A recent blog post at pomomusings is receiving what I think is alot of undue attention for a simple post that suggests the solution for Christian v. homosexuality is to remove the Bible from the equation. Speaking from a Canadian context, where most of Canada is light years ahead of the regular-Bible thumping conservatives from the US, the post worked to create conversation, but failed to suggest a pragmatic solution.

Simply put, to remove the Bible from the equation because its details on homosexuality are scant will mean adjusting your church community into a simple community club. Furthermore, you throw away the only manual on why these people should be included in community. You would become like so many United Church's in Canada: one dying club of old people gathered in the name of cross-stitch and bingo instead of Jesus. In fact, it is my strong opinion that Jesus is primarily revealed through two things, the scriptures about him and the community about him.

Are we to disregard the entirety of scripture because the Bible says little about homosexuality? From my perspective, and hey I'm willing to be wrong too, the Bible is explicitly clear that the act of homosexuality is condemned. But before you conservatives in the crowd sing your heavenly praises, remember homosexuality is a sin among many (that you commit yourself). I also don't buy the thought we live in a society that is more inclusive and progressive (egalitarian, etc.). Ancient Rome, Corinth, *insert wild city here*, would put present day Las Vegas to shame (barely). The difference resides in our interpretation of marriage--more on that later.

Certainly Jesus Christ was counter-cultural when he included the oppressed, women, etc., in his daily commute. He also failed with one in the inner-circle. But that does not open the door to every office and leadership position for practicing homosexuals, just as it wouldn't for straight folks. So, the argument goes, if straight or gay people are not in a loving marriage then they should not be affirmed into leadership positions for a community that emphasizes holiness. The statement now becomes, 'so let same-sex couples marry' and the solution to our inclusion problem is solved. So what constitutes marriage? That's a post for another time which won't be solved here.....

It's quite simple and safe to believe that those with homosexual tendencies can certainly be included in the kingdom of God. It's quite simple and safe to believe that 'Christians' who spawn hate--even to their own kids--are either stupid or sheep in the ultra-conservative pasture. The very nature of many evangelical churches is to be missionary

Nonetheless, observe how it's possible to retain the Bible and still dialogue and be friends with your friends (why label them homosexuals, they're just friends....)

Jesus is the big dot in the middle. The first community square is most conservative churches--using the bible to define who's in and who's out while they worship their little Jesus in the middle. Adam is right, the Bible has too much prominence to the point many don't know the difference between the Word and their zondervan made 'word'.

The second community is open and defines each person as a small dot, some journeying closer to Jesus, the Bible still present yet interpreted through community rather than imposed. That's a post-modernism response to homosexuality and the Bible.

I can see many crying foul that any community can interpret as they please. In a sense, many do, and the nature of our God is that he can be revealed in all of them. However, a smart community will attempt to remain within the bounds of the greater church community rather than creating their own box somewhere further out in the distance.

The Bible isn't an impediment to acceptance, it contains the supreme example of how we need to conduct ourselves to engage God's plan to redeem humanity.