This is actually a side thread that was inspired by my other thread regarding homosexuality and the Old Testament. Years ago I heard a radio talk show where a lesbian minister in the United Church of Christ was saying that the Old Testament prohibitions against homosexuality were actually added in later on, and that God supposedly did not forbid homosexuality. Unfortunately I had to get to work so I didn’t get to hear the minister’s justification for what she said. So if there are any UCC Christians or liberal Christians on this board, I would love to hear from you. How are you able to justify homosexual behavior despite what the Old Testament says about it, and even what St. Paul says about it? FYI I do NOT want this to turn into gay bashing; I am simply curious as to how some Christian Churches can approve something that appears to be expressly forbidden. I look forward to hearing from everybody.
It’s all good, baby.
Ironically I am a member of the UCC who is very conservative on this matter, so I can’t really answer.
Here is a list of responses to the various bible verses that seem to denounce homosexuality, and why they don’t actually do so.
(This isn’t the best such list I’ve seen, but it’s the first good one I was able to find today on a quick search.)
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibl.htm
(corrected link)
It’s amazing the mental gymnastics the faithful can engage in to make the bible say what they want it to say. Christians abolitionist did the same thing in the 19th century here in the United States. I’d be very curious to learn when these interpretations of the bible started to gain popularity.
Later than what?
Probably after shellfish but before tattoos.
Just out of curiosity, does your congregation welcome homosexuals and lesbians? Has your pastor ever commented about it one way or the other? If you wish to mention this post to your pastor or some friends in your congregation, I would be very interested in hearing from them.
My pastor has made a few comments suggesting sympathy with homosexuality, but it’s not a major sermon topic or anything. While I’m horrible at grasping social dynamics, I’m guessing she avoids making a big deal of it so as not to offend the more traditional congregants.
Old Testament laws were usurped by New Testament laws:
And most importantly:
So that takes care of the Old Testament. What about the New Testament?
Well, what did Jesus say about it? According to Matt 15:18-20…nothing. Not a goddamn thing.
Which leads us to post hoc commentary. Let’s just say that good ol’ St Paul was an asshole with his own axe to grind. But unfortunately, that axe has been distorted through history to man’s own will on top of Paul’s own. For the most part, Paul talks about *arsenokoitai *and malakois the poor man’s translation has modernly translated these into “homosexuality” when the truth is that these are better translated as pederasty. Talk to any DSM-IV and you’ll see the HUGE difference between the two.
Frankly, most churches tend to take scripture into their own hands. Look at how many Christian denominations let there be female deacons, pastors, etc. thus completely ignoring 1 Corinthians 14:34. Why is that one acceptable to ignore but homosexuality must be cleaved to as though the instructions were perversely more important?
Meh. For many, the Bible isn’t regarded as a lust of propositions each of which must be agreed with.
For one thing, it’s very plausible to think that its authors’ various cultural presuppositions shouln’t be understood to constitute valid ethical demands.
It was my admittedly poorly researched impression that denominations with female deacons and pastors, etc. did not proscribe either homosexuality or homosexuals.
Nice typo.
I can actually respect those kinds of arguments. I have a hard time respecting arguments that the bible doesn’t say anything negative about homosexuality.
Definitely not so. The Evangelical Presbyterian Church is one counterexample.
Also the Assemblies of God and the Foursquare Gospel Church.
I’m UU, and the UUC and UUs share the same sexuality program.
There is a large element in the program of “don’t judge others.” And that the people whose business is your sex life is you and your partner(s) (that doesn’t come until they are almost young adults - at twelve you are still teaching them that their parents, teachers, etc. have responsibilities to them). Respect yourself, respect your partner(s) - that is what is taught. And you and your partner(s) define that respect.
In the UU training the Bible doesn’t come into it at all, nor God - since about half of UUs are some form of humanist and only a quarter are Christian, it isn’t like what Paul had to say carries a lot of weight. I don’t know if the UUC brings it into their version of the curriculum at all.
Well, thank you.
While it is true that there are conservative Christian sects that give leadership positions to women, those leadership positions should be viewed with some contempt. My mother worked her way through seminary, only to find out that she could only advance to “evangelist” status in his church. Whatever the hell THAT is, but it was made apparent that she’d never get the title “Reverand” or ever be referred to as a minister.
So she left the Church of God in Christ and joined the UCC’s. She likes it much better there, as it not only supports her calling but also her progressive politics. I might still be a Christian if I had been raised in this church rather than that other one. Who knows?