If homosexuality is so sinful, why isn't its prohibition one of the 10 Commandments?

Great Debates
1

I’ve never read the Bible, and I’m woefully ignorant on pretty much all Bible/religion-related subjects. But I do seem to recall that in the Bible, homosexuality might have been considered a greater sin than your average run of the mill sins (drunkenness, sloth, greed, etc.) because God saw it (the act, not the sinner) as an abomination.

I think it’s interesting considering that homosexuality was a topic that was covered and dutifully condemned in the Bible, why wasn’t homosexuality specifically forbidden in the 10 Commandments?

Theories, anyone?

2

Nah, homosexuality isn’t particuarly dumped on, any more than eating shellfish is. Of course, God destroys Sodom and Gomorrah, but he destroys Lot’s wife, too, for a trivial an offence as looking over her shoulder when she was told not to. There’s lots of stuff in the Bible that’s frowned on (cutting hair, dietary requirements, etc.) that isn’t explicitly detailed in the Ten Commandments. I would guess that they are meant to be a catch-all guide to morality, in that nearly everything immoral is caught in them (a sort of ancient “do no harm”).

Also, note that a strict reading of the Ten Commandments might well prohibit any form of desire (including sexual, and thus homosexual) under the “Do Not Covet” clause. Any bible scholars there to tell me I’m full of it?

3

Because it isn’t that big a deal. You’ll note that Christ said nothing on the subject ( and some think Jesus was gay himself, in fact ). He made his position clear on lots of things; if homosexuality was so earthshaking an evil, he’d have mentioned it.

4

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
… and some think Jesus was gay himself, in fact…

I haven’t heard this. Who thinks Jesus was gay?

5

I doubt you can find a historical figure about whom it has never been said that he/she was gay. If you mean “who thinks Jesus was gay and has a semi-sensible reason for thinking so?”, the answer is probably “nobody”.

6

I’ve heard it’s a theory being bounced around mostly in Europe, based on some line about Jesus having a “special love” for one of the Apostles; John, I think. I don’t know the details.

7

But isn’t it “Do not covet thy neighbor’s wife”, thereby only implying heterosexual coveting (assuming no points were taken off back then for tablets using non-gender-neutral language)?

8

[QUOTE=magellan01]

Well, if Jesus was gay that would make the ideas in the* Da Vinci code * false. (Anything to falsify that piece of misleading fiction would help IMHO) :slight_smile:

A good overview of the pro and con evidence for the “Jesus was gay” angle can be found in the Religious tolerance web site:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jegay.htm

9

Fantastic! So the Bible not only not prohibits homosexuality, the Ten Commandments implicitly condone it! Maybe we should put them up outside courthouses after all. :smiley:

10

An interesting re-wording of the question would be: Why do we [Christians] pay an inordinate amount of attention to 10 Levitical laws and ignore the other 600? What makes those more important (even if they don’t specifically mention homosexuality) than the other laws?

Vlad/Igor

11

I dunno, but it seems to me homosexuality = no children = less worshipers= less money to the church = less power of the church = less power to the operators of the church.
I’m guessing the church and its operators don’t like this much.

12

The choice of which laws to follow is even more random then that. There are two versions of the Ten Commandments, and in this version there’s Commandment that most Christians break on a regular basis. Not some obscure Leviticus prohibition, no, one of the original Ten Commandments.

Christians break it, every week when they go Sunday Shopping.

13

I’ve always heard that the wages of all sin is death (i.e., you don’t get eternal life). See Romans 6:23. In other words, all sins are equally bad. That includes homosexual relations, as well as not honoring your mother and father, being drunk, committing heterosexual adultery, or lusting after a woman (Matthew 5:27-28: “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, ‘Thou shalt not commit adultery:’ But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.”).

Also, [url=]Leviticus 18 does describe “l[ying] with a man as with a woman” as an abomination, but the entire chapter is an instruction not to follow the customs of the Canaanites, and it describes all of the customs as “abominations.” The prohibited “abominations” include having sex with your neighbor’s wife, having sex with an exhaustive list of your relatives, having sex with an animal, and having sex with a woman while she’s menstruating.

In other words, homosexuality is not any worse than any other sin. I hope someone will come along with an authoritative description of what constitutes an “abomination,” because I suspect it doesn’t mean “super sin.”

14

Actually, although this works in theory, I recall a thread where we decided that having a small but non-zero percentage of homosexuals in a society was a good thing, but it sucks up less resources (especially when that society has reached the bounds of its resources, as with humans in the current global climate, I’d have thought). For example, I seem to remember an experiment where groups of rats were placed in small apartments, and a much greater number of the rats exhibited homosexual behaviour than normal, because space for expansion was limited.

15

The bible is not the be all and end all of Christian dogma. St. Thomas Aquinas categorised various actions into “mortal sins” (ie. no heaven) and “venial sins” (um…no cookie?). Don;t know which category he put homosexuality into, though (I suspect it was the former, given that most sex is a mortal sin anyway.)

16

Lev. 10:10 calls eating shellfish an abomination. So that shrimp scampi is just as bad as homosexuality.

I got this in an e-mail long ago, and loved it so much I saved it:

DEAR (FILL IN NAME OF LOCAL CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN MINISTER),

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s law. I have learned a great deal from you, and 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 him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

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. How should I deal with this?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as it suggests in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may buy slaves from the nations that are around us. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans but not Canadians. Can you clarify?

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?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 10:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 20:20 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?

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?

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?

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, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging.

  • Source unknown
17

Actually, the Bible is the “be all and end all of Christian dogma.” At least according to the Bible. See Deut. 4:2 (“You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take anything from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.”); Prov. 30:6 (Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar."); Rev. 22:18-19 (“For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”); Mark 7:7-10 ("And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ “For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men–the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things you do.” And He said to them, “All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition.”).

At least since the Protestant Reformation, most Christians have been making up their own minds what the Bible means based on what the Bible says. What Thomas Aquinas said about the Bible is an interesting meditation, but it’s not something that Christians must follow. In other words, it’s not Christian dogma. Similarly, although Catholics are supposedly bound by the Pope’s Biblican interpretation, most Catholics I know tend to make up their own minds based on their reading of the Bible.

18

Alright, you win. I should’t have used the word “dogma”. Would “teaching” be ok? Or “thought”? I specifically chose Aquinas because he was pre-Reformation, and you had to go and spoil my argument :D.

19

HubZilla, here’s your source for that " Letter to Dr. Laura".

20

HubZilla, here’s your source for that " Letter do Dr. Laura".