Mark Keown

I have been asked to consider whether the category “eunuchs from birth” in Matt 19:12 might open the way for biblically minded Christians accepting same-sex relationships on a par with heterosexual marriage. Here is my answer concerning this verse alone. (The solution to such questions involves interpretation of a wide range of biblical material and this is only one such aspect.) The context of the passage is Jesus being asked by Pharisees his interpretation of Deut 24:1, the core text on divorce in Pharisaic thought. Jesus is being asked where he stands in relation to an ongoing debate between Shammai and Hillel Pharisees. Deuteronomy 24:1 states that a husband can divorce his wife if he finds some indecency in her. Shammai took indecency here to mean sexual immorality. The Shammai view is consistent with the Hebrew ʿěr·wā(h) which at its core, means the genitals. Hillel took it more figuratively, Moses giving grounds for a husband to divorce his wife on any grounds. As the ter...

The media is abuzz with questions about whether transgender people should be able to compete in Olympic and other elite sports events with people of their gender, i.e., those who have transitioned to women with women, and those to men with men. The latter is unlikely to happen, as few women would transition to be men and then be capable of competing with them. Then again, you never know, with the use of steroids and many sports do not rely on strength (e.g., lawn bowls). The real question is whether transgender women should compete on the same level with those who are born women and remain so.  At the moment, some sports say no, men who have transitioned to women have an unfair advantage and it will be dangerous in contact sports as women may be hurt by the more powerful transwomen. Some say yes, it is about inclusion, and with the right controls on hormone levels, it will be a fair contest. There is a great pushback from athletes against the latter idea, as they do not agree that ...

I am intrigued by the number of articles, podcasts, videos, and other media using the phrase “post-Christian” in relation to the world or a given context. I will argue that such a descriptor is incorrect and should never be used by anyone who claims to be Christian. In AD 27–30 or 30–33, Jesus Christ entered history. He was God incarnate. He lived an extraordinary life. Imbued with a ridiculous degree of power never before seen in a human, he healed multitudes, walked on water, calmed a storm, turned water to wine, raised the dead, and showed love to people society had utterly marginalized. He was arrested, illegally tried, condemned to death, and died by crucifixion. He never once used his phenomenal power for his own ends, only using it to help others in need. On the third day after his death, his tomb was found empty, and then he appeared around ten times to women, men, and groups. Forty days later, 120 of his followers had an astonishing experience in which they were filled wit...

I was asked at church the other day whether wives should submit to their husbands, based on the English translations of Ephesians 5:22-24. My answer confused the hearer as they thought I was saying no a wife need not obey a husband, when in fact I was saying, yes they should, but all Christians are meant to submit to one another (that is the real command in the passage). Let me explain. In the original Greek, which is the original language of the NT (not English), the command comes in v. 21 as a participle ( hyptassomenoi ), “submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.” This is what is known in Greek as an imperatival participle, which is a fancy way of saying a participle (an “ing” word, e.g., submitt ing ) that is actually a command. It is placed in the first position which gives it prominence or as older scholars would say "emphasis." The following verse (22) does not have a command in it. It draws on the participle stating (wives to your own husbands as to the ...

Good on Christopher Luxon for speaking about his Christian faith in his maiden parliamentary speech. Clips can be heard here: https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018788962/luxon-highlights-faith-in-maiden-speech . In his speech, Luxon challenges the stereotyping of people with a Christian faith as extreme. He states that his faith anchors him, gives his life purpose, and shapes his values. It puts him in the context of something bigger than himself. He goes on to say that his faith has a strong influence on who he is and how he relates to people. He speaks of seeing Jesus showing compassion, tolerance, and care for others. For him, Jesus does not judge, discriminate, or reject people, he loves unconditionally. He notes Christians in history who have made a huge difference by entering public life. He singles our Christian abolitionists who fought against slavery, those who educated the poor and challenged the rich to share their wealth to help others les...

What an amazing year! COVID-19 has dominated, of course, we all know about that and have been affected one way or another. America has a new president, although the current one is not giving up without a fight. And so we come to another Christmas. Christmas tells the story of God’s Son entering human history in a young woman's womb in an insignificant ancient town, Bethlehem. He was raised in the even more insignificant Nazareth. Such things show that God is prepared to come in undramatic circumstances, away from the glitz and glamour of those in power, and grow his kingdom from a small seed into the largest tree in the garden. He came through the miraculous conception of a virgin, showing that God is a God of miracles. He is an interventionist, God, entering creation at his will, to work out his purposes—we are comforted that God can if he wills. He was conceived in a womb and born in the usual human way, not in a blaze of heavenly glory with angels and fire, showing God’s p...

 It is common in our western cultures to speak of “religion” to describe an entity of people who believe in God or gods or who adhere to a particular religious group. It is fair to call such groups religions, we have to call them something. It helps in analysing the differences across humankind. However, what then happens is that others can use this label to make gross generalisations such as blaming religion for ills in the world, like war. They can put people down who do believe in God or gods as inferior because they submit themselves to the said religion’s creeds and ideas. It can become politicised, stigmatised, and weaponised. This has happened in western cultures. Such putting down and labelling is naïve as all humans are religious and submit to something or someone. For some people, it is the government. They look to the government to solve the ills of the world and believe in it. When there is a problem in society, they expect governments to fix it. We see this in NZ w...