There are many bright spots to observe with respect Karen Keen’s reader-friendly, extremely helpful book, New Testament Ethics and the Possibility of Same Sex Relationships. I’ll offer a few preliminary observations then point out what I think are critical features of the book. I can't begin to do justice to the book and it's arguments, but I would recommend this to all Christians who wish to study this topic. To be sure, the book assumes a fair amount at times, but otherwise the arguments are generally quite cogent and the book is very accessible.
I’ve read books with which I fundamentally agreed with the author’s ultimate conclusion, but found central arguments unhelpful and even detrimental. I’ve also read books with which I’ve found particular difficulty with certain arguments – sometimes either agreeing or disagreeing with the final analysis – but still found the book to be extremely helpful and beneficial to Bible students. This falls into the latter category. The book is succinct, readable, carefully reasoned and compelling even if one may question this or that argument.
This is also, arguably, the most helpful book to date on this topic – regardless of which side of the issue one falls. It is extremely fair-minded in breaking down, with criticism and compliment, both sides of the debate, which she categorizes as ‘progressive’ and ‘traditional.’ If one wants a readable and fair approach to the subject from a single author that deals with the major issues with scholarship and integrity, this is the book.
Regardless of where one ultimately falls on the issue, Keen's book holds great value for her insights with respect to the approach to and reading of the biblical texts. The book is helpful in eliminating flawed arguments, and it makes plausible enough arguments that one is forced to think through these matters with much greater care (I would argue that most believers on the traditional side have not given enough careful thought and exegetical consideration on this topic – choosing rather to simplistically read the Bible without reference to the cultural contexts in which we find such readings). It’s an exceptional exercise for everyone in healthy biblical exegesis and hermeneutics.
Perhaps what I like best about Keen’s book is her integrity, honesty, and respect for scripture. Frankly, I tire of progressivists who do little to honor the scripture and read it with great care. Some will, no doubt, conclude that her conclusion or particular arguments do not evince such respect, but I would differ. I think Keen is acutely concerned about the Bible as God’s word and Jesus Christ as the true authority, and reads it as such. But, respect for the Biblical texts as God’s word does not necessitate a fundamentalist, dropped-out-of-the-sky-cultural context-free reading. Rather, it entails “discernment” in determining whether a command / prohibition is universal or particularized.
Her emphasis in the beginning and the end of the book on the importance of seeing this as less about a doctrine and more about people is critical. It’s important in that this is an oft-overlooked yet healthy, biblical element.
Some critical highlights:
Great care and fairness is exercised in discussing opposing views – with criticisms for both progressives and traditionalists. Rarely is this the case on this or other controverted subjects. In most books on hotbed topics one position is given heavy emphasis and opposing views are either ignored or given short shrift or filled with straw men. While Keen may not completely account for every argument – I think the opposing views are handled with grace and honor befitting a person of devout honor and Christian faith. As Keen evinces in this book.
The approach to the subject is exceptional in my view – it’s not as simple as it at first seems, as is the case with many biblical subjects. This is particularly emphasized in chapters 2, 4, and 5.
As Keen notes, many traditionalist and progressive scholars “agree that the biblical authors condemned (at least male) same-sex relations.” She notes on this, “If traditionalists and progressives agree … then why the debate? Doesn’t that mean the Bible says same-sex relationships are wrong? Not necessarily. Part of the debate is whether the reasons the biblical authors give for rejecting homoeroticism are universal.” This is a central point and certainly a student with honor and grace has to give careful consideration to this perspective. It is possible that the biblical authors do not – and/or were not intending to – “specifically address peer same-sex relationships as an ethical issue.”
In other words, what the biblical authors saw and condemned in their cultural setting does not “fit” what might be described today as a mutual, covenantal marriage of equals – not for the purpose of procreation, but companionship.
The fact is, the Bible does address any number of issues and offers perspectives – including prohibitions and positive commands – that are cultural in nature - even tied to morality, whether it’s OT laws regarding clothing, animals, structure of houses, or Jesus’ command to wash one another’s feet or the biblical perspective on cosmic geography that was deeply tied to ANE concepts. This demands that a faithful reader give careful consideration to such matters, including how that may impact same-sex prohibitions within the biblical texts (as few as they are).
Keen gives helpful focus in chapter five to what I would describe, drawing on others, as a “hermeneutic/ethic of mercy.” That is, sometimes biblical laws that seem straightforward and rigid, will change (as with slave laws applied to men and women in Exodus and Deuteronomy) as new insights are gained among people; different cultural or societal problems arise that were not anticipated in the original command. This is why careful discernment is required with respect to even many of the most straightforward of commands. There is often a trajectory of instruction and one cannot arrive at a universal opinion from one or a handful of biblical texts.
With respect to same sex sexual relations, Keen offers an argument from analogy on Jesus’ ethics with particular attention to the Sabbath and heterosexual marriage. Analogical reasoning is one of the most common methods by which human beings attempt to understand the world and make decisions. Arguments from analogy are important and used all the time. They don’t arrive at logical certainty. The strength of such will depend on the parallels and similarities.
One such similarity is on marriage itself in noting how scripture (and Jesus) may temper a particular law based on its social and human impact. So Matthew and Luke temper the rigidity of Mark’s view on marriage, divorce, and remarriage (Mark 10, Mt. 19, Lk. ) – though some more conservative traditionalists would not see the kinds of exceptions Keen sees regarding marriage and divorce, I agree with her on this argument.
Part of seeing such analogies rests on the important perspective that being gay is not a prurient, salacious choice driven merely by the fall, but that there are many who have no heterosexual desires and never have, including devout Christians who’ve chosen to live a celibate life such as Wesley Hill.
Later in the book (ch.6), Keen argues effectively that various historic attempts to “change one’s orientation” are ultimately flawed, if not draconian, and have met with significant failure (including among the leaders of such movements). In my view, traditionalists should abandon orientation change as a credible approach.
For Keen, the foundations of biblical same-sex prohibitions are rooted in procreation. Keen spends some amount of time on this argument and I think it’s a significant issue in the book and her overall case. The question here is how strongly were prohibitions of same-sex sexual relations in the Bible tied to procreation rather than purely anatomical fit within nature?
If the biblical authors tied prohibitions to procreation this has significant bearing on whether the matters addressed in scripture “fit” the practice of same-sex, life-covenant marriages without pro-creational intent. In other words, if the prohibitions in the mind of the authors in the Bible (e.g., Paul discussing what is “unnatural” in Romans 1), were tied less to ‘natural’ anatomical differentiation and more to the ability to procreate then what we find today in terms of same sex orientation and relationships of equality (vs. abuse) may not fit precisely with the biblical prohibitions. In essence, the reasoning at root in some of the Biblical authors discussion may not be analogous to a same sex covenantal relationship such that the ethical perspectives we must apply are not as simple as quoting a verse. This goes back to Keen’s arguments in how to read scripture with discernment.
It seems to me this argument has some weight to it, but I’m not fully convinced as yet. It is something to which I need to devote more study, meditation, and prayer and to be weighed more carefully.
The Challenge of Celibacy (ch.6).
I found this discussion (ch.6) to be both eye opening and formidable. Drawing on several angles – from Paul to Luther and sociological studies on celibacy and its attenuating difficulties for all but a few, along with Paul’s solution for heterosexuals in his day that it is “better to marry than to burn,” Keen argues that perhaps Paul’s ‘ethical exception’ (1 Corinthians 7) could be applied to same-sex marriage relationships. The information in chapters 6 and 7 are vital in any gracious ethic.
Same-sex origins – biblical, sociological, and scientific evidence.
In another excellent discussion (ch.7), Keen deals with three possible origins of same sex orientation / attraction: moral fallenness (“The Fall” from Adam and Eve); natural fallenness (a neurobiological cause; similar to a birth defect); or human variation in the genetics of human evolution. Keen argues effectively against the first (moral fallenness). I find that the typical evangelical, “Calvinist” teaching on inherited depravity to stand on shaky grounds. Indeed, we do inherit within our DNA elements that can shape who we are – positively or negatively – but this is less something a result of the “fall” and more just a scientific reality.
Here again, Keen makes an effective point. Many traditionalists see “same sex attraction” as falling in the category of just wanton, uncontrolled lust. A person I mentioned above, Wesley Hill, a gay Christian scholar who is non-affirming and has chosen to live a celibate life, among others, offers an important argument here. It simply is not the case that all same-sex attraction is a product of prurient desires as was once popular, and which remains a fashionable perspective, among many fundamentalists. The reality is, some find such attractions not exclusively about desire and they also find such attraction to have been a part of their life from the moment they felt such attractions (typically emerging in puberty).
Keen effectively draws from one of the brightest scientists of Christian faith today, Dennis Venema, of Biologos.org. Venema’s work at Biologos on human evolution and genetics is exceptional and needed. While there are no single conclusive arguments, Keen notes that there is evidence that “prenatal influences affect development of same-sex attraction.” She also goes on to note that even if one argues for environmental impact alone for same sex attraction (which does not stand on as firm a ground as many suspect), “Socially induced psychological conditions can prove just as immutable as congenital conditions.”
Keen’s final chapter is filled with grace, humility, and a moving description of her own personal story in all of this. I am appreciative of her bravery and her scholarship. I think she makes the strongest case, and a very compelling one, for traditionalists to – at the least – consider their position on this topic.
And, perhaps most important of all, even if one continues to maintain a traditionalist position and disagrees with Keen’s central conclusions, one can, to some degree, it seems to me, recognize she makes a plausible, biblically-based (from a broad perspective of how the Bible works) case for a covenantal, same sex marriage relationship. Which in turn, should give us significant pause with respect to who we condemn, and why, and pause with respect to an unwillingness to fellowship with those with whom we disagree on this topic.
If you have any interest in this topic, I highly recommend this book, along with Wesley Hill's Washed and Waiting. I find Keen's arguments for her ethic more compelling than Hill's - he does not spend as much time on the case against - but I think reading both in conjunction would be very helpful for traditionalists and progressives alike.
Enjoy fast, free delivery, exclusive deals, and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime
and start saving today with fast, free delivery
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now
Frequently bought together
$16.41
Get it as soon as Monday, Jul 22
In Stock
Total price:
To see our price, add these items to your cart.
Choose items to buy together.
Similar items that may ship from close to you
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
About the author
Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
Reviews with images
A thought-provoking argument for those of us who aren't "affirming"
First, there are a few things I appreciate about this book: - It avoids the binaries we usually see in the politicized culture war (in culture & church) - It takes Scripture seriously - The author (Karen Keen) speaks as someone who really loves God, was, and is (as of the books writing) celibate. So she doesn't appear to be simply justifying her actions. - It's short! A lot of great endnotes, but actual content is only about 115pps (see pic)Keen's argument can be summed up in a few movements:1. Unlike theological liberals, we must take the OT seriously. But rather than blindly applying it, we must read culturally-embedded laws and see what they point to at a deeper level: a good and just world. What might that look like for gay people who desire to follow Jesus seriously (versus as rebellious, deviant, or sex-crazed individuals)?2. Studies show that sexual orientation change (becoming ex-gay) simply doesn't work. The biblical options we have upheld therefore are mixed orientation marriages and -- more visibly: celibacy. Celibacy is biblical, noble, and Christ-like. It is certainly possible for some. For most people, however, the evidence shows it is too difficult to maintain for a lifetime.3. It takes discernment to *apply* Scriptures teachings. Keen shows some interesting examples of how earlier Scriptures are re-interpreted and applied in later parts of Scripture -- and the applications always lean towards mercy. Does the bible open the door to make an *exception* or to *accommodate* these people lest they "burn with passion?"4. Studies show homosexuality is not a choice but possibly the result of prenatal factors. Since it isn't rebellion, we can't call it the product of moral fallenness. At worst, it is a product of natural fallenness (e.g., Tourette's syndrome). At best it is an expression of human variation (e.g., left-handedness). Might this open the door to *affirm* gay marriage?I'm not sure if this ultimately moves the needle for those of us who aren't "affirming". But unlike most arguments I've read from progressives, this one speaks to our evangelical values of (a) upholding Scripture and (b) desiring to love and please God. It's definitely worth considering.Disclosure: I read an early manuscript of this book. I purchased a copy & received a free copy in exchange for an honest review.
Top reviews from other countries
Aaron Brink
Perfect introduction to the conversation
Reviewed in Canada on July 6, 2021
Dr P Skett
An authoritative, readable case for acceptance of same-sex relationships by the church
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on April 15, 2024Amazon Kunde
Informativ, ausgewogen, fokussiert und aktuell
Reviewed in Germany on May 12, 2019
Amazonian doctor
Excellent and compelling discussion of the affirming view.
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on October 20, 2023