I've read some of the bible, but I don't know enough about what it says yet.
anyway, straight to the point here. I read an article recently in Friends Journal that sheds some light on the biblical/theological basis for discrimination against homosexuality. and as it turns out, there is none.
Here's a link to the full article, unfortunately it's not on the Friends Journal site, and I haven't reread this whole page to know if it's exactly the same as what I read, but, here's the link
To summarize:
There's the New Testament and the Old Testament (Torah) in the Christian bible. The New Testiment is based on the life of Jesus and his teachings, it's the more Christian part, we're supposedly following Jesus Christ, hence the term 'Christ'ian. according to the article, homosexuality is only mentioned 3 times in the New Testiment, all of them by the same author, the apostle Paul.
I think I'd better quote the article here:
These homophobic remarks can be found in Paul's letters to the Romans (1:26-27), to Timothy (1:9-10), and to the Corinthians (6:9-10). That's it. I have found no other support for the Pope's homophobic position in the entire "new testament" other than these three short anti-gay comments made by a single Christian leader about 20 or 30 years after Jesus' death. It should also be noted that Paul's comments were made in angry response to some early Christian communities that did not support his homophobic views and, by his own report, actually included gays and lesbians as full and respected participants in their congregations.
The core theological question here, then, is what authority in our lives and religious communities are we to give to these three particular statements attributed to Paul? Are these three statements products of a historically-conditioned, culture-bound, patriarchal worldview not fully left behind by Paul or are they a deep revelation of the wisdom and way of God, the loving and liberating Spirit so fully embodied in human terms by Jesus of Nazareth? These three remarks by Paul were certainly never sanctioned by any recorded comment by Jesus, so this seems like a fair question. Even Paul says, "Do not despise the words of prophets, but test everything; hold fast to what is good, abstain from every form of evil."
And as much as I am deeply moved by so much of what is written in Paul's letters, and as much as I appreciate his efforts to organize and spread the radical Jesus movement in his day, I do see some of his remarks as violations of the best in Jewish and Christian wisdom and practice. For example, Paul also argues that women should not speak in church, that followers of Jesus should always obey governmental orders, that there is nothing wrong with slavery, that slaves should always obey their masters. He even once said that it was sinful for women to wear their hair in braids or to not cover their heads in church...
Furthermore, it must be remembered that Paul was not a close disciple of Jesus. He did not join the Jesus movement until after Jesus was crucified. He had never known Jesus intimately, or traveled with Jesus day in and day out, or discussed his own perspectives and confusions with Jesus at any length.
Kinda makes you go hmmmm
as for the old testiment, there are 5 refferances..
In total there are five additional passages that I have found in the entire Hebrew scriptures that might be legitimately considered anti-gay, or view gay and lesbian behavior as a sin, perhaps even a major sin. These passages are Genesis 19, Leviticus 19:22, Leviticus 20:13, Deuteronomy 23:17, and Judges 19-21. I say "might" here, however, because three of these passages are not even evaluating the moral worth of loving, committed gay and lesbian relationships at all, but actually speak out instead against male-on-male rape, or against men consorting with male or female ritual prostitutes, a practice that was common among some non-Jewish cultural traditions of the time.
The only significant theological support in the entire bible for the Pope's homophobia is found in Leviticus, which clearly says in one passage that gay male sexual behavior is a sin and an abomination before God and then goes on to another passage that says it is a moral imperative on the part of the faithful to kill all men who engage in homosexual behavior.
Regarding the 613 'laws' in the Torah...
Whether or not you agree with the murderous homophobia of these two laws attributed to God through Moses, one might be tempted to say that they do at least offer a firm theological support for the current Pope's homophobia. That would be true, however, only if the Pope actually supported all 613 of the religious laws listed in the Torah as legitimate commandments from God and as perpetual statutes to be followed by all generations of Jews and Christians. The Pope doesn't believe this, though--and neither did the Jewish prophet Micah, or Paul, or Jesus. If the Pope did believe everything that is said in all of the 613 laws attributed to the prophet Moses, he would order animal sacrifice as a core religious practice within the Catholic Mass and he would oppose Catholics eating shellfish or wearing cloth made from two types of fabrics. He would also demand that all Catholic men get circumcised. Indeed, he would demand that all faithful Catholics kill every child they know who has ever talked back to their parents, and demand that they also kill every woman who is guilty of adultery.
All of these actions and prohibitions are included among the 613 laws of Moses. Is it any wonder why Paul called the slavish following of all these religious laws "a curse" and warned people to stay faithful to the underlying spirit of the Law, but not the detailed letter of each one--as many of them are based on mere cultural convention and some are even rooted in deep human prejudices and cruelty.
Fascinating stuff right? I thought so. I'm interested to learn more about Jesus. Found a couple articles within Friends Journal that give context to his life like this one, I plan to read some gospels. Like Mark, and the newly discovered ones are very interesting to me. There were 12 disciples, but only 4 had their gospels included in Constantine's official bible, which is the basis of our current Bible.
Quakers are a Christian religion, and a diverse one, but I think we're more intent on following the path of Jesus, living up to his revolutionary ideals. Following and emulating the spirit of Jesus' life. Striving to create a 'beloved community' on Earth. Not worshiping, or idolizing him or the Church. And certainly not blindly following any Church's 'laws' without context.
This article was written in response to the pope's comments on homosexuality.. "saving humanity from homosexual or transsexual behavior was as important as protecting the environment."
Full Article Again
just wanted to put that out there.
Just to play the other side for a second (even though these arguments no longer convince me).
The Bible never mentions homosexuality in a positive light. Pauls writings are earlier than the Gospels, and teach more directly to the subject.
Also, the Old Testament is no less authoritative than the new (according to many) when it comes to moral laws. Purity laws and civil laws of Israel are no longer, in effect, they argue, but moral laws still are (and yes, they argue that this is a moral law, somewhat arbitrarily).
One more point worth mentioning. Homophobia existed before both Christianity and Judaism, and many other religions. We bear a lot of responsibility for the wrongs we have done, but homophobia would still be there even if all of us came around.
The article does quote different passages from the bible that refer to homosexuality being bad, sinful, whatever. And if you take those quotes out of context, put them on their own, there's about 5 passages that really target homosexuality, and you might claim those as justification. But if you put them in context, like with the other 613 'laws' in Leviticus and the Old Testament, some of those 'laws' are absurd, you start to wonder if these are god's commands, or if this stuff needs to be explored. Same thing with the New Testament, all the Quotes are from Paul, not Jesus, I think that's key (sorry to both Pauls) but if someone is a Christian, I think the words of Jesus are the most important, and if he never talks about it, I think it's open to interpenetration for all Christians.
So Pretty Rusty on the bible and the few parts I know, but isn't there some part that says something like "one man shall not lay with another Man".
I have my own theory or crazy idea about the 10 commandments. Now when people follow them they need to remember that they aren't the first 10. Didn't the tablet break and god had to resend them? Is my memory correct. So isn't it possible that, that is a why of telling people that over time things change.
I think the anti anal sex that (e:james) is talking about is a good point. If you think about it that was common (from what I have heard) in Greece I have even heard it called "Greek Style" I think that back then people where trying to distance them selves from the Greeks. The sex was part of it. But look at You shall not worship other gods. Well there where many gods for greeks.
The thing you have to remember is that The bible is used as the tool to teach or tell people stuff. But you can tell people stuff that isn't in the book. You can tell one story (with out editing it) and get different meanings from it. So maybe it isn't the bible that teaches homophobia maybe it is the people. Or it could be the fact that sex outside of marriage is a sin, so any sex that is gay has to be sin since you can't be married. I think it is also important to note that everyone uses the term Homophobia wrong. It means being affraid of gays, but most people use it to mean hating them, there is a differance.
Interesting. So, Pastor (e:drew) , since you're our local expert on the Bible and things theological, can you point us to the basis for homophobia? Just put on a fundamentalist hat for moment, and, like a prosecutor, lay out the exhaustive case, with quotes and references.
I'd like to understand where all of this comes from.
Thanks!
This issue is a bizarre one.
First, there were no homosexuals in Jesus' lifetime. Oh sure, there was a lot of man on man and girl on girl hot sex, no doubt. But no one was there who declared "I am a homosexual" just as there was no one to declare "I am a heterosexual". Sexual identity is a very recent invention, less than 200 years old.
Second, the Catholic Church's doctrine did not develop out of scripture, but rather Augustine and Aquinas' reading of Aristotle. In the early church homosexual acts was punished just as masturbation would be punished as the crime was the same: spilling semen rather than impregnating a woman.
Treatment of these people became different from treatment of other sexual sinners who the Church had its first dirty priest scandal. Namely, monks were not living a quiet life of prayer, work, and contemplation but were fucking like rabbits (rabbits, not rabbis). Manuals that would serve as prototypes for interrogation methods in the inquisition began appearing in the 13th century. They would have a series of questions to ask, a series of responses, and a series of penances.
What really sparked our modern anti-sex, anti-masturbation, anti-woman, anti-queer crusade was the rise of the middle class and the industrial revolution. Fake Social Science was applied and thousands of men were castrated, thousands of women had their clitoris hacked off, thousands of people received lobotomies. All to curb their very natural, very harmless desires. Of course, the bible was often retrofitted into this crusade.
In short, the bible is not anti-homosexual. Rather, it is anti-sodomy. It is 3,000 years of culture that is anti-homosexual. And while the bible will always be around, that culture is slowly fading away.
You will enjoy reading the Gospels. Mark is a great place to start as it is almost universally recognized as the earliest. You will probably like Luke, too--as it has all of Mark, plus the sermon on the mount, parables, and a special emphasis on women and the poor.
A great book to put Jesus "in context" is "the Secret Message of Jesus" by Brian McLaren (I can lend it, if you would like).
As you probably already guessed, I really like talking about Jesus, so I will be happy to answer any questions you have or help in any way I can.
And one more quick note--the quotes are accurate, and I agree with them, but what you said, about there being no biblical basis for discrimination, is overstating it. I don't think there is a solid one, but I do think we have to grant that people can read the Bible and honestly come to different conclusions. A lot depends on how you read the Bible.