The Word Unfolds

Can Honest Exegesis Yield Truth in Contested Topics?

“The unfolding of your words gives light; it imparts understanding to the simple.” — Psalm 119:130 (ESV)

God’s Word is not a cipher. It is light—unfolding, illuminating, and accessible to those who approach it with reverence and trust. In an age of theological fog and cultural pressure, this verse offers a radical claim: that Scripture, rightly handled, can be understood. Not perfectly. Not exhaustively. But truly.

This article explores whether flawed but Spirit-filled believers—armed with honest hermeneutics and faithful exegesis—can reach conclusions with integrity on complex topics like divine election and homosexuality. It argues that Scripture is not reserved for elite interpreters or philosophical gatekeepers but entrusted to the Church. When approached with humility, coherence, and canonical fidelity, the Bible yields truth—not ambiguity.

While this article focuses on two particularly thorny topics—divine election and homosexuality—it does so not because these are the only contested doctrines, but because they exemplify the kind of theological tension that demands careful, Spirit-led exegesis. There are many other areas where faithful believers can reach conclusions of integrity without smuggling in foreign worldviews or philosophical bias.

Other examples include:

• The role of women in church leadership
• The nature and duration of hell
• The continuation or cessation of spiritual gifts
• The relationship between faith and works
• The interpretation of Genesis and creation
• The ethics of divorce and remarriage
• The use of violence in the Old Testament

These topics, like election and sexuality, require humility, coherence, and submission to the full counsel of Scripture.

Scripture Is Meant to Be Understood

The Bible does not present itself as a mystical riddle or a private code for spiritual elites. It is written for the people of God—those who fear Him, trust Him, and seek to obey Him.

“The testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.” — Psalm 19:7 (ESV)

“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness…” — 2 Timothy 3:16–17 (ESV)

These verses dismantle the myth that Scripture is esoteric or inaccessible. God intends His Word to be understood—not just by scholars or specialists, but by the faithful. The unfolding of His Word gives light. Not confusion. Not relativism. Light.

The Spirit Illuminates, Not Obscures

The Holy Spirit does not bypass the text or inject mystical impressions. He works through the Word, guiding believers into truth.

“When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth.” — John 16:13 (ESV)

“We have received… the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God.” — 1 Corinthians 2:12 (ESV)

The Spirit’s ministry is not to obscure, but to clarify. He illumines the Word—not apart from it, but through it. This means that flawed but Spirit-filled believers can grasp truth when they submit to the Word.

Divine Election: Sovereignty and Grace

Election is not a philosophical puzzle—it’s a biblical truth. Scripture presents God’s choosing as sovereign, gracious, and purposeful.

“He chose us in him before the foundation of the world… predestined us for adoption…” — Ephesians 1:4–5 (ESV)

“Those whom he foreknew he also predestined… called… justified… glorified.” — Romans 8:29–30 (ESV)

“You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you…” — John 15:16 (ESV)

“Not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace…” — 2 Timothy 1:9 (ESV)

Election is active, not reactive. It is rooted in God’s eternal purpose, not human merit or foresight. Honest exegesis reveals a God who chooses, calls, and redeems—not arbitrarily, but graciously.

Counter-Perspectives and Scriptural Clarity

Some argue that divine election undermines human freedom, citing verses like Hebrews 3:15 (“Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts”) or 2 Peter 3:9 (“Not wishing that any should perish…”). These passages create genuine tension that has challenged theologians for centuries, and sincere believers have wrestled with harmonizing divine sovereignty and human responsibility.

While we believe these texts affirm human responsibility within divine sovereignty rather than negating election, we acknowledge this represents one approach to resolving what Scripture presents as complementary truths.

“All who were appointed to eternal life believed.” — Acts 13:48 (ESV)

“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.” — John 6:44 (ESV)

“You did not choose me, but I chose you…” — John 15:16 (ESV)

The biblical pattern is clear: God’s foreknowledge is not passive observation—it is relational and purposeful. Hebrews and 2 Peter affirm that God calls and warns—but they do not imply that human will is the decisive factor in salvation. Instead, they highlight the urgency of response within the framework of divine calling.

Free Will vs. Sovereign Grace

The tension between free will and divine election is often framed as a binary. Many Reformed theologians find compatibilism most consistent with biblical data: God’s sovereign choice and human response coexist, though the former grounds the latter. The precise relationship between divine sovereignty and human responsibility remains partially mysterious (Deuteronomy 29:29), yet Scripture clearly teaches both realities.

Biblical freedom is not autonomous choice, but liberation from sin to serve righteousness—a freedom that flows from divine grace rather than human will.

“For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore…” — Galatians 5:1 (ESV)

The unregenerate will is enslaved, not neutral. Thus, divine election is not coercion—it is rescue.

Homosexuality: Revisionist Claims and Historical Exegesis

In recent decades, some scholars have argued that biblical condemnations of homosexuality actually refer to pedophilia, rape, or exploitative relationships, not consensual same-sex behavior. These claims hinge on reinterpretations of Greek terms like arsenokoitai and malakoi in 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10.

Why This Fails Historically and Exegetically

1. Canonical Consistency Leviticus 18:22 and Romans 1:26–27 condemn same-sex acts as violations of creation order—not merely abusive dynamics. The pairing of arsenokoitai (“male bed-partner”) and malakoi (“soft, effeminate”) in Paul’s vice lists reflects moral categories, not social ones.
2. Historical Witness Early church fathers such as John Chrysostom (Homily 4 on Romans) and Augustine (Confessions 3.8), medieval theologians like Thomas Aquinas (Summa Theologica II-II, q. 154), and Reformers including Calvin (Commentary on Romans 1:27) consistently interpreted these texts as condemning same-sex behavior generally—not merely abusive dynamics. While interpretive traditions can err, the revisionist view lacks substantial support from nearly two millennia of Christian exegesis. This historical consensus, combined with the canonical evidence, suggests that reinterpretations are modern philosophical intrusions rather than rediscoveries of ancient meaning.
3. Philosophical Motivation Aldous Huxley’s candid admission reveals one driving force behind some revisionist approaches: “We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom… We would deny that the world had any meaning whatever” (Ends and Means). While philosophical bias can certainly influence interpretation, and some revisionist scholars may have sincere hermeneutical motivations, it’s crucial to evaluate whether interpretive conclusions align with clear textual indicators or seem driven by cultural accommodation. The pattern of reinterpreting only those passages that conflict with contemporary moral sensibilities raises questions about methodological consistency.
4. Spiritual Discernment Scripture teaches that the unregenerate cannot rightly interpret spiritual truth:“The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God… he is not able to understand them.” — 1 Corinthians 2:14 (ESV) Without the Spirit, interpretation becomes distortion. Revisionism is not just bad exegesis—it is spiritual blindness.

Interpretation or Evasion?

Many today—some professing Christians, others not—insist that topics like election or sexuality are “open to interpretation.” But this claim often conceals a deeper issue: the adoption of a foreign philosophy or a distorted view of God.

“See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit… according to human tradition…” — Colossians 2:8 (ESV)

“We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God…” — 2 Corinthians 10:5 (ESV)

While some appeals to interpretive uncertainty may indeed mask evasion—a desire to reshape Scripture around personal autonomy rather than submit to divine authority—others reflect genuine wrestling with difficult texts. The key distinction lies in whether the interpreter maintains submission to Scripture’s authority even when conclusions prove personally challenging, and whether their interpretive method is applied consistently across all topics or selectively to culturally sensitive issues.

Not Chaos, but Clarity

“The unfolding of your words gives light; it imparts understanding to the simple.” — Psalm 119:130 (ESV)

The Word unfolds—not in chaos, but in clarity. When Spirit-filled believers approach Scripture with humility, coherence, and trust, they are not left in the dark. They may wrestle. They may revise. But they are not abandoned. The light is real. The truth is reachable. And the God who speaks is not silent.