Sponsored links
|
|
| Conservatives frequently quote this verse in isolation and use it to show that God's plan was for every man and woman to be heterosexual. Thus, by implication, this verse condemns all homosexual behavior as a violation of God's intent for humanity. | |
| Progressives would frequently point out that the above statement attributed to Jesus was
in direct response to a request of the Pharisees who asked in Verse 3: 'Is it
lawful for a man to divorce his wife...?' (NIV) Jesus answer is obviously in response
to a question directed at wives and husbands; i.e. the "them" refers to a
married couple. It is unrelated to homosexuality. He confirms this in Verse 6 where Jesus
is quoted as saying: 'So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God
has joined together, let man not separate.' (NIV) Also, Jesus continues in Verse 12
by discussing men and women who, for various reasons, did not get married.
Persons opposed to equal rights to gays and lesbians often point out that "God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve." The obvious reason why God made the first two humans as heterosexuals is that he was interested in them creating an entire human race, now totaling 6 billion descendents. If he had created two gays, humanity would not have started. Although unrelated to the question of gay and lesbian relationships, it is interesting to note that Jesus advocated the violation of existing Jewish Law by banning remarriage after divorce. |
![]()
Sponsored link:
![]()
"Jesus' disciples said to him, 'If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry,' But he said to them 'Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the dominion of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.' " The New Testament & Psalms: An Inclusive Version.
In verse 10, Jesus' disciple are responding to Jesus' statement that divorce is not an option for a man unless his wife has committed adultery. The disciples say that if this is so, then people should not marry. However, Jesus admits that not all Christians can accept singlehood. God gives only some the ability to remain single. He then talks about 3 types of eunuchs. They appear to be:
One source interprets the first category of eunuch as referring to homosexuals, rather than to males born without functioning testicles. 2 This source believes that the Bible contradicts itself, with Leviticus, 1 Corinthians and other passages condemning homosexual behavior, while Matthew "just accepts it as a reality." We have not been able to find support for this belief from any academic source.
![]()
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life" (NIV)
This verse seems to imply that "whoever believes...will have eternal live. "Whoever" presumably includes all men and women, black and white, gay, lesbian, bisexual and heterosexual believers. But there are verses like I Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10 which seem to conflict with John 3:16. The latter both have lists of behaviors that will cause people to be unfit for salvation and thus ineligible to attain heaven after death.
Interpretation:
| Conservatives generally believe that all three verses are simultaneously correct. Some argue that if one is saved, then they become a "new creation" in Christ, and homosexual desires will quickly disappear. If they continue to engage in homosexual acts, then their religious conversion was not sincere, and they are doomed to hell. | |
| Progressives do not stress the concept of salvation and eternal punishment in hell for the unsaved. They discount the implied threat in John 3:16 that the unsaved will not have eternal life. And they discount the validity of the statements in 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy that certain behaviors will cause you to go to Hell. |
![]()
The King James Version of the Bible translates verse 7 as:
| Jude 1:7: "Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, 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 book of Jude is quite short and only has a single chapter.
The phrase translated as "strange flesh" in the original Greek reads: "sarkos heteras." Ironically, our English word "heterosexual" is derived from "heteras." "Strange flesh" has been variously translated in other versions as "perverted sensuality," "unnatural lust," "unnatural sex," "lust of men for other men," "pursued unnatural desire," "sexual sin, even perversion," and (in the NIV) "perversion."
Interpretations:
| Conservatives: 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. | |||||
Progressives: Jude does not define exactly what sexual "perversion" he
is referred to here. It seems to be sexual in nature, because it is coupled with a
condemnation of fornication. Jude might have been referring to:
The Harper Collin's New Revised Standard Version of the Bible uses the term "unnatural lust." A footnote comments: "The Sodomites attempted sexual relations with angels." They apparently use the term "Sodomites" in its original sense to refer to inhabitants of Sodom. Jude appears to be in conflict with other Biblical passages which also refer to Genesis 19, but stress that the crime of the citizens of Sodom was their lack of hospitality to strangers and insensitivity to the needs of the poor. Some biblical scholars interpret this verse as relating to an ancient Jewish legend that the women of Sodom engaged in sexual intercourse with angels. Jude's reference would then definitely be to the sin of bestiality, since angels are a different species from humans. |
![]()
The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.
![]()
Copyright © 1996 to 2008 by Ontario
Consultants on Religious Tolerance
Latest update: 2008-SEP-23
Author: B.A. Robinson
![]()
|
|
|
Sponsored link: