Does the bible really say homosexuality is a sin?
58954 postsposted 27th Mar '08
Please note:
If you are not going to read the post, please do not post just to tell me that you think it's a sin. You're of course free to respond however you'd like, but that isn't the point of this post. It's to show that there are actually different beliefs among Christians as to whether or not homosexuality is a sin, and I'm interested in feedback on that specific topic, and on the intepretations of liberal Christians because I'm pretty sure we're all well aware of the conservative interpretations already.
Thank you, now proceed with the rest of the post:
The following is excerpted from http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibl.htm.
How religious conservatives and liberals interpret the Bible:
Conservative and liberal Christians interpret the Bible in very different ways. This leads to two distinct and contradictory sets of beliefs within Christianity on just about every conceivable topic, from abortion to sex. Belief in equal rights for homosexuals and bisexuals is no exception.
Since the two groups approach the Bible with different assumptions about its nature, and look for different content, one can expect that their conclusions will be very different.
Overview:
There are at least six well defined viewpoints on the nature of homosexuality, and on what heterosexuals' responses should be towards homosexuals and bisexuals. In this section, we explain the two most extreme viewpoints on what the Bible says about homosexuality:
That of most religious fundamentalists, whether Jewish, Christian, Muslim, etc.
That of most religious liberals, gays, lesbians, bisexuals, human sexuality researchers and therapists.
We analyze the contents of many English translations of the Bible, and the Hebrew / Greek original texts.
English translations of the Bible clearly condemn specific homosexual acts. Five Hebrew and Greek original texts definitely condemn such activities as men raping angels (Jude 1:7), and heterosexuals who engage in homosexual acts (Romans 1:26-27).
Interpretations of additional "clobber" texts differ among Christians:
Religious liberals have often interpreted other passages as condemning men who sexually abuse boys, men who engage in homosexual ritual sex in Pagan temples, men intent on raping other men, etc. They view the Bible as being silent on sexual behavior within a consensual, monogamous committed homosexual relationship.
For example, they might identify the sin of the men of Sodom as explained in Genesis 19 as attempting to rape strangers. Alternatively, they might quote other biblical passages as proof that the main sin of that city was their uncharitable behavior towards strangers, and their uncaring conduct towards the poor, the widows, and needy.
Religious conservatives often interpret all of the Biblical passages that touch on same-sex activity as condemning homosexuality in all its forms.
For example, they would probably identify the sin of the men of Sodom to be homosexual behavior. Homosexuality is seen as one of many manifestations of mankind's sinful nature which are a direct result of Adam and Eve's activities in the Garden of Eden. The story in Genesis is interpreted by conservative Christians as describing the fall of humanity.
Basic approach to analyzing the Bible:
The Bible refers to specific homosexual behaviors in a few passages. All references are negative.
Before considering what the Bible might say about homosexuality in today's society, one must figure out what the authors of the Bible meant when they wrote their passages about homosexuality. In order to do this, one must make a fundamental decision -- whether to:
There are two Hebrew words which are often associated with homosexual passages and which are mistranslated in many English versions of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament):
qadesh means a male prostitute who engaged in ritual sex in a Pagan temple . This was a common profession both in ancient Israel and in the surrounding countries. it is often mistranslated simply as "sodomite" or "homosexual." (e.g. the King James Version of the Bible, Deuteronomy 23:17). The companion word quedeshaw means female temple prostitute. It is frequently mistranslated simply as "whore" or "prostitute." A qadesh and quedeshaw were not simply prostitutes. They had a specific role to play in the temple. They represented a God and Goddess, and engaged in sexual intercourse in that capacity with members of the temple.
to'ebah means a condemned, foreign, Pagan, religious, cult practice, but often simply translated as "abomination." Eating food which contains both meat and dairy products is "to'ebah" A Jew eating with an Egyptian was "to'ebah." A Jew wearing a polyester-cotton garment would be "to'ebah."
In order to understand what the Bible has to say on heterosexual activity, we could consult the original Hebrew texts,dividing all of the references to heterosexual sex into different categories:
rape;
sexual abuse of children;
ritual sex in Pagan temples;
prostitution;
sexual orgies;
non-exploitive, consensual, monogamous sex in a loving relationship, etc.
The final category is the only one that would help us understand what the Bible teaches about heterosexual activity in a committed relationship. After all, a verse which describes how an army kidnapped some female virgins for use as sex slaves does not tell us anything about the role of sex in marriage today. A verse that discusses temple prostitution during the worship of Pagan gods does not instruct us about feelings of romantic love between a man and a woman. Similarly, in order to comprehend what the Bible says about gay and lesbian relationships, we must pass over the references to homosexual rape, male sexual abuse of boys, and homosexual prostitution, orgies, Pagan sexual rituals in temples, etc. We would be left with only those references relating to consensual sexual activities within homosexual partnerships. There may not be any of these. The Bible may be as silent on loving, committed same-sex partnerships as it is about planes, trains and automobiles.
There are biblical descriptions of three close and intimate relationships between members of the same gender. But there are no unambiguous passages that show that they were sexually active.
The Bible often condemns heterosexual and homosexual exploitive, manipulative sex, and prostitution, but may be totally silent on consensual homosexual relationships.
One is left with many Biblical passages which condemn fornication - sex outside of marriage. If one were to accept these passages as inspired by God, then one can conclude that the Bible considers homosexual sex within a committed relationship as equivalent to a man and woman living together common-law without having being married.
The use of the word "homosexual" in English translations of the Bible
The word "homosexual" generally refers to sexual orientation. People have one of three orientations:
Most are heterosexual: they are sexually attracted only to members of the opposite sex.
A minority are homosexual: they are sexually attracted only to members of the same sex.
A smaller minority are bisexual: they are attracted to both men and women, but not necessarily to the same degree.
The term dates from the late 19th century, when human sexuality began to be studied as a science.
There is no term that means homosexual orientation in the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts of the Bible. The authors of the Bible did not understand sexual orientation and thus did not write about it. Biblical authors had little or no understanding of same-sex committed relationships. Rather, they assumed that everyone was heterosexual, but that some heterosexuals engaged in sex with persons of the same gender. Thus, when you see one of these words in an English translation of the Bible, it is important to dig deeper and find what the original Hebrew or Greek text really means.
Society in biblical times:
In Biblical times, same-gender sexual interactions could take many forms. Some were:
Kings of conquered tribes were sometimes anally anally raped by the invading army as the ultimate symbol of defeat and humiliation. Such rape was also a way of humiliating visitors and strangers. These were acts of power and domination and had nothing in common with consensual sex by gays and lesbians.
Some religious groups both in and around ancient Israel had male prostitutes in their temples who ritually engaged in same-sex activities. These practices were frequently condemned in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). Temple prostitution is no longer found in most areas of the world.
In biblical times, sex was regarded as an activity engaged in by a dominant person and a submissive person. For a man to play the role of a submissive partner would be a reversal of roles, and unacceptable.
It was common within the Roman Empire for male adults to keep boy prostitutes for the purpose of sexual activity. The boys were often slaves. In modern times, this is considered extreme child abuse, a criminal offense.
It is reasonable to assume that many loving gay and lesbian relationships existed in Biblical times. Rabbi Gershon Caudill wrote:
It was only a millennium after the Torah was written that the Talmud makes its first reference to homosexuality as a perversion. This occurred during the time when the Hebrews were being influenced by Greek culture -- one which accepted homosexual behavior.
Only the last type would have any similarity to today's gay and lesbian consensual, committed, loving relationships.
There were other differences between the culture of the ancient Hebrews and modern day society:
There was a general belief that life on earth was all that there was. A person who led a good life would be rewarded by God with a long life and many children. A person could live on after death only through their children.
Having no belief in an afterlife, men were put under tremendous pressureto marry and procreate. An example of this is seen in Genesis 38, where a widow was expected to have at least one child fathered by her former husband's brother in order to continue her husband's line. Thus both adult bachelorhood and being in a loving same-sex relationship would not have been an acceptable situation.
People's beliefs regarding the Bible:
People differ greatly in their view of the Bible:
Generally speaking, Fundamentalists and other Evangelical Christians believe that:
The Bible, as originally written, is inerrant (infallible; free of errors) and that God prevented the authors from making even a single mistake.
Every verse is useful in their understanding of God's intentions.
One should initially attempt to interpret each passage according to its literal meaning.
Many modern translations are reliable, particularly the New International Version (NIV) and King James Version (KJV).
Many conservative Christians trust the KJV and NIV. Thus, when they read some of the passages that clearly and unmistakably condemn homosexuality, they are inclined to trust the translators and conclude that God hates homosexuality. Unfortunately, many groups of translators have been heavily biased against certain groups, including Witches, gays and lesbians; many have tended to warp their translations accordingly.
We have noticed a practice of a few Fundamentalist and other Evangelical Christian pastors which appear to be unethical and dishonest. We use the word "appear" because we are not certain that the pastors are consciously aware of their practices:
Some pastors cite Genesis 19, a passage that condemns homosexual rape, as proof that God hates all homosexual behavior. Yet they would never quote a verse that condemns heterosexual rape and state that it applies to all heterosexual activity.
We have noticed some pastors switching between Bible translations in order to find the version that is most critical of homosexual behavior. When quoting Deuteronomy 23:17 some deviate from their usual usage of the New International Version (NIV). It accurately translates the original Hebrew condemnation of male and female prostitution in the temple (a common Pagan practice). They prefer the King James Version (KJV) which incorrectly translates the passage as condemning female prostitutes and male "sodomites."
More liberal Christians tend to look upon the Bible as containing many translation errors, whose verses were not inspired by God, but were influenced by ancient pre-scientific culture. Passages often relate to customs of a long-past era that are unethical when compared to today's secular and religious systems of morality. Examples are verses which accept and regulate slavery, require widows to marry their brother-in-law, requiring victims of rape to marry their rapist, or condone child disciplinary practices which most parents have now abandoned. Passages which might be interpreted as condemning homosexuality might also be not applicable today.
Each Bible translation reflects the world view, beliefs and mind sets of its translators. Many, if not most, versions of the Bible are funded by religious organizations and employ translators who all follow a specific theological belief system. Their personal biases distort their work. There is an additional complexity facing translators: today's society is very different from that of Biblical times. It is sometimes difficult to find a current English word that closely matches a Hebrew or Greek term.
Are Bible translators truly free of bias?
The answer is no. They have never been free to translate the Bible as their understanding of the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek dictated. One famous example was the translation of the King James Version of the Bible. The translators were pressured into attacking "witches" where:
The original Hebrew text in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) discussed women who used spoken curses to hurt or kill others.
The original Greek text in the Christian Scriptures (New Testament) discussed people who murdered others through the use of poison.
In modern times, the pressures are from economic considerations, not by royal commands.
Take Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, for example. A word-by-word analysis of these two verses by the National Gay Pentecostal Alliance (NGPA), showed that the passages do not prohibit all same-sex behavior; they do not even prohibit all male same-sex activities. They merely control where male-male intercourse is allowed. It cannot be performed in a woman's bed, because that location is sacrosanct. Only the woman, and under certain circumstances a man, may occupy it. Otherwise, a serious defilement would result. 8
The New International Version (NIV) currently translates Leviticus 18:22 as:
The New Living Translation (NLT) widens the translation to also include lesbians:
Imagine what would happen if the interpretation by the National Gay Pentecostal Alliance (NGPA) was used. Translators might render this verse as:
By reading various translations of the Bible, generations of Christians have been conditioned to expect this verse to condemn all homosexual behavior -- or at least all male same-sex activity. They expect that it will be morally condemned as "an abomination" or at least as a "detestable" act. But this new translation does not prohibit male to male sexual behavior; it only limits where the act can be performed. And it does not say that this conduct, if done on a woman's bed, is to be morally condemned. It only says that it is ritually unclean, like coming too close to a dead body, or eating shellfish, or getting a tattoo. The readers would assume that the translation is defective and that the translators were distorting the original meaning of the passage in order to be politically correct and not offend gays and lesbians. The readers would be disinclined to buy the Bible. Thus, a truly accurate Bible would be a financial failure, and would never see the light of day.
A brief description of passages from the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament)
Genesis 1: Be fruitful and multiply....
Genesis 1:27 & 28: "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, ..." King James Version.
A common religiously conservative interpretation: Moses recorded God as saying that he created Adam and Eve in his own image as "male and female."Having created them capable of procreation, God blessed them and commanded them to be fruitful and multiply. There is obviously a limit to the number of children that Eve could give birth to. One might safely assume that God's instruction to Adam and Eve were also binding to their children, grandchildren, even down to the present generation. Thus, God intended each human to pair up with a member of the opposite sex, and to procreate. There is no room in God's plan for same-sex marriage.
A common religiously liberal interpretation: The creation stories in Genesis do not describe actual events and commands; they were copied and adapted from Babylonian myths by an unknown ancient Hebrew priest.The injunction to be fruitfuland multiply may have had some validity in biblical times when the ancient Hebrews were continually under attack by neighboring tribes. However, today's world is overpopulated and is placing major strains on the environment. The command can hardly apply today.
Throughout most of its history, the Christian church has rejected this passage; it has valued celibacy as a higher calling than marriage.
God stated in Genesis 2:18: "It is not good for the man to be alone." For a homosexual individual, the only suitable companion is a person of the same gender. To say that gays and lesbians should not form committed relationships is to say that it is good for them to remain alone. This is a direct contradiction of God's statement; it implies that God is a liar.
Genesis 2:23-24: About marriage:
Typical interpretation:
Conservative Christians: God created Adam and Eve to be heterosexual, expecting them to be fertile and to populate the world with humans. During the sexual act, their bodies unite, and symbolically rejoin as "one flesh." That is God's plan: for people of opposite genders to marry, raise children and have dominion over all the earth. Homosexual behavior is apart from God's plan, an attempt to distort and pervert what God intended from the beginning. If gays and lesbians cannot change (or do not wish to change) their sexual addiction, they must remain celibate in order to fit into God's planned intent for humanity.
Liberal Christians: The first creation story in the Bible is seen in Genesis 1:1 to 2:3. It describes that God's stated plan was for humanity to "Be fruitful and increase in number." (NIV, Genesis 1:2 . The second creation story appears in Genesis 2:4 to 2:25. It states specifically that a man will unite with his wife. (NIV, Genesis 2:24).
One must interpret these sayings carefully. They obviously do not apply to all people. For example:
A significant portion of the population is sterile and thus cannot be fruitful and multiply.
Some people, for any number of reasons, remain celibate throughout life and never marry or have children.
Some women marry when they are beyond child-bearing age and are unable to conceive and give birth.
Some people carry serious genetic defects and choose to not conceive in order to avoid creating a child who would have disastrous health problems.
Gays or lesbians are, by definition, not sexual attracted to members of the opposite gender, and thus are most unlikely to be able to form heterosexual relationships of one man, one woman.
Above all, they do not apply to most of the other seven marriage and family types mentioned in the Bible.
The Genesis texts can thus refer only to a majority of individuals, not to everyone. It is a general plan for society, but not universally applicable to all.
Genesis 19: The story of Sodom and Gomorra:
This passage states that all of the people from the city of Sodom gathered around Lot's house and demanded that he send out two visiting angels so that the townspeople might "know" the angels. The word "know" probably implies that they wanted to have sex with the strangers. God later destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of the behavior of the people of Sodom -- the Sodomites.
A common conservative interpretation: Moses recorded God as destroying the city. R. Albert Mohler said: "The Genesis passage is very clear, that the sin of Sodom that brought on the destruction of the city was indeed linked to homosexuality." 1 This is a popular passage often quoted in conservative Churches because it so clearly condemns homosexual behavior.
A common liberal interpretation: The sin of the men of Sodom was to humiliate their visitors by engaging in "an act of sexual degradation and male rape...These are acts of violence that are committed by parties seeking to show their hatred for those they are degrading. It is not an act of love or of caring" 2 The sin of Sodom was the intent to commit of mass rape. Same-sex rape is unrelated to homosexuality just as opposite-sex rape is unrelated to heterosexuality. Rape is a crime of power and control. Other biblical passages that mention Sodom clearly indicate that Sodom was punished for being unkind to its poor, widows, orphans, and strangers.
Judges 19:14-29 appears to be a near exact copy of Genesis 19, in which a Levite plays the role of the angels. The mob accepted the offer of a woman to rape in place of the visitor. So, either the men in town were bisexuals, or they wanted to rape the Levite in order to humiliate him. The former is most unlikely, because male bisexuals are relatively rare. They total only about 3% of all male adults. Again, men raping a man is a crime of power and control. It has no connection with loving, same-sex behavior in a committed same-sex relationship, just as a man raping a woman has no connection with consensual opposite-sex behavior in a committed opposite-sex relationship.
Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13: The abomination
Leviticus 18:22 in the King James Version states: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." Leviticus 20:13 is similar, except that it adds the death penalty as punishment.
Although the original Hebrew clearly refers to male-male sexual activity, both the Living Bible and New Living Translation refer to a prohibition of "homosexuality." This would include sex between two women -- a behavior not mentioned anywhere in the Hebrew Scriptures.
A common conservative interpretation: These verses clearly condemn sexual activity between two males. As such, they are consistent with other passages discussed in this essay. No exception is given for consensual sex between two men or for sex within a loving same-sex relationship. All are an abomination to God.
A common liberal interpretation: The Hebrew word "to'ebah" appears in both passages and is generally translated as "abomination." Some religious liberals interpret these passages as referring only to male Jews who engaged in same-sex behavior in Pagan temples. The term would better be translated as "ritually improper" or "involving foreign religious cult practice." Elsewhere in the Hebrew Scriptures, the same word is used to ban wearing of clothing made up from two materials (like cotton-polyester in today's world), or having a tattoo, eating shrimp, eating pork, seeding lawns with a mixture of grass types, etc. None of the passages invoking "T'ebah" are valid for non-Jews today.
Rev. Jill Nelson commented that the passage "... is grounded in the old Jewish understanding that women are less worthy than men. For a man to have sex with another man 'as with a woman' insults the other man, because women are to be treated as property." 1
Deuteronomy 23:17, etc: Sodomites and shrine prostitutes
Deuteronomy 23:17 in the King James Version states: "There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel." There are similar passages in 1 Kings 14:24, 15:12 & 22:46 and 2 Kings 23:7.
A common conservative interpretation: Many Evangelicals prefer the KJV to the NIV translation of this verse. It condemns all male homosexual activity, and is thus applicable to all male gays today, whether they are engaged in casual sex or in a monogamous, consensual, committed relationship.
A common liberal interpretation: The Hebrew word "quadesh" is translated in the King James Version here as "sodomite." Other Bible translations use the term "cult prostitute" or "shrine prostitute." "Qadesh" literally "means 'holy one' and is here used to refer to a man who engages in ritual prostitution" in a Pagan temple. 2 Among Pagan religions in the Middle East, worship often involved ritual sex in the temple, "often with a sacred prostitute who was like a priest or priestess. This sacred sexual activity was believed to encourage the god(s) to bestow fertility on the earth and its creatures." [Typo corrected]. 3 Male shrine prostitutes would have sex with females; female prostitutes with males.
Conclusions:
A common conservative conclusion: God's word repeatedly upholds one-man, one-women marriage as God's intent for relationships. It also repeatedly condemns same-sex behavior between men and perhaps between women.
A common liberal conclusion: Genesis does mention the pairing off of one man and one woman into a marriage-like relationship. But this is only one of many possible marital or family relationships. There are a total of eight types mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures. Genesis 19 definitely condemns rape. But this is unrelated to consensual same-sex sexual behavior. The phrases in Leviticus only apply to Jews engaging in same-sex activity in Pagan temples. The references to sodomites in Deuteronomy etc. is a clear error in translation. Again it refers to ritual sex in Pagan temples.
There is nothing in the Hebrew Scriptures that condemns same-sex committed relationships or same-sex marriage.
With the almost complete absence of dialogue between religious conservatives and others on these topics, the massive gulf over homosexuality and the Bible -- and about the morality of same-sex sexual behavior -- will probably not be resolved in the foreseeable future.One promising exception to the lack of meaningful dialogue is a book by the North Como Presbyterian Church in Roseville, MN in 2005. 4
A brief description of passages from the Christian Scriptures (New Testament)
Romans 1: Changing the natural use into that which is against nature....
Romans 1:26-27: "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet." (King James Version)
Paul directed this book to Christians in Rome -- a city known for its sexual debauchery. Earlier verses in Romans 1 describe how some former Christians had reverted to Paganism. They once more worshiped idols, and engaged in ritual sex orgies. God caused them to engage in same-sex sexual behavior. This is the only passage in the Bible that directly refers to women having sex with other women.
In the first sentence of this passage:
In the original Greek, the phrase translated "vile affections" does not refer to passion or lust. it appears to refer to the "frenzied state of mind that many ancient mystery cults induced in worshipers by means of wine, drugs and music." 1
The "women did change" (or "exchanged" or "abandoned") their normal sexual activity, which had been with a man or men. They engaged in sexual activities with members of the same sex, in violation of their heterosexual orientation.
In the original Greek, the phrase "para physin" translated as "against nature" or "unnatural" or "immoral" actually means "Deviating from the ordinary order either in a good or a bad sense, as something that goes beyond the ordinary realm of experience." 2
Interpretations:
A common religiously conservative interpretation:
The late Bennett Sims, the former Episcopal Church, USA bishop of Atlanta, GA was a supporter of equal rights for gays and lesbians. During a talk that supported same-sex marriage, he expressed well the interpretation of this passage that is held by many conservative Christians. He said: "For most of us who seriously honor Scripture these verses still stand as the capital New Testament text that unequivocally prohibits homosexual behavior. More prohibitively, this text has been taken to mean that even a same-sex inclination is reprehensible, so that a type of humanity known as 'homosexual' has steadily become the object of contempt and discrimination." 3
A. Mohler said: "The passage makes it clear that homosexuality is ultimately a rebellion of human nature against the divine creator. It deals with the heart of homosexuality, the passion of man for man or woman for woman." 4
A common religiously liberal interpretation: It is important to realize exactly to whom this passage refers. It involved some former Christians who had converted back to Paganism and started worshiping idols in the form of humans, animals, and birds. They engaged in wild sexual orgies -- activity which was common in Pagan worship at the time. Although their sexual orientation was presumably heterosexual, under the influence of emotion, alcohol, frenzied activity, they engaged in same-sex behavior: women having sex with women; men with men. In doing so, they violated their own nature, which was heterosexual. They were in turn punished, probably with an STD which was very common at the time. They were being punished because their behavior was opposite to their fundamental nature. The passage is a condemnation of men and women with a heterosexual orientation engaging in same-sex behavior outside loving committed relationships. It does not refer to persons with a homosexual orientation. It does not refer to persons with any of the three sexual orientations who were engaging in sex within a committed relationship.
By extension, this passage could be interpreted as forbidding opposite-sex sexual behavior by persons with a homosexual orientation, because it would be against their basic nature to have sex with a person of the opposite sex.
1 Corinthians 6: Behaviors that will prevent a person from attaining Heaven:
1Corithians6:9-10: "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate [makakoi], nor abusers of themselves with mankind [arsenokoitai] Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." (King James Version) [Emphasis ours]
The New International Version translates the second highlighted group as "homosexual offenders." In Today's English Version, it is "homosexual perverts." There is an enormous range of interpretations that biblical commentators have made of the word "arsenokoitai."
A common religiously conservative interpretation: From a forum on homosexuality and the Bible in the Philadelphia Inquirer: 4
A. Mohler: "I believe it explicitly relates to homosexuality. It has been understood that way in the Christian Church from the earliest era."
T. Crater: "It [malakoi] can have a meaning that's not carnal. But the way it's used -- it's embedded in the same context with adultery -- it's pretty clear what the meaning is...A hallmark of Evangelicals is that we take a literal, normal, face-value interpretation of the Bible. Some people attempt to keep some form of Christianity and hold on to homosexuality, too. It leads to strange interpretations of the Bible."
A common religiously liberal interpretation:
The Greek "makakoi" does not mean actually mean effeminate. It can refer to a range of behaviors: people with loose morals, cowards, lazy men, etc.
The exact meaning of "arsenokoitai" has been lost. In one ancient manuscript, the Hebrew "quadesh" (temple prostitute) is translated into Greek as "arsenokoitai." Others suggest that it refers to gigolos; still others suggest it means masturbators or men who sexually abuse boys.
Since we do not know to which behaviors this passage refers, it would not be ethical to interpret as involving condemnation of homosexual behavior.
1 Timothy 1: "Arsenokiitai" are lawless, disobedient, ungodly...
1 Timothy 1:9-10: "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine." (King James Version) (Emphasis ours).
The King James Version translates "arsenokoitai" as those persons -- presumably men -- "that defile themselves with mankind." The comments for 1 Corinthians 6 apply here as well.
Jude 1:7: Sodomites going after strange flesh:
Jude 1:7: "Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." (Emphasis ours)
The phrase rendered "going after strange flesh" has been translated as "perverted sensuality," "unnatural lust," "unnatural sex," "lust of men for other men." It appears to refer to the incident in Genesis 19 when men of Sodom apparently wanted to rape two angels who were in Lot's home. God responded with total destruction of the two cities.
A common religiously conservative interpretation: This verse is referring back to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. The male mob in Sodom rejected the offer of two virgin women for sexual purposes and demanded to have sex with the male angels instead. This proves that they were homosexuals. The passage clearly condemns homosexual behavior.
A common religiously liberal interpretation: The verse is ambiguous. Two obvious interpretations are:
The intent of the mob to rape the angels. Rape is a clear perversion of God-given sexuality.
The angels were created beings, but were not of the same species as humans. Raping them would involve bestiality. This would seem to match the statement that the men of Sodom went after "strange flesh."
Conclusions:
A common conservative conclusion: God's word repeatedly condemns same-sex behavior, either between two men or two women. It delivers a consistent message from Genesis to Jude.
A common liberal conclusion: There is no passage in the Christian Scriptures that condemns same-sex committed relationships or same-sex marriage.
Romans 1 condemns Christian apostates who apparently had a heterosexual orientation and who engaged in what was for them unnatural sex: engaging in sex with members of the same sex.
1 Corinthians 6 and 1 Timothy 1 are ambiguous. They might possibly relate to homosexual behavior; but they might well refer to men who sexually abuse boys, or to male gigolos, or to male temple prostitutes. We just don't know. If these passages actually referred to persons with a homosexual orientation, they probably would not refer to loving, consensual same-sex behavior in a committed relationship. Paul was writing before the existence of a homosexual orientation was known. The only forms of homosexual behavior of which he was probably aware would have been males sexually abusing boys, and men engaging in of same-sex orgies during Pagan worship.
Jude 1:7 appears to refers to the desire by the men of Sodom to engage in bestiality with another species -- angels. There is none of this going on in by either homosexuals or heterosexuals today.
With the almost complete absence of dialogue between religious conservatives and others on these topics, the massive gulf over homosexuality and the Bible -- and about the morality of same-sex sexual behavior -- will probably not be resolved in the foreseeable future.One promising exception to the lack of meaningful dialogue is a book by the North Como Presbyterian Church in Roseville, MN in 2005. 5
C.
quoteIf you are not going to read the post, please do not post just to tell me that you think it's a sin. You're of course free to respond however you'd like, but that isn't the point of this post. It's to show that there are actually different beliefs among Christians as to whether or not homosexuality is a sin, and I'm interested in feedback on that specific topic, and on the intepretations of liberal Christians because I'm pretty sure we're all well aware of the conservative interpretations already.
Thank you, now proceed with the rest of the post:
The following is excerpted from http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibl.htm.
How religious conservatives and liberals interpret the Bible:
Conservative and liberal Christians interpret the Bible in very different ways. This leads to two distinct and contradictory sets of beliefs within Christianity on just about every conceivable topic, from abortion to sex. Belief in equal rights for homosexuals and bisexuals is no exception.
Since the two groups approach the Bible with different assumptions about its nature, and look for different content, one can expect that their conclusions will be very different.
Overview:
There are at least six well defined viewpoints on the nature of homosexuality, and on what heterosexuals' responses should be towards homosexuals and bisexuals. In this section, we explain the two most extreme viewpoints on what the Bible says about homosexuality:
That of most religious fundamentalists, whether Jewish, Christian, Muslim, etc.
That of most religious liberals, gays, lesbians, bisexuals, human sexuality researchers and therapists.
We analyze the contents of many English translations of the Bible, and the Hebrew / Greek original texts.
English translations of the Bible clearly condemn specific homosexual acts. Five Hebrew and Greek original texts definitely condemn such activities as men raping angels (Jude 1:7), and heterosexuals who engage in homosexual acts (Romans 1:26-27).
Interpretations of additional "clobber" texts differ among Christians:
Religious liberals have often interpreted other passages as condemning men who sexually abuse boys, men who engage in homosexual ritual sex in Pagan temples, men intent on raping other men, etc. They view the Bible as being silent on sexual behavior within a consensual, monogamous committed homosexual relationship.
For example, they might identify the sin of the men of Sodom as explained in Genesis 19 as attempting to rape strangers. Alternatively, they might quote other biblical passages as proof that the main sin of that city was their uncharitable behavior towards strangers, and their uncaring conduct towards the poor, the widows, and needy.
Religious conservatives often interpret all of the Biblical passages that touch on same-sex activity as condemning homosexuality in all its forms.
For example, they would probably identify the sin of the men of Sodom to be homosexual behavior. Homosexuality is seen as one of many manifestations of mankind's sinful nature which are a direct result of Adam and Eve's activities in the Garden of Eden. The story in Genesis is interpreted by conservative Christians as describing the fall of humanity.
Basic approach to analyzing the Bible:
The Bible refers to specific homosexual behaviors in a few passages. All references are negative.
Before considering what the Bible might say about homosexuality in today's society, one must figure out what the authors of the Bible meant when they wrote their passages about homosexuality. In order to do this, one must make a fundamental decision -- whether to:
- Accept the teachings of one's faith group. If you do so, and if you follow a conservative denomination then you will probably be taught that homosexual behavior is chosen, changeable abnormal, unnatural, and condemned by God. It is something that a person does. If you follow a liberal faith group, you may well accept homosexuality as an alternative, normal, natural unchangeable sexual orientation for a minority of humans which is accepted by God. It is something that a person is.
- Study passages from your favorite English version of the Bible, which is filtered by the theological beliefs and homophobia (if any) of the translators. If so, then you will find many passages in the Bible which condemn certain forms of homosexual behavior.
- Follow the ancient Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek writings and attempt to understand precisely what the writers taught. If so, then you will find that these same passages condemn specific homosexual activities (rape, prostitution, etc.) But the Bible appears to be silent about same-sex, committed, monogamous relationships.
There are two Hebrew words which are often associated with homosexual passages and which are mistranslated in many English versions of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament):
qadesh means a male prostitute who engaged in ritual sex in a Pagan temple . This was a common profession both in ancient Israel and in the surrounding countries. it is often mistranslated simply as "sodomite" or "homosexual." (e.g. the King James Version of the Bible, Deuteronomy 23:17). The companion word quedeshaw means female temple prostitute. It is frequently mistranslated simply as "whore" or "prostitute." A qadesh and quedeshaw were not simply prostitutes. They had a specific role to play in the temple. They represented a God and Goddess, and engaged in sexual intercourse in that capacity with members of the temple.
to'ebah means a condemned, foreign, Pagan, religious, cult practice, but often simply translated as "abomination." Eating food which contains both meat and dairy products is "to'ebah" A Jew eating with an Egyptian was "to'ebah." A Jew wearing a polyester-cotton garment would be "to'ebah."
In order to understand what the Bible has to say on heterosexual activity, we could consult the original Hebrew texts,dividing all of the references to heterosexual sex into different categories:
rape;
sexual abuse of children;
ritual sex in Pagan temples;
prostitution;
sexual orgies;
non-exploitive, consensual, monogamous sex in a loving relationship, etc.
The final category is the only one that would help us understand what the Bible teaches about heterosexual activity in a committed relationship. After all, a verse which describes how an army kidnapped some female virgins for use as sex slaves does not tell us anything about the role of sex in marriage today. A verse that discusses temple prostitution during the worship of Pagan gods does not instruct us about feelings of romantic love between a man and a woman. Similarly, in order to comprehend what the Bible says about gay and lesbian relationships, we must pass over the references to homosexual rape, male sexual abuse of boys, and homosexual prostitution, orgies, Pagan sexual rituals in temples, etc. We would be left with only those references relating to consensual sexual activities within homosexual partnerships. There may not be any of these. The Bible may be as silent on loving, committed same-sex partnerships as it is about planes, trains and automobiles.
There are biblical descriptions of three close and intimate relationships between members of the same gender. But there are no unambiguous passages that show that they were sexually active.
The Bible often condemns heterosexual and homosexual exploitive, manipulative sex, and prostitution, but may be totally silent on consensual homosexual relationships.
One is left with many Biblical passages which condemn fornication - sex outside of marriage. If one were to accept these passages as inspired by God, then one can conclude that the Bible considers homosexual sex within a committed relationship as equivalent to a man and woman living together common-law without having being married.
The use of the word "homosexual" in English translations of the Bible
The word "homosexual" generally refers to sexual orientation. People have one of three orientations:
Most are heterosexual: they are sexually attracted only to members of the opposite sex.
A minority are homosexual: they are sexually attracted only to members of the same sex.
A smaller minority are bisexual: they are attracted to both men and women, but not necessarily to the same degree.
The term dates from the late 19th century, when human sexuality began to be studied as a science.
There is no term that means homosexual orientation in the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts of the Bible. The authors of the Bible did not understand sexual orientation and thus did not write about it. Biblical authors had little or no understanding of same-sex committed relationships. Rather, they assumed that everyone was heterosexual, but that some heterosexuals engaged in sex with persons of the same gender. Thus, when you see one of these words in an English translation of the Bible, it is important to dig deeper and find what the original Hebrew or Greek text really means.
Society in biblical times:
In Biblical times, same-gender sexual interactions could take many forms. Some were:
Kings of conquered tribes were sometimes anally anally raped by the invading army as the ultimate symbol of defeat and humiliation. Such rape was also a way of humiliating visitors and strangers. These were acts of power and domination and had nothing in common with consensual sex by gays and lesbians.
Some religious groups both in and around ancient Israel had male prostitutes in their temples who ritually engaged in same-sex activities. These practices were frequently condemned in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). Temple prostitution is no longer found in most areas of the world.
In biblical times, sex was regarded as an activity engaged in by a dominant person and a submissive person. For a man to play the role of a submissive partner would be a reversal of roles, and unacceptable.
It was common within the Roman Empire for male adults to keep boy prostitutes for the purpose of sexual activity. The boys were often slaves. In modern times, this is considered extreme child abuse, a criminal offense.
It is reasonable to assume that many loving gay and lesbian relationships existed in Biblical times. Rabbi Gershon Caudill wrote:
"Like all indigenous peoples, the Jews were not overly concerned about male homosexuality, where two men lived together in a monogamous, sexual relationship. As a rule, it did not get any notice....The Talmud does not record a single instance of a person being brought before the Sanhedrin on the charge of homosexual activity." 7
It was only a millennium after the Torah was written that the Talmud makes its first reference to homosexuality as a perversion. This occurred during the time when the Hebrews were being influenced by Greek culture -- one which accepted homosexual behavior.
Only the last type would have any similarity to today's gay and lesbian consensual, committed, loving relationships.
There were other differences between the culture of the ancient Hebrews and modern day society:
There was a general belief that life on earth was all that there was. A person who led a good life would be rewarded by God with a long life and many children. A person could live on after death only through their children.
Having no belief in an afterlife, men were put under tremendous pressureto marry and procreate. An example of this is seen in Genesis 38, where a widow was expected to have at least one child fathered by her former husband's brother in order to continue her husband's line. Thus both adult bachelorhood and being in a loving same-sex relationship would not have been an acceptable situation.
People's beliefs regarding the Bible:
People differ greatly in their view of the Bible:
Generally speaking, Fundamentalists and other Evangelical Christians believe that:
The Bible, as originally written, is inerrant (infallible; free of errors) and that God prevented the authors from making even a single mistake.
Every verse is useful in their understanding of God's intentions.
One should initially attempt to interpret each passage according to its literal meaning.
Many modern translations are reliable, particularly the New International Version (NIV) and King James Version (KJV).
Many conservative Christians trust the KJV and NIV. Thus, when they read some of the passages that clearly and unmistakably condemn homosexuality, they are inclined to trust the translators and conclude that God hates homosexuality. Unfortunately, many groups of translators have been heavily biased against certain groups, including Witches, gays and lesbians; many have tended to warp their translations accordingly.
We have noticed a practice of a few Fundamentalist and other Evangelical Christian pastors which appear to be unethical and dishonest. We use the word "appear" because we are not certain that the pastors are consciously aware of their practices:
Some pastors cite Genesis 19, a passage that condemns homosexual rape, as proof that God hates all homosexual behavior. Yet they would never quote a verse that condemns heterosexual rape and state that it applies to all heterosexual activity.
We have noticed some pastors switching between Bible translations in order to find the version that is most critical of homosexual behavior. When quoting Deuteronomy 23:17 some deviate from their usual usage of the New International Version (NIV). It accurately translates the original Hebrew condemnation of male and female prostitution in the temple (a common Pagan practice). They prefer the King James Version (KJV) which incorrectly translates the passage as condemning female prostitutes and male "sodomites."
More liberal Christians tend to look upon the Bible as containing many translation errors, whose verses were not inspired by God, but were influenced by ancient pre-scientific culture. Passages often relate to customs of a long-past era that are unethical when compared to today's secular and religious systems of morality. Examples are verses which accept and regulate slavery, require widows to marry their brother-in-law, requiring victims of rape to marry their rapist, or condone child disciplinary practices which most parents have now abandoned. Passages which might be interpreted as condemning homosexuality might also be not applicable today.
Each Bible translation reflects the world view, beliefs and mind sets of its translators. Many, if not most, versions of the Bible are funded by religious organizations and employ translators who all follow a specific theological belief system. Their personal biases distort their work. There is an additional complexity facing translators: today's society is very different from that of Biblical times. It is sometimes difficult to find a current English word that closely matches a Hebrew or Greek term.
Are Bible translators truly free of bias?
The answer is no. They have never been free to translate the Bible as their understanding of the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek dictated. One famous example was the translation of the King James Version of the Bible. The translators were pressured into attacking "witches" where:
The original Hebrew text in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) discussed women who used spoken curses to hurt or kill others.
The original Greek text in the Christian Scriptures (New Testament) discussed people who murdered others through the use of poison.
In modern times, the pressures are from economic considerations, not by royal commands.
Take Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, for example. A word-by-word analysis of these two verses by the National Gay Pentecostal Alliance (NGPA), showed that the passages do not prohibit all same-sex behavior; they do not even prohibit all male same-sex activities. They merely control where male-male intercourse is allowed. It cannot be performed in a woman's bed, because that location is sacrosanct. Only the woman, and under certain circumstances a man, may occupy it. Otherwise, a serious defilement would result. 8
The New International Version (NIV) currently translates Leviticus 18:22 as:
"Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."
The New Living Translation (NLT) widens the translation to also include lesbians:
"Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin.
Imagine what would happen if the interpretation by the National Gay Pentecostal Alliance (NGPA) was used. Translators might render this verse as:
"Two men must not engage in sexual activity on a woman's bed; it is ritually unclean.
By reading various translations of the Bible, generations of Christians have been conditioned to expect this verse to condemn all homosexual behavior -- or at least all male same-sex activity. They expect that it will be morally condemned as "an abomination" or at least as a "detestable" act. But this new translation does not prohibit male to male sexual behavior; it only limits where the act can be performed. And it does not say that this conduct, if done on a woman's bed, is to be morally condemned. It only says that it is ritually unclean, like coming too close to a dead body, or eating shellfish, or getting a tattoo. The readers would assume that the translation is defective and that the translators were distorting the original meaning of the passage in order to be politically correct and not offend gays and lesbians. The readers would be disinclined to buy the Bible. Thus, a truly accurate Bible would be a financial failure, and would never see the light of day.
A brief description of passages from the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament)
Genesis 1: Be fruitful and multiply....
Genesis 1:27 & 28: "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, ..." King James Version.
A common religiously conservative interpretation: Moses recorded God as saying that he created Adam and Eve in his own image as "male and female."Having created them capable of procreation, God blessed them and commanded them to be fruitful and multiply. There is obviously a limit to the number of children that Eve could give birth to. One might safely assume that God's instruction to Adam and Eve were also binding to their children, grandchildren, even down to the present generation. Thus, God intended each human to pair up with a member of the opposite sex, and to procreate. There is no room in God's plan for same-sex marriage.
A common religiously liberal interpretation: The creation stories in Genesis do not describe actual events and commands; they were copied and adapted from Babylonian myths by an unknown ancient Hebrew priest.The injunction to be fruitfuland multiply may have had some validity in biblical times when the ancient Hebrews were continually under attack by neighboring tribes. However, today's world is overpopulated and is placing major strains on the environment. The command can hardly apply today.
Throughout most of its history, the Christian church has rejected this passage; it has valued celibacy as a higher calling than marriage.
God stated in Genesis 2:18: "It is not good for the man to be alone." For a homosexual individual, the only suitable companion is a person of the same gender. To say that gays and lesbians should not form committed relationships is to say that it is good for them to remain alone. This is a direct contradiction of God's statement; it implies that God is a liar.
Genesis 2:23-24: About marriage:
"The man said, 'This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh'...For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife and they will become one flesh."
Typical interpretation:
Conservative Christians: God created Adam and Eve to be heterosexual, expecting them to be fertile and to populate the world with humans. During the sexual act, their bodies unite, and symbolically rejoin as "one flesh." That is God's plan: for people of opposite genders to marry, raise children and have dominion over all the earth. Homosexual behavior is apart from God's plan, an attempt to distort and pervert what God intended from the beginning. If gays and lesbians cannot change (or do not wish to change) their sexual addiction, they must remain celibate in order to fit into God's planned intent for humanity.
Liberal Christians: The first creation story in the Bible is seen in Genesis 1:1 to 2:3. It describes that God's stated plan was for humanity to "Be fruitful and increase in number." (NIV, Genesis 1:2 . The second creation story appears in Genesis 2:4 to 2:25. It states specifically that a man will unite with his wife. (NIV, Genesis 2:24).
One must interpret these sayings carefully. They obviously do not apply to all people. For example:
A significant portion of the population is sterile and thus cannot be fruitful and multiply.
Some people, for any number of reasons, remain celibate throughout life and never marry or have children.
Some women marry when they are beyond child-bearing age and are unable to conceive and give birth.
Some people carry serious genetic defects and choose to not conceive in order to avoid creating a child who would have disastrous health problems.
Gays or lesbians are, by definition, not sexual attracted to members of the opposite gender, and thus are most unlikely to be able to form heterosexual relationships of one man, one woman.
Above all, they do not apply to most of the other seven marriage and family types mentioned in the Bible.
The Genesis texts can thus refer only to a majority of individuals, not to everyone. It is a general plan for society, but not universally applicable to all.
Genesis 19: The story of Sodom and Gomorra:
This passage states that all of the people from the city of Sodom gathered around Lot's house and demanded that he send out two visiting angels so that the townspeople might "know" the angels. The word "know" probably implies that they wanted to have sex with the strangers. God later destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of the behavior of the people of Sodom -- the Sodomites.
A common conservative interpretation: Moses recorded God as destroying the city. R. Albert Mohler said: "The Genesis passage is very clear, that the sin of Sodom that brought on the destruction of the city was indeed linked to homosexuality." 1 This is a popular passage often quoted in conservative Churches because it so clearly condemns homosexual behavior.
A common liberal interpretation: The sin of the men of Sodom was to humiliate their visitors by engaging in "an act of sexual degradation and male rape...These are acts of violence that are committed by parties seeking to show their hatred for those they are degrading. It is not an act of love or of caring" 2 The sin of Sodom was the intent to commit of mass rape. Same-sex rape is unrelated to homosexuality just as opposite-sex rape is unrelated to heterosexuality. Rape is a crime of power and control. Other biblical passages that mention Sodom clearly indicate that Sodom was punished for being unkind to its poor, widows, orphans, and strangers.
Judges 19:14-29 appears to be a near exact copy of Genesis 19, in which a Levite plays the role of the angels. The mob accepted the offer of a woman to rape in place of the visitor. So, either the men in town were bisexuals, or they wanted to rape the Levite in order to humiliate him. The former is most unlikely, because male bisexuals are relatively rare. They total only about 3% of all male adults. Again, men raping a man is a crime of power and control. It has no connection with loving, same-sex behavior in a committed same-sex relationship, just as a man raping a woman has no connection with consensual opposite-sex behavior in a committed opposite-sex relationship.
Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13: The abomination
Leviticus 18:22 in the King James Version states: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." Leviticus 20:13 is similar, except that it adds the death penalty as punishment.
Although the original Hebrew clearly refers to male-male sexual activity, both the Living Bible and New Living Translation refer to a prohibition of "homosexuality." This would include sex between two women -- a behavior not mentioned anywhere in the Hebrew Scriptures.
A common conservative interpretation: These verses clearly condemn sexual activity between two males. As such, they are consistent with other passages discussed in this essay. No exception is given for consensual sex between two men or for sex within a loving same-sex relationship. All are an abomination to God.
A common liberal interpretation: The Hebrew word "to'ebah" appears in both passages and is generally translated as "abomination." Some religious liberals interpret these passages as referring only to male Jews who engaged in same-sex behavior in Pagan temples. The term would better be translated as "ritually improper" or "involving foreign religious cult practice." Elsewhere in the Hebrew Scriptures, the same word is used to ban wearing of clothing made up from two materials (like cotton-polyester in today's world), or having a tattoo, eating shrimp, eating pork, seeding lawns with a mixture of grass types, etc. None of the passages invoking "T'ebah" are valid for non-Jews today.
Rev. Jill Nelson commented that the passage "... is grounded in the old Jewish understanding that women are less worthy than men. For a man to have sex with another man 'as with a woman' insults the other man, because women are to be treated as property." 1
Deuteronomy 23:17, etc: Sodomites and shrine prostitutes
Deuteronomy 23:17 in the King James Version states: "There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel." There are similar passages in 1 Kings 14:24, 15:12 & 22:46 and 2 Kings 23:7.
A common conservative interpretation: Many Evangelicals prefer the KJV to the NIV translation of this verse. It condemns all male homosexual activity, and is thus applicable to all male gays today, whether they are engaged in casual sex or in a monogamous, consensual, committed relationship.
A common liberal interpretation: The Hebrew word "quadesh" is translated in the King James Version here as "sodomite." Other Bible translations use the term "cult prostitute" or "shrine prostitute." "Qadesh" literally "means 'holy one' and is here used to refer to a man who engages in ritual prostitution" in a Pagan temple. 2 Among Pagan religions in the Middle East, worship often involved ritual sex in the temple, "often with a sacred prostitute who was like a priest or priestess. This sacred sexual activity was believed to encourage the god(s) to bestow fertility on the earth and its creatures." [Typo corrected]. 3 Male shrine prostitutes would have sex with females; female prostitutes with males.
Conclusions:
A common conservative conclusion: God's word repeatedly upholds one-man, one-women marriage as God's intent for relationships. It also repeatedly condemns same-sex behavior between men and perhaps between women.
A common liberal conclusion: Genesis does mention the pairing off of one man and one woman into a marriage-like relationship. But this is only one of many possible marital or family relationships. There are a total of eight types mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures. Genesis 19 definitely condemns rape. But this is unrelated to consensual same-sex sexual behavior. The phrases in Leviticus only apply to Jews engaging in same-sex activity in Pagan temples. The references to sodomites in Deuteronomy etc. is a clear error in translation. Again it refers to ritual sex in Pagan temples.
There is nothing in the Hebrew Scriptures that condemns same-sex committed relationships or same-sex marriage.
With the almost complete absence of dialogue between religious conservatives and others on these topics, the massive gulf over homosexuality and the Bible -- and about the morality of same-sex sexual behavior -- will probably not be resolved in the foreseeable future.One promising exception to the lack of meaningful dialogue is a book by the North Como Presbyterian Church in Roseville, MN in 2005. 4
A brief description of passages from the Christian Scriptures (New Testament)
Romans 1: Changing the natural use into that which is against nature....
Romans 1:26-27: "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet." (King James Version)
Paul directed this book to Christians in Rome -- a city known for its sexual debauchery. Earlier verses in Romans 1 describe how some former Christians had reverted to Paganism. They once more worshiped idols, and engaged in ritual sex orgies. God caused them to engage in same-sex sexual behavior. This is the only passage in the Bible that directly refers to women having sex with other women.
In the first sentence of this passage:
In the original Greek, the phrase translated "vile affections" does not refer to passion or lust. it appears to refer to the "frenzied state of mind that many ancient mystery cults induced in worshipers by means of wine, drugs and music." 1
The "women did change" (or "exchanged" or "abandoned") their normal sexual activity, which had been with a man or men. They engaged in sexual activities with members of the same sex, in violation of their heterosexual orientation.
In the original Greek, the phrase "para physin" translated as "against nature" or "unnatural" or "immoral" actually means "Deviating from the ordinary order either in a good or a bad sense, as something that goes beyond the ordinary realm of experience." 2
Interpretations:
A common religiously conservative interpretation:
The late Bennett Sims, the former Episcopal Church, USA bishop of Atlanta, GA was a supporter of equal rights for gays and lesbians. During a talk that supported same-sex marriage, he expressed well the interpretation of this passage that is held by many conservative Christians. He said: "For most of us who seriously honor Scripture these verses still stand as the capital New Testament text that unequivocally prohibits homosexual behavior. More prohibitively, this text has been taken to mean that even a same-sex inclination is reprehensible, so that a type of humanity known as 'homosexual' has steadily become the object of contempt and discrimination." 3
A. Mohler said: "The passage makes it clear that homosexuality is ultimately a rebellion of human nature against the divine creator. It deals with the heart of homosexuality, the passion of man for man or woman for woman." 4
A common religiously liberal interpretation: It is important to realize exactly to whom this passage refers. It involved some former Christians who had converted back to Paganism and started worshiping idols in the form of humans, animals, and birds. They engaged in wild sexual orgies -- activity which was common in Pagan worship at the time. Although their sexual orientation was presumably heterosexual, under the influence of emotion, alcohol, frenzied activity, they engaged in same-sex behavior: women having sex with women; men with men. In doing so, they violated their own nature, which was heterosexual. They were in turn punished, probably with an STD which was very common at the time. They were being punished because their behavior was opposite to their fundamental nature. The passage is a condemnation of men and women with a heterosexual orientation engaging in same-sex behavior outside loving committed relationships. It does not refer to persons with a homosexual orientation. It does not refer to persons with any of the three sexual orientations who were engaging in sex within a committed relationship.
By extension, this passage could be interpreted as forbidding opposite-sex sexual behavior by persons with a homosexual orientation, because it would be against their basic nature to have sex with a person of the opposite sex.
1 Corinthians 6: Behaviors that will prevent a person from attaining Heaven:
1Corithians6:9-10: "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate [makakoi], nor abusers of themselves with mankind [arsenokoitai] Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." (King James Version) [Emphasis ours]
The New International Version translates the second highlighted group as "homosexual offenders." In Today's English Version, it is "homosexual perverts." There is an enormous range of interpretations that biblical commentators have made of the word "arsenokoitai."
A common religiously conservative interpretation: From a forum on homosexuality and the Bible in the Philadelphia Inquirer: 4
A. Mohler: "I believe it explicitly relates to homosexuality. It has been understood that way in the Christian Church from the earliest era."
T. Crater: "It [malakoi] can have a meaning that's not carnal. But the way it's used -- it's embedded in the same context with adultery -- it's pretty clear what the meaning is...A hallmark of Evangelicals is that we take a literal, normal, face-value interpretation of the Bible. Some people attempt to keep some form of Christianity and hold on to homosexuality, too. It leads to strange interpretations of the Bible."
A common religiously liberal interpretation:
The Greek "makakoi" does not mean actually mean effeminate. It can refer to a range of behaviors: people with loose morals, cowards, lazy men, etc.
The exact meaning of "arsenokoitai" has been lost. In one ancient manuscript, the Hebrew "quadesh" (temple prostitute) is translated into Greek as "arsenokoitai." Others suggest that it refers to gigolos; still others suggest it means masturbators or men who sexually abuse boys.
Since we do not know to which behaviors this passage refers, it would not be ethical to interpret as involving condemnation of homosexual behavior.
1 Timothy 1: "Arsenokiitai" are lawless, disobedient, ungodly...
1 Timothy 1:9-10: "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine." (King James Version) (Emphasis ours).
The King James Version translates "arsenokoitai" as those persons -- presumably men -- "that defile themselves with mankind." The comments for 1 Corinthians 6 apply here as well.
Jude 1:7: Sodomites going after strange flesh:
Jude 1:7: "Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." (Emphasis ours)
The phrase rendered "going after strange flesh" has been translated as "perverted sensuality," "unnatural lust," "unnatural sex," "lust of men for other men." It appears to refer to the incident in Genesis 19 when men of Sodom apparently wanted to rape two angels who were in Lot's home. God responded with total destruction of the two cities.
A common religiously conservative interpretation: This verse is referring back to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. The male mob in Sodom rejected the offer of two virgin women for sexual purposes and demanded to have sex with the male angels instead. This proves that they were homosexuals. The passage clearly condemns homosexual behavior.
A common religiously liberal interpretation: The verse is ambiguous. Two obvious interpretations are:
The intent of the mob to rape the angels. Rape is a clear perversion of God-given sexuality.
The angels were created beings, but were not of the same species as humans. Raping them would involve bestiality. This would seem to match the statement that the men of Sodom went after "strange flesh."
Conclusions:
A common conservative conclusion: God's word repeatedly condemns same-sex behavior, either between two men or two women. It delivers a consistent message from Genesis to Jude.
A common liberal conclusion: There is no passage in the Christian Scriptures that condemns same-sex committed relationships or same-sex marriage.
Romans 1 condemns Christian apostates who apparently had a heterosexual orientation and who engaged in what was for them unnatural sex: engaging in sex with members of the same sex.
1 Corinthians 6 and 1 Timothy 1 are ambiguous. They might possibly relate to homosexual behavior; but they might well refer to men who sexually abuse boys, or to male gigolos, or to male temple prostitutes. We just don't know. If these passages actually referred to persons with a homosexual orientation, they probably would not refer to loving, consensual same-sex behavior in a committed relationship. Paul was writing before the existence of a homosexual orientation was known. The only forms of homosexual behavior of which he was probably aware would have been males sexually abusing boys, and men engaging in of same-sex orgies during Pagan worship.
Jude 1:7 appears to refers to the desire by the men of Sodom to engage in bestiality with another species -- angels. There is none of this going on in by either homosexuals or heterosexuals today.
With the almost complete absence of dialogue between religious conservatives and others on these topics, the massive gulf over homosexuality and the Bible -- and about the morality of same-sex sexual behavior -- will probably not be resolved in the foreseeable future.One promising exception to the lack of meaningful dialogue is a book by the North Como Presbyterian Church in Roseville, MN in 2005. 5
C.
I have 2 kids & live in St. Catharines, Ontario
17563 postsposted 27th Mar '08
sorry, but damn thats alot to read. and i have heard that the bible says that it is a sin.
quoteI have 1 child & live in New York
posted 27th Mar '08
If nothing else, I hope this lays to rest the notion that all Christians believe homosexuality is a sin.
C.
quoteC.
I have 2 kids & live in St. Catharines, Ontario
53442 postsposted 27th Mar '08
I believe it is a sin..
But we all sin.
quoteBut we all sin.
I have 1 child & 6 angel babies & live in Santa Clarita, California
1627 postsposted 27th Mar '08
i honestly dont know why it matters...in my opinion i think ppl should just let ppl live their lives the way they want to
quoteI have 1 child & 1 angel baby & live in Texas
14141 postsposted 27th Mar '08
Quoting Miss ♥ Melis:“ I believe it is a sin.. But we all sin.”
I agree we all sin.
I really don't know if homosexuality is a sin though. It's not something I've thought about.
I have 2 kids & live in Berwick, Pennsylvania
156 postsposted 27th Mar '08
Thats a lot 2 read, but ye it is a sin. becuz the bible says that when a man gets married he's is 2 get married with a women not a men. plus GOD doesn't like it when the same sex go out and stuff nasty stuff.
quoteI have 1 child & live in New York
posted 27th Mar '08
Is anybody actually going to read and comment on what's written, or just tell me what I already know?
C.
quoteC.
I have 2 kids & live in St. Catharines, Ontario
posted 27th Mar '08
I honestly believe that homosexuality was brought upon the earth as a way of God to test our "loving" skills. To love thy neighbor, or to love thy brother.. etc etc..
I have a gay co-worker who I go out to lunch with all the time. I think he is an AWESOME man, who is of faith of God.. I dont judge him, because I love who he is, and who god created him to be.. I believe we all sin.. ...
I think we have horrible things in this world to be tested to see if our heart can truly look past the impurities and love anyways.
quoteI have a gay co-worker who I go out to lunch with all the time. I think he is an AWESOME man, who is of faith of God.. I dont judge him, because I love who he is, and who god created him to be.. I believe we all sin.. ...
I think we have horrible things in this world to be tested to see if our heart can truly look past the impurities and love anyways.
I have 1 child & 6 angel babies & live in Santa Clarita, California
1490 postsposted 27th Mar '08
Quoting God:“ Is anybody actually going to read and comment on what's written, or just tell me what I already know? C.”
lol prob. not..
i would if i had the patience.. sorry..
I have 3 kids & live in Denton, Texas
posted 27th Mar '08
Quoting God:“ Is anybody actually going to read and comment on what's written, or just tell me what I already know? C.”
to be quite honest.
I cant read long things at once.. I have to take them in strides.. my mind wanders with long posts..
I have 1 child & 6 angel babies & live in Santa Clarita, California
posted 27th Mar '08
well if u can make that long story short then yes. ifu already know the answer y ask the question?
quoteI have 1 child & live in New York
posted 27th Mar '08
Quoting God:“ Is anybody actually going to read and comment on what's written, or just tell me what I already know? C.”
I would, but I have a wandering mind...That, and a 3 year old saying "mommy, come look" every 30 seconds doesn't help. But, I will read it once she's in bed for the night.
And, I've always wanted to say this to you...
Oh my God! It's God!
I have 2 kids & live in Berwick, Pennsylvania
171 postsposted 27th Mar '08
Its a sin, but i personally don't care! thats between them and God (or whoever they believe in). I treat them the same they are people too!
quoteI have 1 child & live in ?
posted 27th Mar '08
We're all very familiar with the standard interpretation of the bible, it's been debated countless times. If you want to do that, go ahead, but that's not what I would like to do.
I would like to discuss people's views on how liberal Christians interpret these passages, because their interpretations show that the Bible does not take a stance on consensual homosexuality.
C.
quoteI would like to discuss people's views on how liberal Christians interpret these passages, because their interpretations show that the Bible does not take a stance on consensual homosexuality.
C.
I have 2 kids & live in St. Catharines, Ontario
Mama Lissa postedWedding Shower1 min ago
Mommy[+2]19wks![SOM] postedWhat is your..3 min ago
Fuhh-cue. postedopinions?3 min ago
M.C's mommy postedmarriage because of pregnancy?4 min ago
Ph♥ Flyer8784 postedLooking For...5 min ago
Sarah {O08} postedCan you tell?5 min ago
♥ ILU ♥ postedYour expierences.. Help?5 min ago
Riley&Olivia postedHaha.6 min ago
[future] Mrs. *Taylor* postedladies with iphones?7 min ago
mama2bnlovinit postedthe big 21....8 min ago
