Most sermons take 8 hours to write. This one has taken 18 years.

The soul of Jonathan was bound to the soul of David. This phrase is unique in the Bible, found nowhere else. Some rabbinic sources interpret it as an extraordinarily deep connection, almost transcendent between Jonathan and David.

Furthermore, the Hebrew word used for love here is a covenantal, spousal, sometimes romantic love. Earlier in our story, it says that Saul loves David. But it’s a generic Hebrew word more akin to a noncommittal, “oh, I like that restaurant.” Or “He’s a nice guy.” It’s not the geeky, all out, head-over-heels usage of “OH! I LOVE THAT PLACE!”

To put it another way… Sauls love for David is based on what Saul gets out of the relationship. It’s like that kid growing up who had the cool toy. Everyone would head to that house just to see the TV or GI Joe Aircraft Carrier or Sega Genesis. You didn’t like the kid, but they had the cool thing. That’s the same sort of “love” that Saul has for David. Yet Jonathan’s soul is bound upon first seeing David. Literally, it’s love at first sight. And the word for love here is the same word used for when Isaac marries Rebecca or when Jacob sees Rachel.

Jonathan gives David his robe, armor, sword, bow, and belt—symbolically stripping himself of his royal identity. Jonathan is stepping out of his princely role. Some scholars say this is Jonathan clearing the way for David’s royal destiny. Other scholars interpret this as an intimate act of devotion.[1]

When Saul becomes jealous of David, Jonathan watches out for him. Yet they have to part. After Jonathan warns David of Saul’s intent to kill him, they part in a deeply emotional moment:
“They kissed each other and wept together, but David wept the most.” The Hebrew word for kiss[2] is used in other contexts of romantic kissing like that found in Song of Songs 1:2.

One last thing… After Jonathan’s death, David laments: “I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother; you were very dear to me. Your love for me was more wonderful than the love of women.” Some scholars argue that David’s comparison to heterosexual love suggests a different kind of bond. This suggests that their relationship had a level of emotional depth surpassing traditional friendship to the level of a spousal relationship.[3]

Why bring this up? Well, many reasons. Imagine have a gay couple in scripture. How much hate would be erased. How much angst and anger and hatred would have been saved. It’s not like this is unique in history. There are gay couples throughout history: ancient Greece, Persia, Egypt and more.[4] Archeologists have known this for centuries, but we let prejudice determine what is shared and what isn’t. As the prophets Rage Against the Machine sang, “They don’t gotta burn the books they just remove them.”[5]

I tell you this to raise the possibility that Jonathan and David might have been in a same-sex relationship based on these clues in the story. Would they have called it that? No. Because that language wasn’t invented. The word homosexual was invented in 1869 by a Hungarian journalist.[6]

Jonathan and David loved each other. That should be celebrated. In whatever form or label you want to give it. Personally, I don’t know what label I would give it. There are many clues. This is unique in scripture. I’m open to the possibility but we’ll never know for sure. I want to use this sermon to talk about masculinity.

Many of you know that I was raised by my single mom. I spent a lot of time at my grandparents as a result. Two doors down lived a kid around my age. TJ. I never got into more trouble than with TJ. Once, we called random numbers out of the phone book looking for the Ghostbusters. When the long-distance bill came, we got in big trouble. We accidentally broke windows and glass knickknacks in each other’s houses. Once some neighborhood girls stopped by when we were playing. They sang, “Might as well face it you’re addicted to love.”[7] They said, “You LOVE TJ.” I said that I did. “No! You LOOOOVE HIM AND WANT TO KISS HIM.”

This was my first instance of being shamed for having a male friend. It happened a few other times. My friend Mike was going through a hard time at the start of 8^th grade. We were at a party, and I noticed something was up. We went for a walk and he spilled his guts about what was happening at home. I gave him a hug when we got back to the party. That prompted people to start teasing us. I left in tears and didn’t attend many parties afterward.

Why is there shame around male friendships? Where did we learn that?

There is a toxicity around masculinity. Masculinity in itself is not inherently bad—it becomes harmful or toxic when it enforces rigid, destructive, and oppressive behaviors. There is something in our culture that is trying to limit and define what it means to be a man to the most reductionist ways possible. Some have called it toxic masculinity. Some have called it the patriarchy. People smarter than me have words for it, I just know that I’ve bumped up against it multiple times.

I was raised with my mom and sister. I have no problem acknowledging that women have periods. It’s a fact. I have no problem buy tampons. It was normal for me.  When I was in college, my buddy Chris was asked to buy tampons for his then girlfriend. He was sweating bullets at that CVS counter. The guy at the register was also taken aback. “Don’t worry,” I quipped. “They’re not for him.” They laughed, but I was shocked at how nervous they both were.

Yet many things viewed as female or feminine is viewed as weak. The only appropriate emotions men are allowed to feel are anger, pride, or lust. Anything else is bullied out. “Boys don’t cry” is a great Cure song, but a horrible lie. “Boys will be boys” is lifted up to excuse aggressive or violent behavior. The problem with that is boys grow up to be men who don’t know how to have friendships, can’t emotionally regulate, and can’t be held accountable are the same men who join white nationalist movements. They shoot up schools and malls. Violence is the only outlet they’ve been taught.

We have a crisis of masculinity on our hands.

There are folks who say “real men don’t do…” whatever. Fill in the blank. Real men don’t cook. Or bake. Or go to the grocery store. There’s women’s work and then there’s men’s work. But there isn’t. Maybe at one time, yet even then… Before Betty Crocker came along, there was Duncan Hines. We had Rachel Ray and Guy Ferri, the mayor of flavor town.

Whether David and Jonathan were gay is beside the point. Their love for one another was not transactional. They were bound to one another. There was mutuality and vulnerability and trust there. What man doesn’t want that?

Yet there’s this zero-sum thinking. This type of thinking ponders that if two guys are really good friends, then they must be gay. Like being gay is bad. Which is why homophobia is such a problem. It also leads to misogyny. I think guys who have zero-sum thinking stand against LGBTQ+ rights because what if gay men treat me like I treat women. Yet we’ve had 10 years of same sex marriage, and I haven’t felt threatened once. Rights for my LGBTQ+ friends and family doesn’t mean less for me. I don’t understand that thinking.

Instead, Jesus has us think “whoever is not against us is for us.”[8] Live and let live. Diversity is no threat to you. Women aren’t a threat. LBGTQ+ aren’t a threat. What is a threat is being told that I can’t express my emotions. That I can’t cry when I’m sad. That I can’t show anything other than anger or pride. I want to feel. I want to express. I want liberation for myself and for others.

Do I feel any guilt for being a tall white, cis-gendered male? No. I don’t. I had no say in the matter. I feel an alignment between my gender and my biological sex, and many don’t. When that happens, when a story I’m not familiar with comes across my threshold, I have learned to ask questions and get curious… not sharpen my knives and get defensive.

As a white male, sometimes I need to get curious when I get judgmental. Sometimes I need to pass the mic or amplify other voices. Like… Did you hear The Rev. Meghan Malone’s sermon last Sunday?![9] Holy Crap! It’s so good! Using her insights, I think we can apply it to this situation.

Face the Giant: Masculinity is not inherently bad. Each of us hopefully has one good male role model in our history or a patchwork of qualities you admire from different men. There has been men who have loved us into being. They were real, complex humans who were more than just tough, aggressive, and hypersexual. They were servant leaders of courage and character.

Use what you have: Have you met the men in this church? Hang out with them. See them. There are guys here who want to teach what they know in the talent bank. Who are loyal, dedicated, men of character. We have the men. We have the women. We have the best people in Medina. I’m so thankful to be your pastor. We have a lot of work to do, so let’s keep meeting and making plans. There’s no greater feeling than turning dreams into reality.

Attend to the Little Things: In a homophobic world, the possibility of David and Jonathan loving each other as more than friends is heresy. Yet there are clues in the words. There might be something there. Or there might be such a bond, such a friendship that words fail. I don’t know. We don’t know. We can use it to reflect on our own friendship and expectations of how we view men and their relationships.

Don’t Become Them: The “them” here are the one-dimensional men. Those who cling to a narrow and rigid view of what men do. I have no interest cutting off parts of myself or numbing or any of that. I have no interest for disloyal men who can’t talk about their emotions, men who disrespect their partners. Fathers who aren’t involved with their children. I have strong opinions about this, but I would like to build bridges for men trapped and numbed to cross over into a fuller and more expansive masculinity. Feminist legend bell hooks wrote, “No significant body of feminist literature has appeared that addresses boys, that lets them know how they can construct an identity that is not rooted in sexism.”[10] We have our assignment. Let’s talk about what wider, move involved, nonsexist men look like.

The Battle Belongs to God: Jesus was a servant leader. He was strong in conviction but showed all the human emotions. He was around women and didn’t view them as conquests but as equals. At the last supper, he took the servants role and washed his disciples feet. Peter couldn’t handle it. Peter missed what was being done here. Jesus said to them, “there’s no greater love than to lay down your life for your friends.” This is salvation. This is the way, the truth, and the life. Jesus’ way is counter to domination and power for power’s sake.

David and Jonathan loved each other. Saul’s love of David was transactional. He only loved David for how Saul benefited from David. When Saul decided David was a threat, he turned toxic and tried to kill him. When Judas figured out that Jesus wasn’t going to do what Judas wanted, he turned on him. Here are toxic males demanding their own way. Power for power’s sake. Only looking out for themselves. Yet David and Jonathan had a friendship that the story tellers didn’t have words for. They loved each other. Their souls knit together. They found sanctuary in one another.

Just as Jesus is sanctuary for us. He comes to us humble, riding not on a war horse or chariot, but a donkey. Born by humble means. Surrounded by everyday people. No pedigree to speak of. He shows us vulnerability: blessed are the meek, the humble, the poor in spirit. Blessed are the men who mourn and cry and show emotion and model good regulation for us. Blessed are the merciful and the righteous. Blessed are the pure in heart, who love us with no strings attached. Blessed are the peacemakers, who never resort to violence for they will be called children of God. Blessed are those who are the men who are persecuted for showing emotion, loving friendship, and those who are reviled, slandered, all because they refuse to be cruel, violent control freaks.

Rejoice for your reward is great in heaven for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. Prophets like St. Francis, Mr Rodgers, and all grandfathers, fathers, uncles, mentors, coaches, teachers, janitors, bosses, professors, and strangers who became friends, who became family. Who our souls are knit to despite death, distance or anything else. Thanks be to God. Amen.

Works Cited

[1] Susan Ackerman, When Heroes Love: The Ambiguity of Eros in the Stories of Gilgamesh and David (New York: Columbia University Press, 2005), 140–143.

[2] נָשַׁק, nasha: Martti Nissinen, Homoeroticism in the Biblical World: A Historical Perspective (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998), 50. And Theodore W. Jennings Jr. and Tat-Siong Benny Liew, “Mistaken Identities but Model Faith: Rereading the Centurion, the Chap, and the Christ in Matthew 8:5-13,” Journal of Biblical Literature 123, no. 3 (2004): 483.

[3] Catherine E. Southwood, “Job’s Body and the Dramatized Comedy of Moralizing,” in Beyond Influence: Expanding Conceptions of Wisdom & Law in Biblical Tradition, ed. Alexander T. Kirk and Rony Kozman (London: T&T Clark, 2020), 322–335. Ze’ev Farber, “David and Jonathan: A Case of Unconditional Love,” TheTorah.com, accessed February 11, 2025, https://www.thetorah.com/article/david-and-jonathan-a-case-of-unconditional-love.

[4] Plato. Symposium. Translated by Benjamin Jowett. In The Dialogues of Plato, Vol. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1892, “Ten Famous & Not-so-Famous Same-Sex Couples in Ancient History,” World History Encyclopedia, accessed February 11, 2025, https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1775/ten-famous–not-so-famous-same-sex-couples-in-anci/ and “‘Throughout All Days And Nights, Forever’: Could An 11th-Century Contract Show Same-Sex Marriage In Medieval Spain?” Ancient Pages, August 23, 2024, https://www.ancientpages.com/2024/08/23/throughout-all-days-and-nights-forever-could-an-11th-century-contract-show-same-sex-marriage-in-medieval-spain/.

[5] Rage Against the Machine, Bulls on Parade, on Evil Empire, Epic Records, 1996.

[6] Robert Deam Tobin, “Kertbeny’s ‘Homosexuality’ and the Language of Nationalism,” German Studies Review 26, no. 2 (2003): 333–350.

[7] Robert Palmer, Addicted to Love, on Riptide, Island Records, 1985.

[8] Mark 9:40

[9] https://www.uccmedina.org/sermons/facing-our-giants/

[10] Hooks, bell. Feminism is for everybody: passonate politics. Routledge Publishing, New York, NY, 2015. Page 70.