What does the Bible actually say about being gay?

BBC ^ | October 23, 2003 | BBC

[ejdrapes]

What does the Bible actually say about being gay?

Confused how two groups of church-goers can have such conflicting views about whether it's OK to be gay?

Both sides of the debate about homosexuality in the church, which threatens to split the worldwide Anglican church, hold their views sincerely and after much study. So how can their views be so contradictory?

The Bible makes very few mentions of homosexuality - lesbianism isn't mentioned at all in the Old Testament - and as the examples below show, interpretations of the verses that do exist differ hugely.

Following each of the verses below is a brief illustration of what a hardline pro- and anti-gay position might be. (Most Christians hold views somewhere in between these two stances.)

An illustration of the division can be seen by what either side might say about the friendship in the Old Testament between David and Jonathan. One verse reads: "I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother; dear and delightful you were to me; your love for me was wonderful, surpassing the love of women."

PRO-GAY A pro-gay position might be that this is a clear indication that King David had a gay relationship, and to pretend otherwise is naive.

ANTI-GAY An anti-gay opinion might be that the friendship between the two men was exactly that - a very close and loyal allegiance.

Similarly, the tale of Sodom is often debated. In it, Lot has two angels staying in his house. The men of Sodom surrounded the house. "They called to Lot and asked him where the men were who had entered his house that night. 'Bring them out,' they shouted, 'so that we might have intercourse with them.'"

To protect his visitors from an act which Lot describes as "wicked", he offers the crowd his two virgin daughters instead. The crowd are not satisfied and break the door down - the angels then make the intruders blind and Sodom is eventually destroyed by "fire and brimstone".

ANTI-GAY An anti-gay argument might say this story demonstrates the immorality of homosexuality, as has been accepted for generations, hence the term sodomy. Elsewhere in Genesis, God says of the men: "Their sin is very grave." It's an example of behaviour degenerating.

PRO-GAY Of course the men's behaviour was wicked, but it was wicked because it's a tale of sexual assault and rape. When Jesus mentions Sodom, hundreds of years later, it appears to be in a context of a discussion of hospitality, rather than one of sexual morality.

There are several verses in the Bible which are similarly contested - there are however a much smaller number of seemingly clear statements. The most famous of them is probably from Leviticus: "You shall not lie with a man as with a woman; that is an abomination."

ANTI-GAY An anti-gay position would be that this line is unambiguous. It is also repeated elsewhere in the book. The speaker of the words is God, so this is an explicit indication that homosexuality is wrong in God's eyes. It was one of the sins that justified God in giving the land of Canaan to the Israelites

PRO-GAY A pro-gay argument might say that other verses in the same book forbid a wide range of sexual activities, including having sex with a woman who is having her period. This is an indication that the passage embodies specific cultural values rather than God's law.

There is some debate about how relevant rules in the Old Testament are to Christians. Some would say they are binding, since Jesus said he did not come to abolish the old laws. Others would say that Jesus set Christians free from the old laws, highlighting instead that people should love God and their neighbour.

Jesus himself says nothing explicitly about homosexuality. There are though two statements by him which have been interpreted as having a bearing on the subject.

"[A] man shall leave his father and mother, and be made one with his wife; and the two shall become one flesh."

ANTI-GAY This indicates Jesus saw heterosexual relations as the proper way of behaving.

PRO-GAY Jesus is actually talking about the sanctity of heterosexual marriage

Later in the same conversation, after Jesus has spoken about divorce, the disciples say to him it is better not to marry at all. Jesus says: "That is something which not everyone can accept, but only those for whom God has appointed it. For while some are incapable of marriage because they were born so, or made so by men, there are others who have themselves renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of Heaven. Let those accept it who can."

PRO-GAY This shows that Jesus is more concerned with people looking after their own relationship with God, than with enforcement of rules. The reference to being "born so" indicates that heterosexual marriage is fine for those who are heterosexual, but it's OK to be different. Again and again Jesus reaches out to those on the margins of society, like prostitutes and tax collectors, to include them.

ANTI-GAY Jesus here is actually talking about people who were born incapable of having children, or people who were castrated - not about gays. He is actually saying that marriage and chastity are both within God's purpose. Jesus does appeal to the sinners, but once he has called them, he tells them to go and sin no more.

The letters of St Paul provide the other traditional support for the position that homosexuality is sinful. He writes: "God has given [people who worship false gods] up to shameful passions. Their women have exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and their men in turn, giving up natural relations with women burn with lust for one another; males behave indecently with males and paid in their own persons the fitting wage of such perversion."

Paul later writes: "Make no mistake: no fornicator or idolator, none who are guilty either of adultery or of homosexual perversion, no thieves or grabbers of drunkards of slanderers or swindlers, will possess the kingdom of God."

PRO-GAY A pro-gay position might be that the word Paul uses for homosexual here could alternatively be translated as "male prostitute". In any case, Paul's writings are clearly of his time, and there are plenty of other verses which people have no difficulty in ignoring - for instance: "a woman brings shame on her head if she prays or prophesies bare-headed; it is as bad as if her head were shaved." This should be viewed like that.

ANTI-GAY Anti-gay argument might say this line is crystal clear in establishing that Christianity and homosexuality are incompatible. Paul is actually quite clearly referring to homosexual behaviour, and includes lesbianism. You can't just pretend that St Paul, who did so much to influence our understanding of Jesus, didn't know what he was talking about. He's clear that homosexuality is an offence against God and against people's own bodies.

Part of the reason the views diverge so much is because Christians think of the Bible differently. Some see it as literally the word of God, divine inspiration which humans should not question. Others see it rather as a book which is a witness to God's message, but one which was written by humans and thus has flaws.

Trying to find common ground between the two positions is no simple matter - one of the reasons that Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, is having such a tricky job keeping everyone on board.

Quotations are taken from the New English Bible.

References are on this page

[asformeandformyhouse]

But not Jesus. In fact, He never said a word on the subject

He gave the apostles the authority to speak for him.

Matthew 16:19  And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

[Skooz]

The Gospels are a record of what Jesus said and did, which was usually to tell people what they did not know. The fact that homosexuality is a sin was well known among the Jews, as it was codified in the Law. He did not need to tell them it was sin; they knew that already.

God used the Apostle Paul to reiterate the matter in Scripture and place it in a New Covenant context.

[William Terrell]

The only reference:

James 2: 3

And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool:

[OpusatFR]

"PRO-GAY
A pro-gay position might be that this is a clear indication that King David had a gay relationship, and to pretend otherwise is naive."

OH geez. The classic lefty argument. You are naive, homophobic, hateful, blah blah blah blah........

So the rag knows that the Bible states David was gay?

[newcats]

literally that it makes him want to puke.

Does anyone else have problems imagining God....puking?

[jetson]

It depends on the definition of lie.

[VOA]

bump

[ZULU]

The Bible is quite clear about homsexuality and other deviant acts, Read the Mosaic laws in detail in Exodus.

Homosexuality is a filthy, unnatural abberation.

Male and female were designed to procreate, not male and male or female and female. The fact that reproduction is only possible between two individuals of opposite sexes in the overwhelming number of higher species of animals prooves this beyond any contention.

[Always Right]

Why don't we discuss fornicators,slanderers,thieves,adulterers,like we do homosexuals?

Because there are not activists for theives and adulterers trying to normalize the behavior, trying to teach its acceptance in our schools, trying to gain extra legal protection for their behavior, actively promoting the behavior, trying to demonize anyone who does not accpet the behavior, etc, etc, etc....

[Always Right]

I simply think we can be hypocrites if we only concentrate on homosexuality.

It would only be hypocritical if there were activists promoting the other sins.

[Agnes Heep]

Because fornicators, slanderers, thieves, adulterers are not trying to convince the whole world that the bible says it's ok to fornicate slander, steal, commit adultery and convince everyone that the above is normal and acceptable behavior.

You're obviously not familiar with the Democrats.

[GWfan]

Spinning the Bible has been the focus of anyone who has been convicted by his/her conscience and doesn't want to change. It's not a comfortable feeling to think that sin separates us from God.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

ping

[scripter]

Thanks for the ping. There's so much here I'm not sure where to start...

[eastsider]

There's so much here I'm not sure where to start...

Allow me ...

Jesus himself says nothing explicitly about homosexuality. There are though two statements by him which have been interpreted as having a bearing on the subject. [Mt19:5; Mt19:11-12]

They've left out what is arguably the most important reference: Mt15:19 (see also Mk7:21) --

For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander.

[scripter]

That's a start! :-) I've been looking for a website I found yesterday but time constraints force me to move on for now. Thanks for the post.

[John O]

Lets deal with the easiest one first

From the KJV:

1 Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

PRO-GAY A pro-gay position might be that the word Paul uses for homosexual here could alternatively be translated as "male prostitute". In any case, Paul's writings are clearly of his time, and there are plenty of other verses which people have no difficulty in ignoring - for instance: "a woman brings shame on her head if she prays or prophesies bare-headed; it is as bad as if her head were shaved." This should be viewed like that.

The phrase "abusers of themselves with mankind" (commonly translated 'homosexual') is from the Greek word "arsenokoites" Strongs number 733:

(my apologies are due here. The first entry in each definition should be in greek but I don't have and cannot install a greek font on this machine)

"733 arsenokoithv arsenokoites ar-sen-ok-oy’-tace

from 730 and 2845; ; n m

AV-abuser of (one’s) self with mankind 1, defile (one’s) self with mankind 1; 2

1) one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual"

It comes form the words "arrhen" Strongs number 730 and "koite" Strongs number 2845.

"730 arrhn arrhen ar’-hrane or arshn arsen ar’-sane

probably from 142; ; adj

AV-male 4, man 3, man child 1, man child + 5207 1; 9

1) a male"

"2845 koith koite koy’-tay

from 2749; ; n f

AV-bed 2, conceive 1, chambering 1; 4

1) a place for laying down, resting, sleeping in
1a) a bed, couch
2) the marriage bed
2a) of adultery
3) cohabitation, whether lawful or unlawful
3a) sexual intercourse"

Now lets look at all the possible meanings and bounce them against the bible and common sense and the culture of the times.

Arrhen always means male. Linked with koite we have:

1. Male + place for lying down. As opposed to a female place for lying down? and why would a male place for lying down be worried about getting into heaven anyway? I guess we can cross this one off the list. Makes no sense in context

2. Male + Bed. See #1

3. Male + Marriage bed. Inconsistent with the bible and the culture as there was no male-male marriage. Alternately there is no furniture going to heaven anyway. Cross this one off. Makes no sense in context. 4. Male + adultery. While male adulterers don't go to heaven Paul already mentions this just three words prior. Cross this one off too. Makes no sense in context

5. Male + cohabitation. A man leaves his father and mother to live with his wife. In that time and that culture a man lived with his parents and unmarried siblings until he got married. The houses were small and the families were large. Brothers shared the same room and probably the same bed. Also, cohabitation is not spoken against any where else in the bible. Cross this one off too.

6. Male + sexual intercourse. Normal sexual intercourse is understood to involve a man and a woman. It doesn't have an identifier before it (Have you ever seen the usage female sexual intercourse?) So if the identifier was required then this is not talking of normal sexual intercourse but sexual intercourse between 2 males. In various places in the OT and the NT this is spoken against. I think we have a winner here. This is the only interpretation that both makes sense in context and is internally consistent with the rest of the bible.

Note well that it doesn't say anything about prostitution, the act itself is the topic, not the circumstances of it.

Therefore arsenokoites can only be interpreted as 'those who practice homosexual behavior' and those who practice homosexual behavior are not getting into heaven.

[eastsider]

(my apologies are due here. The first entry in each definition should be in greek but I don't have and cannot install a greek font on this machine)

Try doing it this way:

< font face=“symbol” > GREEK WORD </font >

For example, using the formula above, if I replace "GREEK WORD" with the word Petra, it will look like this:

Petra

[John O]

(from KJV) 2 Samuel 1:26 I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.

PRO-GAY

A pro-gay position might be that this is a clear indication that King David had a gay relationship, and to pretend otherwise is naive.

Again have to check against rest of the Word for consistency. The bible says that David was a man after God's own heart. Since the rest of the bible states that God's own heart is against the practice of homosexuality we can state that David was not practicing this behavior.

A further proof to this is that when David did sin he was punished quickly and severely for it. What punishment was there for his friendship with Jonathan?

Also note that verses 17 to 27 are a song written by David to eulogize Jonathan. Some poetic license is granted here. See Psalm 133 where David describes unity in similar overwhelming terms. (unity is as the sacred annointing oil)

Also this could be a bit of a slam against Jonathans sister Michal (David's wife) who wasn't such a good wife. Jonathan loved David better than his sister did and his sister was David's wife.

"1 Samuel 20:42 And Jonathan said to David, Go in peace, forasmuch as we have sworn both of us in the name of the LORD, saying, The LORD be between me and thee, and between my seed and thy seed for ever. And he arose and departed: and Jonathan went into the city."

Jonathan was obviously family minded as he talks about his descendents. Not a typical 'homosexual' mindset.

In any event, assuming David practiced homosexual behavior is inconsistent with the rest of scripture

[John O]

"They called to Lot and asked him where the men were who had entered his house that night. 'Bring them out,' they shouted, 'so that we might have intercourse with them.'"

A little context:

Genesis 19:4 ¶ But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:
5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.
6 And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him,
7 And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.
8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.
9 And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door.

PRO-GAY
Of course the men's behaviour was wicked, but it was wicked because it's a tale of sexual assault and rape. When Jesus mentions Sodom, hundreds of years later, it appears to be in a context of a discussion of hospitality, rather than one of sexual morality.

As we can see from the scriptures this was not a problem of inhospitality. If "Know" was anything else other then "have sex with" it would not have been an issue.

"Hey honey, the neighbors want to come over and visit with our guests" No big deal.

"Hey honey, the neighbors want to come over and have sex with our guests" Big deal.

The fact that Lot offered his daughters to the crowd to have sex with (he makes a point that they are virgins, why?, unless the crowd was interested in sex) as a substitute for the visitors establishes the crowd's intent toward the visitors. They wanted to have sex with them.

Now since the people who came to Lots house were the men of the town and since the visitors were men and since Lot tells the crowd to have his daughters rather than perform wickedness with his visitors we can safely assume that the reason Sodom got nuked was because of homosexual behavior

Every mention that Jesus makes of Sodom uses them as an example of how horrible things will be for those who refuse Him (exception being Luke 17:29 where He uses them as an example of the suddenness of destruction when the chosen people are removed). He makes no mention of hospitality.