Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Biblical Jesus Christ never condemned homosexuality
The Liberal Constitutionalist ^

Posted on 06/06/2002 10:02:20 AM PDT by aconservaguy

The Biblical Jesus Christ never condemned homosexuality.

I know this subject is a little outside the scope of liberal Constitutional theory, but we hear it all the time. The Bible God, Christian fundamentalists say, condemns homosexuality. The religious conservative's favorite anti-gay hammer verses include such perennial stand-bys as Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, and Leviticus 20:13. When read alone, these verses sound convincing and unequivocal.

However, there is another approach to the Bible that sheds a very different light on today's gay issues. Perhaps the biblical Jesus isn't as mean and nasty as some Christians seem to want him to be.

The Old Testament "anti-gay" dictates, such as in Leviticus, make up part of Mosaic Law, which was intended for the Israelites and those living with them. Mosaic Law also contains other odd dictates, such as death for rebellious teens and other (sometimes minor) offenses. Exodus chapters 21-24 and Leviticus chapters 20-22 lists many of these.

Today, however, many fundamentalist Christians, when asked why they no longer follow all of Mosaic Law, will respond "Well, Jesus fulfilled the Law!" "We are no longer under the Law!" Yet, when asked about gay issues, they generally revert to a law-like argument, proclaiming that "homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God."

Well, which is it? Are we "under the Law" or not?

Some Christians attempt to separate "ceremonial law", done away with after the crucifixion, from "moral law," which they claim is still in effect. Others argue that some or much of the law remains in effect, but without the mandated punishments. These Christians often quote Matthew 5:17, claiming that Jesus did not "abolish" the Law, but merely "fulfilled" it.

What follows is a new and different angle, one which very seldom makes it to the airwaves or to the press.

First and foremost, Jesus did abolish the literal Mosaic Law. Ephesians 2:13-17 makes this perfectly clear. What Jesus properly fulfilled was not "the Law," but the prophecies of him, some of which were written in the Law (Luke 24:44, John 15:25). Read Matthew 5:17-18 to the very end - nothing shall disappear from the Law "until everything is accomplished" - and this will become obvious. There is nothing in the Bible to indicate that Jesus "fulfilled the law" in the modern Christian fundamentalist sense that God still requires adherence to useless and baseless taboos.

However, how Jesus reportedly dealt with "law" questions is most revealing.

When the rich young man asked Jesus how he might obtain eternal life, Jesus replied, "obey the commandments" (Matt 19:17). That's a loose answer for a supposedly strict Savior, don't you think?

Apparently the man thought so, too. In verse 18, the man asked Jesus, "which ones?" In verses 18-19 (and Mark 10:19, Luke 18:20), Jesus replies with only five of the ten commandments. And, in Matthew's rendition Jesus gives a commandment that is not even one of the ten. In verse 19, Jesus lists "love your neighbor as yourself." Evidently Jesus was not overly concerned with strict literalism.

Interestingly, Jesus never did mention homosexuality. In Matthew 22:38-39, Jesus summarizes the thrust, the spirit of the law: Love God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself.

Romans 13:9-10 reinforces this, as does James 2:8, which reads, "If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, 'Love your neighbor as yourself,' you are doing right." Homosexuals are entirely capable of complying with this commandment, perhaps more capable than some of the heterosexual Christians I have known.

If you dig deep enough, you find a new, universal moral law that is good anywhere on earth: Try to help people, and do not harm anyone, including yourself. Simple, but forever valid.

What do we do with the "anti-gay" verses in the opening paragraph, then?

Leviticus 20 is gone with the rest of Mosaic Law. The objects of the Romans and Corinthians passages seem not to be homosexuals in and of themselves. The mental picture that forms when reading these passages is a vision of irresponsible, senseless, and destructive behavior, which bears no resemblance to that of responsible gays and lesbians entering into lasting commitments.

Moreover, Paul's letters had specific intended recipients. Paul sounds prohibitive in dealing with the Corinthians because they were the early church group with the most troubles. But when Paul wrote the Galatians, who were especially uptight about matters of "law," Paul sounds like a civil libertarian. Some of the most beautiful Scriptures are found in Galatians.

An argument can thus be made that likens God to a physician treating different patients with various illnesses. God, through Paul, wrote one type of prescription to treat the wayward Corinthians, a different prescription to treat the uptight Galatians, etc. Each of God's prescriptions would be "true" for its intended patient.

Therefore, when Jesus died on the cross for all mankind, do you really think that God wanted to "change the rules" for distant cultures such as the Aborigines and Lakota to fit what Paul wrote to Romans? Or did Jesus merely summarize the essence of all moral customs, no matter how these may manifest themselves at any given place or time?

Something to think about.

Here are some more quaint Scriptures to ponder:

James 2:25 - "In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction?" Hmmm

3 John 1:11 - "Dear friend, do not imitate what is evil but what is good. Anyone who does what is good is from God." Interesting.

Romans 14:5 - "One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind." Whatever happened to the Ten Commandments and keeping the Sabbath day holy??

Extra credit points go to anyone who takes the time to peruse Colossians 2:20-23.

From 1988 to 1996, reported hate crimes against gays and lesbians have increased 260 percent, a rise which closely coincides with today's rapidly escalated religious hatred toward gays by the extreme right wing's thousands of mass media outlets.

This begs the question: What do you think "pleases God" more? How kindly and charitably we as humans treat one another? Or how hatefully we abuse people such as gays and lesbians who fail to adhere to baseless religious taboos and "moral laws" that no longer serve any useful, practical purpose toward creating a civil society?

"If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone." (Romans 12:18).


TOPICS: General Discusssion
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-107 next last
To: Ol' Sparky
Romans 14:13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.
14:14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
81 posted on 06/06/2002 1:39:34 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
It isn't your place to decide.
82 posted on 06/06/2002 1:43:01 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Revelation 911
Doesn't even deserve a reply! It is that antiBiblical!
83 posted on 06/06/2002 1:47:03 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
Be careful about the context there, keeping in mind that this speaks on matters of Christian liberty (such as foods previously prohibited by the Mosaic dietary laws). This verse does not apply to something like homosexuality.
84 posted on 06/06/2002 1:48:19 PM PDT by Frumanchu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Frumanchu
This verse does not apply to something like homosexuality.
Thank you for pointing that out. I had considered placing a disclaimer of some sort in the post stating that it concerned meat, drink and herbs. I too often expect that others know the Word or will look it up for theirselves to see what it is about.
85 posted on 06/06/2002 2:04:05 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Frumanchu
It does directly address my reply 79.
86 posted on 06/06/2002 2:06:48 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
I need not speak a word for my peace to be seen.

I want what you have. (That's compliment, btw.) I struggle daily with that very issue. I sure wish I could just put it to rest and get it over with. Some of us take more time I guess (heavy sigh...)

87 posted on 06/06/2002 2:46:45 PM PDT by usconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
1 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.

Thus Jesus' recognition of Pontius Pilate's authority over his (Jesus') life. Even Jesus acknowledged Government's authority over Man, and the ability to enforce law as that ability came from God.

"Render unto Caesar, that which is Caesar's" comes to mind...

88 posted on 06/06/2002 2:50:51 PM PDT by usconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: usconservative
If I'd shut my mouth more often I'd have less of a struggle. I have a hard time holding back my tongue at times. Sometimes you just have to speak out.
Each of us works out their salvation in their own way and I wish you luck.
Reconcile with the Lord at the days end and contemplate upon the Lord when you're at rest is the best advice I can give you.
89 posted on 06/06/2002 3:21:48 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
But it is my place to judge. And I'll be damned if some liberaltarian knuckleheads that want legalize drugs try to redefine the Bible.
90 posted on 06/06/2002 3:34:32 PM PDT by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
Either the Bible contradicts itself or you have taken the verse out-of-context. The verse you mentioned involves believers judging other believers on personal eating preferences and issues outside of God's moral laws. It's amazing how liberaltarians and liberals twist the Bible.
91 posted on 06/06/2002 3:38:37 PM PDT by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
That's correct. The Bible says to judge "rightly" and would criticize someone -- like an idiot critictizing drug laws -- for judging incorrectly.
92 posted on 06/06/2002 3:42:19 PM PDT by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
But it is my place to judge.
I'm not saying that it isn't your place to judge. I'm saying that it is your place to judge rightly. I feel that you don't so in some cases.
And I'll be damned if some liberaltarian knuckleheads that want legalize drugs try to redefine the Bible.
So which am I supposed to be? A "liberaltarian knucklehead" or a "Bible redefiner".
I've never claimed to be a Libertarian, much less a liberaltarian (in case you didn't know there is no such thing). You only assert that I am based upon one particular stance of mine. Also, I've not redefined anything that I'm aware of. You need to help me out.
My aren't you upset...
93 posted on 06/06/2002 3:49:04 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
The verse you mentioned involves believers judging other believers on personal eating preferences and issues outside of God's moral laws.
The verse mentions not judging others on those habits.
My take and your take are obviously different so I'm going to tell you the same thing I said earlier...Each of us works out our salvation in their own.

Just don't presume that you can tell me how to work out my salvation, which is exactly what you're doing, being completely contrary to what the Bible tells us to do.

94 posted on 06/06/2002 3:53:54 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: aconservaguy
Your comments about the Law's applicability under the New Covenant were good, but you didn't address Rom. 1:26-27 --

26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

95 posted on 06/06/2002 3:54:14 PM PDT by My2Cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
Gen. 1:11 And G_od said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb (6212) yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

G_d's Word.
BTW...I don't see any way whatsoever that those two verses can be taken out of context or "redefined" in any manner. Seems pretty straightforward. Maybe you are the one "redefining things".

96 posted on 06/06/2002 3:59:59 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: aconservaguy
No, but God makes it pretty clear in Leviticus. Sorry, but revisionism doesn't work too well in the religious context.
97 posted on 06/06/2002 4:00:37 PM PDT by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeTally
The only thing I posted on this thread was this:
Apparently you don't understand either. Our Lord did not tolerate her wickedness and sin. He spoke to her to call her away from it, not because he tolerated harlotry.

Then you posted this and refered it to me:

Christ did not advocate execution for simply disobeying Biblical laws.

Your assertion that he would have killed the harlot if not for the Roman government is specious and quite silly. He had not appointed himself as a ruler, thus it would be sinful for him to usurp the "power of the State".

Christ was clear that we are to separate ourselves from sinners, not kill them. "Judge not, lest ye be judged".


I have to ask, Are you mentally retarded or just falsely attributing statments to me for some unknown reason?
98 posted on 06/06/2002 5:37:04 PM PDT by Thorondir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: FreeTally
You must have read a different KJV Bible than I did. I don't remember Christ condeming or "not tolerating" the harlot. I remember the townspeople and disciples being mad because they did not understand why he spoke to her.

I'm not sure if you are referring to the woman caught in adultery, here:

John 8:10-11 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more. ...where Jesus plainly tells her to "sin no more," or to the Samaritan women, here:

Joh 4:5-42 Then cometh he to a city of Samaria, which is called Sychar, near to the parcel of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph. Now Jacob's well was there. Jesus therefore, being wearied with his journey, sat thus on the well: and it was about the sixth hour. There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water: Jesus saith unto her, Give me to drink.(For his disciples were gone away unto the city to buy meat.) Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans. Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water. The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living water? Art thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle? Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. The woman saith unto him, Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw. Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither. The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband: For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly. The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet. Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he. And upon this came his disciples, and marvelled that he talked with the woman: yet no man said, What seekest thou? or, Why talkest thou with her? The woman then left her waterpot, and went her way into the city, and saith to the men, Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ? Then they went out of the city, and came unto him. In the mean while his disciples prayed him, saying, Master, eat. But he said unto them, I have meat to eat that ye know not of. Therefore said the disciples one to another, Hath any man brought him ought to eat? Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work. Say not ye, There are yet four months, and then cometh harvest? behold, I say unto you, Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest. And he that reapeth receiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life eternal: that both he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together. And herein is that saying true, One soweth, and another reapeth. I sent you to reap that whereon ye bestowed no labour: other men laboured, and ye are entered into their labours. And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on him for the saying of the woman, which testified, He told me all that ever I did. So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he would tarry with them: and he abode there two days. And many more believed because of his own word; And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.

I'm sorry the passage is so long, but the fact that Jesus was not condoning this women's behavior, but seeking to save her from it is not apparent without the entire passage. In any case it is one of the most profound passages of Scripture, and includes the wonderful passage, "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth," with emphasis on the truth.

Hank

99 posted on 06/06/2002 6:42:41 PM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
Romans 14:13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.
14:14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.

Taking passages out of context is essentially the same as lying, unless you are unaware that is what you are doing. I give you the benefit of the doubt. This passage is talking about eating meat (food) sacrificed to idols, and deemed 'unclean" because of its religious use. It has nothing to do with moral practices. As you present the verses, virtually anything would be allowed, even theft and murder, so long as one did not esteem those thing "unclean," which you know is an obvious absurdity.

Hank

100 posted on 06/06/2002 6:51:15 PM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-107 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson