Friday, January 4, 2008

Bible Teaching

Summarized from What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality

GENESIS 19:1-25

What was the sin of Sodom? Some proclaim that God destroyed the ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of "homosexuality." Although some theologians have equated the sin of Sodom with homosexuality, a careful look at Scripture corrects such ignorance. Announcing judgment on these cities in Genesis 18, God sends two angels to Sodom, where Abraham's nephew, Lot, persuades them to stay in his home. Genesis 19 records that "all the people from every quarter" surround Lot's house demanding the release of his visitors so "we might know them." The Hebrew word for "know" in this case, yadha, usually means "have thorough knowledge of." It could also express intent to examine the visitors' credentials, or on rare occasions the term implies sexual intercourse. If the latter were the author's intended meaning, it would have been a clear case of attempted gang rape. Horrified at this gross violation of ancient hospitality rules, Lot attempts to protect the visitors by offering his two daughters to the angry crowd, a morally outrageous act by today's standards. The people of Sodom refuse, so the angels render them blind. The angels then rescue Lot and his family as the cities are destroyed. Several observations are important. First, the judgment on these cities for their wickedness had been announced prior to the alleged homosexual incident. Second, all of Sodom's people participated in the assault on Lot's house; in no culture has more than a small minority of the population been homosexual. Third, Lot's offer to release his daughters suggests he knew his neighbors to have heterosexual interests. Fourth, if the issue was sexual, why did God spare Lot, who immediately commits incest with his daughters? Most importantly, why do all the other passages of Scripture referring to this account fail to raise the issue of homosexuality?

What was the Sin of Sodom?
Ezekiel 16:48-50 states it clearly: people of Sodom, like many people today, had abundance of material goods. But they failed to meet the needs of the poor, and they worshipped idols. The sins of injustice and idolatry plague every generation. We stand under the same judgment if we create false gods or treat others with injustice.


LEVITICUS 18:22 & 20:13

Christians today do not follow the rules and rituals described in Leviticus. But some ignore its definitions of their own "uncleanness" while quoting Leviticus to condemn homosexuals. Such abuse of Scripture distorts the Old Testament meaning and denies a New Testament message. "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." These words occur solely in the Holiness Code of Leviticus, a ritual manual for Israel's priests. Their meaning can only be fully appreciated in the historical and cultural context of the ancient Hebrew people. Israel, in a unique place as the chosen people of God, was to avoid the practices of other peoples and gods. Hebrew religion, characterized by the revelation of one God, stood in continuous tension with the religion of the surrounding Canaanites who worshipped the multiple gods of fertility cults. Canaanite idol worship, which featured female and male cult prostitution as noted in Deuteronomy 23:17, repeatedly compromised Israel's loyalty to God. The Hebrew word for a male cult prostitute, qadesh, is mistranslated "sodomite" in some versions of the Bible.

What is an "Abomination?"
An abomination is that which God found detestable because it was unclean, disloyal, or unjust. Several Hebrew words were so translated, and the one found in Leviticus, toevah, is usually associated with idolatry, as in Ezekiel, where it occurs numerous times. Given the strong association of toevah with idolatry and the Canaanite religious practice of cult prostitution, the use of toevah regarding male same-sex acts in Leviticus calls into question any conclusion that such condemnation also applies to loving, responsible homosexual relationships. Rituals and rules found in the Old Testament were given to preserve the distinctive characteristics of the religion and culture of Israel. But, as stated in Galatians 3: 22-25, these Jewish laws no longer bind Christians. By faith we live in Jesus Christ, not in Leviticus. To be sure, ethical concerns apply to all cultures and peoples in every age. Jesus Christ, who said nothing about homosexuality, but a great deal about love, justice, mercy and faith, ultimately reflected such concerns.


ROMANS 1:24-27

Most New Testament books, including the four Gospels, are silent on same-sex acts, and Paul is the only author who makes any reference to the subject. The most negative statement by Paul regarding same-sex acts occurs in Romans 1:24-27 where, in the context of a larger argument on the need of all people for the gospel of Jesus Christ, certain homosexual behavior is given as an example of the "uncleanness" of idolatrous Gentiles. Does this passage refer to all homosexual acts, or to certain homosexual behavior known to Paul's readers? Romans was written to Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome, who would have been familiar with the infamous sexual excesses of their contemporaries, especially Roman emperors. They would also have been aware of tensions in the early Church regarding Gentiles and observance of the Jewish laws, as noted in Acts 15 and Paul's letter to the Galatians. Jewish laws in Leviticus mentioned male same sex acts in the context of idolatry.

Significant to Paul's discussion is the fact that these "unclean" Gentiles exchanged that which was "natural" for them - physin, in the Greek text - for something "unnatural," para physin. In Romans 11:24, God acts in an "unnatural" way, para physin, to accept the Gentiles. "Unnatural" in these passages does not refer to violation of so-called laws of nature, but rather implies action contradicting one's own nature. In view of this, we should observe that it is "unnatural," para physin, for a person today with a lesbian or gay sexual orientation to attempt living a heterosexual lifestyle. Romans 1:26 is the only statement in the Bible with a possible reference to lesbian behavior, although the specific intent of this verse is unclear. Some authors have seen in this passage a reference to women adopting a dominant role in heterosexual relationships. Given the repressive cultural expectations placed on women in Paul's time, such a meaning may be possible. The homosexual practices cited in Romans 1:24-27 were believed to result from idolatry and are associated with some very serious offenses as noted in Romans 1. Taken in this larger context, it should be obvious that such acts are significantly different from loving, responsible lesbian and gay relationships seen today.


I CORINTHIANS 6:9 & I TIMOTHY 1:10

Any consideration of New Testament statements on same-sex acts must carefully view the social context of the Greco-Roman culture in which Paul ministered. Prostitution and pederasty (sexual relationships of adult men with boys) were the most commonly known male same-sex acts. In I Corinthians 6:9, Paul condemns those who are "effeminate" and "abusers of themselves with mankind," as translated in the King James version. Unfortunately, some newer translations are worse, rendering these words "homosexuals." Recent scholarship unmasks the homophobia behind such mistranslations. The first word, malakos, in the Greek text, which has been translated "effeminate" or "soft," most likely refers to someone who lacks discipline or moral control. The word is used elsewhere in the New Testament but never with reference to sexuality. The second word, arsenokoitai, occurs once each in I Corinthians and I Timothy, but nowhere else in other literature of the period. It is derived from two Greek words, one meaning "males" and the other "beds," a euphemism for sexual intercourse. Other Greek words were commonly used to describe homosexual behavior, but do not appear here. The larger context of I Corinthians 6 shows Paul extremely concerned with prostitution, so it is very possible he was referring to male prostitutes. But many experts now attempting to translate these words have reached a simple conclusion: their precise meaning is uncertain.

No Law Against Love
The rarity with which Paul discusses any form of same-sex behavior and the ambiguity in references attributed to him make it extremely unsound to conclude any sure position in the New Testament on homosexuality, especially in the context of loving, responsible relationships. Since any arguments must be made from silence, it is much more reliable to turn to great principles of the Gospel taught by Jesus Christ and the Apostles. “Love God with all your heart,” and “love your neighbor as yourself.” “The fruit of the Holy Spirit is love ... against such there is no law.” One thing is abundantly clear, as Paul stated in Galatians 5:14: “the whole Law is fulfilled in one statement, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’”

6 comments:

Brendon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brendon said...

I wonder why Paul would mention prostitution twice in 1 Cor. 6 as you suggest. If arsenakoite means prostitution, he'd be repeating himself. I think, since he had already mentioned prostitution, as well as idolatry, the word must be referring to something else. So, what else could it possibly be? What you seem to suggest is that Paul is saying something like this: "male prostitution and male prostitution is wrong". That just doesn't make sense to me. He surely had to be talking about something else.

I also find it interesting how the two words which Paul used to combine to make the word arsenakoite are the same as those used in Leviticus dealing with the prohibition against homosexuality. I don't mean, nor do I want to begin a debate here, but I just wondered if you'd considered these things when you reached your conclusion.

dan said...

que interesante!
good post. old testament law is just that, and was thrown out with the new testament, but it's worthy to understans our relationship to God and who He is. new testament, you have interesting points.
thanks for the post. later

gay, christian and scared shitless said...

Oh this is a good debate. I've spent hours and hours going round and round in circles see both points being made using the same evidence in different lights.

I personally do believe in the divinity of the bible, HOWEVER I do also believe that the current english translations are in place to so far from the original greek and herbrew its astonishing. My lines still arn't fully drawn. Thanks for the post, its well condensed

Mikey said...

Brandon:
I think what he may be talking about is both the prostitute and the one who uses the prostitute. The "effeminate" would be the (young?) male prostitute who takes on the "female" role. The "abusers of them self with mankind" would be the (older?) man who hires the prostitute. Regardless of the specific meaning, I think the general idea is those who are sexually immoral. And I don't think of folks in same-sex, monogamous, committed relationships as being sexually immoral. But I also think this is one of the main scriptures that each spiritually-minded gay person has to come to their own understanding of.

Fancy Pants said...

It's funny, I'm no longer Christian so I'm not personally interested in what the Bible says, but I was raised with it and I'm working on a project lately which has me reading a lot of books on the topic of gays and Christians, and anyway, the main thing I come away with is that the Bible can be used to justify or condemn just about anything (and has). What I do hope for is that more and more gay men raised in Christian homes will feel less and less uncomfortable trying to combine their religion with their orientation . . . anyway -- interesting post.