SDA & Same-gender Sex

I’m bisexual. Let’s get that out in the open for starters.

I was raised in the Seventh Day Adventist Church (www.sda.org). The SDA Church has a standing policy that those who have same-gender sex (e.g., “practicing” homosexuals or bisexuals in homo- relations of that sort) are not allowed to be members of the church. While I am not “practicing”, in this sense, I still consider this stance to be ridiculous, and it is my grounds for withdrawing my membership from the church.

The following is my diatribe on why I consider this policy to be ridiculous:

1. It is predicated on the belief that same-gender sex is a sin.

This is debatable at best. There are quite a few texts in the bible that appear quite straightforward in their meaning – men should not have sex with men. The opening chapter of Romans is a good example of this (see verses 22-28). While these do appear clear in their intent, I do not believe they have been correctly interpreted in the context of a modern homosexual relationship. There’s quite a bit of literature online that discusses this particular point of interpretation, and from what I can tell there is greater academic veracity in the viewpoint of the New/Old Testament writers condemning gay sex in pagan temples, rather than a modern monogamous homosexual relationship. If nothing else, it is of equal veracity with the plain-text interpretation, in which case we should suspend judgment of the issue since neither is clearly the correct one.

See this website, “What the Bible Says – and Doesn’t Say, about Homosexuality”. There is also a direct link to a PDF of the 24-page booklet.

I would also recommend reading ReligiousTolerance.org’s treatment of the “The Bible and Homosexuality”.

2. The reasoning behind tossing out a member because they are a “sinner” is specious and hypocritical. Not to mention, the salvation model is a little confusing.

Let’s model the basic logic behind what is considered an acceptable member of the SDA church in a simple pseudo-computer program. I know this is oversimplified. However, if you can show me why it is not an *accurate* model of how this reasoning works, and why it should be considered non-specious, then please contact me.

‘Person’='Joe’

if ‘Joe has same gender attractions’ == TRUE

and ‘Joe has same-gender sex’ == FALSE

then ‘Membership’ == TRUE”

This is essentially the stance of the SDA church. You can have same-sex attractions, as long as you don’t act on them as a lifestyle (e.g., you choose to ’sin’ on a regular basis). If you do have sex, you’re a sinner, and we can’t have that in the church. Except:

‘Person’='Joe’

if ‘Joe has temptations to eat too much’ == TRUE

and ‘Joe eats too much, and is overweight’ == TRUE

then ‘Membership’ == TRUE

The bible has passages in which it condemns gluttony as a sin – especially as a lifestyle. But overweight members in the church are not condemned for being overweight, nor asked to leave the church. Granted, there are programs in place to help people lose weight because we want people to be in a good state of health, but simply having a lifestyle of overeating does not prompt anyone to ask fat people to leave the church. Of course, this entire analogy depends also upon the idea that same-gender sex is also bad, which was repudiated in the previous point.

If overeating is acceptable, but same-gender sex not, then we clearly have a sliding scale of what sins are “really bad” and what sins are “not too bad”. Sins are not equal.

But really, what is sin? In the most basic sense, it is separation from God. This is why christian doctrine contains the concept of “original sin” – that the sin of Adam and Eve was passed down to the offspring, and that we are inherently disconnected from God – and thus sinners – from birth.

So then, what’s the fundamental difference between someone who does not act on temptations of what we consider to be ‘bad’, and the person who does? Both are sinners, since both have original sin on their shoulders. I would hypothesize that an Adventist would say that the person who acts on temptations is choosing to stay separated from god, and in this sense is not saved. The person who only has original sin, and only commits “not too bad” sins can be saved despite their ‘bad’ lifestyle because they can claim Christ as their saviour.

From this I would conclude that Adventists have a fundamental goal of ‘closeness’/'connectedness’ to god, and that they believe there is a sliding scale in the distance of disconnection between a given person and god. This seems reasonable, except that on a fundamental level we have not been given a criterion from god of what is a more or less acceptable sin (except, perhaps, the “unforgivable sin”). This is where we have entered the realm of subjective judgment, where one acts off of the feelings of one’s guts and the current political climate. I would say any reasoning as to what is more or less acceptable is specious by this very fact of a lack of objective or authoritative criterion.

I would say “Judge not, lest ye be judged”. Else, “Judge, and prepare to be judged”. Your pick. I think I’ll go with the former.

Conclusion

So let’s do a recap:

1. Same-gender sex is clearly not prohibited in the bible in specific contexts, and it does not talk at all about a modern monogamous homosexual relationship.

2. For someone to judge another on their actions as worse than their own is bigoted and specious in their reasoning by virtue of subjectivity. Why are you judging people anyway?

————

Just for the sake of a point of reference, here’s the

Official Seventh Day Adventist Position Statement on Homosexuality

“The Seventh-day Adventist Church recognizes that every human being is valuable in the sight of God, and we seek to minister to all men and women in the spirit of Jesus. We also believe that by God’s grace and through the encouragement of the community of faith, an individual may live in harmony with the principles of God’s Word.

Seventh-day Adventists believe that sexual intimacy belongs only within the marital relationship of a man and a woman. This was the design established by God at creation. The Scriptures declare: “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh” (Gen. 2:24, NIV). Throughout Scripture this heterosexual pattern is affirmed. The Bible makes no accommodation for homosexual activity or relationships. Sexual acts outside the circle of a heterosexual marriage are forbidden (Lev. 20:7-21; Rom. 1:24-27; 1 Cor. 6:9-11). Jesus Christ reaffirmed the divine creation intent: “‘Haven’t you read,’ he replied, ‘that at the beginning the Creator “made them male and female,” and said, “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh?” So they are no longer two, but one’” (Matt. 19:4-6, NIV). For these reasons Adventists are opposed to homosexual practices and relationships.

Seventh-day Adventists endeavor to follow the instruction and example of Jesus. He affirmed the dignity of all human beings and reached out compassionately to persons and families suffering the consequences of sin. He offered caring ministry and words of solace to struggling people, while differentiating His love for sinners from His clear teaching about sinful practices.

This statement was voted during the Annual Council of the General Conference Executive Committee on Sunday, October 3, 1999 in Silver Spring, Maryland.”

Essentially, love the sinner, hate the sin. All who are attracted to homosexual relationships should deny themselves. Heterosexual domestic partnerships are the only kind that were instituted by God in the Bible, and therefore should be the only kind that we have in modern society.