In view of the innumerable threads that have argued this issue, this one might seem superfluous, but I thought it might be a good idea to bring together the large number of questions, which get addressed by inference and assumptions, as asides, or not at all in those threads.
First, let me set a ground rule: Nobody gets called names of any sort in this thread. I know that there are some strong feelings on both sides, but each poster gets treated with respect. And that includes, “Well, I don’t hate you, but God thinks you’re committing abominations” type posts.
Second, let’s look at the questions that get brought to the table in such discussions. While I have strong opinions on the subject and intend to post at length, this OP is intended just to set the questions such a thread needs to analyze:
1. Is there a God? Debatable and debated at length in other threads elsewhere. Discussion on this needs to be limited to an assertion of what you think.
2. Does such a God have opinions on human moral behavior? Assumed w/r/t a positive answer to question 1. Deists may have other views.
3. Is such a God identical to the historical God of Judaism and Christianity? Assume this for purposes of this thread. Freyr, I love you, but please don’t hijack this into a debate on whose god says what.
4. Is the Bible as it stands an accurate record of such a God’s views? There are issues to be addressed here.
5. What does the Bible have to say about homosexuality?
6. Is a “literal” reading of the passages answering question 5 an accurate representation of what God has to say?
7. To what extent is the Law of the Bible applicable to people today, Christian or not?
8. What is the proper reaction of a Christian towards a gay person? Why is this the proper reaction? I see this one as the most critical question of the lot, given the attitudes presented in threads touching on the subject recently.
9. Presuming the political power to do so, to what extent is a Christian required or permitted to impose his moral standards on those who hold different moral standards?
Other questions may come to light as we proceed, but that ought to do to get us started.
My opinions only and not to be intended as a falsifiable statement of fact:
1- not as defined in the Bible
2- I can’t imagine why a deity capable of making or destroying a universe would give a fig what people do with their genitalia or to each other, good bad or indifferent, any more than we greatly care what goes on in an ant bed in Guam
3- n/a
4- n/a
5- it’s very clear- it doesn’t like it. As a gay man, I’ve never understood gay men who can’t acknowledge this. True, Jesus never said anything about gays, but neither did he ever condemn mass murder or wifebeating. The OT could not be clearer and Paul certainly had some issues on the subject. (It’s often claimed that Paul was secretly gay, though I’ve never understood how its possible to psychoanalyze the dead, especially when almost nothing is known of their childhood, personal habits, etc…)
6- That’s assuming that there is a God and that He wishes to communicate
7- no more so than the general principals of other ancient religions and much less applicable than English Common Law. The Golden Rule still works but is not unique to any religion. Laws that governed desert nomads could not extend to their descendants in a Roman occupied province, let alone to their descendants on Michigan assembly lines, Irish farms, Italian farms, etc… For 2000 years the law and the religion were essentially one with the Jews and how they kept their identity, but in a multicultural world they cannot work. Each civilization must make its own laws and review them constantly for there to be relevance.
8- Ooooh… I should think the proper Christian answer is the cliche of love the sinner but not the sin and judge not lest ye be not judged.
9- He is probably required to do so by his religion moreso than he is permitted to do so by Cæsar. That’s a good thing.
*2. Does such a God have opinions on human moral behavior? *
I have no idea.
*3. Is such a God identical to the historical God of Judaism and Christianity? *
I don’t know.
*4. Is the Bible as it stands an accurate record of such a God’s views? *
I don’t believe it is; it is a transcription of decades-old oral histories, warped by time and telling, edited and revised repeatedly throughout many hundreds of years. And that doesn’t take translations into account. Besides which, an omniscient god wouldn’t be quite so incoherent and self-contradictory.
There may be some truth in that volume, but extracting that truth is difficult, and runs the danger of misinterpretation constantly.
*5. What does the Bible have to say about homosexuality? *
A few things, in sections of the bible devoted to lists of other prohibitions which are always conveniently ignored, as they have no bearing on modern life or morality.
*6. Is a “literal” reading of the passages answering question 5 an accurate representation of what God has to say? *
No.
*7. To what extent is the Law of the Bible applicable to people today, Christian or not? *
It is applicable to Christians, as long as it doesn’t contravene the legal code, or basic morality (as in, don’t hurt people.) It is completely inapplicable to those who don’t ascribe to it.
*8. What is the proper reaction of a Christian towards a gay person? *
The same as it is toward anybody else; they should be judged as individuals, on their own individual merits. Why is this the proper reaction?
Because everyone should be judged on their own merits, not pre-judged based on fallacious assessments of the sub-groups of humanity they belong to.
*9. Presuming the political power to do so, to what extent is a Christian required or permitted to impose his moral standards on those who hold different moral standards? *
Whatever requirements your religion places on you to impose your ideas on others, I’d have to say that your religion’s requirement that you treat your neighbors with love, and that you refrain from judging others, would make your intercession into the legal process in order to prevent people from loving each other hypocritical.
Number nine is the most interesting to me, and number eight is the one that Polycarp wants answered, so I’ll take a stab at those.
I also had a very long, drawn out response to all questions, but some glitch ate it. Grrr!
What is the proper reaction of a Christian towards a gay person? Why is this the proper reaction?
-Love. That is all that is required. It is the proper reaction for me because it is how Jesus condensed the final seven (or six, depending on the version) Commandments given to Moses. “Love your neighbor as I have loved you.” Love, of course, entails differnet things than preaching at someone (although that might possibly have some benefits. Hey, anything is possible!) Love entails empathy, friendship, sacrifice, listening, communication, helping others, and everything else. We all know what love is (at least we should.)
Presuming the political power, to what extent is a Christian required or permitted to impose his moral standards on those who hold different moral standards?
-The purpose of a government is to, ultimately, protect the interests of its citizens, and to a lesser extent, the interests of all else. Thus, drunk driving should be illegal, as that is endangering people in a society. So is murder. So is fraud. Obviously, so are recreational drugs, although they may be doing more harm than good illegal. This is debatable, and not in order for this thread. Homosexuality isn’t really harmful, so I see no idea why a liberal democracy would make it illegal or stigmatized or even discriminated against. Religion and government mixing is ALWAYS a bad idea. This does not mean that elected officials shouldn’t guide their decisions by morality that could possibly be influenced by religious beliefs. Those beliefs and subsequent punishments just shouldn’t be legislated.
I’m so happy you started this thread, Poly! (For the simple reason that I intend to link to it next time I’m accused of starting a “too ambitious” OP. )
1. Is there a God?
If so, God wears so many faces and is so circumspect I’ve been unable to discern the Presence.
2. Does [would] such a God have opinions on human moral behavior?
I would think that’s inherent.
3. Is such a God identical to the historical God of Judaism and Christianity?
Necessarily.
4. Is the Bible as it stands an accurate record of such a God’s views?
It’s a heavily revised and evolving collection of the writings of fallible men. So no.
5. What does the Bible have to say about homosexuality?
It lists a few prohibitions which seem to have been laws of the Jewish people at one time or another.
6. Is a “literal” reading of the passages answering question 5 an accurate representation of what God has to say?
See answer 4.
7. To what extent is the Law of the Bible applicable to people today, Christian or not?
To the extent that human authority applies that law.
8. What is the proper reaction of a Christian towards a gay person? Why is this the proper reaction?
Exactly the same as the proper reaction of a Christian towards a straight person. Because Christ didn’t make the distinction.
9. Presuming the political power to do so, to what extent is a Christian required or permitted to impose his moral standards on those who hold different moral standards?
As I understand it, moral standards cannot be imposed, merely rules of behavior based on those standards. However, as I also understand, Christians are expected to leave those rules to human authority, and leave moral judgement of others to God. The communication of one’s own moral standards is both permitted and expected, I believe.
Since I’m atheist, the questions 2,3 and 4 lose any relevance.
5. What does the Bible have to say about homosexuality?
The bible clearly condemn homosexuality. Given the number of threads on this topic, I don’t think I need to point out where it does so. Of course, one can always “interpret away” condemnations he doesn’t like (or prescriptions he doesn’t like, for that matter) but this can be done for pretty much everything in the scriptures, so it isn’t a good argument IMO. A good argument would be to find some verse allowing homosexuality as clearly as it is condemned. Then, one would have to decide which one is the most authoritative. Lacking such a thing, I don’t believe it’s objectively possible to state that homosexuality is in agreement with the scriptures. It seems to me it’s the very usual “I want to see in the bible only the things I agree with” tactic.
6. Is a “literal” reading of the passages answering question 5 an accurate representation of what God has to say?
This question too is irrelevant for an atheist. It’s probably an accurate representation of what the people who wrote the bible had to say.
7. To what extent is the Law of the Bible applicable to people today, Christian or not?
I think you can guess my answer to this one…
8. What is the proper reaction of a Christian towards a gay person? Why is this the proper reaction?
The proper reaction of a christian should be the same that the proper reaction of any other person. Even if there was a 11th commandment printed in red and in bold charachters stating “Thou shall hate the queers” it still would be irrelevant as far as I’m concerned. Christian people can pray for the homosexuals in their closets, can be saddened because they think homosexual are doomed, they can even avoid them like the plague if they can’t bear the concept, that’s up to them. What they definitively shouldn’t do is interfering with other people life in any way on the basis of their religious beliefs alone. If they want to preach to them in a not too offensive way (not by picketing a burial, for instance), that’s fine. They’ll have to accept the likely consequences, like being ridiculed or facing very angry responses, though…
9. Presuming the political power to do so, to what extent is a Christian required or permitted to impose his moral standards on those who hold different moral standards?
I’d be tempted to answer that a policy based on faith (understand : fantasy, in my mind) shouldn’t be implemented, whether or not a majority (or a dictator) shares this faith. It should rest only on arguments which can be debatted in some form of objective or rational way. “Because I say so”, “because of the eek factor” or “Because it’s written here” aren’t such arguments. “A foetus is a human being hence abortion is murder and should be banned” or even “homosexuality is an unnatural behavior hence is a disease which shouldn’t be encouraged” can be debatted in some meaningful way without resorting to an argument by authority, so would be a valid start for a debate, in theory.
The problem is of course that most christians (or whoever else holding a strong “because I say so” opinion) are unlikely to be able to leave aside, not only in their words, but also in their minds, their religious prejudices (couldn’t find a more “neutral” english word than prejudice, sorry…) when having to decide on a moral issue.
I’m going to ignore the problem of moral relativism which, though related, is another can of worms…
At the risk of sounding like I’m playing Devil’s Advocate (God’s Advocate? the Divine Weasel’s Advocate?)…
The two passages in Leviticus condemning or prohibiting male homosexual acts are found in Leviticus, chapter 18 and Leviticus, chapter 20. Leviticus 18 also condemns assorted acts of incest, adultery, child sacrifice to Moloch, and bestiality. Leviticus 20 prohibits child sacrifice, sorcery, cursing ones father or mother, adultery, incest, and bestiality, in addition to male homosexual acts; it adds penalties (pretty much all death) for most of these acts, although it’s unclear if certain acts of incest are punishable by death, by some sort of excommunication or shunning, or in one case by a threat that the couple will be childless, which seems to put marrying one’s brother’s wife beyond the reach of any human authority. My guess is that most of the Christians who condemn homosexuality would also condemn the rest of the stuff on that list. Fundamentalist Christians may wear cotton-wool blends and eat bacon cheeseburgers, but they generally are down on adultery, incest, and sorcery. As far as dietary laws go, they can point to specific New Testament passages (Acts 10:9-16 and Acts 11:1-18); as far as wearing cotton-wool blends, they argue that there is a distinction between “ceremonial” laws (which they claim were just “pointers” to the coming of Christ and are now obsolete), and “moral” laws, such as the Big Ten (no murdering and stealing), and which category they would argue Leviticus 18/20 belong in as well. Generally speaking, those “ceremonial” laws (including the sacrifices) wouldn’t be applied to non-Jews, but the “moral” laws would be considered by them to be generally applicable; i.e., even heathen savages should be taught not to commit adultery, worship idols, or marry their sisters, but eating pork would not be a problem from the point of view of an evangelical missionary.
One prohibition to get them on might be Leviticus 18:19/20:18, which prohibits sexual intercourse during a woman’s menstrual period. (It’s not clear if the penalty in Leviticus 20:18 is death or some sort of excommunication.) I don’t know if modern pro-Biblical morality Christians follow that one or not; it would be sort of interesting to ask one who’s on a gay-bashing roll if he has sex with his wife during her period. But he might say “Of course not!”, and then where do you go from there?
Paul, in Romans 1:27, uses language which seems to condemn homosexual acts in “moral”, not just “ceremonial” terms (and also apparently throws an attack on lesbians, which Leviticus does not), and in Romans 1:28-31, seems to consider such behavior as being in the same moral ballpark as “wickedness, evil, greed and depravity”, and more specifically “envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice”, disobeying parents, and being “senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless”. The KJV translation uses somewhat different unpleasant-sounding terms for the assorted Greek words. With either translation, most of the things on the list are things which homosexuality-condemning Christians would also condemn as sinful and wicked.
So, does “the Bible” condemn homosexual acts as immoral? “The Bible” was written by lots of different people over the course of centuries. I think it’s safe to say that Paul and the author(s) of Leviticus would have considered homosexual acts (or at least male homosexual acts in the latter case) to be immoral or wicked. I don’t believe in God, so any questions as to what God condemns or doesn’t condemn are pretty much moot to me.
As to Polycarp’s question # 7 (“To what extent is the Law of the Bible applicable to people today, Christian or not?”): The Bible is very definitely down on worshipping false gods, however, Christians who say that Hindus and so forth are devil-worshippers are often scorned in our society, and we certainly don’t allow that piece of Biblical morality to rule our laws and customs in general. Many Americans (including many who not only believein God but still self-identify as Christians) seem to have moved beyond the Bible on the quite important matter of worshipping false Gods. (“Well, there are lots of different paths to God.”) Personally, I would say that if some Christians believe that practicers of non-Christian or non-Judeo-Christian religions are hell-bound idol-worshippers, that’s their business, and their right to preach sermons on the topic should be protected. But they don’t get to dictate social policy regarding non-discrimination laws in housing or employment (which invariably include “religion” as a protected category); and of course, in this country, “idolatry” is a constitutionally protected right, in fact, it’s the first of our constitutionally-protected rights. Socially speaking, Christians in many situations have to put up with people with different ideas of morality than the Bible’s. Generally speaking, a Christian isn’t going to be able to get away with accusing his Hindu co-worker* of “flaunting her idol-worship” because she wears that little dot on her forehead at work. I don’t really think the rules should be any different for heathen fornicators living in sin or “sodomites” than they are for “idolaters” in social or business settings, which means as far as I’m concerned gays and lesbians (and people shacking up without benefit of marriage) should no more have to live their lives “in the closet” than Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, or secular humanists. As far as gay marriage goes: The state recognizes marriages performed according to the rules of all sorts of religions, and secular religions performed with no religious ceremonies at all, so I don’t see why Christians should be able to impose Biblical rules on the rest of society there either. (Of course, no specific church or clergyman can be forced by law to marry two people of the same sex any more than any specific church or clergyman can be forced by law to perform a Hindu wedding.)
As to question #9 (“Presuming the political power to do so, to what extent is a Christian required or permitted to impose his moral standards on those who hold different moral standards?”): If fundamentalist Christians want to criminalize homosexual acts (and even fairly “mainstream” Religious Right organizations like the Family Research Council have made statements in support of keeping sodomy laws), why don’t they want to criminalize worshipping false gods as well? (Of course, some of them do, but one hopes those guys will stay safely on the fringe.) Again–Christians don’t have the right, in a free society, to impose their religiously based laws on everyone else. Laws against murder, rape, or robbery or theft can be justified on both secular grounds and on the teachings of many religions; but I don’t see a secular justification for laws criminalizing the private sexual behavior of consenting adults. And I don’t think a majority of voters should have unlimited power to enact their beliefs into law; that’s what the Bill of Rights is all about.
Finally, I, an atheist and secular humanist, am arguing that the claim by some Christians that homosexuality is immoral according to the Bible does have some merit–that is, that they may be right about what the Bible says. (I just don’t happen to care overmuch what the Bible says is immoral.) Why? Just to stir people up and make liberal Christians and gay Christians feel bad? Well, first of all, I make the claim because I happen to think it’s true. Making arguments which aren’t true (if someone were to say, for example, that no part of the Bible really condemns homosexual acts as immoral) strikes me as wrong on several counts; for one thing, it builds on an unstable foundation. If someone who has been taught that the Bible nowhere condemns homosexual acts reads for themselves and decides that in fact it does, who knows how they’ll react as far as the other moral teachings they’ve been given. They might decide that liberal Christians are all deceivers and swing all the way over into the hard-line Biblical morality camp. Also, I object to the Bible being presented as the source of a perfect, or even all that good, moral code. Biblical morality condemns a lot of things which I find to be harmless or maybe even good, and permits a lot of things which I consider evil. I don’t see any sense in whitewashing that. (Of course, as I indicated earlier, “Biblical morality” is a slippery concept; I don’t think there is one “Biblical morality”: the Bible frequently contradicts itself–although never explicitly on the subject of homosexuality that I am aware of.)
*The temptation to make the old “cow-orker” joke is really strong here.
2. Does such a God have opinions on human moral behavior?
Yes.
3. Is such a God identical to the historical God of Judaism and Christianity?
Yes
4. Is the Bible as it stands an accurate record of such a God’s views?
The question is too simplistic to answer correctly. we are no longer subject to the law which was given so that sin could be manifest as well as providing secular requirements such as health (eg. prohibition of pork) Much of what we read regarding sinful behavior needs to be understood in the context of the time it was written. Clearly, the life of Jesus and His words convey the essence of the morality that God requires for us to share in the ultimate grace when He will be “ALL IN ALL”
5. What does the Bible have to say about homosexuality?
Doesn’t look good for homosexuals, but then it doesn’t look good for fornicators either.
6. Is a “literal” reading of the passages answering question 5 an accurate representation of what God has to say?
Not in the context of today. People change.(God doesn’t). Ever notice that the bible has nothing to say about child molestation? Most likely hidden, just like committed homosexual relationships. (Not comparing here, but indicating how the bible does not address hidden issues directly) Sex can cause a lot of pain because it is primarily so selfish that manifestations of abuse such as to Lots guests or to Uriah must be condemned. It seems quite clear to me that God has issues with selfish sexuality which most likely was the character of known homosexuality of biblical times.
7. To what extent is the Law of the Bible applicable to people today, Christian or not?
We are not subject to the law any longer. We may use it for guidance for ourselves, but not to judge others.
8. What is the proper reaction of a Christian towards a gay person? Why is this the proper reaction?
Love him/her just like anyone else. As we are preparing for the future when we will share in His glory, keep in mind that there will be neither male nor female. Homosexuality will be a dead issue. 9. Presuming the political power to do so, to what extent is a Christian required or permitted to impose his moral standards on those who hold different moral standards?
None whatsover, but that does not mean the Christian should remain silent. Although I believe Christian issues should not be politicised, I find it ironic that many Christians oppose gay marriage. Certainly establishing an institution that partially addresses the problems of umcommitted sexual relationships can only be seen as positive in God’s eyes.
I really want to avoid hijacking this thread into the familiar territory this debate always seems to end up in, so I’ll keep my reply to MEBuckner brief.
I’m fully aware that the Bible condemns homosexuality pretty explicitly. That the current crop of biblical literalists focus on those condemnations, and not the others detailed in the very same chapters, is what, for me, invalidates their arguments. Cafeteria-style Christianity, with a heaping side order of hate.
Who decides what is a moral proclamation, and what is a ceremonial one? Who decides which of God’s laws get ignored this century, and which get used to opress people? It’s all pretty arbitrary.
I’ve never stated that the Bible doesn’t state that homosexuality is wrong; I’ve just argued that Christians using those passages to condemn homosexuality is wrong.
Guinastasia, I never said I was an atheist. It has been assumed that I am, but this is the first time anyone here has ever asked.
I’m not sure how fair a criticism that is, though. One of the same chapters of Leviticus which condemns homosexual acts also condemns sorcery or witchcraft, and by gum, many of the same Christians who condemn gays also get worked up over the “Harry Potter” books and kids playing Dungeons and Dragons. I’m pretty sure they’re also against adultery, incest, and sacrificing children to Moloch.
Pick-and-choose Christianity isn’t any more valid if you’re picking and choosing entire chapters than if you’re selecting individual verses to follow or ignore. Let’s take a look at Leviticus chapter 19, which resides right between 18 and 20.
Do these Christians follow these proclamations?
These declarations are in the same chapter as prohibitions against using dishonest weights when measuring goods, against going to spiritualists and mediums, and against perverting justice to serve the wealthy, which I’m sure a good majority of Christians are against. Why are some valid, and others not? Why, if some things in this chapter can be ignored, can some things in other chapters not be?
And, most importantly, who decides which verse is actually God’s law, and which verse is irrelevant?
A slight hijack: On the subject of gays and Christianity, I’ve never understood the logic of the Metropolitan Community Church. As Snopes and Buckner and others have pointed out, there’s no two sides- the Bible clearly preaches against homosexuality. Wouldn’t a Christian church for gays be something like a church for adulterers or a Christian church for idol worshippers? I’m not homophobic (I completely support gay rights and gay marriage) and for that matter I’m not Christian, but I’ve just always wondered this; if there are any MCCers present, could you please shine some light on this?
Maybe there is a god. Maybe it has opinions on how things should or should not be, what people do and do not do. But regardless of its opinions, it wouldn’t make a heap of difference to me.
The fact is, if you want to argue that homosexuality is wrong, then you are going to have to present an actual moral arguement that starts from meaningful first principles(common values), not simply reference the Bible. Morality is something for which someone’s say so, even a gods, is just a no go as far as justifying anything. It’s methodologically IMMORAL, IMHO, to accept that something is right or wrong merely on authority: it belies a reckless indifference to moral judgement (not to mention clomps right past the important question of whether a god’s opinions on what is right and wrong should be ours).
I’d like to request that you share your answers to your stated questions with us, Polycarp. I very much look forward to seeing your perspective on them, as I look forward to seeing your input in any thread.
1. Is there a God? Certainly looks that way from where I’m sitting.
2. Does such a God have opinions on human moral behavior?‘Moral’ Hmmm, yes, but see (9)
*3. Is such a God identical to the historical God of Judaism and Christianity?*Yes, identical, and then some other stuff besides
*4. Is the Bible as it stands an accurate record of such a God’s views?*Hmmm, I believe that God is revealed in (among other things) the Bible, but the Bible isn’t God.
*5. What does the Bible have to say about homosexuality?*I’m not sure; many of the passages so often quoted seem to be talking about something similar to but not the same as homosexuality (often motivated by very different drives).
*6. Is a “literal” reading of the passages answering question 5 an accurate representation of what God has to say?*I have come to believe that a literal reading causes one to miss out a lot of the ‘spirit’ and to impose a lot of modern contextual thinking.
*7. To what extent is the Law of the Bible applicable to people today, Christian or not?*Love God wholeheartedly and Love your neighbour as much as you love yourself - what other law is there? (there is no ‘except if…’)
*8. What is the proper reaction of a Christian towards a gay person? Why is this the proper reaction?*What is the proper reaction of a Christian to someone who loves or hates Marmite; what is the proper reaction of a Christian towards someone who was born on a Thursday? - the question is meaningless (see (7))
*9. Presuming the political power to do so, to what extent is a Christian required or permitted to impose his moral standards on those who hold different moral standards?*Insofar as the actions of a person inflict harm on a ‘victim’, a Christian is right (and perhaps morally obligated) to intervene, that’s it.
Thanks, Polycarp, for starting this thread. I would like to answer all of your questions, but -
[hijack]I have a link to an online translation of the Koran, but I am not at all familiar with what keywords I should search on. I would like to see if there are any references to homosexuals or to homosexual behavior in the Koran or any of the sacred writings of Islam.
If any Dopers know the Koran better than I, could they point me to some verses, or let me know that my search is useless?
And if anyone knows of any other sacred writings of major religions (Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, Hinduism, whatever - I already know about Greek religion), I would be grateful for cites regarding the same subject.
My reason for asking is I have heard claims that all the major religions of the world - by which I think is meant all the larger religions of the world - condemn homosexuality in the same way that Judaism and Christianity do.
TIA. [/hijack]
Anyway, I will try to be back later to address the questions completely.
)