Where We Go Wrong in Discerning the Will of God

 During the past year, The UMC has splintered as members who identify themselves as conservative have chosen to disaffiliate from The UMC. (Disaffiliation is a fancy term meaning “leave.”)

I use the term “splinter” as it reflects the reality of what has happened. The UMC did not split, as into two opposing groups. It splintered. Those who chose to leave did not all chose to become Global Methodists (the new denomination created by those who spearheaded the conservative position in the conflict). Some became independent. Others associated with other Methodist groups. Others started new Wesleyan coalitions.

The identified issue that has fueled this fifty-year conflict and current division is the place and rights of LGBTQ+ people in the church. Every group involved—those who chose to leave as well as those who chose to remain United Methodist—believes they have discerned the will of God regarding the issue.

Here’s the thing about this conflict and splintering (as well as every other conflict that has resulted in division in the church): they can’t all be right! Both sides cannot have discerned the will of God about this issue. Which of the opposing views accurately reflects the will of God?

The answer depends on who you ask. Each side believes they know the will of God regarding the issue.

This controversy and splintering illustrate where—I believe—we go wrong in seeking to discern the will of God. What we identify as the will of God is determined by the standard we use to consider the issue.

In this controversy—as well as in most religious controversies—those of us involved used two primary standards. Those two standards determined the conclusions we reached. (Read that again.) In choosing to use these two standards, we chose their predetermined conclusion. Ironically, we used these standards without stopping to identify them or discuss if they were the appropriate standards to use. They were merely our default standards—the ones we always use in dealing with such issues.

The first standard we use to determine the will of God is a moral standard.

Moral standards identify what behavior society or some group has identifies as right and wrong, acceptable and unacceptable. They are passed down from one generation to the next, taught by families, schools, churches, and community organizations.

Moral standards are part of the lifeblood of religious groups like churches. They are the means by which church members identify themselves, the means by which they evaluate themselves and others. They are often the basis for acceptance or rejection, for praise or condemnation and judgment. Moral standards are such a natural part of the life of a religious group that they are seldom questioned. They are accepted as “what we believe.”

Moral standards are a simple way to determine the will of God. The will of God is clear—whatever the moral standard identifies as right and acceptable behavior.

The simplicity associated with using moral standards to discern the will of God often masks the problems associated with them.

Moral standards call for black-and-white, right-and-wrong, either-or thinking. They do not allow room for the complexities that are an inherent part of any moral issue—what are commonly called “the gray areas.” (A friend suggested that “prism areas” is a better descriptor than “gray areas.” Prisms refract the light, showing the many spectrums that create the light.) Black-and-white, right-and-wrong, either-or thinking fosters the rigidity associated with a closed mind. This kind of thinking does not allow for questions, exceptions, exploration, learning, or growth.

Moral standards primarily focus on behavior, ignoring the interior realm of the heart. Jesus identified the heart as the real source of moral issues. “For it is from within, from the human heart, that evil intentions come: fornication, theft, murder, adultery, avarice, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness, envy, slander, pride, folly. All these evil things come from within” (Mark 7:17-23). The way to deal with wrong behavior is to address what is in the heart. Moral standards almost universally ignore this reality.

Those choosing to use a moral standard to determine the will of God did not have to discern the will of God. It was predetermined by the moral standard they chose to use.

The second standard that was used to determine the will of God in this controversy was the Bible. People on both (all) sides of the issue quoted the Bible to support their position. Because they could quote the Bible in support of their position, they viewed their position as the “biblical” position and, thus, the will of God.

As with moral standards, using the Bible to identify the will of God creates its own set of problems.

The Bible is an ancient book (actually, a compilation of books), written from a Near Eastern, prescientific perspective. It reflects the understanding of God and the ways of God by numerous individuals. It reflects the work of editors who compiled and refined materials that span a period of twenty-five hundred years. Some materials challenge and refute the understanding offered in other books. (The book of Job, for instance, challenges the theology that runs through the wisdom literature, particularly Proverbs and some of the psalms.) A variety of progressions in understanding can be identified in the Bible.

All of these factors—and more—mean we can’t just quote what the Bible says to support our position. The Bible must be interpreted using the best resources available to us, using our best thinking.

One of the factors in this controversy was how the Bible was viewed and used. Some gave equal weight or authority to every verse of the Bible as though every verse reflected the will of God. They failed to recognize the differing levels of revelation and spiritual understanding that are found in the different parts of the Bible. In doing so, they often exalted the teachings of the Levitical law over the teachings of Jesus. They used the Bible as though it, not Jesus, was the fullest revelation of God and of God’s will.

Using the Bible is an important part of discerning the will of God, but it is not the primary standard to be used.

I believe these standards that were used to determine the will of God regarding the LGBTQ+ issue is where we went astray in seeking to discern the will of God. They allowed us to confuse our will with God's will. A different, more reliable standard is needed.

I believe the character of God and the ways of God that grow out of that character are the standard that we are to use in discerning the will of God. The will of God will always be an expression of and align with the character of God. It will always reflect the ways of God.

Jesus is the in-the-flesh embodiment of the character of God. Jesus lived and taught the ways of God. Thus, the will of God will always reflect and align with the teachings, life, and ministry of Jesus. Jesus—not the Bible, not any moral standard—is the fullest and final revelation of the will of God.

Note that using the character of God and the ways of God alongside the life and teachings of Jesus calls of thinking. Discernment involves thinking—thinking shaped by the character of God and the ways of God, under the guidance of the Spirit.