Sexuality in scripture has lately been the subject of controversy, especially because certain Christians seek to condemn homosexuality on the basis of their interpretation of Biblical passages. Here, I've written the first draft of a monograph on the subject, and I hope to revise it after consideration.
Those who cite Scripture in condemning homosexuality, and those who seek guidance about heterosexual behavior in the Bible, tend to cite passages from Scripture which refer, explicitly or obliquely, to the Leviticus statutes defining cultural practice for ancient Israel. In Leviticus, principles underlying a believer's relationship to God are coupled with specific statutes given to the ancient people of Israel; some of these may also be found in Numbers and Deuteronomy. The statutes specifically describe behavior forbidden to the ancient Israelites. In addition, there exist a series of spiritual laws; Jesus Christ quoted the two fundamental spiritual laws given to God’s people: “ ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” (Matt. 22: 37-40) These two commandments are repeated in Deut. 6:5 and Lev. 19:18. Jesus said “Do this and you shall live.” (Lk. 10:28).
It’s very interesting that some modern readers of Scripture cite Lev. 18:22 and 20:13 as condemnation of homosexuality, implying that no believer should be gay in today’s world. Study of the context for the Leviticus statute reveals that various rules right beside that one are no longer kept by those Christians who would proscribe homosexuality on the basis of the “holiness code”. For instance, Lev. 19:19-22 forbids interbreeding of animals, and mixing of seeds in a field, practiced by many Christian farmers today. Also, most Christians probably wear clothes made of mixed fabrics (think: cotton and polyester, or linen and silk) also forbidden in these verses. Other statutes, currently ignored, include Lev. 19:26-27 which forbids eating “anything with its blood”—so much for rare or medium-rare steak. “You shall not round off the hair on your temples or mar the edges of your beard” is right in there with “you shall keep my Sabbaths and reverence my sanctuary: I am the Lord”. None of these statutes are kept by Christians nowadays.
What differentiates the spiritual laws most Christians keep from those statutes fallen into disuse? Any biblical scholar will attest to the cultural significance of the statutes, aimed at the people of Israel in a specific context as desert-dwellers during the early centuries of their identity as a people. The spiritual laws, on the other hand, embody general principles, rooted in God’s love, applicable to all people in all contexts, as made clear by Jesus Christ.
Reading the more specific statutes set forth in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, the purpose emerges clearly: to promote health among the desert sojourners, to set them apart from neighboring idolaters, and “so that you may be fruitful and multiply greatly” (Deut. 6:3). Most of these statutes are not kept today, for very good reasons. Most of us are not desert sojourners, for one thing. And, more compellingly, Jesus said “The law and the prophets were in effect until John came; since then, the Kingdom of God is proclaimed…” (Luke 16:16) It’s interesting to note that Jesus refined specific statutes pertaining to marriage, implying that those rules did not conform to His spiritual laws, to loving God and one’s neighbor. He said that “if you look at a woman with lust, you have committed adultery with her in your heart.” He also said that in the kingdom of heaven people “neither marry nor are given in marriage” (Luke 20:35). These statements show how higher spiritual laws overrule the specific statutes closely heeded by the Pharisees of Jesus’ time.
The New Testament contains a few references to homosexuality: all are rooted in the same passages of the “holiness code” mentioned above. Romans 1:24-32, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10 decry those who commit “sodomy” (which may also be committed by heterosexuals, and which does not define homosexual behavior) and those “men [who] giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another.” (Romans 1:27) This obvious reference to Lev. 18:22 falls under the same statutory limitation as the other laws mentioned in Leviticus, and practiced by Paul and his Jewish companions. Paul clearly states, elsewhere, that Christian Gentiles should not be bound by statutes; he specifically mentions those pertaining to food and drink, and “sabbaths”. While the injunctions in Romans 1:24-32, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10 may be read as condemning immoral sex or passion, they should not be read as condemning moral, thoughtful, prayerful practice of homosexuality.
Consider just a sampling of the other sexual laws found in Leviticus, in order to see clearly the cultural context in which they were valid: Sex with slaves is delineated (Lev. 19: 20-22 and other places); does that mean we modern Christians may have sex with slaves? Polygamy is sanctioned; yet even in the days of Jesus and Paul, it began to fall into disrepute, as when Paul amends the law by stating that a church leader must be “husband of one wife” (1 Tim. 3:12) Women were to separate themselves when menstruating and “You shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness when she is in her sexual uncleanness” (Lev. 18:19) Do modern believers sequester themselves when it’s that time of month? Then too, if “a man has an emission of semen, he shall bather his whole body in water and be unclean until the evening. Everything made of cloth or of skin on which the semen falls shall be washed with water and be unclean until the evening. If a man lies with a woman and has an emission of semen, both of them shall bather in water and be unclean until the evening” so that would involve loads of extra laundry for many modern believers, should any elect to keep this statute.
What separates the statutes, culturally appropriate to desert-dwelling tribes, from the spiritual laws, given at Sinai, reinforced by Jesus, and upheld by believers today? The spiritual laws stipulate a spirit of love toward God and neighbors. Jesus overruled “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” (Lev. 24:20), asking his Father instead to “forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.” He healed those who those zealous in the law deemed unclean; those who the lawkeepers deemed unworthy, he sat with, ate with, walked with, and saved.
When a man asked Jesus what he should do to inherit eternal life, Jesus asked what was written in the law, and the man replied: “You shall love the Lord your God withal your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself. And Jesus said to him, You have given the right answer. Do this and you shall live.” (Luke 10:27-28) Jesus did not ask the man whether he was gay; why then do some of us so fervently condemn homosexuality, when there are so many loving and needful tasks which await us?
Those who cite Scripture in condemning homosexuality, and those who seek guidance about heterosexual behavior in the Bible, tend to cite passages from Scripture which refer, explicitly or obliquely, to the Leviticus statutes defining cultural practice for ancient Israel. In Leviticus, principles underlying a believer's relationship to God are coupled with specific statutes given to the ancient people of Israel; some of these may also be found in Numbers and Deuteronomy. The statutes specifically describe behavior forbidden to the ancient Israelites. In addition, there exist a series of spiritual laws; Jesus Christ quoted the two fundamental spiritual laws given to God’s people: “ ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” (Matt. 22: 37-40) These two commandments are repeated in Deut. 6:5 and Lev. 19:18. Jesus said “Do this and you shall live.” (Lk. 10:28).
It’s very interesting that some modern readers of Scripture cite Lev. 18:22 and 20:13 as condemnation of homosexuality, implying that no believer should be gay in today’s world. Study of the context for the Leviticus statute reveals that various rules right beside that one are no longer kept by those Christians who would proscribe homosexuality on the basis of the “holiness code”. For instance, Lev. 19:19-22 forbids interbreeding of animals, and mixing of seeds in a field, practiced by many Christian farmers today. Also, most Christians probably wear clothes made of mixed fabrics (think: cotton and polyester, or linen and silk) also forbidden in these verses. Other statutes, currently ignored, include Lev. 19:26-27 which forbids eating “anything with its blood”—so much for rare or medium-rare steak. “You shall not round off the hair on your temples or mar the edges of your beard” is right in there with “you shall keep my Sabbaths and reverence my sanctuary: I am the Lord”. None of these statutes are kept by Christians nowadays.
What differentiates the spiritual laws most Christians keep from those statutes fallen into disuse? Any biblical scholar will attest to the cultural significance of the statutes, aimed at the people of Israel in a specific context as desert-dwellers during the early centuries of their identity as a people. The spiritual laws, on the other hand, embody general principles, rooted in God’s love, applicable to all people in all contexts, as made clear by Jesus Christ.
Reading the more specific statutes set forth in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, the purpose emerges clearly: to promote health among the desert sojourners, to set them apart from neighboring idolaters, and “so that you may be fruitful and multiply greatly” (Deut. 6:3). Most of these statutes are not kept today, for very good reasons. Most of us are not desert sojourners, for one thing. And, more compellingly, Jesus said “The law and the prophets were in effect until John came; since then, the Kingdom of God is proclaimed…” (Luke 16:16) It’s interesting to note that Jesus refined specific statutes pertaining to marriage, implying that those rules did not conform to His spiritual laws, to loving God and one’s neighbor. He said that “if you look at a woman with lust, you have committed adultery with her in your heart.” He also said that in the kingdom of heaven people “neither marry nor are given in marriage” (Luke 20:35). These statements show how higher spiritual laws overrule the specific statutes closely heeded by the Pharisees of Jesus’ time.
The New Testament contains a few references to homosexuality: all are rooted in the same passages of the “holiness code” mentioned above. Romans 1:24-32, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10 decry those who commit “sodomy” (which may also be committed by heterosexuals, and which does not define homosexual behavior) and those “men [who] giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another.” (Romans 1:27) This obvious reference to Lev. 18:22 falls under the same statutory limitation as the other laws mentioned in Leviticus, and practiced by Paul and his Jewish companions. Paul clearly states, elsewhere, that Christian Gentiles should not be bound by statutes; he specifically mentions those pertaining to food and drink, and “sabbaths”. While the injunctions in Romans 1:24-32, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10 may be read as condemning immoral sex or passion, they should not be read as condemning moral, thoughtful, prayerful practice of homosexuality.
Consider just a sampling of the other sexual laws found in Leviticus, in order to see clearly the cultural context in which they were valid: Sex with slaves is delineated (Lev. 19: 20-22 and other places); does that mean we modern Christians may have sex with slaves? Polygamy is sanctioned; yet even in the days of Jesus and Paul, it began to fall into disrepute, as when Paul amends the law by stating that a church leader must be “husband of one wife” (1 Tim. 3:12) Women were to separate themselves when menstruating and “You shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness when she is in her sexual uncleanness” (Lev. 18:19) Do modern believers sequester themselves when it’s that time of month? Then too, if “a man has an emission of semen, he shall bather his whole body in water and be unclean until the evening. Everything made of cloth or of skin on which the semen falls shall be washed with water and be unclean until the evening. If a man lies with a woman and has an emission of semen, both of them shall bather in water and be unclean until the evening” so that would involve loads of extra laundry for many modern believers, should any elect to keep this statute.
What separates the statutes, culturally appropriate to desert-dwelling tribes, from the spiritual laws, given at Sinai, reinforced by Jesus, and upheld by believers today? The spiritual laws stipulate a spirit of love toward God and neighbors. Jesus overruled “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” (Lev. 24:20), asking his Father instead to “forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.” He healed those who those zealous in the law deemed unclean; those who the lawkeepers deemed unworthy, he sat with, ate with, walked with, and saved.
When a man asked Jesus what he should do to inherit eternal life, Jesus asked what was written in the law, and the man replied: “You shall love the Lord your God withal your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself. And Jesus said to him, You have given the right answer. Do this and you shall live.” (Luke 10:27-28) Jesus did not ask the man whether he was gay; why then do some of us so fervently condemn homosexuality, when there are so many loving and needful tasks which await us?
posted by Vicky at 9:16 AM
3 Comments:
I see your point about the Levitical law and homosexuality. However, Leviticus is not the only book of the Bible to discourage homosexuality. Romans chapter 1 is a good reference in showing the condition of man's depravity in sin, and homosexuality is a clear example of this depravity.
Further, in the context of the entire scope of the Bible, sin is described as any action which is self-seeking rather than God-seeking. To elevate sexual desire to such a degree to welcome what is unnatural, in my opinion, is sinful.
Hi Townsmite,
Yes, we are sinners all, but that's why the power of salvation is so necessary. The point of salvation is to save us from our sins, and so we need to worship, to avoid judging our neighbors and leave the judging to God, and to arrive at a definition of sin. The Bible describes sin in many ways, more than just as self-seeking (one could, for example, describe my consumption of breakfast in the morning as self-seeking, because I seek to keep myself alive and healthy).
About Romans 1: as with most of the Bible, this passage needs study in a cultural context. Read the Oxford Study Bible, which has helpful notes on this and other passages. Paul opposed the use of temple prostitutes, which definitely falls under the heading of fornication and idolatry, whethere hetero- or homosexual. Also, it's worth noting that Paul though it inadvisable to marry, and he held many other views that we as Christians do not agree with today. Therefore it's vital, when reading the Bible, to discern between kinds of messages given by various servants of the Lord in various historical contexts. We must follow the spirit and not the letter, in such cases.
What if homosexuality is a natural condition, like heterosexuality? I believe there's evidence for this, and I believe there is no evidence in the Bible that homosexuality is sinful in itself. The Bible describes sinful heterosexual actions (rape, incest, temple prostitutes, adultery, etc) and sinful homosexual actions (rape, temple prostitutes etc). But to demonize homosexuality, as some Christians do, seems, well, unchristian!
Vicky
Hey Cruztacean,
Thanks for the comment!
In answer to your question about "music of the spheres", the phrase originates in the writings of Plato, I think. That's where I first encountered it--
Vicky
Post a Comment
<< Home