In my last post, I decided that citing the story of Sodom and Gomorrah was not a good way to "prove" that God hates homosexuality. While I do stand by that, I can understand why it's often used as a clobber passage. If we were to interpret the way so many conservative homophobes have over the years, it essentially says that God will destroy you and your home if you are gay. I can't really think of a harsher warning than that. If someone really wanted to scare someone away from being gay (as if that was possible), threatening them with fire falling out of the sky sounds like a good way to do so. Still, there's nothing in the Bible that explicitly states that the people of Sodom were killed for being gay, so using it as a warning against the homosexual lifestyle is questionable at best.
Since the story of Sodom and Gomorrah shouldn't really be used as a warning against homosexuality, the next go-to passage in the Bible used to condemn homosexuality is Leviticus 18:22, which reads in the King James Bible as such:
"Thou shall not lie with mankind as with womankind; it is abomination."
If that sounds bad, Leviticus 20:13 is even worse:
"If a man also lie with mankind as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."
That is really harsh. I can definitely see why these two are used as clobber passages. They are also the passages that more than ever make me question my Christian beliefs. I'd like to think that Christianity is a religion of peace, love and forgiveness. I don't want to be told that not only are all gay people (or gay men, anyway) sinners, but that they deserve to be executed. It goes against everything that I've come to believe, and these passages are brought up so often that it's easy for someone to think that being a Christian means hating gay people.
Then again, just like the story of Sodom's destruction, these passages are open to interpretation. Yes, it is rather difficult to argue that these passages aren't talking about sex between two men, but as always it's important to know their Biblical and historical context. Leviticus 18:22 is part of the Mosaic code, which states that there are two types of sin: moral sin and ceremonial uncleanliness. Moral sin is deliberate rebellion against God. This is thought to be expressed in the original Hebrew text as "toeyvah," which becomes "abomination," "detestable" or "enormous sin" in many English translations. The transliterated Hebrew texts reads as: "V'et zachar lo tishkav mishk'vey eeshah toeyvah hee." If "toeyvah" means what traditional English translations would have us all believe, then sex between two men would indeed be "an abomination." Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on where you stand on this issue), homosexual sex appears to not be a moral sin within the context of the rest of Leviticus but a ceremonial uncleanliness. Ceremonial uncleanliness refers to coming into contact with a forbidden object or performing a forbidden act. An unclean act may have been perfectly acceptable for non-Hebrews, but it was forbidden to Hebrews. Those who were "unclean" were often put to death or exiled from their tribe.
I know that what I've said so far does not seem too supportive of my opinion that being gay isn't a sin. At a glance, it does appear that Leviticus 18:22 states that gay people are unclean, and that Leviticus 20:13 says that they should be put to death. Then again, Leviticus also states that those who eat shellfish, pick up sticks on a Saturday, cross breed livestock, plant mixtures of seeds in a field or wear clothing made from a blend of two textiles are also unclean. Religious conservatives are always quick to use Leviticus to condemn homosexuality, yet they all but ignore everything else that it warns us against. They are largely considered to be archaic laws that are no longer relevant. The New Testament even says that Christians no longer need to follow this code and that we are all saved according to a new covenant with God. To insist that we follow just one of these laws while ignoring the rest is ridiculous.
Of course, all of this talk about Leviticus condemning homosexuality is assuming that Leviticus actually condemns all modern same-sex relationships. The truth is that despite what most modern translations would have everyone believe, the true meaning of Leviticus 18:22 is actually pretty unclear. The verse could mean that all sex between two men is an abomination regardless of the context or the relationship between the men, but I cannot help but think that that interpretation was at one point simplified for the sake of conservative homophobes. When analyzing this passage further, one must remember that the structure of sexuality in Leviticus assumes that men are dominant and women are submissive. According to one interpretation by writer and rabbi Arthur Waskow, a sex act between two men could place one of the men in a dominant role and the other in a submissive role, thereby feminizing the submissive man and effectively turning him into "an abomination" since women were not regarded as highly as men in that society. This interpretation could mean that only certain sex acts that I'd rather not describe here were forbidden, not homosexuality as a whole. Other scholars have theorized that the passages in Leviticus that "forbid" homosexuality only do so in the context of pagan rituals, which would make sense since any Hebrews engaging in such rituals would be effectively disobeying their God according to their own religious beliefs. Again, this interpretation doesn't forbid homosexuality outright; it only does so in certain contexts. It's also interesting to note that at no time is sex between two women mentioned; Leviticus seems to be only concerned with the men of Israel.
To sum up this long-winded and possibly offensive-on-at-least-one-level blog post: yes, most modern English translations of Leviticus seem to condemn male-male homosexuality...maybe. The Scripture was written long ago and refers to a time and culture that was very different from our modern society. Many of the laws written in Leviticus are considered archaic to modern Christians, and in my opinion its very few mentions of homosexuality are open to enough interpretation to be disregarded as proof that all gay people are hell-bound sinners. People need to stop citing them as justification for homophobia and bigotry.
And yes, I'm well aware that the subject of homosexuality as a sin comes up in the New Testament. I plan to get to that as well someday. Hopefully, I won't wait a month and a half to do it.
Source:
No comments:
Post a Comment