JustBeingMichael

Part Two - Oh, Paul... Nobody Likes Prison Rape

Part Two - Wrapping Up the "Big Six" Scriptures

Part Three - WWJD, Y'all? What Would Jesus Do?

Part Three - Better Run Tell Somebody!
Part Four - Same Sex Activity In The Bible

They will help you in reading this work in context and in the flow it was intended.

Part Five - Christian Beliefs about the Bible, Gays, Homosexuality…

People's beliefs regarding the Bible:

People differ greatly in their view of the Bible. That is just fact. In fact, generally speaking, fundamentalists and other evangelical Christians believe that:

The Bible, as originally written, is inerrant (infallible; free of errors) and that God prevented the authors from making even a single mistake.
Every verse is useful in their understanding of God's intentions.
One should initially attempt to interpret each passage according to its literal meaning.
Many translations are reliable, particularly the New International Version (NIV) and King James Version (KJV). NOTE: The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) is the most widely accepted version among secular scholars as being the closest to the Greek translations. I grew up using the KJV and NIV, and I happen to love the Good News Translation. But please know that I am trying to answer the conservative, fundamentalist arguments that being gay is a blanket "sin". They tend to use either KJV or NIV. I do tend to either translate the original for myself during study, or I do give credit to the very educated secular scholars for their adherence to the nearly original NRSV.

When conservative Christians read biblical passages in English that clearly and unmistakably condemn homosexuality, they are inclined to trust the translators and conclude that God hates homosexuality. Unfortunately, many groups of translators have been heavily biased against certain groups, including witches, gays and lesbians; many have tended to warp their translations accordingly. I, as a Christian, and as a person of intelligence and tolerance, try to avoid criticizing the beliefs of religious groups. However, I am a Christian and I do feel free to criticize openly and fervently when the religiously motivated activities of a group exhibit hatred against an identifiable group or when they have a negative impact on the civil rights of others.

I’ve noticed a practice of a few fundamentalist and other evangelical Christian pastors which appear to be inconsistent, unethical and dishonest. Now, I don’t necessarily want to say it is malicious in nature, because I am not quite sure if they are doing it ON PURPOSE. But I use the word "appear" because I’m just not certain that the pastors are consciously aware of their practices:

Some pastors cite Genesis 19, a passage that condemns homosexual rape, as proof that God hates all homosexual behavior. Yet they would never quote a verse that condemns heterosexual rape and state that it applies to all heterosexual activity.
I have sat and listened to sermons where I have noticed some pastors switching between Bible translations in order to find the version that is most critical of homosexual behavior. When quoting Deuteronomy 23:17 some deviate from their usual usage of the New International Version (NIV). It accurately translates the original Hebrew condemnation of male and female prostitution in the temple (a common Pagan practice). They prefer the King James Version (KJV) which incorrectly translates the passage as condemning female prostitutes and male "sodomites."

More liberal Christians tend to look upon the Bible as containing many translation errors, whose verses were not inspired by God, but were influenced by ancient pre-scientific cultures. Passages often relate to customs of a long-past era that are unethical when compared to today's secular and religious systems of morality. Examples are verses which accept and regulate slavery, require widows to marry their brother-in-law, requiring victims of rape to marry their rapist, or condone abusive child disciplinary practices which most parents have now abandoned. Passages which might be interpreted as condemning homosexuality might also be not applicable today.

Each Bible translation reflects the world view, beliefs and mind sets of its translators. Essentially all versions of the Bible are funded by religious organizations whose translators who all follow a specific theological belief system. Their personal biases distort their work. There is an additional complexity facing translators: today's society is very different from that of Biblical times. It is sometimes difficult to find a current English word that closely matches a Hebrew or Greek term.

Fundamentalist Christians

Common conclusions by “Fundamentalist” Christians:

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, God saved, 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."

Mainline Christians

Common conclusions by “Mainline” Christians:

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.

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." Speaker 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."

United Methodist Church: The conservative wing of this denomination appears to be currently gaining ground. At their 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.

Liberal Christians

Common conclusions by liberal Christians:

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 Judean 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."
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.

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."

The Bible says little to nothing about homosexual feelings. Why? It doesn’t delve into the feelings of slaves, of women, of children, of MANY of the people in the Bible. It’s not that there were not homosexuals. It’s not that they didn’t have feelings. Take David and Jonathan or Daniel for example, clearly they had feelings. But there are not large discussions on the emotion and sexual nature of a committed loving relationship between gay people. Further, 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 19^th century and only began to be seriously investigated in the middle of the 20^th century. People just had sex with who they had sex with. It wasn’t scientifically investigated or discussed. They didn’t talk about penicillin or mood stabilizers either. If you wanted to take a leap and further argue the point, you can infer 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 could be met with some level of 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.

But, in my not so humble opinion, and many other theologians, 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.

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.

Evangelical Christians (other than Fundamentalists)

Common conclusions by Evangelical Christians OTHER than Fundamentalists:

“Evangelical” Christianity is a very 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. Sadly, there are no widely and truly accepted, precise definitions for the terms "Fundamentalist," and "Evangelical," or "conservative Christian." So, some of this may repeat the other sections or be quite 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.

As you can see, there are many ways that current Christians view the Bible, and its scriptures. We are required by God to study for ourselves and to be accountable for our spiritual well being.

Here are additional blogs in the series:
Part One - Why and Introduction
Part Two - Sodom and Gomorrah
Part Two - Levitical Law
Part Two - Romans Road To Salvation
Part Two - Oh, Paul... Nobody Likes Prison Rape
Part Two - Wrapping Up the "Big Six" Scriptures
Part Three - WWJD, Y'all? What Would Jesus Do?
Part Three - Better Run Tell Somebody!
Part Four - Same Sex Activity In The Bible
Part Five - Common Christian Beliefs
Part Five - One Anglican View Against Being Gay
Part Six - Examples of Gay Couples in The Bible
Part Six - David and Jonathan - A Love Story
Part Seven - Conclusions, Recaps, and References

Cheers,
#JustBeingMichael

Is Being Gay A Sin? Part Four - Same Sex In The Bible Versus Homosexuality

Is Being Gay A Sin?

We are in Part Four of the blog series, "Is Being Gay A Sin?" It is about same sex issues in the Bible. Not to be confused with a later section on same-sex couples and examples. There are always reasons to promote procreation, unless you are alive today. America still has the notion that there is plenty for everyone, but China and other countries are actively promoting family planning and NOT being fruitful or multiplying. Why? Because we are over 7 BILLION now on the planet, and because we carried out or mission from God to be fruitful, and we also, in the process, became the Apex Predators on the planet. In the course of these blogs, if you are reading in order, you can see where we've talked about the cultures and translations, and that God changed what was "abominable" and "unclean" for his people as times changed and as the possibility of salvation was presented to Gentiles... As a Christian, it is our duty to prayerfully study and understand what God was trying to communicate to His people, not only in ancient Hebrew times, the more recent Greek and Roman times, but througout ALL time.

Please read:

Part Two - Oh, Paul... Nobody Likes Prison Rape

Part Two - Wrapping Up the "Big Six" Scriptures

Part Three - WWJD, Y'all? What Would Jesus Do?

Part Three - Better Run Tell Somebody!

They will help you in reading this work in context and in the flow it was intended.

Same-sex activity in biblical times:

In Biblical times, same-gender sexual interactions could take many forms. Some were loving and consensual. They were married or monogamous. But there were many forms of sexual activity that were not. And there are plenty of times where I can FULLY SUPPORT the scriptures, incorrectly translated or not for the intent of preventing some of activities that were propagated. Some were:

Kings of conquered tribes were sometimes anally raped by the invading army as the ultimate symbol of defeat and humiliation. Such rape was also a way of humiliating visitors and strangers. These were acts of power and domination. [They had nothing in common with consensual sex by gays and lesbians today.]
Some religious groups both in and around ancient Israel had male prostitutes in their temples who ritually engaged in same-sex activities. These practices were frequently condemned in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). [Temple prostitution is no longer found in most areas of the world.]
In biblical times, sex was regarded as an activity engaged in by a dominant person and a submissive person. For a man to play the role of a submissive partner would be a reversal of roles, and unacceptable. [Most adults engaged in sexual activity today consider each other as equals.]
It was common within the Roman Empire for male adults to keep boy prostitutes for the purpose of sexual activity. The boys were often slaves. [In modern times, this is considered extreme child abuse, a criminal offense.]
It is reasonable to assume that many loving gay and lesbian relationships existed in Biblical times. Rabbi Gershon Caudill wrote: "Like all indigenous peoples, the Jews were not overly concerned about male homosexuality, where two men lived together in a monogamous, sexual relationship. As a rule, it did not get any notice....The Talmud does not record a single instance of a person being brought before the Sanhedrin on the charge of homosexual activity."

It was only a millennium after the Torah was written that the Talmud makes its first reference to homosexuality as a perversion. This occurred during the time when the Hebrews were being influenced by Greek culture -- which accepted homosexual behavior. Only the last type would have any similarity to today's gay and lesbian consensual, committed, loving relationships. There were other differences between the culture of the ancient Hebrews and modern day society:

There was a general belief that life on earth was all that there was. It isn’t like it is today in Mississippi where almost everyone has been to church their whole lives and the Bible Belt prevails in our mental forefront. A person who led a good life would be rewarded by God with a long life and many children. A person could live on after death only through their children. This caused any male to want to procreate. I am not even a fan of kids, and I want to continue my bloodline. It’s almost an animalistic and genetic thrust to want to propagate.
Having no belief in an afterlife, men were put under tremendous pressure to marry and procreate. An example of this is seen in Genesis 38, where a widow was expected to have at least one child fathered by her former husband's brother in order to continue her husband's line. Thus both adult bachelorhood and being in a loving same-sex relationship would not have been a very acceptable situation.
Ancient Israel was under continual attack from other countries. A large and competent army was a high priority, and could only be maintained with a high birth rate. Since same-sex couples had a low birth rate, such families would be considered unacceptable.

“Same-Sex” In The Bible Versus Homosexuality

What Gays are Up Against, And What They’ve Got Going For Them

Quotations by theologians and others, showing diverse beliefs:

"I want God's gay and lesbian children to know of God's unconditional love and acceptance of them as well. We cannot find any condemnation in scripture for committed monogamous same-sex relationships." Rev. Charles Coppinger, Chaplain of the Arizona Legislature in a letter to legislators, sent 11-7-2000, announcing that he is gay.

"The Genesis passage is very clear, that the sin of Sodom that brought on the destruction of the city was indeed linked to homosexuality." A. Mohler, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Time.com called him the "reigning intellectual of the evangelical movement in the U.S” in 2003.

"The half-dozen biblical references to homosexuality do not reflect what we understand today about loving relationships. This is an identity, not a sin." The Rev. Dan Johnson of Good Samaritan United Methodist Church in Edina, MN.

"The witness of the Bible is univocal about same sex sexual activity. It is always rejected as sinful. There is no distinction made between homosexual behavior that is part of the consensual acts of adults and other forms of such behavior." Ben Witherington III, evangelical biblical scholar.

"Homosexuality and sodomy are not ethical sins. No one is being hurt, no one is being cheated, nobody's rights are being infringed upon. Homosexuality is a religious sin, analogous to other Biblical prohibitions, like not eating the carcass of a dead animal, or not sleeping with a woman during her menstrual cycle." American Orthodox Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

"I am always amazed at how the Bible, that portrays my Lord embracing the outcasts, touching the lepers, welcoming the Samaritans, not judging the woman taken in the act of adultery, and inviting 'all of ye,' not 'some of ye,' to 'come unto me,' can, in the hands of a few distorted people be turned into a book of hatred, violence and judgment." J.S. Spong, an author and retired bishop of the Episcopal Church, USA

"In reality, there are no biblical literalists, only selective literalists. By abolishing slavery and ordaining women, millions of Protestants have gone far beyond biblical literalism. It's time we did the same for homophobia." William Sloane Coffin, former chaplain of Yale University and, peace activist, and leading liberal clergyperson.

Exactly WHAT does the Bible say? Common mistranslations in English versions of the Bible:

In order to understand what the Bible has to say on heterosexual activity, we could consult the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts, dividing all of the references to heterosexual sex into different categories:

Rape;
Sexual abuse of children;
Ritual sex in Pagan temples;
Prostitution;
Sexual orgies;
Non-exploitive, consensual, monogamous sex in a loving relationship, etc.

The final category above is the only one that would help us understand what the Bible teaches about heterosexual activity in a loving committed relationship. After all, a verse which describes how an army kidnapped some female virgins for use as sex slaves does not tell us anything about the role of sex in marriage today. A verse that discusses temple prostitution during the worship of Pagan gods does not instruct us about feelings of romantic love between a man and a woman.

Similarly, in order to comprehend what the Bible says about gay and lesbian relationships, we must pass over the references to homosexual rape, male sexual abuse of boys, and homosexual prostitution, same-sex orgies by heterosexuals, Pagan sexual rituals in temples, etc. We would be left with only those references relating to consensual sexual activities within homosexual partnerships. There may not be any of these. The Bible may be as silent on loving, committed same-sex partnerships as it is about planes, trains and automobiles. But it’s not… Thank God.

There are biblical descriptions of three close and intimate relationships between members of the same gender. But there are no unambiguous passages that show that they were sexually active. Those relationships will be discussed in detail later in this writing about Ruth and Naomi, Daniel and Ashpanez and David and Jonathan.

The Bible often condemns heterosexual and homosexual exploitive, manipulative sex, and prostitution, but appears to be totally silent on consensual homosexual relationships. One is left with many Biblical passages which condemn fornication - sex outside of marriage. If one were to accept these passages as inspired by God, then one can conclude that the Bible considers homosexual sex within a committed relationship as equivalent to a man and woman living together common-law without having being married.

The word "homosexual" in English translations of the Bible:

Outside of the conservative wings of religions, the word "homosexual" or “gay” generally refers to sexual orientation. People have one of three orientations:

Most are heterosexual: they are sexually attracted only to members of the opposite sex.
A minority are homosexual: they are sexually attracted only to members of the same sex.
A smaller minority are bisexual: they are attracted to both men and women, but not necessarily to the same degree.

The term "homosexual" dates from the late 19^th century, when human sexuality first began to be studied as a science. Interestingly enough, there is no term that means homosexual orientation in the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts of the Bible. The authors of the Bible did not understand sexual orientation and thus did not write about it. Thus, when you see one of these words in an English translation of the Bible, it is important to dig deeper and find what the original Hebrew or Greek text really means.

Is Being Gay A Sin? Part Three - Better Run Tell Somebody

Is Being Gay A Sin?

We are still in Part Three of the blog series, "Is Being Gay A Sin?" I wanted to see what God, or Jesus, actually might have said or meant as times and positions changed in the political and socio-economic world that was changing with Jesus. I have other theories to write concerning Jesus as a political activist, but that is another story, and another time. But, we do have clear statements that God changed what was "abominable" and "unclean" for his people as times changed and as the possibility of salvation was presented to Gentiles... Please don't forget, dear Reader, middle to upper class white men were NOT God's first choice - poor, agro-rural brown Middle Eastern males were. And as times have changed, you see more and more of the wealthy, right wing white people acting as though God called them first and to be the example. Gentiles and NON-Jews were allowed in only after God gave the Jewish people a chance to accept his son, Jesus as their Savior. Paul opened this amazing salvation up to the rest of the world. As a Christian, it is our duty to prayerfully study and understand what God was trying to communicate to His people, not only in ancient Hebrew times, the more recent Greek and Roman times, but througout ALL time.

Please read:

Part Two - Oh, Paul... Nobody Likes Prison Rape
Part Two - Wrapping Up the "Big Six" Scriptures
Part Three - WWJD, Y'all? What Would Jesus Do?

They will help you in reading this work in context and in the flow it was intended.

Part Three - Acts 8:26-39 - Better Run Tell Somebody…

Acts 8:26“Then an angel of the Lord said to Philip, "Get up and go toward the south to the road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza." (This is a wilderness road.) Acts 8:27 So he got up and went. Now there was an Ethiopian eunuch, a court official of the Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, in charge of her entire treasury. He had come to Jerusalem to worship Acts 8:28 and was returning home; seated in his chariot, he was reading the prophet Isaiah.

Acts 8:29 Then the Spirit said to Philip, "Go over to this chariot and join it." Acts 8:30 So Philip ran up to it and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah. He asked, "Do you understand what you are reading?" Acts 8:31 He replied, "How can I, unless someone guides me?" And he invited Philip to get in and sit beside him. Acts 8:32 Now the passage of the scripture that he was reading was this: "Like a sheep he was led to the slaughter, and like a lamb silent before its shearer, so he does not open his mouth. Acts 8:33 In his humiliation justice was denied him. Who can describe his generation? For his life is taken away from the earth."

Acts 8:34 The eunuch asked Philip, "About whom, may I ask you, does the prophet say this, about himself or about someone else?" Acts 8:35 Then Philip began to speak, and starting with this scripture, he proclaimed to him the good news about Jesus. Acts 8:36 As they were going along the road, they came to some water; and the eunuch said, "Look, here is water! What is to prevent me from being baptized?" Acts 8:37 Acts 8:38 He commanded the chariot to stop, and both of them, Philip and the eunuch, went down into the water, and Philip baptized him. Acts 8:39 When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away; the eunuch saw him no more, and went on his way rejoicing.

In this passage an Ethiopian Eunuch [remember a group specifically excluded for sexual reasons from membership in the people of Israel by Deut 23:1] is baptized by Philip. This entire passage [which has Philip also preaching to Samaritans] is about the including disenfranchised groups in the Church of the excluded - First a racially/ethnically excluded group, then a sexually excluded individual.

The verse in Genesis dates from approximately 920 BCE although it is probably older. The verses in Leviticus were probably inscribed onto parchment around 500 BCE, when the highest level of technology available was the war chariot. The verses in Romans and 1 Corinthians date from approximately 60 CE. The verses in 1 Timothy probably date from approximately 90-120 CE.

Anyone who claims to be a Christian, however, is compelled to ignore these verses altogether, since they are superseded by the two Great Commandments: to love God with all one's heart and mind and soul and strength, and to love other human beings as much as you love yourself.

Period.

No exceptions. Jesus did NOT say, “except black people, except women, except homosexuals, except left-handed people, except children, except Romans (or Roman Catholics), except feminists, except liberals.” Jesus said EVERYONE.

If you just said, “Yes, but—”, just stop right there.

“Yes, but” is NOT Christian as it applies to this theory and scripture. These passages in Acts are part of the very cornerstone and foundation for allowing other races and ethnicities to enjoy and partake in Christianity. If you are seething about the race, gay, or gentile thing... Maybe some time in prayer is for you so that God can speak to you and show you that HE loves everyone.

Is Being Gay A Sin? Part Three - WWJD? What Would Jesus Do?

Is Being Gay A Sin?

We are entering Part Three of the blog series, "Is Being Gay A Sin?" So my theologians, Christians, and scholars state that Jesus never mentioned the gays. And that is a possibility. However, there are other scholarly theories that think he spoke out quite directly from the Sermon on the Mount. As a Christian, it is our duty to prayerfully study and understand what God was trying to communicate to His people, not only in ancient Hebrew times, the more recent Greek and Roman times, but througout ALL time.

Please read:

Part Two - Oh, Paul... Nobody Likes Prison Rape
Part Two - Wrapping Up the "Big Six" Scriptures

They will help you in reading this work in context and in the flow it was intended.

Part Three
WWJD… What Would Jesus Do?

Did Jesus ever really have anything to say on the issue? Better be careful what you call your Christian brother, Foo’

Matthew 5:22: “But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. Matt 5:23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;”

Mat 5:22 . . lego . . . pas ho . orgizo . . adelphos eike . eike . . . enochos . . krisis . hos an . epo . . adelphos rhaka . . . enochos . . sunedrion . hos an . epo . moros . . . enochos . geenna pur Mat 5:23 oun . . prosphero . doron . . thusiasterion . ekei mnaomai . . adelphos echo tis kata .

Someone on an Internet discussion group pointed out that this passage may be the only reference made by Jesus to homosexuality. I think argument can be made, but not conclusively. The context is of course the compilation known as the Sermon on the Mount, a series of sayings of Jesus which are taken to call for a transcending of the Torah, to get to the "spirit" if you like [although I am sure a defense could be made of the Law, that is not my concern here].

The important words are Raca/Rhaka, and Fool/moros.
Rhaka is not a Greek word. This seems to be its only occurrence in a Greek text, and Lidell-Scott Jones Greek Lexicon merely states that it is Hebrew. Most translations either ignore the word, or note it as a general term of abuse. Greenberg relying on the work of Warren Johannssen, points out that its roots in a variety of Semitic languages mean "soft" [Hebrew "rakha"] and carries a connotation of effeminacy or weakness. The Akkadian word "raq" is used to denote a woman's name or occupation, and its graphic representation in Akkadian derives from a Summerian symbol for woman. In other words it can be argued that "Raca" [applied here to a "brother"] is an accusation of "sissy", or perhaps "catamite". It’s the same in Spanish as calling a male the female word of “puta”. It is a word for females that means whore, but when applied to a male, means “fag” or “punk”.

This argument works better if the word Moros is considered. The word can mean "fool", but it also has the amply used connotation of sexual aggressor, or even "homosexual aggressor". LSJ9 confirms this, although Johannsen makes much more of it. It could reasonably be argued then that Jesus words here condemn those who abuse other about their homosexuality. Such as, gay bashers, homophobes, those that openly spread hatred, lies, and misinformation. And that IS coming from Jesus' mouth, directly. Pray carefully and ask God to lead you to a conclusion on this passage. I personally think it was Jesus, defending a sect of his people, using the common language of the time and that the translation is wonky. But that is me. YOU, Reader, need to make sure that you can live (or die and still make Heaven!) with your choices... with the words you speak... with the actions you take... with the people you either comfort, or condemn.

In other words it could be translated as:"But I say to you, whoever is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment, and whoever says to his brother "sissy" will be answerable to the Sanhedrin, and whoever says "You bugger" will be liable to fiery Gahanna."

Less convincing, but still plausible, is that since the abuse of "queers" is condemned, but homosexuality itself is not mentioned [unlike the women taken in adultery story] that Jesus is defending those who engage in homosexual practice. Considering Jesus breaks with other mores of contemporary Judaism, equally seen in his commendation of those who are "eunuchs for the kingdom of Heaven", this is a plausible, but far from certain reading of this text.

Here are additional blogs in the series:
Part One - Why and Introduction
Part Two - Sodom and Gomorrah
Part Two - Levitical Law
Part Two - Romans Road To Salvation
Part Two - Oh, Paul... Nobody Likes Prison Rape
Part Two - Wrapping Up the "Big Six" Scriptures
Part Three - WWJD, Y'all? What Would Jesus Do?
Part Three - Better Run Tell Somebody!
Part Four - Same Sex Activity In The Bible
Part Five - Common Christian Beliefs
Part Five - One Anglican View Against Being Gay
Part Six - Examples of Gay Couples in The Bible
Part Six - David and Jonathan - A Love Story
Part Seven - Conclusions, Recaps, and References

Cheers,
#JustBeingMichael

Is Being Gay A Sin? Part Two - Wrapping Up the "Big Six" Scriptures...

Wrapping Up “The Big Six” Scriptures

So there we have it — a condemnation of homosexual gang rape; two prohibitions of a physical impossibility (and by the way, Lev. 11:6 says very clearly that hares chew their cud!); a scare-tactics announcement of what happens to heterosexual men and women who engage in idolatry; and two condemnations of homosexual rape. Six verses out of 31,174, which in case you're interested is ONLY 0.000192468%!!! The Bible also contains 321 verses that condone slavery (a whopping 1.0297%).

When you are told every day by important people in your world that you are evil and unfit because you are homosexual, you begin to believe that some of it must be true. None of it is true! National news, in the past, announced that over 10,000 military personnel have been thrown out of military service based on the "Don't ask. Don't tell" policy of our national government. Take a moment to think about that, and to let it soak in. It’s crazy to think just how many people are affected and abused by the prejudice of others.

ESCAPE FROM ABUSE

What has helped you the most to resist homophobic rejection and build up your own self-acceptance and self-esteem? How have you handled your rejection by family, friends, church, etc.? Don’t you just get tired of them all, sometimes? Or the fact that they love us “anyway”?

We like to pretend that our family or friends actually "mean well" when they quote biblical material to "save us" from being gay and from our sin against God and nature. They do not "mean well"! They are deluded and distracted by traditional abusive religion and they are not thinking for themselves. They need accurate information and truth. Give it to them! Become informed! Not knowing enough accurate information to be confident in yourself that your sexual orientation is right for you is a great disadvantage for you and can eliminate you from the battlefield before you can engage the enemy and go beyond defense into effective contact and conquest. Our battle for acceptance and respect is not lost. "We have just begun to fight!"

Three of the passages: Genesis 19:5; I Corinthians 6:9 and I Timothy 1:10 are incorrectly translated. The other three: Leviticus 18:22; 20:13 and Romans 1:26-27are taken out of their original setting of condemning idolatrous religious practices and wrongly used to judge and condemn people of the same sex who love each other. None of these passages refer to people of the same sex who love each other. None originally were aimed at homosexuals. The cultural world of the biblical material is vastly different from ours today, and not one word means exactly today what it meant 2,000 to 3,000 years ago in a different world and in languages that are not used any more as they existed at that time.

Is Being Gay A Sin?

We are still in Part Two of my blog series, "Is Being Gay A Sin?" Along with many misinterpretations of the Old Testament and New Testament. Oddly chosen words that normally translated another way, and written 80 years after the dated accounts? There are questions that secular scholars use and ask that I don't. I do love the Bible, and I am trying to answer this from an evangelical fundamentalist perspective, albeit a gay one. As a Christian, it is our duty to prayerfully study and understand what God was trying to communicate to His people, not only in ancient Hebrew times, the more recent Greek and Roman times, but througout ALL time.

Please read:

Part Two - Oh, Paul... Nobody Likes Prison Rape

They will help you in reading this work in context and in the flow it was intended.

Is Being Gay A Sin? Part Two - Oh, Paul, Nobody likes prison rape!

Is Being Gay A Sin?

We are still in Part Two of my blog series, "Is Being Gay A Sin?" Along with many misinterpretations of the Old Testament, we have to review and consider what the Apostle Paul had to say on the matter. Besides only Romans, we have to consider his letters to the Corinthians and Timothy. There are so many controversies surrounding his writings that we do have to consider the pseudo-epigriphal issues and the fact that many of his writings are attributed to a "ghost writer". As a Christian, it is our duty to prayerfully study and understand what God was trying to communicate to His people, not only in ancient Hebrew times, the more recent Greek and Roman times, but througout ALL time.

Please read: