Matthew Vines is speaking truth to power and so, naturally, tribal gatekeepers are responding by speaking power to truth.
You may remember Vines from a viral video posted to YouTube in 2012. That video has been viewed more than 700,000 times — which is astonishing when you realize that, unlike most viral videos, it’s more than an hour long and consists entirely of a lecture on biblical exegesis. It’s not flashy, or (for the most part) funny. It’s just an earnest, whip-smart young man who’s done his homework sharing his personal testimony and the substance of his extensive study. Yes, that’s right, Matthew Vines made substance go viral.
That’s part of why the gatekeepers are puckering from head to toe. And now, to make matters worse, Vines has expanded on the substance of this lecture in a new book, God and the Gay Christian. Even the title of that book is a frightening challenge to those whose self-proclaimed authority is based on denying that there is any such thing as a gay Christian. Vines didn’t have to write a book to disprove that ridiculous claim, of course, all he had to do to disprove that was to show up, because Matthew Vines — like millions of others — is, in fact, a gay Christian.
More than that, Vines is a gay evangelical Christian — one who approaches the Bible as an evangelical does (albeit with more care than is typical of many evangelicals). That is why, James McGrath says, Vines’ book is “absolute dynamite”:
That is why Vines’ book is so important. It is written by a conservative Christian who is gay. It accepts the authority of Scripture. And it makes a convincing case within that framework that what the Bible says does not provide a basis for disapproving of same-sex marriage. Although Vines is not a scholar, by drawing on scholarship and carefully investigating the subject, he comes up with interpretations of the relevant Biblical texts, against the backdrop of their cultural setting, that are thoroughly persuasive.
It is a remarkable achievement. I can well imagine that a century from now, people may look back to this book as the one that decisively turned the tide regarding conservative Christians views on homosexuality.
I’m less optimistic than McGrath. Vines may win the exegetical argument over each of the infamous clobber texts, but a text-by-text exegetical argument won’t likely turn the tide. Just look at the work of Christians for Biblical Equality over the past several decades. CBE has never lost an exegetical debate over any of the clobber-texts used to deny women full equality in the church, but that undefeated record still hasn’t turned the tide because the problem isn’t the exegesis of specific texts but the larger hermeneutic that singled out, isolated and elevated such clobber-texts in the first place.
Vines’ project — engaging all of those clobber-texts head-on — is worthy, valuable and necessary, but I don’t think it can be sufficient.
Still though, Vines is compelling and persuasive. The substance and affect of his argument is attested to not just by the praise he’s receiving from people like James McGrath, Rachel Held Evans and James Brownson, but also from the vehemence with which he and his publisher are being attacked by those on the losing side of this argument.
The Southern Gothic Presbyterian World magazine tag-teamed with Southern Baptist spokesman Russell Moore to try to withdraw the tribal imprimatur for Vines’ publisher, Convergent Books, and for all the other Chrsitian imprints of that publishing house. They don’t engage Vines or his argument, instead misrepresenting it and dismissing it as an unacceptable “stance.” But they’re not really interested in the substance of their disagreement with Vines. What they’re really doing is exerting their power — trying to threaten the publisher with financial punishment for daring to challenge their authority as gatekeepers.
That’s not how people respond when they believe their side of the argument is defensible on its merits.
Al Mohler raced to pre-empt Vines’ book with an insta-e-book of his own. Mohler edited the book and contributed a chapter, filing the rest with chapters from his Mohleretttes. That format isn’t well-suited to the culture of Southern Baptist Seminary, though. When the authoritarian head of an institution that requires complete uniformity of opinion edits a collection written by his loyal acolytes you don’t wind up with a book so much as a single chapter repeated several times over with very slight variations in word order. The effect is like holding open auditions for a community theater production of Annie. “My name is Al and I’ll be singing ‘Tomorrow.” “My name is Russell, and I’ll be singing ‘Tomorrow.'” “My name is Owen, and I’ll be singing ‘Tomorrow.'” “My name is Denny, and …”
In this case, such repetition is a feature, not a bug. When all you’ve got is raw assertion — you can’t be a gay Christian — then repetition ad nauseum is your best bet for making it sound persuasive.
Matthew Paul Turner says the book from Mohler and the Mohlitos is an attempt to “sabotage not only the success of Vines’s book … but also the conversation he’s hoping to spark.” That’s not entirely fair. I think Mohler also genuinely, sincerely is hoping to cash in on the success of Vines’ book and the conversation he’s generating. Do you remember how many e-books on Hell were rushed into print in “response” to Rob Bell’s Love Wins? Some of those folks did pretty well for themselves.
Want to see what all the fuss is about and what has Mohler and all these other tribal gatekeepers so afraid? Check out Vimes’ original lecture on YouTube. And today, at noon EDT, Patheos is hosting a live webchat with Vimes, joined by Tony Jones, Rachel Held Evans and Jay Bakker
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In