“My HomoErotic Relationship with Jesus”
Your lips, O my spouse, Drip as the honeycomb; Honey and milk are under your tongue; And the fragrance of your garments Is like the fragrance of Lebanon. - Song of Songs 4:11
Popular Christianity places an emphasis on believers having a Personal Relationship with Jesus. As a Christian, I proudly proclaimed that I did not follow a religion, but that I had a relationship - a personal one-on-one with the Messiah. Looking back, I have no idea how to Biblically justify the idea of a personal relationship. I am pretty certain it is nothing more than modern Christian pop culture. And on a more practical level, I don’t think Jesus wants a relationship with any of us anyway. As a Christian, I talked to Jesus for years, but never heard a word back from him. That is in no way a relationship, despite all the effort I put into it.
As unsupported as I think this idea of a personal relationship is, there are times when Christians seem to think that a mere relationship is not enough. If it were not so grotesque, I think many Christians would want to change the cliché from personal relationship to intimate relationship. The relationship between the Christian and the Christ becomes so close that Jesus becomes a surrogate lover to the faithful Christian. To be a disciple and even a slave to Jesus means, to some of the most devoted, that the relationship with the Savior Jesus must be the closest relationship that the Christian is to hold. As a proud heterosexual male, this gooey GodTalk gave me the hives.
Take a look at this photo that I took last weekend of a banner hanging from a local nondenominational church. What is the first thing this banner reminds you of? I saw it and immediately thought ‘eharmony.com’. Any dating service will use a very similar ad, featuring an attractive and smiling woman to charm all the lonely single men out there. “Looking for that certain… special….somebody?” But instead of helping to find your perfect human match, this church would have you believe you should have the perfect Divine Match. You should meet, not just someone, but ‘someONE – and be solely HIS’.
Am I the only one who got creeped out with stuff like this? Maybe so - I must have been the odd Christian out. Men voluntarily show off their Real Men Love Jesus bumper stickers as if the homo-erotic overtones were the most natural thing in the world. Was I the only Christian who could not avoid the sexual nature inherent in phrases like this? Was I the only Christian man who cringed at the thought of a little personal one-on-one with my man Jesus? I could not have been the only man who admitted loving Jesus to unbelievers to be an awkward experience. Honor? Yes. Obey? You bet. Trust? Surrender to? Absolutely. But telling somebody that I loved Jesus? Yick.
Jesus was my secret, backdoor lover. I could witness the Gospel to unbelievers until I was blue in the face, but I always stopped short of declaring my Love for Jesus. Cut me some slack! I am a man – Jesus is a man. I could not admit love for any man the way I felt I was to love Jesus. I could even admit loving an amorphous, asexual God. But the man Jesus? I loved this man because I felt it was an obligation to love Jesus. I did not know him - I never felt him, touched him, saw him, felt his breath on my ear – how could I possibly love him? But I had to. It was easier to share my love to Jesus when I was alone. I could admit to Jesus that I loved him when I had my quiet time with him every morning. During my daily devotionals, I constantly told him of my devotion and love for him. I always made a point of worshiping my Divine Lover, by whispering words to him like,
“…I love you, Jesus. I love you, Jesus. Oh, How I love you. I love you more than all. I forsake all for you, my sweet Jesus. Praise your name. I love you, Jesus. My precious Lord, my precious Jesus. I praise you. I worship you. I adore you. I love to sing your praises…”
C’mon men, fess up. If you have not spoken this way to Jesus, you have certainly heard praise and worship leaders talk this way. After all, I was just parroting lines that I’ve heard in many contemporary worship songs. Jesus was my one and only. I felt that Jesus had love for me that I could never hope to match, so I strove to make him the top priority of my life. I was a member of the Bride of Christ, and I would join him someday for the Marriage Supper of the Lamb. I would be reunited with him as a pure and unblemished bride, justified by his Blood, and our marriage would be consummated in the New Jerusalem. I owed everything to him, even my undying affection, even though I often felt like a faithless and selfish bride. I immediately felt the guilt of a cheating boyfriend when I occasionally sinned by glancing at a centerfold or pretty woman walking down the street. No sin made me feel guiltier than when I occasionally succumbed to my fleshly lusts and masturbated. I always felt the invisible but disapproving eyes of my Jesus staring down at me during my act of adultery. I always cursed myself when I finished, and would ask my jilted Lover for forgiveness as I zipped up my pants.
I cannot have been the only Christian who suffered this anxiety. I recently received a devotional chain email that contained several nauseating pictures that reflected popular Christianitiy’s desire for a more intimate relationship with Jesus. Included was a picture of a forlorn woman alone on a porchswing. On one side of the swing was a pillow with ‘Awaiting Christ’s Return’ embroidered on the side. Deep in her thoughts is the ghostly image of her Heavenly Lover - the feathered, blowdried and neatly trimmed Jesus, who looks more like Kenny Rogers than a Jewish carpenter. This was sent to me as an inspirational devotion to Jesus, but could easily have been ripped off a Harlequin romance cover. Christian or non-Christian, this stuff is really disturbing to me. How is a man supposed to relate to this kind of stuff?
When Christians receive messages like these, from their pastors, their devotionals, from their popular culture, and from their environment, is it any wonder why they feel obligated to make Jesus into a husband, and why men get overwhelmed with neurosis when he is worshipped and adored in the likeness of a Divine Lover?
I continued telling Jesus I loved him for years, and I am confessing it all to you here, safe in my anonomity. But when I got married, I realized that I had all these loving phrases that I wanted to pass on to my wife but were already reserved for Jesus! I could not tell my wife that she was my one and only, then turn around and tell Jesus that HE was my one and only!! I the lovey-mushy talk of love for Jesus abruptly ceased. I realized that if I were to be a faithful husband, I must have only one lover in my life. My marriage his given me a real relationship, and the anxiety of Loving Jesus has finally disappeared.
…and don’t get me started on how my old Calvary Chapel pastor interpreted the Song of Songs….
-HeIsSailing
Once again, HIS brings some very honest perspective to this discussion. His views in no way represent the views of COAS, they are simply meant to supplement a very important discussion from a very different perspective (i.e. how the Church is sometimes perceived by non-believers). Whether you agree with him or not, afford him the same respect you would us.
Posts
Thanks for reprinting this old article, Brad. Glad you found it … er.. edifying.
Before anybody complains, I want everyone to understand that I am not criticizing what I, and probably most of you, consider to be orthodox Christianity. I admit up front that I am criticizing a very distorted, highly feminized and sentimental view of Christianity that is pervasive in the pop Christian culture of the United States. This article criticizes how that culture affected me personally as a self-serious and neurotic man who was doing his best to be a good Christian. I did write this article as an ex-Christian, but I think I could have just as easily written this article as a critical and fed up Christian.
HIS,
That helps even more. And that is why we wanted to post this article, because it effectively points out the need to discern between a popularized sub-culture in Christianity and orthodox Christianity. This is worse in some places, and better in others, but very few churches are not affected by an over sentimental and feminized Christianity.
Thanks again, bro. And welcome!
I suppose the biblical basis could be attributed to John 15:15, but I have to admit that the “personal relationship” aspect of American Christianity never really sat well with me.
I remember someone mentioning somewhere that his spouse had come from another country to The States, which is where she had first heard of that “personal relationship” stuff. And her response to it, in a nutshell, was, “I want to worship Jesus! Not be His buddy!”
I’ve never heard it put better than that.
I love my friends and my family. And I could say that I have even extended a few olive branches to my enemies (see “When Lightning Strikes”), but I do not worship any of them.
NorEaster, you might be thinking of me. My wife is a devout Catholic from the Philippines, who went to Baptist church with me for two years before I quit. She did the whole ‘40 days of purpose’ thing with Rick Warren books and videos, and complained bitterly about the whole thing when it was over - She believes in adoration and worship of God, and I really have come to appreciate that aspect of the liturgical drama that is the Catholic Mass. She was the one who told me that she wanted to worship and adore Jesus, not be his friend. Since learning things more from her perspective, I was relieved to rid myself of the whole ‘personal relationship’ thing. It was an awful anxiety that I was glad to drop.
I really liked the writing - very honest indeed. I have a tough time with the personal relationship aspect also - in that it’s supposed to mimic a human relationship - which is usually never possible and sets up a standard that is just unattainable.
For me, the relationship with God thing comes down to studying what was taught, adopting values, and elaborating upon them (which this post does quite nicely). I think God wants us to be personally involved with our ‘neighbors’ and that’s what’s important - and how we treat them in daily interactions. I am not sure there is a God in the sky too worried about how much we adore Him. I figure of we love his creation - then we show the same admiration for the Creator.
And I think this is why I prefer the nomenclature of “follower of Jesus.” It nicely wraps up all the variables being discussed.
I wish, however, that this feminization were limited to how we refer to our faith. HIS, your discussion of the worship music hits a little too close to home…
Nicely written.
I always wondered if fellas had a problem with this, and it seems as if the answer is yes. That encourages me. When I saw the e-harmony-like-ad in this post, it scared me too! I think it scares me because it plays upon an area of vulnerability and desire in my own heart and seems to elevate the spiritual-aspect of me waaaay above the physical aspect. It kind of tells me that if it’s just me and God that I need no-one or nothing else, and that simply is not true! God didn’t put me in a vacuum to just be there all by myself, rather I’m here in the world surrounded by plants and animals to take care of and people to love and work to do…and through these things I am able to know Him more dearly and learn things about Him as I recognize that He is the giver of all good things and thank Him for it all. He has given me a guide and way of navigating through this life because He wants me to live it well and bring Him honor!
I am but a mere eyelash on the bride of Christ and why would anyone love a mere eyelash all by itself? It would not work, now, would it?
God loves His people as a whole, and while it includes me, it is not just me! I think the main problem with this e-harmony-like-ad is that it takes something that is immensely spiritual and tries to attribute to it physical properties that are just not there–and if you try to see it that way– it’s not gonna satisfy and it will feel fake and like you are just making it up! The Bride and Bride-groom allegorically speaking refers to Christ and His Church…which would include one Christ, and lots and lots of people. He also refers to us as the “Light of the World” and “Salt of the Earth” like a “City on a Hill”, but we don’t get all mixed up with those like we do this one, I don’t know why.
If you want to speak personally about individual relationships with God then we should talk about the Father-Son relationship and the Father-Daughter relationship. Through Christ’s death on the cross, we are indeed reconciled to God, and adopted by Him as His Sons and Daughters. In this way, God provides for us, cares for us, protects us, guides us, gives directions, disciplines us, and gives us lots and lots of gifts! He also forgives us, knows more than we do, understands us, cares for us and comforts us in ways that I can’t describe. He is also bigger than us and gives us reason to fear Him and obey Him like no other.
Sailing:
That’s right. I think it was you. And you had also mentioned something about a mission trip in The States where she had trimmed rose bushes in the rich part of town, but in The Philippines she would fed starving children on a mission trip. Both of which are quite different than the trips I’ve been on (a farm set up to help teenagers recover from drugs and alcohol addictions and The Gulf Coast, for example). But that was such a contrast that it stayed with me. Unfortunately, I’ve always been horrible with names!
NorEaster, yup that was me alright. I still remember that day. Our church had organized a mission trip to the poor part of El Paso - we usually go to Juarez, so I usually know what to expect (it is pretty bad down there). Unfortunately, I took my new wife with me, and she was also expecting some pretty bad conditions. We both prayed together for God’s strength, and were ready. We got on the church bus with bags of tioletries (which we usually brought with us - simple stuff like hand lotion and vasaline is greatly appreciated amongst the poor of Juarez).
And we stop in front of an old woman’s house. The brick house looks very nice indeed! We pray for her invalid husband. Then she directs us to the back yard where the weeds and rose bushes have sort of taken over. Our church gang dutifully and unquestioningly started trimming her hedges and rose bushes. My wife and I, good Christians that we were, did not budge. We sat in the van and simply refused to tend her garden. I was mad at my fellow Christians for just unquestioningly buckling under this strange lady’s whims. She was not rich by modern standards, but very rich amongst the truly poor. She was certainly not needy in any sense though, and was simply looking for free labor amongst the willing church missionaries. I knew it. My wife knew it. Certainly my fellow church-goers knew it, but they were too stoked after watching Warren’s latest ‘40 days of purpose’ video to muscle up any objection. So like flacid Ned Flanders, they turned the other cheek, trimmed rose bushes and remained good witnesses for Jesus. Halelujah!!
My wife was furious. She could not believe how the people in my church could be so easily led by an obvious manipulator. “What is wrong with these people?”, she would cry, “she asked me to paint her bathroom!! No thank you, she should be thanking God she has a bathroom at all!!”
The group leader said he was coming back for some follow up work on caulking the bathroom sink. I said I would not be returning, and I said why - this was the richest poor person I had ever met, and if living a good testimony meant being exploited as free house labor, then I wanted no part of it.
That was 3 years ago, and as you can tell it still gets me upset. As an ex-Christian, I still go on mission trips to Juarez and donate where I can to what I feel is a truly worthwhile cause. The Catholic church has many faults, but give them their due, they know how to minister to the truly poor - and they do it all without this whole ‘personal relationship’ tripe. And I am glad to help in that area. I am not sure who to blame in that whole fiasco - the lady who felt she could exploit lilly-livered Christians, my baptist church, my old small group who met weekly at my house, the whole church culture, all of the above - I just don’t know. But that whole scene, that whole *attitude* was just nausating to both me and my wife.
jenloughary sez:
“It kind of tells me that if it’s just me and God that I need no-one or nothing else, and that simply is not true!”
My old pastor used an often repeated quip: “Jesus does not want to be number 1 on a list of 10. He wants to be number 1 on a list of 1. Because of Jesus is truly number 1 in your life, is there really room for anything else?”
As an ex-Christian, I can see in hindsight that following my old pastor’s advice will do nothing but foster ignorance, insecurity and severe emotional immaturity in the unsuspecting believer. I would like your thoughts on my old pastor’s quip.
Intersting.
One of the things that I liked about the Mormon church was the idea that families were together forever. We could get sealed together in the temple, and then we were promised to be together in the afterlife.
This was different from where I had been told over and over that there would be no need for my mother, sister, lover, or father in heaven because I would be living in the light of Christ. that always weirded me out.
Jen,
Dang… talk about a hammer drop. It is really encouraging to hear people besides red-meat-eating dudes notice how problematic this is.
“If you want to speak personally about individual relationships with God then we should talk about the Father-Son relationship and the Father-Daughter relationship.”
So very true. That opens up another can of worms (”what is your relationship with your father like?”), but at least it’s theologically sound…
HIS,
*sigh* I’m feeling you on the rich-mission trips. I live in a nice area in the suburbs (student discount ;-)), and there seems to be almost no awareness of what you are talking about. In ministry, it is hard to rationalize trimming rose bushes… I guess the trick is knowing which old lady really needs the help (even if she isn’t critically poor), and which one is just taking advantage of the church…
Kyle,
“This was different from where I had been told over and over that there would be no need for my mother, sister, lover, or father in heaven because I would be living in the light of Christ. that always weirded me out.”
What the…? Well yeah, understandably so. I hope and pray my parents and my brother will kick it with Jesus someday as well… Is there a possibility that they may not? Yeah, but that’s not because “they don’t matter.”
Sailing:
Your story about that day has left me with some serious nausea. It is simply disgusting. And, honestly, it makes me wonder what the people who attended your old church would say if they had read “A Dark & Stormy Night” on my site. But that’s one reason why I started a blog; because I know a lot of people can’t bear the ugly honesty of night so they never get to the renewal of day.
Thanks for expanding on that story. And I will say that I’m glad you and your wife decided to stay in the van and refused to be a part of it. I would have, too. And I certainly would have said something to the leader and to the woman. To quote Ledyard, “Let the consequences be what they may!”
As for your old pastor’s quip…Simple: If all I needed was Christ, there would be no women, no language, no dogs, no neighbors, no friends, no parents, no siblings, no oxygen, no grilled flat iron steak, no chocolate, no baseball, no strawberries…Who the heck wants to live like that?!?! I mean, SOMEBODY needs to get with the program already!!
This has opened my eyes to something I never really thought about - reminds me of the first time my pastor mentioned not liking the “sweet Jesus, meek and mild” songs.
What about the idea of Jesus being our friend? Doesn’t that speak to a personal relationship? Isn’t “friend” used in the scripture to speak of the deep, binding, personal covenant we have with Him?
I see Jesus as I did when a child. I wanted to be one those kids sitting on His lap, or the picture on the front of my Bible - laying in the grass looking up at the clouds with Him. He is portrayed in scripture as able to laugh and cry with His friends. He was human…can we not relate on a human level too?
Just asking…
Michelle, when I was a kid, I used to take Jesus for rides in my wagon. I would tow him around, talk to him, and I swore he was right there with me.
Michelle, that was 40 years ago. I am a grown man now. If I start imagining Jesus is sitting with me on a hilltop as I gaze at clouds… sorry Michelle, but that is bordering on schizophrenia.
I once dated a woman who made a bold confession to me. She had an invisible friend who followed her around and talked to her. Her friend was named Peggy. Peggy was a cat from an alternate universe. Needless to say, I did not date her for very long. What am I supposed to make of grown men and women who still cling to imaginary playmates?
If you want the Biblical answer - no, I don’t think the Bible in any way asks the Christian to have any kind of friendship or ‘personal relationship’ with the risen Christ. That sentamentality in Protestant faith did not exist until the 17th -18th century.
If you want my real answer to this as a non-Christian, no, I do not want to imagine Jesus walking around with me and being my friend. Because Jesus, if he ever existed at all, died 2000 years ago, and his corpse rotted. To have Jesus as my imaginary playmate would be truly delusional at this point.
I can understand how you see it this way - but I assure you I am not sshizophrenic. I have no imaginary playmate. I do have a friend in Jesus, and He is alive. He calls all who are in covenant with Him, friend.
I speak to Him all day long. Do I hear an audible voice in return? No, but I do have scriptures and assurances of peace that help me moment-by-moment. He is in covenant with me, and through the Holy Spirit I am walking with Him.
I’m sorry it sounds crazy to you - but it is what the scripture teaches. My mind is not diseased and I am not deluded. I am a believer.
Oh,…and the scripture reference…John15:12-17.
You pulled a fast one on me, Michelle. I thought for sure you would cite John 15:4, but you surprised me and went forward to 12-17. OK. You do know that Jesus says he will only be your freind if you do as he commands you to do (v14). Jesus’ and God’s conditional love and friendship is emphasized in John’s Gospel (also in 14:21, 14:23, 15:10). I hope you understand if I don’t think conditional friendship based on following one’s commands is a very solid basis for friendship - even if I can communicate with this person by some method other than charades. Do you accept conditional friendship from anybody else? I thought true love kept no record of wrongs (1 Cor 13)
Sorry Michelle, sentimental piety is nausea inducing to many male Christians. It really is as bad as I wrote it in this article, and many men - Christian men - are very uncomfortable with it. Most just don’t want to discuss it because this idea that one most have some kind of relationship with Jesus to be saved from hell has permeated our culture. Trust me on this one.
Ok, let’s get into the exegesis of the text. In looking at the Greek structure of the sentence, the noun refers to us - we are not His friends “unless” we follow the commands of the covenant. We have a choice to enter into covenant, or not, based upon the conditions of the covenant - “count the cost.” If we don’t live up to our end of it, the covenant is not severed, but the friendship has been hurt. He is unconditionally our friend, but we may choose not be His friend. The onus is on us, not Him. He is a covenant-keeping God, we are the wishy-washy partner. He is constant, we are flawed.
As in a marriage, one partner may be unfaithful but that does not mean the other must walk away from the covenant. The relationship is terribly hurt, but not broken.
It’s not meant to be sentimental piety - it is descriptive of the type relationship we have entered. The nauseous sentimentality, I agree, is a late development that misconstrues the text.
Michelle,
“It’s not meant to be sentimental piety - it is descriptive of the type relationship we have entered. The nauseous sentimentality, I agree, is a late development that misconstrues the text.”
You hit the nail on the head. It is quite clear from a number of other texts (lets leave Song of Solomon out) and from many of the references, some of which come from Jesus, that we Christians as a collective are Jesus’ bride. As a man, I have really struggled to understand what God intends to communicate to me through this picture, but simply because it is difficult or maybe uncomfortable doesnt mean I should give up. It is the sentimentality that you speak of that I think we can all agree we can do with out. For more references on this stuff, Rob Bell has a book called Sex God that deals with a lot of these issues, although I wouldnt say it is comprehensive nor the final authority. Just wanted to throw my two cents in.
Thanks for your two cents - I’ll look for that book.
Although a woman, I have had difficulty with the same thing, until my husband showed me the truth of the concept. Jesus loves the church as a husband loves his wife. I didn’t see a great example of this in my home - my dad was always one to be waited upon and rarely lifted a finger to help. My husband lives a sacrificial life. He has put his needs before mine and has loved, cherished, understood and provided in a way rarely seen - and since I am disabled, his sacrifice is more than the average man’s. My needs come before him, he lives with me in understanding.
Is that sentimental? I see it as commitment to a covenant, although I can’t keep up my end perfectly, he (and He) just keeps giving.
He has put MY needs before HIS*
Whoo! I really messed up that concept.
I will try my best to keep this short -
Michelle, first you say this:
“I see Jesus as I did when a child. I wanted to be one those kids sitting on His lap, or the picture on the front of my Bible - laying in the grass looking up at the clouds with Him.”
Then you say this:
“It’s not meant to be sentimental piety - it is descriptive of the type relationship we have entered. The nauseous sentimentality, I agree, is a late development that misconstrues the text.”
In your second statement, you agree with me that sentimental piety, as I have described in this article ‘misconstrues the text’ and is a late development in Christian thought.
Michelle, how is your first statement *not* sentimental piety? You want to sit on the lap of your invisible friend, and lay on the grass an gaze at clouds with him, presumably to admire his handiwork. This is the relationship that you desire with Jesus, and you don’t find this overly sentimental? This is the sort of thing that gave me hives as a Christian -
So… my question is, which is it? As a Christian, I had no problem with a *convenent relationship* with the risen Lord. Each side has a responsibility. Jesus requires faith in him. If I do this, he will save me from the Fires of Hell. This is salvation. This is not a friendship - this is a relation between a Lord and his servant, a God and his redeemed. As a Christian, I was hag-ridden with the idea that Jesus had to be my personal friend, that he ‘walks with me and he talks with me..’ etc. My personal relationship with an invisible friend had no more viability than the girl I dated who had a personal relationship with Peggy the Invisible Cat. An outside observer would find each claim to a relationship to be equally incredulous, and I knew that even as a Christian.
Michelle:
“Ok, let’s get into the exegesis of the text….”
Honestly, I would rather not. Because if I do, I am arguing for a position that I no longer believe in anyway. After much studying, reading, praying and no small amount of pain, I have come to the conclusion that the Gospel of John is historically worthless. I don’t think Jesus ever said anything attributed to him in John 15, so that whole issue is moot.
The people who I have known who practice the kind of Christianity that I write about in this article are some of the most emotionally stunted and immature people I have ever met. I knew that as a Christian - and that is the whole point of this article. It did nothing but make me very insecure and neurotic, and I was glad to be finally rid of it. I could accept Jesus as my Lord and Savior, but not as a friend with whom I could hold a conversation with.
There was one lady in particular who comes to mind, from my home Bible Study. As sentamentally pious as they come, yet her life was an utter mess. She passed off all responsibilty and decision making to her invisible friend who was a constant presence in her life. Her ‘relationship’ with Jesus consisted of her talking to her invisible friend Jesus while she interpreted random events of her life to be signs from Jesus which she must interpret.
“I need to see a doctor, but my appointment was canceled - what must that mean, Lord? My grown son will not leave the house and abuses me terribly - help me Jesus to understand. My father died very young, despite him honoring his parents all his life - what are you trying to tell me, Jesus?” all these are real issues that she brought up to us.
This never-ending game of charades between believers and their invisible friend is engaged by many, many Christians, I think to their own detriment. This was the issue I had with it as a Christian - and this is a real concern to the Christian community (note that I wrote this article but a Christian asked my permission to place it on this blogsite). A covenential relationship with a Lord and Savior is one thing. But Christian teaching that tells me that my best friend is an invisible being who communicates to me only in ambiguous games of charades, and if I do as Rick Warren advises and chant mantra-like throughout the day to him “Jesus I love you, Jesus I ask for your help, Jesus you are my guiding light, etc”, then I will be just as emotionally immature and naive as if I really were talking to Peggy the Invisible Cat.
Maybe that is why I am arguing with you now. Because I have known many Christians who act this way. Even as an ex-Christian, it *still* makes me mad because these were real people, people who I loved, who were taught this overly emotional sentimental ‘personal relationship’ nonsense - and they are just emotional wrecks for it. Maybe that is why I get so upset thinking about this - I do take it personally - for their sakes.
I can’t make my point any clearer. I will end my commenting here, unless you want to bring up something else.
Mike says:
“It is quite clear from a number of other texts (lets leave Song of Solomon out)’…”
Thank you for leaving Song of Solomon out. You have no idea how many bible commentaries I have read, and sermons I have heard over the years that quote passages from this erotic book as figurative of Christ’s love for his church. My old Thompson Chain reference is sitting right next to me, and it’s summary of the book states quite plainly that the whole book is nothing but a forshadow of Christs love for his Church.
No. no no no no please no
He Is Sailing:
“I see Jesus as I did when a child. I wanted to be one of those kids sitting on His lap, or the picture on the front of my Bible - laying in the grass looking up at the clouds with Him. He is portrayed in scripture as able to laugh and cry with His friends. He was human…can we not relate on a human level too?”
Where did I say that I want to sit on Jesus’ lap today? I came to Jesus with a childlike faith as a child. My faith and understanding of Jesus have grown through the years. The picture of Jesus as our friend is biblical - “friend” is a covenant term. Yes, I see Him as Savior, Lord, My Redeemer, The Rock on which I stand, but I also see Him as human. He came to walk among us and to experience life as a man - He understands my weaknesses. I can accept that part of Him too.
“It’s not meant to be sentimental piety - it is descriptive of the type relationship we have entered. The nauseous sentimentality, I agree, is a late development that misconstrues the text.”
I am agreeing with you in this statement, that nauseous sentimentality is frustrating and difficult to hear. You may consider my description as nauseous, but it is biblical, nonetheless. I have similar feelings when I hear “emotionally stunted and immature” Christians - but I try to hear them with grace and not add to their difficulties with harsh judgments.
I can tell this is a hot button for you - I am sorry I pushed it. I only felt the need to respond from my bruised ego.
Michelle:
“Where did I say that I want to sit on Jesus’ lap today?”
OK - I re-read it and I apologize. I misunderstood what you said. At the very least, I hope that I made my opinions clear on what I think is a real problem with popular Christianity.
HIS,
On Song of Solomon…
HIS, it is the firm opinion of the writers here that this is NOT a description of Christ’s love for the church. That’s a copout and an exegetically poor rationalization to avoid admitting sex is in the bible (forsooth!).
On your friend’s sentimental piety…
The lady from the bible study example sounds a little different from the homoerotic language you discuss in this article. I am not terribly sure (theologically or culturally) what has influenced that kind of piety, but I agree with you that it is damaging and not biblical.
One of our professors, every time the topic of prayer comes up, rants about how Christians have misunderstood prayer. He uses an example of how a pastoral search committee prayed for a new pastor by asking God to “reveal the pastor that He has already chosen, and give us some sign so that we will know.” He says that Biblically, we should ask for the wisdom and discernment to make the right decision, but not “pass the buck” to a God-in-the-box.
Anyway, not too familiar with this problem myself because I avoid people like that because it gives me the creeps, but I thought you might be encouraged to hear that.
Brad:
“…but I thought you might be encouraged to hear that.”
It is encouraging, and I have great hope for the younger generation. You (and presumably all the seminarianblog contributors) and I come from very different generational and cultural religious backgrounds. To me, it sounds like your generation is finally “growing up” as oppossed to my religiously stiffling and repressive upbringing.