HOMOSEXUALITY - What does scripture say?
Have you seen this e-mail?
----- Original Message -----
From: xxxxx
To: "Randy Smith"
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 7:49 AM
Subject: Scripture???
Dear President Bush,
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from you and understand why you would propose and support a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage.
As you said "in the eyes of God marriage is based between a man a woman." I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination... End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some
other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them:
1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female,
provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims
that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I
own Canadians?
2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?
6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?
7. Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of
God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit
that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is
there some wiggle-room here?
8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die?
9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
Here's my response...
The author of this e-mail is correct, Leviticus
The scripture also states eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 11:10), I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight (Lev.21:20), trimming our hair around the temples is forbidden (Lev.21:20), touching the skin of a dead pig (pork, footballs) makes me unclean (Lev. 11:6-8) and wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend) can get me stoned – and I don’t mean getting high either! (Lev.24:10-16).
I have to admit the author of this e-mail makes his point loud and clear. He is appealing to our common sense that these scriptures are outdated or even outlandish so the Old Testament directive that “homosexuality is an abomination “ is just as outdated or even outlandish. I’ll give the guy credit – he’s done some homework and if you took his argument at face value, he seems to make a valid point. However, his conclusion conveniently overlooks several important facts. His homework is only halfway finished so I'd give him a D (maybe a C-).
First and most importantly, we must
remember that whenever you talk about scripture’s stand on any controversial
subject you need to talk about how to interpret Scripture.
Here’s the basic rule of scripture study: To
reach a biblical conclusion on any subject – especially a controversial or
complex subject, you must make a decision based on what I call the 4 C’s –
content, comparison, context and culture.
The two most important C’s are “content” – what does a verse or passage say and, “comparison” – what does scripture overall say. You have to look at what might be called the preponderance of evidence in Scripture, not just any one isolated passage. To take one verse – whether in or out of context - and make a doctrine or theological practice of it is wrong!
Let me say that again – to reach a biblical conclusion on any subject – especially a controversial or complex subject, you must make a decision based on the 4 C’s – content, context, culture, and comparison. Ask yourself, “What does the verse as well as the whole of scripture say? You have to look for the preponderance of evidence on controversial and complex issues.
Let me give you an example of how this works. One of the "laws" the e-mail referred to dealt with slavery. Does the Bible condone slavery. After all, in 1 Peter 2:18, Peter writes this: "Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh." Now, there are a few other verses similar to this: Ephesians 6:5 and Colossians 3:22.
In the debates about slavery in the South, for instance, 150 years ago, Southern Christians would sometimes point to these verses and say, "It’s right there in the Bible. Slaves, obey your master. The Bible is pro-slavery." And they would say the Bible is on the side of slavery. That was a real problem. The Bible never says anyplace, "Slavery is a bad institution, so get rid of it." That would have made the discussion much easier. There were a lot of people who understood the Bible to be on this side of slavery.
But on the other hand, the great
moral force behind abolition was overwhelmingly Christian. And it was Christians
like William Wilburforce in
Think about it like a giant scale. On one side of the scale, you could put verses like 1 Peter 2:18 that appear to be pro-slavery. But then they’d say on the other side of the scale, there is so much of Scripture — go back to Genesis 1 — that says, "All human beings are created in the image of God." We all carry that dignity.
Then look at the prophets — Isaiah and Amos and others — who burn with righteous indignation with God’s hatred of oppression and injustice. Look at the Book of Acts where you see this radical equality in the new community. Look at the Book of Philemon where Paul writes to Philemon: "Receive Onesimus back, not as a slave but as a dear brother."
Look at Galatians 3:28 where Paul writes, "There is now neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Christians who fought for freedom said, "If you look at the preponderance of evidence in Scripture, if you take into account the whole text, then clearly slavery is not most consistent with God’s will for the human race."
Of course, looking back on it now, we would say, "Of course that’s right. There’s nobody in here that would argue that the Bible would support a system of slavery, that the Christian faith would say, 'We ought to go back to that.' Slavery was a cultural thing."
Historically, there have been certain complex arguments. Slavery is one. The divine right of kings to rule was another that was also supported by certain people by appealing to Scripture. These people would say there’s no place where the Bible says, for example, patriarchy is a bad institution. Get rid of it. These are complex issues. The woman’s role in church leadership is another. In those complex arguments, it’s critical that you look at the preponderance of evidence in Scripture.
So then, what does the preponderance of evidence in Scripture have to say about homosexuality? Let’s look at some of the passages used by both sides of the issue:
To start with, 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.
God also condemns homosexuality in Genesis 19.
Pro-homosexuals respond that the sin of
Homosexuality is just not an Old Testament topic either. In the New Testament, Matthew 19:4-6 Jesus is speaking to the Pharisees about divorce and He says, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? "So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." In these verses, Jesus defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
Other passages in the New Testament (Romans
I should note that 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. If it were true that God is only condemning promiscuity, 90 to 99 percent of all homosexuals would fall into this category! According to recent studies, only about 1 out of 7 homosexuals have had fewer than 50 partners in their lifetime, and 99 percent of the male homosexuals interviewed have had sex with complete strangers!
Nevertheless, the context of Romans and Corinthians affirm
that homosexuality is completely unnatural (Rom.
So it’s my conclusion, based on a preponderance of evidence in scripture (content, comparison, context and culture) that homosexuality is not smiled on by God nor should it be overlooked or ignored. Homosexuality is a sinful practice BUT, as with any sin, we need to love the sinner as we help them turn from their sin. That's one of the jobs Discovery has to do!
The author of the e-mail did get one thing right. God's word is eternal and unchanging and when interpreted correctly it brings life and hope to those who would honestly and openly seek truth in its pages!
God's best!
Randy
Here's a response to each of the "laws" highlighted in the e-mail...
The Bible reflects God’s relationship with man over a period of time in a way similar to the relationship of a parent with their child over time. We would never let preschoolers play with matches or sharp knives, but as they mature we would trust them to handle these things safely and wisely as the common tools that they are. Sometimes, in a like manner, God permits us to do things that He previously forbade because He feels that we are now mature enough to deal with the challenges appropriately and safely.
God used to walk with man in the Garden of Eden making it easy to discuss the rules and to obtain direct clarification. That face-to-face relationship didn’t occur again until Jesus walked with man, clarifying the rules again, after many misconceptions and misinterpretations had arisen over thousands of years. Jesus often explained to His disciples and to the religious leaders of the day that their interpretations of God’s rules missed the point, specifically they often missed the Spirit of the law being exemplified.
In general it can be said that the New Testament replaces the Old Testament but that would be an oversimplification in answer to the questions posed in the email. Below are my thoughts on the issues raised in the email; and as Randy said, we need to bear in mind the four C’s: content, context, culture, and comparison.
§ Content: what does it he verse say literally.
§ Context: what does it say in the context of the passage/chapter.
§ Culture: what did it mean within the culture; examples from today: “I like your crib, Dog” or an idiom: “I hit a home run on my first date”.
§ Comparison: what does the whole Bible say about the subject.
1. Slavery: (see above).
2. Daughters: It should be noted that culturally (in Old Testament times), women were treated as property. However, as is always the case, Jesus changed things and He elevated women to coequal status with men in all His dealings with women and in all His teaching. We believe that when you take into account the whole of the Scripture, the clear preponderance of evidence is that God’s plan for the human race is that it be a community of men and women where they share equally in the giftings of the Holy Spirit, the image of God, and the ministry of his kingdom.
In any case, in the Old Testament times, many female slaves were concubines or secondary wives (cf. Gen. 16:3; 22:24; 30:3, 9; 36:12; Judges 8:31; 9:18). Some Hebrew fathers thought it more advantageous for their daughters to become concubines of well-to-do neighbors than to become the wives of men in their own social class. If a daughter who became a servant was not pleasing to her master she was to be redeemed by a near kinsman (cf. Lev. 25:47-54) but never sold to foreigners (Ex. 21:8); she could also redeem herself. If she married her master’s son she was to be given family status (v. 9). If the master married someone else he was required to provide his servant with three essentials: food, clothing, and shelter (marital rights probably meant living quarters, not sexual privilege). —Bible Knowledge Commentary
3. Menstrual sex: see the next item.
4. Sacrificing bulls: In the OT a system of sacrifices and offerings was established to cleanse the people from sin and to in general make them right with God. Priesthood was established (Levites & Aaron’s lineage) to administer the sacrifices and the offerings, as well as the sacrificial altar and the implements. The priests had to cleanse themselves through appropriate rites before they could minister on behalf of the people. These sacrifices had to be done often and every time that someone goofed up knowingly or unknowingly.
In this sacrificial system blood was a big deal. In fact, from the beginning of time blood was a big deal: it was blood that made Abel’s offering acceptable and the lack thereof that made Cain’s offering unacceptable. But as you noted, blood could get you into trouble as well (Lev 3:17b: you shall not eat any fat or any blood). Jesus, God incarnate, offered himself as the supreme sacrifice; the once and for all sacrifice, “and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all” (Hebrews 9:12). Hebrews chapter 9 states in detail what I am summarizing here.
5. Keeping the Sabbath holy: read Matthew chapter
12. In these verses Jesus says, "For the Son of Man
is Lord of the Sabbath." (Matt 12:8)
6. Eating shellfish: Today we tell people to eat
oysters in months without “R”. Back then they didn’t have dieticians to
guide them. God often used the KISS principle to school His children. It’s not
until Acts 10:9-16 that Apostle Peter is taught new dietary rules. Peter said,
"By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything unholy and
unclean." However, again a voice came to him a second time
saying, "What God has cleansed, no longer consider
unholy" (Acts 10:14-15).
7. Approaching the altar: Jesus makes it possible for all of us to come before God just as we are, warts and all. Read the Hebrews reference in number 2 above.
8. Haircuts: God in these series of admonitions was trying to keep the Israelites distinct from the local people. It’s funny how men handle common unimportant things: I worked on Wall Street on the day that the parading crew-cut construction men attacked and beat the longhaired hippies of my generation. Today I smile to see pony-tailed construction men and crew-cut nonconformists. What a curiosity we must be to the Angels.
9. Dead pigs: They didn’t have antibacterial cleansers, running water and throwaway paper towels back then in the dessert. God told them to keep things simple or they might have to sacrifice a bull again J
10. Multiple crops & multiple materials: The forbidden mixtures (Lev 19:19) suggest that man was not to confuse what God had made distinct. —Bible Knowledge Commentary
This last thought above brings us back to the heart of the discussion: does changing times or changing cultures today permit and condone homosexuality in the same light that we accept heterosexuality? There are loving long-lived homosexual relationships and there are far too many broken heterosexual relationships. What does God say?
Jesus in speaking to the Pharisees about divorce said, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? "So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." (Matt 19:4-6)
Jesus makes a few points here. One, God does not condone divorce for any reason.
Two, it can be argued from these verses that Jesus defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
Three and most importantly, Jesus says that marriage is very unique…two people (man and woman) become one through marriage. They become one spiritually, emotionally, and physically. Marriage is such a special mystical joining of two people that in fact there is only one reason permitted for divorce…infidelity (And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery." Matt 19:9). Infidelity tears apart this spiritual union such that God does not even recommend the remarrying of your ex-spouse after an intervening marriage.
Unfortunately homosexual relationships are not held in this same regard. There is no inseparable, spiritual bond mentioned or intimated in scripture. The contrary is inferred in 1 Cor 6:18 and a little closer to home in Jude 1:7. God didn’t bring Adam a male companion…from the beginning it was not so. When we look at homosexuality in the Bible in content, context, culture, and comparison we find that God does not endorse it.
The church is composed of sinners. God wants them/us to come to Him and repent of the sin in our life and instead emulate Jesus. To repent is to change one’s mind. God wants us to change our way of thinking to His way of thinking and to change to His way of living for our own benefit and for that of those around us. May God bless your walk to His glory.
God's best!
Carlos
Campus Pastor - Washington Township