Read Further Level 1

Read Further: Level 1

A reminder that the purpose of sharing the guides and further information, is to support deeper understanding, and not an attempt to persuade readers toward a single viewpoint.

The page includes

Key Biblical Texts and how Christians interpret them
Questions to explore, and
Why St John’s elders have landed where they have

Key Biblical Texts, and how Christians interpret them

Below is a presentation of the main approaches found in mainstream Christian teaching today. These reflect the actual breadth of the elders’ engagement.

Genesis 1–2: Creation, Humanity, and Companionship

Why this matters: These passages shape discussions about sex differences, marriage, and gender.

Interpretations Across the Christian Tradition

View: Traditional (non-affirming)

Male–female pairing is part of God’s creational design and prescriptive for marriage. The binary is fixed and normative.

View: Mixed / Integrative

Genesis shows male–female partnership but emphasises companionship, mutuality, and the needs of human beings. The text describes origins, not rigid categories for every relationship or gender experience.

View: Affirming

Genesis 1–2 expresses human dignity, relational need ('not good to be alone'), and covenantal unity, but not a prohibition of other relational patterns between two individuals. It presents a symbolic prototype, not an exhaustive model.

Key Theological Themes:

Image-bearing (Gen 1:26–27)
The human need for mutual help (Gen 2:18)
Covenant unity (Gen 2:24)
Poetry and archetype, rather than technical biology

Leviticus 18 & 20: Holiness, Purity, and Ancient Law

Why this matters: These are the only two Old Testament verses directly mentioning male–male sex.

Interpretations Across the Christian Tradition

View: Traditional (non-affirming)

These verses express a timeless moral prohibition.

View: Mixed / Integrative

Leviticus expresses holiness through cultural symbols. Some parts carry forward; others don’t. These verses reflect concern for patriarchy, identity, and boundary markers more than modern sexual orientation.

View: Affirming

These belong to the ritual purity code. The Hebrew to’evah often means “ritually unclean” (e.g., shellfish). Christians do not consider most of the Holiness Code binding. These verses are not addressing covenantal, loving same-sex relationships.

Key Contextual Points

The Holiness Code included many regulations that Christians no longer follow
The Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) dealt with continuity/discontinuity.
Patriarchal assumptions may underlie the prohibitions.

Romans 1:26–27: The Most Debated Passage

Why this matters: These are the only two New Testament verses directly mentioning male–male sex.

Interpretations Across the Christian Tradition

View: Traditional (non-affirming)

Paul appeals to creation order; same-sex acts contradict God’s design and are universally sinful.

View: Mixed / Integrative

Paul condemns lust, excess, and heterosexuals engaging in same-sex acts as part of idolatrous practices. It may not address orientation or modern relationships.

View: Affirming

Paul uses Stoic categories of “natural” tied to cultural expectations of procreation and social order. He critiques exploitative, excessive, or status-driven practices — not mutual same-sex love.

Important Context from Scholarship

'Natural/unnatural' language was commonly used for men acting “against masculine honour,” non-procreative acts, or acts associated with pagan worship.
Early church fathers linked “unnatural” to non-procreative sex, not orientation
The passage critiques lust and idolatry, not covenantal relationships.

1 Corinthians 6 & 1 Timothy 1 (“arsenokoitai” / “malakoi”)

Why this matters: These two Greek words are often translated as “men who have sex with men.”

Interpretations Across the Christian Tradition

View: Traditional (non-affirming)

These terms condemn homosexual behaviour broadly.

View: Mixed / Integrative

These words likely relate to economic exploitation, prostitution, and abusive relationships.

View: Affirming

The Greek terms are extremely rare and probably describe coercive or exploitative practices, not committed same-sex relationships. There is no evidence they refer to loving partnerships.

Key contextual points:

Ancient Greek vocabulary lacked terms for sexual orientation.
Vice lists focus on exploitation, not loving relationships.
Translation history is complex.

Genesis 19 — Sodom and Gomorrah

Why this matters: Sodom is often cited in discussions of homosexuality.

On this passage, there is now broad Christian agreement that:

The sin of Sodom is violence, attempted gang rape, and inhospitality, not consensual same-sex love (Ezekiel 16:49).

However, some people still see this passage as a condemnation of homosexuality.

New Testament Texts on Marriage

Across Matthew 19, Ephesians 5, and 1 Corinthians 7:

Jesus emphasises covenant faithfulness and the protection of the vulnerable
Paul recognises relational complexity and privileges peace (1 Cor 7:15)
marriage functions symbolically (Christ & the church), not merely biologically

None of these texts directly addresses same-sex relationships.

Gender in Scripture

1. Image-Bearing Applies to All (Genesis 1)

The starting point for any Christian understanding of gender is the affirmation that every human being is created in the image of God:

“So God created humankind in his own image; in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” Genesis 1:27

A few things are important here:

a. The text affirms dignity before it describes difference

Being made in God’s image (the imago Dei) is the first and primary claim: before gender is mentioned, humanity is declared God-reflecting.
This means worth, honour, and dignity are not tied to conformity with cultural or bodily norms.

b. “Male and female” here has different interpretations

Genesis 1–2 describes humanity as “male and female,” and Christians interpret this in different faithful ways. Some see these verses as presenting fixed, binary categories; others read the language as poetic, naming the ends of a spectrum to describe the breadth of human experience.

We recognise this as an ongoing conversation within the wider church. In this season, St John’s Elders emphasise the imago Dei, the diversity within creation, and Jesus’ pattern of welcome, while honouring that people in our community may hold different interpretations.

c. Image-bearing is relational

Genesis 1 links the divine image with:

relational capacity
stewardship
creative potential
vocation
and mutuality

All of these are expressed across a spectrum of human experiences, including intersex and gender-diverse people, who equally reflect God’s character and creativity.

2. Jesus Repeatedly Dignifies Those Marginalised or Outside Norms

Throughout the Gospels, Jesus consistently encounters people whose bodies, social roles, or identities place them “outside the lines” of accepted norms — and he dignifies, honours, and restores them.

Examples include:

The eunuchs in Matthew 19: Jesus recognises that some people exist outside typical sex/gender structures (“born that way”, “made that way”, or choosing another path for the kingdom). He treats them with unusual respect for his time.
The woman with the issue of blood (Mark 5): Her bodily difference made her ritually “other”, yet Jesus calls her daughter and restores her fully to community.
The Samaritan woman (John 4): A woman, a foreigner, and socially outcast, yet Jesus reveals his identity to her more fully than to most disciples.
The centurion (Matthew 8): A Gentile man outside covenant boundaries, whose faith Jesus praises above Israel.
Zacchaeus (Luke 19): Socially despised, yet Jesus centres him as a son of Abraham.

How this shapes our understanding of gender

Jesus consistently:

subverts purity boundaries,
restores those excluded by social norms,
challenges the idea that identity categories determine belonging,
and expands the circle of who is welcomed into God’s family.

This pattern encourages us to approach questions of gender with the same honour, compassion, and boundary-breaking welcome.

3. The Fruit of the Spirit Is the New Testament’s Measure of Maturity

Paul’s description of the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22–23) is the clearest biblical description of what Christian maturity actually looks like:

“Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.”

This is significant because:

a. The New Testament does not define discipleship by gendered roles

Jesus never assigns discipleship differently for men and women.
Paul often breaks down old distinctions rather than creating new ones.

b. The fruit of the Spirit is about character, not conformity

Growth in Christ is measured not by:

fitting a cultural gender role,
conforming to a binary,
or performing masculinity or femininity in specific ways.

Instead, it is measured by the fruit of the Spirit.

c. Leadership in the early church was based on gifting, not gender

Christian communities empowered people based on:

character
calling
service
spiritual maturity rather than biological or social categories.

Gender identity does not determine someone’s capacity to bear fruit or lead faithfully.

4. Biblical Categories of Sex/Gender Are Descriptive, Not Rigid Taxonomies

The Bible does not contain a modern biological taxonomy of sex or gender. Instead, Scripture:

a. Uses everyday language describing what people generally see

The biblical world was not asking modern biological questions. The language reflects observation, not scientific categorisation.

b. Does not present gender as rigid in its expression

In Scripture, we see:

strong women (Deborah, Jael),
gentle men (David’s lamenting, Jesus’ weeping),
prophetesses and female apostles (Miriam, Anna, Junia, Priscilla)
men and women breaking stereotypical roles (Esther, Jesus)

Biblical gender categories are therefore:

descriptive (narrating common experience),
do not always conform to narrow cultural norms,
and sometimes intentionally subversive.

c. Includes categories outside today’s assumed binary

Jesus’ mention of eunuchs (Matthew 19), as well as non-testament mentions (Isaiah 56) is significant — a real, recognised social category that did not align with typical sex/gender norms.

This shows that the biblical world already recognised complexity.

d. A Note on New Testament Texts Sometimes Read as Gender-Binary or Restrictive

Some New Testament passages (such as 1 Corinthians 11 and 14 or 1 Timothy 2) are often read as reinforcing fixed gender roles or binary categories. Christians interpret these texts differently. Some understand them as universal instructions rooted in creation order; others understand them as pastoral guidance shaped by the cultural and social dynamics of early Christian communities. St John’s Elders recognise these differences and have engaged seriously with these passages. In this season, we place primary emphasis on the New Testament’s broader trajectory, character, gifting, and the fruit of the Spirit, while honouring that people in our community may faithfully read these texts in different ways.

5. Intersex Realities Reveal That Biological Sex Is Not Always “Binary Simple”

Biological sex is not uniformly binary in reality, and Scripture’s world included people whose bodies did not fit typical categories.

Why this matters biblically

Genesis 1 describes creation in broad strokes (“light/dark”, “land/sea”), but creation itself contains gradients, spectrums, and exceptions.
The existence of intersex people shows that “male and female” in Genesis is not meant as an exhaustive medical classification.
Physical variation does not diminish God’s image in anyone.

Why this matters pastorally

Intersex people have always been part of humanity, including in biblical times.
Their existence invites humility in how we apply ancient descriptive categories to modern lived realities.

6. The Early Church Repeatedly Re-Evaluated Identity and Purity Boundaries (Acts 10–11; Galatians 3:28)

The early church faced major identity questions that required rethinking long-held assumptions. Two passages are especially relevant:

Acts 10–11: Peter and the Gentiles

Peter’s vision overturns deep-seated purity rules:

foods once considered unclean are declared clean
Gentiles, once excluded are declared full recipients of the Spirit
Peter concludes: “God has shown me that I should not call anyone impure or unclean.” (Acts 10:28)

This shift is massive. It shows:

the Spirit leads the church beyond old categories
the community must welcome whom God welcomes
identity boundaries can be redrawn by grace

Galatians 3:28:

“There is no longer Jew or Greek, slave or free, male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

This is not erasing identity but reframing it:

Old social hierarchies no longer determine status in God’s family.
“Male and female” is explicitly listed among categories that do not define inclusion.

Implications

Belonging in Christ does not depend on where a person sits within traditional categories.
Gender is not a barrier to full participation in the life of the church.
The gospel consistently expands the circle, not shrinks it.

Questions that came up

These questions have come up often in our conversations as elders and in the Learning Streams over the past few years. None of them has simple answers, and faithful Christians hold a range of views on each one. Rather than offering definitive conclusions here, the FAQs are meant to name the questions many people are already carrying and to reflect our hope that people will really grapple with the discussions.

More details of the elders' discussions can be found in the Read Further: Level 2 document

Q. Isn’t Genesis 1–2 clear that marriage is male–female?

Christians read these passages differently. Some see them as presenting a fixed pattern; others read the language as poetic and archetypal. What is clear is that Genesis emphasises companionship, shared dignity, and covenantal relationship. The longer document explores both views and why St John’s Elders have emphasised covenant and mutuality.

Q. Doesn’t Leviticus forbid same-sex relationships?

These verses sit within a wider purity code that Christians no longer follow in full. The question is how these passages apply today, especially to committed relationships that were not in view in the ancient world. Different Christians answer this differently; our longer reflections summarise the main approaches.

Q. Didn’t Paul condemn homosexuality in Romans 1?

Romans 1 describes a range of behaviours connected to idolatry, exploitation, and lack of self-control. Whether Paul is referring to all same-sex relationships or specific cultural practices is a live debate among Christians and scholars. We invite people to study these texts carefully and engage in the fuller analysis provided in the supporting documents.

Q. What about “arsenokoitai” and “malakoi”?

These two Greek words are rare and their meanings are debated. Some interpret them as references to exploitation or power abuses; others see them as more general. This is a place where humility is essential, and where Christians are encouraged to engage with scholarship and discussions.

Q. Does the Bible ever affirm same-sex marriage?

Scripture does not describe same-sex marriage as we understand it today. The question is how biblical values, covenant, faithfulness, mutuality and Christlike love, apply in contemporary contexts. Different believers land differently here; the elders have explained why they believe these values can be embodied by same-sex couples.

Q. Does the Bible talk about gender identity?

Not in modern terms. Scripture does address people outside typical social or bodily categories, and repeatedly shows Jesus welcoming those marginalised or misunderstood.

The nearest categories could be seen to be:

eunuchs (Isaiah 56; Matthew 19),
diversity within creation,
non-conformity to rigid gender roles.

Why St John’s Elders Have Landed Where They Have?

Based on the broad biblical landscape summarised here, the elders focused on:

1. Covenant, faithfulness, and mutuality: These appear repeatedly in Scripture as the heart of Christian relational ethics.

2. Jesus’ welcome of the marginalised: This shaped a desire to remove unnecessary barriers to belonging.

3. The fruit of the Spirit as the measure of maturity: Galatians 5 is treated as a central ethical anchor.

4. Recognition of legitimate Christian diversity: Scripture is complex, and faithful Christians read it differently.

5. A desire to care well for real people with real stories:

Pastoral practice has to deal with:

trauma,
brokenness,
family complexity,
gender identity,
and diverse relational forms.

6. Honouring Scripture without flattening it: Rather than claiming absolute certainty on contested texts, the elders chose a principled focus on covenant, integrity, safety, and discipleship.

7. Paying attention to how the Holy Spirit has shaped the church across Scripture and today: The elders recognised that throughout the New Testament, especially in Acts 10–11, Acts 15 and Galatians 3:28, the early church repeatedly re-evaluated long-held boundaries as the Spirit revealed new understanding. Our journey as a church in 2025 through these passages has shaped our conviction that faithful discernment sometimes requires re-examining assumptions, listening to the Spirit, and allowing grace to widen the circle of belonging.