Made For Love

The Roles of Kinship and Covenant in Sexual Ethics Initial Assumptions About Biblical Interpretation I. Scripture does not answer every question we have (eg. Genesis is not a science textbook with instructions on how to make your own universe) II. We cannot know with absolute certainty what the author of any given passage intended the passage to mean. Interpretation is always involved, and so humility is necessary a. The literal meaning of a text is not always the most accurate interpretation of what the text means (eg. the lamb will be our light) b. Sometimes, the clear or common sense interpretation of scripture says more about the assumptions of the reader than the meaning of the text. c. The more we understand about the literary, cultural, and historical context of scripture, the clearer we can understand scriptures meaning III. When in doubt a. Consider the passage in question within a broader context (what point does it serve in the argument that the author is making? How does it fit within the entire book/letter? How does it fit within the overarching themes of the entire bible?) b. Jesus words and deeds should provide the lens through which we interpret scripture c. Trust the Holy Spirit to empower us to interpret scripture through the gift of understanding Gods wisdom (1 Cor. 2:10-16) Genesis 2:18-25: Becoming Blood (NIV) [suggested alternative translation] 18 The LORD God said, It is not good for the man [the human] to be alone. I will make a helper [ally/power] suitable for him. 19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds in the sky. God brought them to the man [the human] to see what he would name them; and whatever the man [the human called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man [the human] gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals. But for Adam no suitable helper was found. 21 So the LORD God caused the man [the human] to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, God took one of
Copyright 2012 Rev. Darren McDonald. No alterations to these notes may be made without the express written permission of the author.

the mans ribs [side] and closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib [side] God had taken out of the man [the human], and God brought her to the man [the human]. 23 The man said, This is now bone of my bones / and flesh of my flesh; / she shall be called woman, / for she was taken out of man. 24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. 25 The man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame. I. Its not good for the human to be alone a. Note: Translations miss that the first appearance of gender happens AFTER Adams partner is created. b. This not good sounds resounding after the poem of Genesis 1 which is structured around the refrain God saw all that God had made, and it was VERY good c. Isolation and loneliness is not Gods intent for humanity. Those who wish to assume that celibacy is the only faithful choice for gay and lesbian Christians need to deal with this passages emphasis that having a sexual partner was part of Gods original plan for humanity (And also with Pauls skepticism in 1 Corinthians 7 about the normal persons ability to live a celibate life) II. Helper is NOT a diminutive term a. ezer (helper)refers to one with the power/resources to help/aid. It is used 17 times in the Hebrew Scriptures to refer to God as the one who helps/aids Gods people and 3 times to refer to military aid. Ezer can also be translated as power. b. cenegdo refers to being in the presence of an equal III. Blood covenant a. "Bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh" is a kinship formula (cf. Genesis 29:14; Judges 9:2; 2 Samuel 5:1) The effect of this formula is to identify Eve as Adam's blood kin/family. This is not about ownership but about kinship. i. Within the kinship system, kin are expected to care for kin as they would for themselves. This is an enduring mutual obligation to for the partners to protect and uphold the welfare of each other. ii. Note: Similar language is used between Jacob and Laban (brothers) (Genesis 29:14) and between the tribesmen of Israel
Copyright 2012 Rev. Darren McDonald. No alterations to these notes may be made without the express written permission of the author.

b.

c.

d.

e.

and David (2 Sam 5:1) The idea that only one man and one woman can become one flesh is clearly unbiblical. iii. As Wenham (1987) explains, this formula sets man and woman on an equal footing as regards their humanity, yet sets them apart from the animals" (p. 70) You shall be called a woman for from a man she was taken". Don't read too much into this. This does not subordinate women to men (the rest of the passage makes their equality obvious) it's simply a play on words "Therefore a man leaves his father and mother and is united ("sticks to" his wife i. The man's primary kinship obligation shifts from.his parents to his partner ii. Interestingly, this reverses the cultural norm of the Ancient Near East where the woman and not the man would be expected to leave home to join the husband's family A great deal is lost in translating ( vedavaq) as "be united, as this fails to convey the covenantal significance of the term. i. By becoming "one flesh" (similar to "bone of my bone") they bear lasting kinship responsibilities to each other. Contrary to Western individualism, Western Semitic tribal groups conceived of the kinship system as being of one flesh, of one bone (Cross, 3). ii. It should be noted that the kinship system, as it developed, was very patriarchal. The male head of the clan was the property/land owner and the legal status and rights of the patriarchs household depended upon him. It is this sort of covenant that Jesus appeals to in his discussion of divorce in Mark 10:8-9, as he emphasizes they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate Its beyond the scope of this study to discuss in depth Jesuss words on divorce (culturally, this ruling protected women by viewing them as equal participants in one flesh with their partner rather than as the discardable possession of their husbands). Here its important simply to note that this kinship responsibility of partners in covenant to each other, rather than gender, is definitive of the ideal sexual relationship.

Ruth & Naomi An Example of Same-Sex Kinship

Copyright 2012 Rev. Darren McDonald. No alterations to these notes may be made without the express written permission of the author.

MCC has traditionally read the story of Ruth & Naomi as a scriptural example of same-sex commitment (and possibly sexual) love. In this story, two childless widows (who as such would have had an extremely marginalized status in the ancient Near East) find resiliency, strength, and resourcefulness in their relationship. In the process, they create a family of choice that includes Boaz (a kinsman of Naomi with whom Ruth bears a child). By the end of the story the townspeople acknowledge that Ruth is more valuable to Naomi than seven sons.

I. This is an example of a hermeneutic (interpretive strategy) of suspicion a. This assumes that there was more going on in scripture than the author tells us (a necessity of the written word) and the authors (and intended audiences) worldview might filter out marginal voices (a classic example would be the likely presence of women and servants at the last supper). b. By carefully attending to the text in its literary, historical, and cultural contexts this approach to reading suggests that we might find glimpses of those people to whom scripture does not attend. c. In this case, the suspicion is that there might be elements of culturally transgressive same sex relationship that might be sexual in nature. II. There is some evidence that this relationship between Ruth and Naomi was unusually transgressive a. The same word ( davaq) that is used to describe a man and wife being united in one flesh is used to describe how Ruth clings to Naomi in Ruth 1:24 b. Ruths choice to declare kinship with Naomi in Ruth 1:25 is For Further Reflection I. Who do you consider your family of choice? In what ways can you count on them to be there for you? Can they count on you? II. How is power and mutuality expressed in your relationship? Do you treat your partner with the respect of an important ally? Do they treat you with that respect?

Copyright 2012 Rev. Darren McDonald. No alterations to these notes may be made without the express written permission of the author.

Cross, Frank Moore. From Epic To Canon: History and Literature in Ancient Israel. Baltimore Gordon, MD: John Hopkins. 1998. Wenham, J. Genesis 1-15 (1998). Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 1. David A. Hubbard,
Glenn W. Barker, & John D. W. Watts (Eds.) Waco, TX: Word.

Copyright 2012 Rev. Darren McDonald. No alterations to these notes may be made without the express written permission of the author.