I'm very disappointed the entire narrative was deleted because I posed questions about bibical interpretation and was looking forward to getting answers. As somebody who is not a bibical scholar, I was curious how one supports their anti-gay belief with a literal reading of scripture--e.g., previously cited passages in Leviticus and Romans--but don't literally interpret other verses. For instance, in Romans, Paul suggests that homosexuality is bad, but he also says in Corinthians that women should absolutely be silent in church. Thus, a literal reading of Paul's words would not only say that homosexuality is bad, but women shouldn't sing nor pray in church.
I also mentioned that a passage in Exodus says people who work on the Sabbath should be put to death. Why does that ignored by Christians?
Obviously, I'm suggesting that people using the Bible to condemn homosexuality are--perhaps unknowingly--reading it in such a way to suit their purposes. The historical example is southerners using the Bible to support the institution of slavery in the nineteenth century.
Tell me why I'm wrong. And if I'm wrong, what bibical passages matter and which ones can be ignored? Why does the passage in Exodus get ignored but Paul's take on homosexuality in Romans is approved? And if Paul is correct about homosexuality, why is he wrong about women being silent in the church?
Ok, with that thought in mind, we will begin a debate on homosexuality, and the morality of it.
Please be civil, and argue within the arena of ideas, not shameless emotional appeals.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
9 comments:
John, I am sorry that you are disappointed about losing what you had written and obviously had put a lot of thought into. In one sense I am not a Bible scholar, as I have not studied theology formally, however, I do study the Bible in hope of seeing what God reveals about Himself in it. When my life and the Bible don't line up, it is my life that should change and interpretation should be done prayerfully. Sometimes when I am driving I listen to a guy on the radio called "The Bible Answer Man" so I wanted to see what he said on the issue. Here is a quote from him:
"Those who advocate homosexuality use passages such as 2 Samuel 1:26 to support their position. It states that David and Jonathan had a relationship that surpassed the love of women. This is not referring to sexual love, however, but to a special friendship they had which exceeded or was different from any kind of sexual relationship. David and Jonathan would have been stoned under Levitical law had they been homosexuals (Lev. 18:22; 20:13).
God also condemns homosexuality in Genesis 19. Pro-homosexuals respond that the sin of Sodom was not homosexuality, but rape. However, the Sodomites did not initially force Lot’s male guests to have sex with them, but just by them mentioning it, Lot urged them not to do such a “wicked” thing (19:4-8). Other ancient sources such as Josephus and the New Testament (Jude 7) confirm that the sin of Sodom was homosexuality.
Additionally, Romans 1:21-32 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 clearly condemn lesbianism and homosexuality (cf., 1 Tim. 1:9, 10). Homosexual advocates reply that Romans 1 refers only to phallic cults who committed idolatry. Along with 1 Corinthians 6, they claim that God is simply condemning excessive and promiscuous sex, not a dedicated relationship between two homosexuals....Finally, the Bible condemns all types of fornication which would therefore include homosexuality (Matthew 15:19; Mark 7:21; John 8:41; Acts 15:20, 29; Gal. 5:19-21; 1 Thes. 4:3; Heb. 13:4). "
Specifically to answer what you asked in your post: I believe that Old Testament has a lot of Levitical rules addressing "outward actions", but when Christ came, he was addressing the heart. He gave a new covenant in the New Testament.
Yes,Southerners were 100% wrong to use the Bible for their own purposes. Blinded by sin can do that to anyone.
Personally, I have recently wrestled with some other spiritual issues lately and have had to go to the Bible to look up verses and then go into my room and humbly ask God to help me understand it.
As for the person who was "bashing" earlier, it just grieved me. If I were in the same room with you I would extend a hand of friendship, offer you a cup of coffee and then hopefully have the same kind of talk we are having now.
Romans 3:10 says "there is none righteous, no not one." We all have sins, the question is what are we going to do about it. We can pridefully say that we are without sin or we can humbly confess them. Knowing we will stand before God on judgement day, I know I deserve to go to hell. No question. But God sent his Son to be the sacrifice, so we don't have to go there, if we confess, believe and trust in Christ.
I don't mean to keep posting as anonymous, and one of these days will sit down and get an online identity. I am often rushed and don't want to think about it and before I know it, I have sat here for an hour reading poeple's posts!
So for now I will say "goodnight" and have to sign off as --SB again.
I forgot to say that I believe the part about women speaking in the church is taken literally but that the work actually means "speaking in authority" or teaching in the church.So that is taken literally by many Christians. I think....and will look it up in the original and get back to you in a couple days on that.
--SB
Thank you for conversing with me. I have been thinking a lot about this conversation. I used the Bible Answer man as a reference because I have heard him answer wisely on quite a few topics on his radio show, but not because I think what he is so much smarter than anyone. I don't even he claims that. He has just studied a lot.
I have looked at those OT verses and they seem to be under the Old Law of ancient Israel. Yes, they seem harsh. The Old Testament teaches us history, teaches us about God's faithfullness to Israel and gives us the old law.In Hebrews 7 is says that "the law made nothing perfect and on the other hand, there is a bringing in of a better hope.....so much the more also Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant." In the New Testament when Jesus is having his last meal with the disciples he says of the cup of wine "this is the new covenant" ---representing his blood and the sacrifice he was about to make. (That is in Luke 22:20) and then again in 2 Cor 3:4-18 it talks more about the New Covenant.
In the New Testament, Romans 1 does clearly say that homosexuality. It is one of several sins listed...and is followed by chapter 2 which condemn jusgemental moralists. So what I am saying is yes, I think the Bible is clear in saying that homosexuality is a sin, along with greed, gossipiing, pride, etc. My point being, we are all sinners in need of a Savior.
I gotta go for now--take care. --SB
Sorry, I meant to say "Romans 1 does clearly say that homosexuality is wrong."
Stop beating a dead horse. Some will just not accept that homosexuality is acceptable. If there is to be productive debate it should be centered on how to deal with the real fact that homosexuals are in our society and how public policy should deal with it. lets just take as a given some people will always see it as immoral.
I really think SUVs are immoral, but I have stopped running around with my hair on fire over it.
feetman, i agree that some people are always going to disagree with the homosexual lifestyle, but why should that preclude a spirited biblical debate? i think john is raising some interesting questions here that should be explored before we move on to public policy.
i, myself, was raised catholic and struggled for a long time to reconcile my faith and my sexuality. in the end, i could not deny who i was, nor could i believe that the god of love and forgiveness i saw in the bible would turn away from me because of my identity. to me, faith and spirituality have always had much more to do with love and joy than with hellfire and damnation. there are plenty of conflicting stories and images of god in the bible: god as father and protector vs. god as judge and jury, and each member among the faithful must choose his or her own interpretation. this was mine.
to those who deny the bible must be interpreted, who say there is but one meaning and one true way, i say this: this is the book of the christian faith. when you simplify its lessons into easily digestible soundbites and accept the rhetoric of those human beings in power who think they have all the answers, you diminish the complexity of that faith. in my mind, to question, to challenge, to debate, to probe the bible in pursuit of truth is a noble and worthy cause.
I know elizabeth. It just really causes tired-head.
You are also opening up the "interpretation" issue that is also inclined to cause "tired-head".
Indeed Elizabeth, the "God of love and forgiveness" does not turn away from homosexuals. He desires a relationship with each of us based on love. Jesus said "if you love me you will obey my commands (John 14:15)". However, when we don't obey His commands we break that relationship. One of those commands is "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Corinthians 6:9-10)".
I agree that we shouldn't reduce the bible to soundbites, nor should we rely on 'those in power'. We should most definitely question, ponder and research to find the truth of the bible. The thing that think we differ on is that I believe there is only one truth whereas it seems you feel there is more than one meaning and one true way.
Anyway, that's my two cents. I really like the way you are conducting this discussion reasonably and respectfully.
Hi All-
I thought if anyone is really interested about the word ,"homosexual" came from in the Greek. It comes from the word :malakos which means (catamite) a boy who is kept for sexual relations to a man, a male prostitue, a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness. It also means effeminite.
As for being looking to the Bible for absolute truth. Here is my 2 cents: On many issues there is one right answer and many wrong answers. (2+2=4, not 55, not 90, etc. One right answer and many wrong answers. Who is President of the USA? Again, one right answer, many wrong. So, when it comes to eternity, there is one right answer. There are some areas that the Bible is not so clear (piercings, drinking wine) and it is open for interpretation, but often it is clear and when we don't want to accept what it says, we say it is unclear.
Any dogmatism from Christians should be coming from a love for people and a heartfelt desire to know that those people will spend eternity in heaven instead of hell.
Thanks, John and Elizabeth, for being open to conversation. It is really nice to be challenged in what I believe and have the opportunity to discuss.
--SB
Post a Comment