Further to an item that I posted on another thread I'd like to repost that item and make it the theme of a new thread. I think it important that we understand biblical contexts and also the ramifications when ignorance of context is used in such a manner as to condemn 'other' human beings.
The way I see it is that God (through the lens of Moses) speaks of what some refer to as 'homosexuality' in only ONE place in the entire Bible. That is found in Leviticus 18:22. None of the other biblical references that are so often brought up by anti-'gay' Christians ARE ANY MORE THAN THE VIEWPOINT OF HUMAN BEINGS. We cannot, therefore, attribute these handful of texts as being 'a Law' of God because they would have simply been based on NOTHING OTHER than Leviticus 18:22. Should Jesus have affirmed the teachings of Leviticus 18 in its entirety (some of which are listed below), then perhaps we might need to take notice. But He didn't. In fact, Jesus - if we are being totally honest with ourselves - actually BROKE a command of God by letting go the adulterous woman. The Law of God as well as the law of the land demanded that she be stoned to death.
Understanding Leviticus requires much more time than I'm willing to give it but below is just a portion of an item by Paul Halsall, based on Gay Theology Without Apology by Gary David Comstock. When you're read it, please come back and argue FOR Leviticus 18:22 in regard to its supposed condemnation of homosexuality in general. I don't think you can. And, if not, then any other scripture supposedly condemning homosexuality that is based on Leviticus 18:22 (ALL of the NT references?) must also be eliminated.
Most ancient Jews, as part of a patriarchal society, would have seen homosexuality in negative terms. Why deny this? Leviticus is the best example. The book was largely compiled after the return of the Jews from exile in Babylon. It shows how an elite which had been dethroned (perhaps 5% of the population had been deported) sought once it lost political power to establish its power in the only arenas it could - religion and family life. This is the book which lists the death penalty for more offenses than any other (homosexuality, cursing parents, adultery, incest, marrying a mother and her daughter, inappropriate behavior with animals, wizardry, harlotry, working on the Sabbath, cursing the name of Yahweh, and murder).
Compare the one death penalty in Exodus (for inappropriate behavior with animals) and three in Deuteronomy (for deception by a virgin, adultery, and adultery with a virgin). The Rabbis had to work hard in the Talmudic period to void ahese penalties. Leviticus is a book which is concerned only with Israel and which rejects foreigners. Since the elite had lost its power in polititics, they expressed it by issuing detailed and obsessive laws about religious practice. It elevates the priesthood of unblemished married hterosexual males, the inferiority of women in sacrifices and ceremonies, and measures protecting the sexual ownership of women by men (Leviticus 1:3, 10; 4:3, 23, 28; 5:15, 18; 6:6; 12:1-5; 27:1-7). It does all this in very bombastic and absolute language: the term "I am Yahweh" occurs twice in Exodus, twice in Deuteronomy, and 52 times in Leviticus, half of these in chapters 18-20. Later projections of married love and equal partnerships and all the flammery of modern marriage in an industrial society are quite in opposition with reference to Leviticus.
It is also worth pointing out that there is a dispute in the Bible itself over the Levitical code. While the post-exilic laws, also reflected in Nehemiah, were nationalistic and somewhat xenophobic, the writer of the book of Ruth attacked such laws by making it clear that King David, a hero to all, would have been excluded from the Temple because his grandmother was Ruth, a Moabite woman. Even in its lawgiving the Bible is not monolithic.
Ancient Israel was a patriarchal society. But is was also one in which God-in-history operated. We need to look to it for what we need, but recognize that it and its attitudes have little bearing on our own lives as Christians.
The way I see it is that God (through the lens of Moses) speaks of what some refer to as 'homosexuality' in only ONE place in the entire Bible. That is found in Leviticus 18:22. None of the other biblical references that are so often brought up by anti-'gay' Christians ARE ANY MORE THAN THE VIEWPOINT OF HUMAN BEINGS. We cannot, therefore, attribute these handful of texts as being 'a Law' of God because they would have simply been based on NOTHING OTHER than Leviticus 18:22. Should Jesus have affirmed the teachings of Leviticus 18 in its entirety (some of which are listed below), then perhaps we might need to take notice. But He didn't. In fact, Jesus - if we are being totally honest with ourselves - actually BROKE a command of God by letting go the adulterous woman. The Law of God as well as the law of the land demanded that she be stoned to death.
Understanding Leviticus requires much more time than I'm willing to give it but below is just a portion of an item by Paul Halsall, based on Gay Theology Without Apology by Gary David Comstock. When you're read it, please come back and argue FOR Leviticus 18:22 in regard to its supposed condemnation of homosexuality in general. I don't think you can. And, if not, then any other scripture supposedly condemning homosexuality that is based on Leviticus 18:22 (ALL of the NT references?) must also be eliminated.
Most ancient Jews, as part of a patriarchal society, would have seen homosexuality in negative terms. Why deny this? Leviticus is the best example. The book was largely compiled after the return of the Jews from exile in Babylon. It shows how an elite which had been dethroned (perhaps 5% of the population had been deported) sought once it lost political power to establish its power in the only arenas it could - religion and family life. This is the book which lists the death penalty for more offenses than any other (homosexuality, cursing parents, adultery, incest, marrying a mother and her daughter, inappropriate behavior with animals, wizardry, harlotry, working on the Sabbath, cursing the name of Yahweh, and murder).
Compare the one death penalty in Exodus (for inappropriate behavior with animals) and three in Deuteronomy (for deception by a virgin, adultery, and adultery with a virgin). The Rabbis had to work hard in the Talmudic period to void ahese penalties. Leviticus is a book which is concerned only with Israel and which rejects foreigners. Since the elite had lost its power in polititics, they expressed it by issuing detailed and obsessive laws about religious practice. It elevates the priesthood of unblemished married hterosexual males, the inferiority of women in sacrifices and ceremonies, and measures protecting the sexual ownership of women by men (Leviticus 1:3, 10; 4:3, 23, 28; 5:15, 18; 6:6; 12:1-5; 27:1-7). It does all this in very bombastic and absolute language: the term "I am Yahweh" occurs twice in Exodus, twice in Deuteronomy, and 52 times in Leviticus, half of these in chapters 18-20. Later projections of married love and equal partnerships and all the flammery of modern marriage in an industrial society are quite in opposition with reference to Leviticus.
It is also worth pointing out that there is a dispute in the Bible itself over the Levitical code. While the post-exilic laws, also reflected in Nehemiah, were nationalistic and somewhat xenophobic, the writer of the book of Ruth attacked such laws by making it clear that King David, a hero to all, would have been excluded from the Temple because his grandmother was Ruth, a Moabite woman. Even in its lawgiving the Bible is not monolithic.
Ancient Israel was a patriarchal society. But is was also one in which God-in-history operated. We need to look to it for what we need, but recognize that it and its attitudes have little bearing on our own lives as Christians.
