One of the subjects that seem to be tearing the church and society apart today is the issue of homosexuality. The purpose of this essay is to look at the passages that are often quoted by those that believe that God condemns homosexuality and why those that make such claims are wrong.

Use of Biblical Texts

While biblical interpretation is not the subject of this essay it is necessary to point out, as I have elsewhere, that the Plenary Inerrant method is clearly wrong and is not my intent. God did not whisper, like the little cartoon shoulder angels, into the ears of the writers of the bible. Nor do I believe in proof-texting (where one seeks out biblical texts to prove preconceived beliefs). That being said, I do quote the biblical texts heavily in this essay as I do in the others on this site. This is because the biblical texts, being at the center of Christianity, are to be taken seriously and therefore must be addressed in any discussion of the faith.

Claims Based on the Old Testament

The story of Sodom and Gomorrah has often been quoted as a condemnation of homosexuality. It’s very important to note that the citizens were going to rape the visitors. In fact if we are to look at this story for a moral lesson on the "evils of homosexuality" then it would appear as though it was also a justification of the rape of women since Lot gave his daughters to the mob. No one who defends the rights of homosexuals would try to justify rape, homosexual or straight. Sodom and Gomorrah is a story of cruelty and violence, not of the "evils of homosexuality".

In Deuteronomy 23:17 we read, "There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel." At first glance this verse seems to be a clear condemnation of at least male homosexuality. But upon a closer look at the original wording we read something very different. The Hebrew word translated as "whore" in this verse is "qedeshaw" and the Hebrew word "qodesh" which is rendered as "sodomite" in this verse. "Qodesh" is the masculine form of "qedeshaw". This verse is a reference to the male and female pagan cult prostitutes and not of modern homosexual relationships.

To what degree should we follow Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13? Throughout the Old Testament there are many passages which are not followed by even the strictest literalists. In Deuteronomy 23:1 we read: "He whose testicles are crushed or whose male member is cut off shall not enter the assembly of the Lord". Leviticus also describes menstruating women as an "abomination". Would those who would condemn homosexuality also agree with the biblical writers about menstruating women? The Old Testament also restricts priests from having a "blemish" (Leviticus 21:17). A blemish was defined among other things as being blind, lame, have a mutilated face, being hunchback, dwarf, having scabs or crushed testicles (Leviticus 21:18-20). None of these restrictions were reversed by the New Testament. If one is not to follow Leviticus 21 or Deuteronomy 23 then why should one follow Leviticus 18:22 or Leviticus 20:13?

Claims Based on the New Testament

In Corinthians 6:9-10 we are given a long list of those who are the "unrighteous". There are two Greek words used here that have been translated in various ways. The words are "malakoi" and "arsenokoitoi". The New American Standard translates them as "effeminate" and "homosexual" respectively. Again let us look closely at the original words. "Malakoi" translates literally as "soft" and by extension as "effeminate". In several pagan texts the word is used in association with a call-boy, or male prostitute. The word "arsenokoitoi" is made up of two words. "arsen" = male and "koite" = bed. Because in the Greek the emphasis is on the second part of a word "arsenokoitoi" translates literally as "lying with a male" or "one who lies with a male". If "malakoi" points to the effeminate call-boy then the "arsenokoitoi" is the active partner who visits the call-boy. The lifestyle of the modern gay community is not the issue in this verse. It is instead a criticism of male prostitution.

It is Romans 1:26-27 that is used the most against homosexuals.  Both the term "male lying with male" and the word "shame" (askemosune) were used by Philo in this reference to pederasty. One should also note the great similarity between this passage and Deuteronomy 23:17. The similarities are simply too great to be ignored. Finally there is the reference to "receiving the punishment". This very well may be a reference to the various venereal diseases that are common among prostitutes. It was widely known at that time, as it is today, that prostitutes were carriers of diseases and that their "johns" often became infected. They in turn bring these infections home to their wives. It is fair to say then that Romans 1:26-27 is referencing to pederasty and cult prostitution rather than a modern homosexual relationship.

The last passage in the New Testament is 1 Timothy 1:9-10. The words in question in this passage are "immoral persons" and "sodomites". These two words in their original Greek are "pornoi" and "arsenokoitoi". The first word will probably look familiar because it shares the same root as the modern English word "pornography". It is used to mean either male prostitute or a sexual criminal in general. The second word "arsenkoitoi" as we have seen means the "john" of a male prostitute. Therefore it only makes since that this verse is referencing to the practice of male prostitution not a modern relationship, homosexual or otherwise.

Slavery and the Bible

At this point I want to stress that while the above analysis is sound there is always a danger whenever we try to analyze the biblical texts.  There is always a risk of unintentionally slipping into the trap of Plenary Inerrancy, which is the same historical error made by conservatives over the centuries.

A good example of this danger is to look at how Christians have historically handled the issue of slavery and the bible.  In Colossians 3:22 we read, "Slaves, in all things obey those who are your masters on earth, not with external service, as those who merely please men, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord.” This verse was historically used by slave masters to try to force obedience by their slaves.  Add to that the many Old Testament passages in support of slavery and which claim that a slave is nothing but property. There were those Christians in the past that refused to call slavery a sin because of these very passages and others that justified slavery using these verses. They used the same logic as those who today who use even the fewer number of passages to condemn gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered.

Conclusion

Those today that would condemn an entire group of people for their sexual orientation based on a few passages are as wrong as those who used the bible to condone slavery. It's time for the Church to acknowledge that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered relationships are sanctified by God just as heterosexual relationships are.