From: gerber@solbourne.com (Andrew Gerber)
Subject: Re: need good bible arguments AGAINST the anti-gay passages
Organization: Solbourne Computer, Inc., Longmont, CO
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 21:56:53 GMT

In article <1992Aug21.204615.11457@lclark.edu> klotz@lclark.edu (Gretchen Klotz) writes:
>In article <1992Aug20.211139.15881@cis.ohio-state.edu> amz@iguana.cis.ohio-state.edu (Arnold M Zwicky) writes:
>>those of you who are trying to confront those who use the bible
>>as a weapon against gay people might be able to use the fine
>>piece on the new york times op-ed page this monday: "homophobic?
>>re-read your bible" by Peter J. Gomes, an American Baptist minister
>>and professor of Christian morals at Harvard.
>>
>>arnold
>
>Arnold, you tease, couldn't you type it in for those of us who've already
>recycled our NYT?  Or could anyone else, please???  Thanks!
>
>BB,
>
>- Gretchen

This was sent to me today; it's great article, although I think the
writer meant Colorado rather than Maine in the second paragraph.

Andy

-----------------------------------------------------------
"Homophobic? Re-read your bible", by Rev. Peter J. Gomes
New York Times, 17 August 1992, Op-Ed section

[Peter J. Gomes, an American Baptist minister, is professor of
Christian morals at Harvard.]

Opposition to gays' civil rights has become one of the most visible
symbols of American civic conflict this year, and religion has become
the weapon of choice. The army of the discontented, eager for clear
villains and simple solutions and ready for a crusade in which
political self-interest and social anxiety can be cloaked in
morality, has found hatred of homosexuality to be the last
respectable prejudice of the century.

Ballot initiatives in Oregon and Maine would deny homosexuals the
protection of civil rights laws. The Pentagon has steadfastly refused
to allow gays into the armed forces. Vice President Dan Quayle is
crusading for "traditional family values". And Pat Buchanan, who is
scheduled to speak at the Republican National Convention this evening
[Aug 17], regards homosexuality as the litmus test of moral purity.

Nothing has illuminated this crusade more effectively than a work of
fiction, "The Drowning of Stephan Jones", by Bette Greene. Preparing
for her novel, Ms Greene interviewed more than 400 young men
incarcerated for gay-bashing, and scrutinized their case studies. In
an interview published in "The Boston Globe" this spring, she said
she found that gay-bashers generally saw nothing wrong in what they
did, and, more often than not, said their religious leaders and
traditions sanctioned their behavior. One convicted teen-age
gay-basher told her that the pastor of his church had said,
"Homosexuals represent the devil, Satan", and that the Rev. Jerry
Falwell had echoed that charge.

Christians opposed to political and social equality for homosexuals
nearly always appeal to the moral injunctions of the Bible, claiming
that Scripture is very clear on the matter and citing verses that
support their opinion. They accuse others of perverting and
distorting texts contrary to their "clear" meaning. They do not,
however, necessarily see quite as clear a meaning in biblical
passages on economic conduct, the burdens of wealth and the sin of
greed.

Nine biblical citations are customarily invoked as relating to
homosexuality. Four (Deuteronomy 23:17, I Kings 14:24, I Kings 22:46
and II Kings 23:7 ) simply forbid prostitution, by men and women.

Two others (Leviticus 18:19-23 and Leviticus 20:10-16) are part of
what biblical scholars call the Holiness Code. The code explicitly
bans homosexual acts. But it also prohibits eating raw meat, planting
two different kinds of seed in the same field and wearing garments
with two different kinds of yarn. Tattoos, adultery and sexual
intercourse during a woman's menstrual period are similarly outlawed.

There is no mention of homosexuality in the four Gospels of the New
Testament. The moral teachings of Jesus are not concerned with the
subject.

Three reference from St. Paul are frequently cited (Romans 1:26-2:1,
I Corinthans 6:9-11 and I Timothy 1:10). But St. Paul was concerned
with homosexuality only because in Greco-Roman culture it represented
a secular sensuality that was contrary to his Jewish-Christian
spiritual idealism. He was against lust and sensuality in anyone,
including heterosexuals. To say that homosexuality is bad because
homosexuals are tempted to do morally doubtful things is to say that
heterosexuality is bad because heterosexuals are likewise tempted.
For St. Paul, anyone who puts his or her interest ahead of God's is
condemned, a verdict that falls equally upon everyone.

And lest we forget Sodom and Gomorrah, recall that the story is not
about sexual perversion and homosexual practice. It is about
inhospitality, according to Luke 10:10-13, and failure to care for
the poor, according to Ezekiel 16:49-50: "Behold, this was the
iniquity of they sister Sodom, pride, fullness of breadm and
abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did
she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy". To suggest that Sodom
and Gomorrah is about homosexual sex is an analysis of about as much
worth as suggesting that the story of Jonah and the whale is a
treatise on fishing.

Part of the problem is a question of interpretation. Fundamentalists
and literalists, the storm troopers of the religious right, are
terrified  that Scripture, "wrongly interpreted", may separate them
from their values. That fear stems from their own recognition that
their "values" are not derived from Scripture, as they publicly
claim.

Indeed, it is through the lens of their own prejudices and personal
values that they "read" Scripture and cloak their own views in its
authority. We all interpret Scripture: make no mistake. And no one
truly is a literalist, despite the pious temptation. The questions
are, by what principle of interpretation do we proceed, and by what
means do re reconcile "what it meant then" to "what it means now".

These matters are far to important to be left to scholars and
seminarians alone. Our ability to judge ourselves and others rests on
our ability to interpret Scripture intelligently. The right use of
the Bible, an exercise as old as the church itself, means that we
confront our prejudices rather than merely confirm them.

For Christians, the principle by which Scripture is read is nothing
less than an appreciation of the work and will of God as revealed in
that of Jesus. To recover a liberating and inclusive Christ is to be
freed from the semantic bondage that makes us curators of a dead
culture rather than creatures of a new creation.

Religious fundamentalism is dangerous because it cannot accept
ambiguity and diversity and is therefore inherently intolerant. Such
intolerance, in the name of virtue, is ruthless and uses political
power to destroy what it cannot convert.

It is dangerous, especially in America, because it is anti-democratic
and is suspicious of "the other", in whatever form that "other" might
appear. To maintain itself, fundamentalism must always define "the
other" as deviant.

But the chief reason that fundamentalism is dangerous is that, at the
hands of the Rev. Pat Robertson, the Rev. Jerry Falwell and hundreds
of lesser-known but equally worrisome clerics, preachers and pundits,
it uses Scripture to encourage ordinarily good people to act upon
their fears rather than their virtues.

Fortunately, those who speak for the religious right do not speak for
all American Christians, and the Bible is not theirs alone to
interpret. The same Bible that the advocates of slavery used to
protect their wicked self-interests is the Bible that inspired slaces
to revolt and their liberators to action.

The same Bible that the predecessors of Mr. Falwell and Mr. Robertson
used to keep white churches white is the source of the inspiration of
the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and the social reformation of the
1960s. 

The same Bible that anti-feminists used to keep women silent in the
churches is the Bible that preaches liberation to captives and says
that in Christ there is neither male nor female, slave nor free.

And the same Bible that on the basis of an archaic social code of
ancient Israel and a tortured reading of Paul is used to condemn all
homosexuals and homosexual behavior includes metaphors of redemption,
renewal, inclusion and love - principles that invite homosexuals to
accept their freedom and responsibility in Christ and demands that
their fellow Christians accept them as well.

The political piety of the fundamentalist religious right must not be
exercised at the expense of our precious freedoms. And in this summer
of our discontent, one of the most precious freedoms for which we
must all fight is freedom from this last prejudice.
                 ------Here Endeth the Reading--------





-- 
/-----------------------------------------------------------------/
/ Andy Gerber		     / gerber@solbourne.com               /
/-----------------------------------------------------------------/