How Christians interpret
biblical passages on homosexuality
Sponsored link.
Note:
In most essays in this web site, we compare and contrast very conservative
and very liberal viewpoints on each topic. Here, because of the complexity and
importance of the topic, we will describe four separate viewpoints on
homosexuality.
Topics covered: beliefs about homosexuality in the Bible, by:
Fundamentalist Christians represent the conservative wing of
Evangelical Christianity, which in turn represents the conservative Wing
of Christianity. They typically believe in the strict inerrancy
of the Bible and in historical Protestant beliefs. They interpret most biblical passages literally. They view the Bible
as the Word of God fully applicable to present day situations. Many believe:
Whether a sexual act is a sin or not is largely defined by the act itself. e.g. all
homosexual activity is inherently sinful, irrespective of the
relationship between the two persons. Most heterosexual activity is not
sinful if it is done within a marriage.
Many biblical passages condemn all forms
of homosexual behaviors, using inclusive terms such as "sodomite" or
"homosexual."
God destroyed Sodom and its inhabitants because of their homosexual
activity. All the men in the town wanted to have homosexual sex with
the visiting angels.
There are no committed, consensual homosexual relationships described in the
Bible.
The Bible refers to homosexual acts; it does not talk about sexual
orientation. If such a thing as an unchangeable sexual orientation
exists, it would have been mentioned in the Bible.
Same-sex practices are uniquely offensive to
God. After all, the only time that God destroyed a city was Sodom
because of male citizens' homosexual sin. Homosexual behavior is
one of a small group of behaviors that will prevent a
person from attaining salvation and going to heaven. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10
says that "...neither...effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with
mankind...shall inherit the kingdom of God." Other English
translators substitute the term "homosexuals"
here.
Some Fundamentalists interpret 1 Corinthians 6:11, as stating
that
if gays and lesbians are truly saved,
God will remove their homosexual feelings and convert them to a
heterosexual orientation. Thus, no individuals who continue to
engage in homosexual activities have actually been saved; all are destined for
Hell after death. Others believe that gays and lesbians can change
their sexual orientation through reparative
counseling and prayer.
Some Fundamentalist Christian organizations have invested heavily in
media advertisements which emphasize that gays
and lesbians can become ex-gays and leave the "homosexual lifestyle."
When North America is faced with a major ethical conflict, it
tends to be resolved first among religious liberals, and last among
religious conservatives. This has been the pattern in such conflicts as equal
rights for women, including the right to vote; an end to racial
segregation; and legalization of
interracial marriage. Currently active topics like abortion access, physician assisted suicide,
and equal rights for gays and lesbians appear to be
in the process of being resolved in the same way.
The "gay agenda" which includes:
protection from hate crimes based on sexual orientation;
an end to discrimination in employment and accommodation;
the
right to marry or enter into civil unions;
the right to be accepted as church members;
the right to be considered for ordination, etc.
is no exception. Most conservative Christians are firmly in favor of maintaining the status quo;
many liberal Christians feel that ethical considerations require equal rights for homosexuals
both within and outside of the church.
A serious problem facing most mainline denominations is that the
conservative/liberal split is reflected in the membership of their own
congregations. Within each mainline faith group, there is a wide range of
belief on all social and theological topics, from abortion access to the
virgin birth. The larger
mainline denominations have spawned internal, conservative, reform movements which are attempting
to restore church teaching, belief and practices to those of earlier
times. They seek to prevent sexually active gays and lesbians from being considered for
ordination, and to prevent the church from holding homosexual union or commitment
ceremonies for gay and lesbian couples. Meanwhile, liberals
within these same denominations -- often including central leadership in
the denomination -- are fighting for change. Bitterly fought
battles have occurred in such denominations as the
Episcopal Church, Presbyterian Church (USA), and United Methodist Church.
The possibility of denominational schism has been raised, as they were
over previous ethical clashes such as the legality of slavery and
women's ordination.
The Episcopal Church might be evolving in the direction of a
schism. There are, in effect, two Episcopal Churches within the United
States. Two bishops head a conservative, reform Episcopal movement which is attempting
to end female ordination and roll back gains made by gays and lesbians
within the church.
The Presbyterian Church (USA) may be moving towards a liberal point
of view. At a 2000-Fall meeting of the Covenant Network of Presbyterians,
(a conservative reform group), speakers stated that "Scriptural
condemnations of homosexuality merely reflect biblical authors' cultural
biases and are not among the "essential" messages of the
gospel." Several conference speakers said the Bible's condemnations of
same-gender sexuality call to mind other scriptural passages used in past
centuries to justify slavery and to keep women from participating fully in
the life of the church -- on the basis of long-held interpretations that are
largely abandoned today." 12Speaker William
Placher from Wabash College, said interpreters of the Bible must "draw
a line between cultural conventions and the truths that Bible stories convey,"
and always "keep in mind the assumptions the author brought to his
time and place." He said the apostle Paul, for example, lived in a
patriarchal culture where it was "socially acceptable to treat
homosexuals with contempt." 12
United Methodist Church: The conservative wing of this denomination
appears to be currently gaining ground. At their 2000-MAY convention, a
resolution was proposed about homosexuality. It read "Many
consider this practice incompatible with Christian teaching. Others believe
it acceptable when practiced in a context of human covenantal faithfulness. "
This motion was simply a statement of fact. It accurately reflected the
reality of the division within the denomination. However, it was voted down
by a ratio of 1.5 to 1.
For the foreseeable future, mainline denominations will undoubtedly remain split
over the homosexual issue, with one part of their membership following
conservative Christian beliefs (described above) and the rest following
liberal beliefs (described below). Only time will tell whether the
conflict will be resolved through:
a compromise (as in a local option plan which would let individual
congregations or regions decide what path to take), or
a gradual fading of the conflict as one division within the church loses
support, or
church schism.
One or more denominational schisms may well materialize as they did
over slavery. However, history has shown that they need not be permanent.
Religious liberals generally do not view the
Bible as inerrant. They see is as a collection of writings by various
authors, each of whom was promoting their own religious beliefs. Thus, biblical
passages describe how Jewish and early Christian societies viewed various
matters. They may or may not reflect the will of God. Passages relating to
the genocide of whole peoples, the oppression of women and slavery are
certainly not in accordance with the wishes of God.
Some religious liberals argue one or more of the following points:
English versions of the Bible are translations from the original
Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts. The wording has been filtered
through the mind-set and prejudices of various sets of translators.
They feel that one must carefully examine the original texts from the point of view of
ancient Israeli and early Christian societies in order to determine
their precise meaning.
Most religious liberals believe that some sexual acts are
sinful; others are not. It depends mainly on
the participants' relationship, not by the specific act itself.
They view
manipulative, dominating, coercive, under age and/or unsafe sex is sinful. Safe
heterosexual or homosexual sex within a truly
consenting and committed relationship is not sinful. Author Chris Levan
sees this reflected in the Bible. He writes: "The best response that scripture can give with regard to
homosexuality is the declaration that our Creator is very often not
concerned about the 'who' of relationship so much as the 'how.' It simply
asks if the relationship is functioning according to principles of justice
and dignity? Does the partnership demonstrate mutual trust and compassion?
If so, it is blessed by God." 10
The original passages in the Hebrew Scriptures usually do not refer to homosexual acts
in general, but to specific immoral behaviors, such as rape, ritual sex in Pagan temples, and
prostitution:
Genesis 19: Other biblical passages about Sodom identify
the sin of the city as being unresponsive to the poor and needy,
and being uncharitable towards strangers. The only obvious sexual
sin of Sodom was a desire to rape strangers.
Leviticus 18 & 20: Male ritual sexual activity in
Pagan temples is clearly prohibited. Such behavior was a common practice within the
Canaanite fertility religion. The practice was also taken up by
some ancient Israelites.
Deuteronomy 23: Prostitution, both heterosexual and homosexual is always
condemned.
Judges 19: A duplicate of the Genesis story.
Jimmy Creech, former senior pastor of the First United Methodist Church,
in Omaha, Nebraska has concluded that: "...there was no understanding of sexual
orientation in the culture and time when scripture was written. There was not even a word
for 'homosexuality' or 'homosexual' in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic, the original languages
of scripture. There are biblical references that condemn same-sex sexual behavior, but
they are all within contexts related to violence, idolatry, promiscuity and exploitation.
Careful reading within the historical setting reveals that it is the violence, idolatry,
promiscuity and exploitation that is condemned, not the same-sex sexual behavior. The same
condemnation is given to opposite-sex sexual behavior that is violent, idolatrous,
promiscuous and exploitative." 3
The Bible says little about homosexual feelings.
The Bible says nothing about the concept of sexual orientation for the same
reason as it does not mention television sets and airplanes. All were
unknown in biblical times. The
concept of orientation dates only from the late 19th
century and only began to be seriously investigated in the middle of
the 20th century.
There may be as many as three references in the Bible to committed
homosexual relationships, none of which was condemned. But there is no
absolute proof that they were sexually active.
Paul's Epistles in the Christian Scriptures considered at least some male and female homosexual acts to
be forbidden, but it is unclear precisely which acts are included. He
may have been referring to:
temple prostitution,
ritual sex activities in Pagan temples,
heterosexuals who engaged in homosexual acts against their basic
nature,
child sexual abuse,
group sexual orgies, or
all people who commit any homosexual acts.
Paul was certainly aware of sexual orgies in Pagan temples, including
both heterosexual and homosexual encounters. He would have been aware of the
practice of male adults keeping a boy (often a slave) for sexual purposes. These may have
been the only forms of same-gender sex that he knew of. He did not appear to
make any references in his writings to consensual, committed homosexual
relationships. He may well have not known of any; he may not have known that
any could exist.
Paul is not necessarily a useful guide for ethics and morals.
Elsewhere in his writing, he was sexist: For example, he condemned
women preaching (1 Corinthians 14:34). A passage in 1 Timothy 2:11
condemned the wearing gold or pearls. This book says that it was
written by Paul, but most mainline and liberal theologians believe
that it was written up to 80 years after Paul's death. Paul accepted and did not criticize the institution of slavery
(Philemon 1:15 to 16). Many Christians feel that some of his writings
reflect his own prejudices are not a particularly helpful guide
today.
Of the many hundreds of Jesus' instructions and prohibitions
recorded in the gospels,
few if any have a sexual component and none deal with homosexuality.
It is debatable whether St. Paul's prohibition of at least some
homosexual acts was:
for the people in the vicinity of the Mediterranean during the
1st Century CE, or
for all people, forever.
One can argue that the ancient Israelites were surrounded by warlike
tribes. Their fertility was very important if the group was to survive. The
early Christian church was persecuted by the Roman government and by the
Jewish religious leaders. Homosexuals tend to have few children; thus their
presence would be met with opposition. At the end of the 20th Century,
conditions are the exact opposite; we are threatened by our excessive
fertility. Perhaps Paul's criticism of homosexuality (if that was his
intent) is no longer valid today.
Bible translators must be aware of the errors that have been made in
previous versions of the Bible; they are widely discussed in
theological literature. But it would probably not be economically
possible at this time to produce a translation of the Bible that was
accurate. People are so used to expecting homophobic references in a
half-dozen locations in scripture that they probably would not buy a
Bible that was accurate to the original text, or which admitted that
the meanings of certain words are unknown.
Most religious liberals agree with the main mental health associations. Sexual
orientation is determined before school age, and is perhaps determined
genetically at conception. It cannot be changed through prayer,
religious conversion, reparative therapy,
aversion therapy or counseling, any more than a person can change
their race or gender.*
[Note: Transgendered individuals can and do have their appearance
changed to that of the opposite gender through surgery, medication, makeup, etc.
We are defining "gender" here in a narrow sense to refer to the
X and Y chromosome content of each cell of a person' body. They are unchangeable.]
Evangelical Christians (other than Fundamentalists):
Evangelical Christianity is a broad tent and contains a range of
diverse beliefs. Most regard Fundamentalism as representing the
conservative wing of Evangelical Christianity, which in turn represents
the conservative wing of Christianity. Unfortunately, there are no
generally accepted, precise definitions for the terms "Fundamentalist,"
and "Evangelical," or "conservative Christian."
Thus, this section will necessarily remain vague.
Evangelicals, exclusive of the Fundamentalist wing, typically believe in the inerrancy
of the Bible, but with a number of qualifications. They believe in historical
Protestant beliefs, but have modified some of them. For example,
Many reject the historical view of Hell as a place of never-ending
physical torture; they now view Hell as a place of separation from God.
Some have abandoned the historical view that all individuals who are
unsaved during their lifetime will go to Hell. They feel that sending
persons to Hell who have not had a chance to hear and accept the Gospel
is profoundly immoral. It is an act that God is incapable of doing.
They feel that God has provided some mechanism by which people who have
not heard the Gospel can still be saved after their death, and attain
Heaven.
On homosexuality, many non-Fundamentalist Evangelicals have beliefs that are slightly more
liberal than those of Fundamentalists. They believe that:
All homosexual activity is
inherently sinful, whether it is done by singles or by gays or lesbians
involved in committed relationships.
Homosexual behavior is unacceptable. A Barna Research poll conducted
in 2001-AUG showed that only
2% of Evangelical Christians (including Fundamentalists) regarded
homosexuality as "an acceptable lifestyle." (In contrast, the
general American population is evenly split on this matter.) The poll
question is deeply flawed, because it can be interpreted in many ways.
But it does indicate the degree of opposition to the acceptance of
homosexuality as normal and natural for a minority of adults.
Many biblical passages condemn all forms
of homosexual behaviors, using inclusive terms such as "sodomite" or
"homosexual."
Some refer to the many references to Sodom in the Bible as implying
that the inhabitants of Sodom were destroyed by God for their many
sinful behaviors, only one of which was their homosexual
activity.
There are no committed, consensual homosexual relationships described in the
Bible.
Many recognize that sexual orientations do exist and are either
fixed or nearly unchangeable for adults. Some even believe that people
can be "born gay." Some agree with human sexuality researchers
that three sexual
orientations exist -- heterosexual, homosexual, and bisexual.
Same-sex practices are offensive to
God, but not uniquely so. Homosexual behavior is one of many
sinful behaviors, like assault, theft, murder, etc.
Some Fundamentalists interpret 1 Corinthians 6:11, as
implying that
if gays and lesbians are truly saved,
God will help them change their behavior and remain celibate.
Jim W. Martyn, "A Plea for Christian Understanding & Support of Human
Rights" at: http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/jmartyn/dec97.htm
Although written for a Canadian audience, and containing some Canadian
political references, the message is universal. Unfortunately, this essay
appears to be no longer on the Internet.
Dr. Rembert S. Truluck, "Steps to Recovery from Bible Abuse"
is "a response to the abusive use of the Bible against Gays and Lesbians and all
others oppressed and alienated by religion." See: http://www.truluck.com
John Boswell, "Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality : Gay People
in Western Europe from the Beginning of the Christian Era to the Fourteenth Century,
" University of Chicago Press (1981) Would you like to read some
reviews of this book
and
perhaps order it from the Amazon.com virtual book store?
Christopher Levan, "Does the Bible condemn homosexuality? In an
honest approach to the scriptures, the challenge is to suspend biases,"
Edmonton Journal, 1995-MAY-27. Online at: http://www.ualberta.ca/~cbidwell/cmb/bibl-ho.htm
The Reconciling Congregation Program publishes and distribute a
pair of books: "Claiming the Promise Bible Study: An Ecumenical
Welcoming Bible Study Resource on Homosexuality." One is a
study book, the other a leader's guide. They "can be used for group
or individual study. Planned for seven one- to two-hour sessions."
See http://www.rcp.org/ctp.html