|
|
Pro-Gay Texts in the Bible
First. Let us remember the most important verse for gay
people in the Bible. John 3:16 "For God so loved the world
that he gave his only Child, so that everyone who believes
in him may not perish but have eternal life".
And in this
same Bible, a book produced, in all its phases, in
patriarchal cultures in which marriage and property
exchange were completely intertwined, God gave us also
the most pro-gay book of the Bible - the Song of Songs.
Read it one day: it is about two lovers making love; the
lovers are male and female, but they are not described as
married, property and progeny and not an issue either.
What is important in the Song is the beauty and value of
human erotic attraction; this attraction is validated by God,
and by Jesus also who continually plays down the
importance of traditional ideas of the family.
God takes as
one of the great prophets of the Old Testament a man who
is not a man - a eunuch, the sexual minority par excellence,
of the ancient world, the prophet Daniel, who, along with
his companions, is take because of his physical beauty to be
a court eunuch in the Palace of Nebuchadnezzar. This was
known to all ancient commentators, for instance St. John
Chrysostom, but has been ignored recently. GOD has a
place for those who deviate sexually from social norms -
gays, lesbians, and transgendered people. In Isaiah 56:4-5,
the Lord addresses the eunuchs, and those who do not
participate in the dominant culture of preserving name and
family through children: "For thus says the Lord: to the
eunuchs who keep my sabbaths, who choose the things that
please me and hold fast to my covenant, I will give, in my
house and within my walls, a monument better than sons
and daughters, I will give them an everlasting name that
shall not be cut off."
Note that eunuchs could not keep the
covenant in the same way as heterosexuals - they could not
dedicate their first born sons for instance - and so, gay
people CAN keep the covenant of the Law of Love - to
love the Lord God and ones fellow human beings - but the
way they do so might be slightly different from heterosexuals.
The Bible, you see, is full of many wonderful things. You
can pull out a few verses here and there that seem,
especially in modern translations, to be anti-gay, but this is
always a misunderstanding. There are verses, indeed whole
books of the Bible which challenge the viewpoint of the
fundamentalists who seek to prove their view of the world
by selective quotation [ask a fundamentalist where the
Bible has any doctrine of the Trinity someday!].
As to St. Paul's apparent attacks. It seems that Paul was
disgusted with certain aspects of sex in Greco-Roman
society. He was at times a bigot and a prude - he even
admits as much when discussing whether women's hair
should be covered. He at no time discusses equal
relationships between people of the same sex. It is possible
that if he had known about them he would still have
disliked them; after all Paul seems to condemn prostitutes,
but given that we know most ancient prostitutes, whatever
their social opprobrium, were forced, usually sold in fact,
into prostitution, it does not speak well of Paul, IMO, that
he condemned these poor abused people: Jesus never did!
We hold Paul as authoritative for his expansionary view of
an inclusionary church, for his profound understanding of
sin and redemption, for his exaltation of Jesus as Saviour.
We do not hold his every word and decision, nor those of
any other apostle, as correct in every way.
And neither does anyone else! In Acts 9, I think, the
Council of Jerusalem laid down certain laws for non-Jewish
Christians [so we are not talking OT laws here]. Among the
laws was an instruction not to eat the blood or the meat of
strangled animals. No Christians observe these laws [what
exactly do you think is in sausage? ;-)], and while
Catholic's may have an excuse - we believe the Church
existed before the Bible and has much say in interpreting it
[and WE are the Church !], fundamentalists have no such
rationale. They simply ignore it.
In sum: the Bible is *OUR* book. It speaks to us, and it
speaks to all people who are "deviant" in their society. It is
misused and picked over by fundamentalists, and you
should resist going along with their agenda, in my opinion.
But above all it teaches the God loves you and wants you to
love and be loved. I hope you have found, and will find,
Regina, a lover, woman or man, who will bring that
experience of God into your life.
"For God so loved the World that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life"
In other words, all the pro-human texts in scripture are pro- homosexual too.
But that is not what anti-gay folk mean when they say there are no "progay" texts in Scripture. It all depends on how you read it, though.
Try these then:
Matt 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 the internet discussion group Gaynet recently
pointed out that this passage may be the only reference
made by Jesus to homosexuality. I think think argument
can be made, but not conclusively.
I consulted the Greek Text [main word roots give in
transliterated form, D. Greenberg, The Construction of
Homosexuality, LSJ9 [Greek Dictionary], and various
English translations.
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 defence 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
occurence in a Greek text, and LSJ 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 [an acquaintance of mine - and very
anti-religious in fact], points out that its roots in a variety
of semetic 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".
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.
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 break 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.
Compared to justifying Cardinal Ratzinger and the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith from Matt 16:18
though, it is a cinch.
In Matthew 8:5-13 and Luke 7:1-10 the same story is told
about the centurion who approaches Jesus so that this
"servant" might be cured.
Texts:
Mat 8:5 And when Jesus was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him, Mat 8:6 And saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented. Mat 8:7 And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and heal him. Mat 8:8 The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed. Mat 8:9 For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. Mat 8:10 When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel. Mat 8:11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. Mat 8:12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Mat 8:13 And Jesus said unto the centurion, Go thy way; and as thou hast believed, so be it done unto thee. And his servant was healed in the selfsame hour.There are several aspects to this story which might lend it to a gay reading. In the first place it seems somewhat odd that a centurion would be so caring about a slave, caring enough to risk ridicule by approaching a Jewish miracle worker for help. The underlying Greek text intensifies this suspicion of a possible homosexual relationship. Tom Horner, author of David and Jonathan: Homosexuality in Biblical Times, points out that in Matthew, the earlier account and directed to a Greek-speaking Jewish audience, the word for servent is "pais" - which means "boy", but can also mean "servant", and, given the rather greater than average concern for a servant demonstrated by the centurion, can also mean "lover". The word "pederasty" for instance derives from "pais". Luke, who was writing in a much more Greek milieu changes the word "pais" to the much more neutral "doulos" ("servent" or "slave"), presumably aware of its homosexual implications to any reader witha a Greek cultural background. Jesus, clearly, does not condemn the centurion in this story of faith.
Luke 7:1 Now when he had ended all his sayings in the audience of the people, he entered into Capernaum. Luke 7:2 And a certain centurion's servant, who was dear unto him, was sick, and ready to die. Luke 7:3 And when he heard of Jesus, he sent unto him the elders of the Jews, beseeching him that he would come and heal his servant. Luke 7:4 And when they came to Jesus, they besought him instantly, saying, That he was worthy for whom he should do this: Luke 7:5 For he loveth our nation, and he hath built us a synagogue. Luke 7:6 Then Jesus went with them. And when he was now not far from the house, the centurion sent friends to him, saying unto him, Lord, trouble not thyself: for I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter under my roof: Luke 7:7 Wherefore neither thought I myself worthy to come unto thee: but say in a word, and my servant shall be healed. Luke 7:8 For I also am a man set under authority, having under me soldiers, and I say unto one, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. Luke 7:9 When Jesus heard these things, he marvelled at him, and turned him about, and said unto the people that followed him, I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel. Luke 7:10 And they that were sent, returning to the house, found the servant whole that had been sick.
The Book of Ruth sensitively portrays bonding and
devotion between two women. Also don't miss Book of
Judith for a surprising overturning of male/female roles:
Judith sneaks into the enemy camps, cuts off the head of
Holofernes, the leader of the enemy army, returns and
receives a hero's welcome, and then lives out the remainder
of her days with her maidservants, rejecting all male
suitors!
These texts describe the relationship between David and
Jonathon. You may not interpret them as homosexual, but I
do, and I think I have valid reasons to do so.
The "friendship" between David and Jonathan. The
relevant passages: 1 Samuel 18:1-4; 20:3-4, and especially,
20:41 and 2 Samuel 1:25-26, quoted here: "And as soon as
the lad had gone, David rose from beside the stone heap
and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed three times;
and *they* (David and Jonathan) KISSED ONE
ANOTHER, and wept with another, until David recovered
himself" (1 Sam. 20:41 New International Version). Note:
It's really amusing to see the Fundamentalists try to dismiss
the obvious passion in this episode!
"(David speaks:) 'Jonathan lies slain... I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; very pleasant have you been to me; YOUR LOVE TO ME WAS WONDERFUL, PASSING THE LOVE OF WOMEN'" (Emphasis added by editor.) (2 Sam 1:25-26, New International Version)
This is a series of herterosexual love poems. But it is
unique in the scriptures [the product largely of a pastoral
society in which property transfers were accomplished by
marriage and inheritance, hence the laws and concern with
marriage], in that it presents sexual love between two
people who are not clearly married [marriage is not
discussed] as a joyful thing in itself. This is pro-
homosexual, if you like, because it challenges the
procreation centered view of sex held by some.
This prophecy concerns the outcasts of Israel, and
specifically the sexual minorities of the time, ie eunuchs.
These were people who were not part of the dominant
family/property complex, but people still who God loves
and includes [since there was no category of homosexul -
until very late in the 19th century it seems - these Biblical
texts are ones I read as relevant and pro-gay: I am not
asserting that they are discussing homosexuality, which
would falsify my earlier statement that there was no such
concept at the time].
The prophet Daniel was understood by Byzantine
commentators to have been taken to serve as a eunuch, the
major defined sexual minority of the ancient world, at the
King of Babylon's court. Note the emphasis on the physical
beauty of the four young men. He is, nevertheless, along
with David one of the heros of the Jewish Scriptures. Fr.
Helminiak reports suggestions that "eunuch" was just a
general way of refering to "homosexuals" in the period,
although remains merely a suggestion. More interesting has
been discussion of the "favour and tender love" Daniel
enjoyed with the chief eunuch. Nothing definite can be
asserted, but Daniel is one of the most intersting biblical
figures for gay people.
You may note the development seen in Isaiah and Daniel
when you compare them with Deut. 23:1 which excluded
eunuchs from the community. I take the phrase of Jesus
about "Eunuchs from birth" to be the closest thing in the
Bible to the concept of homosexual as we now understand
it [BTW it is a modern misperception to think that eunuchs
could not and did not have sex]. .
So I would also include as a pro-homosexual text :-
[an apparent description of bi-location by the way]. 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 baptised by Philip. This entire
passage [which has Philip also preaching to Samaritans] is
about the inclusion in the Church of the excluded. First a
racially/ethnically excluded group, then a sexually
excluded individual.
You may not agree with my reading of these passages, but it is untrue to say that in either the Jewish Bible or the New Testament there are no passages that can be read as supportive of homosexuals.
|
More pages on this site |
|
If you this Website useful, or enjoyable in any way, please take a moment to let me know by signing my guestbook.
If, however, you wish to tell me how that God "hates the sin and loves the sinner", or repeat the lie that God "hates homosexuals", please go elsewhere! Build your own webpage to do that, perhaps.
|
|
|
|
|
times since November 2000
Back to Deacon Ninure's Home Page