Stop Asking What the Bible Says: You Might Be Asking the Wrong Questions About Faith and Sexuality
Youtube
Introduction: A Stalemated Debate
“In many areas of Christian faith and practice, consensus has collapsed and is fiercely contested. The disagreement over the relevance of the Bible for understanding human sexuality is unprecedentedly vast.”
— Stephen C. Barton
This quote from British theologian Stephen C. Barton accurately depicts the predicament of the contemporary church when facing the issue of “sex.” When we touch upon human sexuality, the Bible seems to transform from a book of good news into a battlefield of endless quarrels. We brandish different scriptures, debating the original translations and historical contexts, trying to prove that our own position is the one that is “biblical.”
Within Christian communities, discussions about the Bible and human sexuality often devolve into a frustrating and seemingly endless debate. Many firmly believe the Bible is the authoritative guide on how to practice sexuality and love in our families, churches, and society. Many others believe the Bible is outdated, its teachings neither credible nor helpful. And some are caught in the middle, feeling a loyalty to the Bible on one hand, while on the other, deeply convinced that its literal meaning can no longer be applied to contemporary life.
The core of these disagreements often lies in the method of interpretation. We constantly ask: What is the purpose of the Bible? What is the meaning of the Bible? Is the Bible true? But what if the root of the problem is not the Bible itself, but the way we ask the questions? What if a slight shift in our starting point could open a window in this stalemate and find a more life-giving, nourishing path for dialogue?
1. We’ve Been Asking the Wrong Questions: The Focus is Not on the Bible, but on the Reader
When confronting the controversies surrounding “sex,” we often put the Bible on the “defendant’s stand,” questioning and cross-examining it like lawyers, trying to defend it or, conversely, to prosecute it. We ask: “Is the Bible good news for homosexuals?” “Does the Bible support or oppose transgender people?”… We expect it to give a black-and-white, standard answer applicable to everyone in the 21st century.
However, this path seems to lead only to more division and harm. Theologian Stephen C. Barton proposes a revolutionary turn, a subversive proposal: “Let us stop putting the Bible in the dock and instead put the reader—that is, ourselves—there.” He suggests we should instead ask a completely different question: “What kind of people should we become to be able to read the Bible in a way that brings life in the realm of gender and sexuality?”
This shift seems minor, but it is extremely powerful. It moves our focus from “judging whether the biblical text is adequate” to “reflecting on whether we ourselves—the readers—are prepared to receive it.” This is no longer a litigation about the text, but an invitation to a life of transformation. The core of the problem is no longer whether the Bible provides the right answers, but whether our lives are ready to “perform” it in a way that brings life and transformation. This means that the question we ask is no longer “What does the Bible say?”, but “Who are we? What kind of people must we become to read the Bible in a life-giving way?”
2. “Returning to the Bible” Directly is a Trap
When facing controversy, a common reaction for both conservatives and liberals is to “return to the Bible,” attempting to “read” the answers directly from the relevant texts. This approach assumes that once the correct text is found, a foundation for interpretation can be laid, and then application can proceed. However, this seemingly obvious step hides a trap.
Theologian Nicholas Lash uses a vivid “relay race” metaphor to reveal the fallacy of this thinking. The scene Lash depicts is filled with frustration: New Testament scholars seem to be “marching in place,” never able to hand over the baton called “original meaning,” leaving the systematic theologians waiting anxiously at the finish line in great annoyance.
When the New Testament scholar has completed his work and produced his complete package of “original meaning,” he hands it over to the systematic theologian, whose responsibility it is to translate the received meaning into a form intelligible in our contemporary cultural conditions…. The New Testament scholar seems to be “marching in place”; he never reaches the point where he can pass the baton.
This metaphor challenges our naive idea of “just see what the Bible says.” It reminds us that interpretation is not a linear, objective process of information transfer. If searching directly for the “original meaning” keeps us marching in place, then we need a new perspective on the nature of the Bible. This leads us to the next question: What is the Bible, really?
3. The Bible is Not a Rulebook, but a Musical Score
How should we view the Bible? A flawed model is to see the Bible as a “mineable resource” from which people dig for “proof texts” or historical facts to support their views. In this model, both the literal application of conservatives and the historical research of liberals are just forms of excavation and analysis.
Barton proposes another, more vibrant model: The Bible is more like a Shakespearean play script or a Beethoven symphony score. The core of this metaphor is that the true meaning of the script or score does not exist on the pages themselves, but in being “corporately enacted and practically performed” by a community. Each performance generates a unique meaning depending on the characteristics of the performers and the context of the performance.
This view completely changes how we read the Bible. Reading is no longer a private academic activity for a scholar in their study or a believer’s “quiet time,” but it brings Bible reading back into the process of community formation, celebration, and mission. The truth of the Bible is “played out” in the life practices of the community, a process that is vibrant, transformative, and life-giving.
4. Buffet-Style Cherry-Picking Robs the Bible of Its Meaning
In the debate about gender and sexuality, an extremely common yet dangerous practice can be called “buffet-style Bible reading.” This method refers to people treating the Bible like a lavish buffet, picking only the “dishes” that suit their taste (e.g., Galatians 3:28, “neither male nor female”), and then debating fiercely around these “selected dishes,” while completely ignoring other more complex and even unpalatable “dishes” (i.e., the whole message of the Bible). This practice has at least three major harms:
- It trivializes the Bible and the issue of sexuality: When the debate is focused only on whether certain verses support a particular position, the Bible is reduced to a battlefield for different interest groups. This distracts us from more central issues—such as trust in God and the pursuit of justice and righteousness. At the same time, the issue of sexuality is trivialized into an exegetical exercise that only a few experts can participate in.
- It fragments the integrity of the Bible: This method often pits different parts of the Bible against each other, for example, contrasting the creation in Genesis 1 with the creation in Genesis 2, the celebration of sexual love in the Song of Songs with the disciplinary emphasis in the Pentateuch, or Jesus’ attitude with Paul’s. This not only destroys the coherence of the Bible but ultimately weakens its authority.
- It makes the text a captive of tribal interests: When a group—be it conservative fundamentalism, liberal biblical criticism, feminism, the gay liberation movement, or any other group—binds the meaning of the text to its own group identity, the goal of reading is no longer to seek truth, but to use the text to consolidate its own position.
5. Wise Interpretation Begins with Life Transformation
So, how can one interpret the Bible wisely? Barton points out that this is not just an intellectual skill, but a spiritual and ethical practice. The ability to make wise interpretations belongs to a faith community whose members are “practicing Christian virtues.” In other words, the character of the reader determines the quality of the reading.
A “life-giving way of reading” is not about finding a set of timeless rules for sexuality in the Bible. On the contrary, it acknowledges that the Bible was written in specific historical and cultural contexts by imperfect people, recording their real, complex, and even tense encounters with God. Such a reading will have the following characteristics:
- Taking love as the ultimate criterion: Jesus summarized all the law into “love God” and “love your neighbor as yourself.” A life-giving interpretation will inevitably ask: Does my interpretation bring more love, acceptance, and healing to the world, or does it create more division, judgment, and harm? If our interpretation ultimately leads to the exclusion of a certain group (e.g., LGBTQ+), we must seriously ask ourselves: Is this really “loving your neighbor as yourself”?
- Humbly listening to others: If we put ourselves in the dock, we must admit that our views are limited and biased. We must humbly listen to those who are different from us, especially those who have been hurt by traditional interpretations. The interpretations of the Bible by the queer community, born out of struggle, pain, and hope, should not be dismissed as “heresy,” but as a precious gift that helps us see our own blind spots and broaden our theological horizons.
- Pursuing transformation, not answers: The purpose of reading scripture is not to win a debate, but to allow our lives to be shaped and transformed by God’s word. It challenges us to confront our fears, prejudices, and idols. On the issue of sex, it challenges us to reflect: What are we defending? Is it God’s justice, or just our accustomed cultural traditions, family values, or even our anxiety about “purity”?
Discerning the truth of the Bible is ultimately a “theological, ecclesial, and practical matter.” Historical-critical tools can help us understand the historical context of the text; literary-critical methods can help us appreciate how the text speaks. But they cannot answer the most crucial question: “Is what it says true?” This question can only be answered through practice in the life of a community that seeks to follow Christ.
Those who are themselves being transformed and are being transformed in the image of Christ will be most capable of “performing” the Bible in a way that brings life and Christ-like transformation to human sexuality.
Conclusion: A Challenge Left to Us
So, is the Bible good news for human sexuality?
Perhaps the answer to this question is not a simple “yes” or “no.” The good news lies not in the literal meaning of a particular passage, but in the wonderful transformation that occurs when we, as imperfect readers, are willing to encounter this ancient book with love, humility, and openness.
In summary, reading the Bible faithfully is not about extracting a set of standard answers about sexuality, but about striving to become a community that can live out the message of the Bible in a life-giving way. The real challenge is not in the Bible, but in ourselves. This path requires us to shift from endless textual interpretation debates to a profound transformation of personal and communal life.
Instead of constantly asking what the Bible says about our sex and love, perhaps we should reflect more on: What kind of Bible story are our lives performing for the world? This path is not a war over texts, but a journey of discipleship concerning life. And that, perhaps, is the real “good news.”