Homosexuality

Homosexuality is a sin according to the Bible. What texts within the Bible are the sources for this and what related texts can add context for this denouncement?

This is not an argument for or against homosexuality being permissible in Protestant Christianity. Rather this page seeks to explore what the Bible and related texts say about homosexuality and how these texts have been interpreted by different groups throughout history. At this time this page is mostly just me listing relevant texts and noting ideas for research along with my own thoughts. Eventually I hope to clean up all of this and have sources for everything rather than me just saying stuff.

## Texts

### Genesis

The men of Sodom attempt to rape two male strangers.

"19 The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When he saw them, he got up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground. 2 “My lords,” he said, “please turn aside to your servant’s house. You can wash your feet and spend the night and then go on your way early in the morning.”

“No,” they answered, “we will spend the night in the square.”

3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate. 4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house. 5 They called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.”

6 Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him 7 and said, “No, my friends. Don’t do this wicked thing. 8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don’t do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof.”

9 “Get out of our way,” they replied. “This fellow came here as a foreigner, and now he wants to play the judge! We’ll treat you worse than them.” They kept bringing pressure on Lot and moved forward to break down the door.

10 But the men inside reached out and pulled Lot back into the house and shut the door. 11 Then they struck the men who were at the door of the house, young and old, with blindness so that they could not find the door.

12 The two men said to Lot, “Do you have anyone else here—sons-in-law, sons or daughters, or anyone else in the city who belongs to you? Get them out of here, 13 because we are going to destroy this place. The outcry to the Lord against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it.”"

Genesis 19:1-13

Sodomites is the term born from the name of Sodom for men who have sex with men. Little more needs to be said about the historical association between this story, homosexuality and God's judgment of it.

"And among the prophets of Jerusalem I have seen something horrible: They commit adultery and live a lie. They strengthen the hands of evildoers, so that not one of them turns from their wickedness. They are all like Sodom to me; the people of Jerusalem are like Gomorrah.”"

Jeremiah 23:14

It is interesting to see what other parts of Hebrew scripture say about Sodom. Jeremiah, in comparing Jerusalem of his day to Sodom says of Israel and by implication, Sodom that they commit adultry, and live a lie, and that they strengthen the had of evildoers and no one turns away from being wicked.

"“‘Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy."

Ezekiel 16:49

I have seen this verse used to claim that the sin Sodom was punished for was being arrogant, gluttonous, and apathetic. Noticeably absent from this list is any kind of sexual sin. The claim being that God didn't punish Sodom for being homosexual but rather for these other things. I would rebut with the preceding verse in Jeremiah that at least implies a sexual sin and also the following passage in Jude.

### Jude

"Though you already know all this, I want to remind you that the Lord[c] at one time delivered his people out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe. 6 And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. 7 In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.

8 In the very same way, on the strength of their dreams these ungodly people pollute their own bodies, reject authority and heap abuse on celestial beings."

Jude 1:5-8

This author clearly sees the sin of Sodom as sexual and has compiled it here in a list of errors and God's punishment of those errors warning the audience not to likewise err.

It is likely premature to say it here- but based upon my previous studies- it is a fools errand to try and prove that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality. At best the Protestant canon is negative when it mentions the topic (except with the Centurion) and at it's worse- it is comically graphic in its depiction of people who give themselves over to this sin.

### Leviticus

Leviticus features the command forbidding a man from having sex with a man twice and declares the penalty for doing so as death.

Leviticus 18:22

Allegedly the context of this command (being nestled between a command against killing babies and bestiality) insinuates that lying with a man as with a woman is equivalent to infanticide. I need to do research and find sources but I have encountered the idea of the homunculus. The idea that ancient peoples who did not yet understand how reproduction worked believed that all the descendants of a man were in his seed. That his children were within him as little proto-people and that all a woman provided was a fertile soil for him to plant his seed in. And so spilling a man's seed or planting it in any soil the seed could not grow in- i.e. animals, or men, was killing the homunculus- killing an infant.

Obviously if that is the only reason that Leviticus has for forbidding same-sex intercourse than it is a rather silly reason. Sperm is alive but it is a single cell carrying DNA that when merged with an egg will grow into a person. If we are precipitating our prohibition of same-sex relationships upon ancient science that we long ago learned to be false then... what reason is there to continue prohibiting it?

It could be argued that while the author of Leviticus or it's immediate audience may have had this mistaken idea- God would have known the truth- as the creator- and merely presented the command in this way- in this context- so as best to have the Israelites understand and obey but there is a real reason that God made this command and we have to trust that God made this command because he knows what is best for us- even if we may not understand biology then or now- we certainly do not understand it as well as God does.

I gently ask: Where is the line? At what point do we stop hand-waving things that don't make sense and keep making excuses for the parts of the Bible that clearly meant something very different from what we are twisting them to say today? What hermeneutic is most accurate? If we can only understand what the Bible means by first understanding the ancient culture, geography, science, economy and other contexts it was written into then why don't we do that? Instead we take everything we know today, our science and ethics, our culture, and all of our religious traditions and teachings- and we cram all of that back into the Bible.

Angels are a trite but good example of how the ancient context was lost, ignored, and now actively fought against as heretical. But which is heresy? The original understanding of a scripture or the new? Religions evolve over time. Beliefs evolve. I don't expect anyone to be O.K. with that. But I wish more people would open up to seeing scripture with less of a vice grip on what they believe it says. Maybe it's not important. Maybe I'm wrong. But when war, genocide, slavery, misogamy, or cruelty are supported by your understanding of a scripture that you say is the moral guide... I don't know. I doubt this part of the wiki is the place for these musings. I'll come back later and clean these out.

Leviticus 20:13

It may be said that this and the rest of the Old Testament Law is not applicable to Christians as Christians are not Israelites and they are under the New Covenant and the only laws that Christians have to follow are the ones explicitly stated in the New Testament. This is a debate that has many opinions and I will not attempt to wade into that discussion here. I will only say that this prohibition is in Leviticus and that the New Testament does forbid sexually immorality on numerous occasions and while that term may seem relatively ill-defined in the NT- if you want a good idea of what the Jewish authors that were using it in the NT meant by it- I'd suggest looking at their Jewish law- which is in Leviticus. I expect that they were thinking of all the sexual taboos therein.

### Judges

A woman is enslaved, gang-raped, murdered, mutilated and used to start a war.

1 In those days Israel had no king.

Now a Levite who lived in a remote area in the hill country of Ephraim took a concubine from Bethlehem in Judah. 2 But she was unfaithful to him. She left him and went back to her parents’ home in Bethlehem, Judah. After she had been there four months, 3 her husband went to her to persuade her to return. He had with him his servant and two donkeys. She took him into her parents’ home, and when her father saw him, he gladly welcomed him. 4 His father-in-law, the woman’s father, prevailed on him to stay; so he remained with him three days, eating and drinking, and sleeping there.

5 On the fourth day they got up early and he prepared to leave, but the woman’s father said to his son-in-law, “Refresh yourself with something to eat; then you can go.” 6 So the two of them sat down to eat and drink together. Afterward the woman’s father said, “Please stay tonight and enjoy yourself.” 7 And when the man got up to go, his father-in-law persuaded him, so he stayed there that night. 8 On the morning of the fifth day, when he rose to go, the woman’s father said, “Refresh yourself. Wait till afternoon!” So the two of them ate together.

9 Then when the man, with his concubine and his servant, got up to leave, his father-in-law, the woman’s father, said, “Now look, it’s almost evening. Spend the night here; the day is nearly over. Stay and enjoy yourself. Early tomorrow morning you can get up and be on your way home.” 10 But, unwilling to stay another night, the man left and went toward Jebus (that is, Jerusalem), with his two saddled donkeys and his concubine.

11 When they were near Jebus and the day was almost gone, the servant said to his master, “Come, let’s stop at this city of the Jebusites and spend the night.”

12 His master replied, “No. We won’t go into any city whose people are not Israelites. We will go on to Gibeah.” 13 He added, “Come, let’s try to reach Gibeah or Ramah and spend the night in one of those places.” 14 So they went on, and the sun set as they neared Gibeah in Benjamin. 15 There they stopped to spend the night. They went and sat in the city square, but no one took them in for the night.

16 That evening an old man from the hill country of Ephraim, who was living in Gibeah (the inhabitants of the place were Benjamites), came in from his work in the fields. 17 When he looked and saw the traveler in the city square, the old man asked, “Where are you going? Where did you come from?”

18 He answered, “We are on our way from Bethlehem in Judah to a remote area in the hill country of Ephraim where I live. I have been to Bethlehem in Judah and now I am going to the house of the Lord.[a] No one has taken me in for the night. 19 We have both straw and fodder for our donkeys and bread and wine for ourselves your servants—me, the woman and the young man with us. We don’t need anything.”

20 “You are welcome at my house,” the old man said. “Let me supply whatever you need. Only don’t spend the night in the square.” 21 So he took him into his house and fed his donkeys. After they had washed their feet, they had something to eat and drink.

22 While they were enjoying themselves, some of the wicked men of the city surrounded the house. Pounding on the door, they shouted to the old man who owned the house, “Bring out the man who came to your house so we can have sex with him.”

23 The owner of the house went outside and said to them, “No, my friends, don’t be so vile. Since this man is my guest, don’t do this outrageous thing. 24 Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But as for this man, don’t do such an outrageous thing.”

25 But the men would not listen to him. So the man took his concubine and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go. 26 At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight.

27 When her master got up in the morning and opened the door of the house and stepped out to continue on his way, there lay his concubine, fallen in the doorway of the house, with her hands on the threshold. 28 He said to her, “Get up; let’s go.” But there was no answer. Then the man put her on his donkey and set out for home.

29 When he reached home, he took a knife and cut up his concubine, limb by limb, into twelve parts and sent them into all the areas of Israel. 30 Everyone who saw it was saying to one another, “Such a thing has never been seen or done, not since the day the Israelites came up out of Egypt. Just imagine! We must do something! So speak up!”

Judges 19:1-29

This story hits me harder than the story of Sodom. It is a tough account to read and the coldness of the delivery does little to help. However this is one of the few stories that mentions homosexuality. When I first read it I was astonished at its similarity to the story of Sodom. Regardless of how one wishes to explain the similarity it makes me wonder how common this kind of interaction was in the ancient near east. When a strange man came into town- was it common that the men of that town sought to sexually dominate the stranger? Is this a way of letting the stranger know that they have no power here?

Of course it could be suggested that the men of Sodom and the Benjamites were just that lustful and that they just wanted to have sex with the newest thing.

Either way it is bizarre that this happens twice in scripture.

Research needs to be done into other examples of this happening in the ancient near east and how Israel viewed the act of a man having sex with a man.

If it were not for the commandment's placement in Leviticus it could almost be argued that the prohibition of a man lying with a man was strictly to prevent the abuse of aliens- strangers- visitors. Other nations dominate guests in their land. We do not.

### Samuel

It has become common amongst LGBTQ+ readers of scripture to read the relationship between David and Johnathan as homoerotic. Obviously this reading is dismissed by conservative Christians and the accusation is made of reading one's own agenda into scripture. Given the rest of the hebrew scripture's aversion to homosexuality I doubt that David and Jonathan's relationship would have been favorably portrayed if it was homosexual and if it was homosexual that God and his prophets would have failed to call it out as sinful. Unless the Levitical law was established after the story of David had been recorded and there was a hypothetical period during which the people of Canaan had a more favorable view of same sex relations or at least a neutral opinion. But that idea is working inside the assumption that David was at least in part a legendary figure rather than historical and that the Torah and it's laws were not codified until during or after the Babylonian exile and was largely created to set themselves apart from the other peoples in Canaan. This is not an idea that conservative Christians would likely entertain even being suggested much less explored.

"After David had finished talking with Saul, Jonathan became one in spirit with David, and he loved him as himself."

1 Samuel 18:1

the rest

### 1 Kings

1 Kings 15:12

What do we know about the male shrine prostitutes? What gods and cultures used male prostitutes' in shrines?

### Romans

Romans 1:18-32

Romans 13:8-10

### 1 Corinthians

1 Corinthians 6:9-20

1 Corinthians 7:2

### Mark

Mark 10:6-9

**John**

The Faith of the Centurion with a "Pais"

John 8:7-11

Matthew 8:5-13 and Luke 7:10

In the story of the centurion that asks Jesus to heal his servant the word "pais" is what we translate as servant. This word allegedly is used of a younger male slave who is used for sex. The implication being claimed by LGBTQ+ readers is that Jesus in not condemning this relationship is thereby affirming it. This is a risky claim because the idea of an older man having a young boy sex slave is obviously unacceptable today but in the desire to have a positive story of same sex love in the Bible- this story is uncritically portrayed as a positive relationship. Proof that Jesus himself did not teach that homosexuality was wrong- rather that was a later imposition by teachers like Paul.

As Jesus does not directly address the relationship the centurion had with his "pais" I would argue that this passage is irrelevant in an argument about whether or not same-sex marriage is allowed for Christians. An absence of a condemnation may seem like acceptance but Jesus was not in the business of correcting the life-styles of gentiles. Look through all of the gospels and you will find that not only does Jesus rarely interact with gentiles but he never condemns their actions to their face outside of telling his disciples not to pray by babbling as the pagans do. Because Jesus didn't march into the Decapolis and start screaming fire and brimstone didn't mean he approved of the lives the pagans lived.

This is an interesting piece of trivia but it only amounts to evidence that the Romans practiced homosexual and pedophilic slavery in the first century.

## Thoughts

Protestant Christianity

I suppose what I really mean is conservative or fundamentalist protestant Christianity. I come from a fairly conservative- maybe fundamentalist, protestant Christian background.

In my exploration of this topic the idea of a Christian not believing that the Bible is the final authority, or not believing that the Bible is inerrant is foreign to me. I have difficulty wrapping my head around the concept. It just can't be. Even though I now often call myself an atheist the idea of a liberal Christian is strange to me. I endeavor to understand that point of view more. I wonder how common these Christians are. I do not think I have ever met any in person- or if I did- I likely dismissed them as "not really Christians." I fear I would be inclined to do so even now- as an atheist. It's either all or nothing. You have no right to call yourself a Christian. You don't do this. You don't believe that. As is I am the authority on who is and isn't a Christian.

I am of the opinion that if a Protestant Christian holds to in inerrancy and authority of the Bible and they are well-informed on the Bible- that they cannot honestly believe that it is not a sin for two people of the same sex to have sex even if they are married. Even if one believes that the OT law does not apply because of the New Covenant the New Covenant forbids sexual immorality (constantly) and to understand what the Jewish authors meant by sexual immorality one should turn to Leviticus for a good idea of what they meant. Additionally Paul makes it clear in Romans that at the very least- same sex intercourse is unnatural and is painted very negatively. And the new testament describes marriage as between a man and his wife. So same sex marriage/intercourse is a sin, not permissible for Christians- and implicitly anyone else.

However, I have heard that there are some Christians who- to varying degrees- do not believe in the inerrancy or authority of scripture or even in God himself. Rather they are more comfortable with dropping parts of scripture as "cultural" or "of the time" when such passages and the teachings they contain are seen as morally reprehensible. To the extreme of this group- there are some who would say that all of scripture except for God himself is metaphorical or illustrative. The tangible truth is that of God and how he wishes for us to treat one another- but that the stories and teachings are symbolic not literal. There are varying degrees and versions of these ideas- like- all of the events in the bible did happen literally- however there is room to think that perhaps some errors or insidious alterations did make their way into the text. All the way to- God himself is not real- and by extension- almost nothing in the Bible is in a strictly historical sense- but the Bible does represent a large and vibrant faith tradition that can be used as a framework for introspection and relationships. But when part of the framework doesn't make sense- we acknowledge it for what it is- a product of humans in a foreign and ancient culture that despite their best attempts got science wrong and often fell short of the moral standards we have today.

In those contexts- a Christian is essentially free to believe whatever they want- so far as they and their group are able to satisfactorily (to themselves) reason out how that belief makes sense.

Though I suppose it could be argued that any Christian is capable of bending their theology to allow or support whatever positions they like. It's just that we tend to allow our particular type of Christianity to bend the bible and our theology to whatever or type of Christianity teaches rather than allow the bible to speak for itself.

This topic is a big one for me. I grew up as a conservative protestant Christian and as I grew up I had same-sex and heterosexual encounters as a young child and later experienced same-sex attraction. I loved God but I also secretly struggled with this interest in men. In college these two aspects of myself finally began to collide. Never before had I allowed myself to even acknowledge that I was gay. Somehow despite the attraction I felt I was never gay in my mind. I crossed that line with a guy for the first time since I was 7 and I secretly began to date him. About 2 years later- I couldn't take it and I just told everyone that I was Christian and I was attracted to guys and that I was ashamed of both. I broke up with my boyfriend to be a good Christian- to do the right thing- to stop hurting him by sinning with him. I accidentally inspired a gay friend to similarly renounce homosexuality in favor of living for God. My new friend and I slept together. But we resolved to confess and he was baptized, then he moved away. Then I was counseled to cut all ties with guys that made me struggle. I had been trying to understand why God forbid same-sex marriage- and I hadn't intended to sound like I was decided- but that was how my friend heard me. But I guess I hadn't decided- no matter how much I wanted to be a good Christian- I couldn't do it. For love of God- I just got sadder and angrier. Until I had to go to therapy because I could feel myself turning into a person I didn't want to be. It was too late. I was depressed and bi-polar and really insecure. And what the Bible had to say about homosexuality and why it said it just didn't make any sense. And recently I was learning about that much of the OT probably didn't happen and that some Christians were comfortable going on being Christians believing that while other's refused to acknowledge the possibility that part of scripture was fiction not history. How could large chunks of the Bible be fictitious but the God they teach about be real? It didn't make sense. And my mentor at church moved away. And the people I tried to reach out to for help- didn't want to mentor me. and the person that did end up mentoring me- he tried his best- but I guess it wasn't what I needed.

I learned that my ex-boyfriend was in a new relationship and it devastated me.

I decided that I needed to take some time away from the church. I didn't know if it was true anymore. The more I looked- the less I was certain that most things could be known. But for the first time ever- I allowed myself to consider for a moment- what if God wasn't real? What if I could just be me?

It was a scary feeling. But it was also a good feeling.

It is tough not having a church family anymore. And when I try to spend time with church people- I am not comfortable- I feel like I am lying if I try to fit in.

It is also tough finding a reason to motivate myself to grow and to be charitable- to be selfless.

Life can be directionless and meaningless without a cosmic story to anchor you. But I cannot live a lie. I must be honest. Even though- I tend to be quite dishonest when it comes to trying to make people happy. Trying to please others- do what I think they want or expect of me.

I don't know. Life is complicated. But it's also very simple.

Just be me. It's O.K.

I don't care. It isn't true- I care a lot and probably too much- but maybe I should endeavor to care less. To worry less.