingual (English-Spanish) ministry 

• Provide on our website daily devotions and worship resources, including prayers and hymn suggestions

The reason we are able to do all of this work is because of your faithful prayer and financial support.  Please click on the button below to let us know how we can be praying for you.  Your timely gift to Lutheran CORE will help enable us to continue to be a VOICE for Biblical Truth and a NETWORK for Confessing Lutherans.

As a steward with you in the ministry of the Gospel, 

Dennis D. Nelson
Executive Director of Lutheran CORE

Visit our website www.lutherancore.org
Follow us on Twitter @LutheranCORE
Like us on Facebook www.facebook.com/LutheranCORE

.thermometer_svg{} .therm_target{font-size: 16px; text-anchor: middle; font-weight: bold;} .therm_raised{font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold;} .therm_percent{ text-anchor: middle; font-weight: bold;} .therm_subTarget{font-size: 14px; } .therm_legend{font-size: 12px; } .therm_majorTick{stroke-width: 2.5px; stroke: #000;} .therm_minorTick{stroke-width: 2.5px; stroke: #000;} .therm_border{stroke-width: 1.5px; stroke: #000; fill: transparent;} .therm_subTargetArrow{stroke: #8a8a8a; stroke-width: 0.2px; fill: #8a8a8a;} .therm_raisedLevel{stroke-width: 1px; stroke: #000;} .therm_subRaisedLevel{stroke-width: 1px; stroke: #000;} .therm_arrow{stroke: #000; stroke-width: 0.2px; fill: #000;} .therm_subTargetLevel{stroke-width: 2.5px; stroke: #8a8a8a;}

Thank you for your generous response to our appeal for $15,000 so that we will be able to sponsor one week of NEXUS for high schoolers at Grand View University in Des Moines, Iowa. As of April 30, 2020, $8,081 has been given towards our goal of $15,000. We are 54% of the way there!

NEXUS is designed to give high school students a chance to engage in the study of the Bible and Lutheran theology, be involved in service, and discern whether God has gifted them and is calling them to full-time Christian ministry and/or leadership in the church. In the past three years, over one hundred high schoolers have gone through NEXUS. In addition, many college-aged mentors who have participated in the program have gone on to seminary and/or full-time church work.

The cost to host one week of NEXUS for twenty-four high school students, which includes college-age mentors, teachers, activities, room and board, and materials, is $30,000. Lutheran CORE has committed half of the amount for one week – $15,000. The funds from Lutheran CORE will be matched by Lilly Endowment to cover a full-week’s cost of $30,000. The funds from Lutheran CORE will be used for a week during the summer of 2021.

If you have not already done so, please consider giving a gift to Lutheran CORE – over and above your current giving – to help fund the commitment that we have made. Please be sure to designate NEXUS on the memo line of your check.

My wife and I decided to give the amount of the financial stimulus check that we will be receiving from the federal government to five different Christian charitable causes, including NEXUS. We would like to challenge and encourage you to do the same.