Although the Bible explicitly says marriage is between a man and a woman, homosexual relationships don’t seem to be “outlawed” by the Bible. The closest thing I see to saying it is wrong is the tale of Sodom. However, it is believed that Sodom’s crime was rape and failure to repent. At no point in the Bible is homosexuality explicitly banned. I suspect that the church has merely construed it as wrong so they could claim that “God” supported their own personal beliefs.
IANA believer, but even I can find this:
Lev 20:13 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.
Note only male homosexuality gets a mention. Now why they stress that so much and not:
Lev 20:12 And if a man lie with his daughter in law, both of them shall surely be put to death: they have wrought confusion; their blood [shall be] upon them.
IS a good question.
Leviticus 18:22. :“V’et zachar lo tishkav mishk’vey eeshah toeyvah hee.” literally translated as “And with a male you shall not lay lyings of a woman.” I believe this is accepted by most scholars as forbiddence of male homosexuality (there are other more dubious interpretations). It only explicitly pertains to male homosexuality primarily because the Torah was written for a male audience, women’s issues(accept fidelity,dowry, etc.) are just not that important in middle eastern society at the time. So female homosexuality is not addressed, but most likely not because it was any more acceptable. Haven’t we reached critical mass on gay threads yet?
There are also references in Corinthians and Timothy which are often translated incorrectly as “homsosexuals.”
The truth is that every presumptive reference to homosexuality in the Bible is questionable as to its real meaning. The Leviticus prohibition, for instance. is probably a reference to Male temple prostitutes (and let’s not forget that Leviticus contains a passle of other “abominations” such as eating cheeseburgers, working on the Sabbath, wearing cotton blends and having physical contact with menstruating women). Timothy and Corinthians refer to pederasty, not the kind of homosexual relationships we are familiar with today.
Oh…and the Bible never says marriage has to be monogomous, either. Polygamy is acceptable in scripture and so is banging concubines or slaves.
Leviticus 18:22 is probably the most direct reference: “You shall not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; it is an abomination.”
Then there’s Genesis 19:4-7
“4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:
5 and they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.
6 And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him,
7 and said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.”
Well, we all know what happened to Sodom. Look for its charred remains on the bottom of the Dead Sea.
Some feel the New Testament has nothing to say on the subject, but not so. As Paul wrote in Romans 1:18-28
“18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind…”
Not a very nice characterization. “Vile affections” doesn’t leave much room for doubt.
Sodom was punished for inhospitality not homosexuality.
The “vile affections” line is an indication of pure, hedonistic (and adulterous) lust, not homosexuality, per se.
I maintain that the Bible is entirely silent on monogomous, same-sex relationships between consenting adults. Homosexuality was not even undesrtood as a fixed orientation. People didn’t think in terms of “gay and straight.” It was all just seen as behavior.
I’m afraid that that presumption is highly doubtful. The prohibition against male homosexual relations is contained in a greater subset of forbidden relations in Leviticus 18. I highly doubt that the other prohibitions have anything to do with temple prostitutes, and likewise it is doubtful this one too applies.
In any event, in Jewish law, male homosexual relations is forbidden whether in the temple or not.
Well, to be techinical, the term toevah (“abomination”) is not used with regard to any of the prohibitions that you mentioned.
Zev Steinhardt
Where does that assertion come from? It seems much more generic than that.
Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic :
“…wearing cotton blends …”
One of my personal favorites. Textile blending is probably the biggest reason the world has seen so much strife, pain and gnashing of teeth. Yet, strangely,the importance of wearing uniform, homogenous fabric eludes so many otherwise good people. Also, rarely is the slogan “God hates poyester-cotton blends” seen outside abortion clinics…
I think Chief Wiggum put it best,
Lisa:“Wait! Doesn’t the Bible say, Judge not, lest ye be judged?”
CW:“The Bible says a lot of things. Shove her!”
Just some more minor nitpicks…
Oh, and by the way, there is no prohibition on cotton blends (only wool-linen mixtures) and there is no absolute Biblical prohibition against contact with a menstruating woman (there is, however, a prohibition against sexual relations with a menstruating woman).
Carry on.
Zev Steinhardt
Don’t forget the rest of the story. Lot said this to try and protect his visitors.
Yet G-d considered Lot righteous and saved him and killed those would be rapists. Trying to give your young daughters to a mob seems uh…wrong. Do the moral contradictions raise questions on the other laws? Zev?
Swearing at your parents also had the same dire consequences as homosexuality.
Maybe teens were better behaved in that day. :rolleyes:
Leviticus 18 states that the list of prohibitions which follow were the practices of the Canaanites. The entire list is meant to separate Israelite priestly practices from the Canaanites. Canaanite temple prostitutes were transvestite males. It is argued quite often by liberal Christian and Jewish scholars that the Leviticus “male with a male” prohibitions refer to patronizing those prostitutes.
Orthodox Jews and conservative Christians still prefer the “homos are bad” interpretation but it’s not a settled matter of fact that such an interpretation is correct. I’m not asserting a categorical position on this, I’m just pointing out that the Leviticus passage is debatable.
Zev, I was just being a little facetious with the “abomination” thing. My point was that there are a lot of archaic prohibitions in Leviticus which are not fixated upon by religious fundamentalists.
Do you have a reliable citation for that?
All the Biblical laws can be clearly seen and understood by looking here.
d&r
I got this from this site
Not to continue to flog a deceased equine, but Chaim and I debunked that letter and refuted it point by point years ago. You can do a search of the archives.
Ah, what the heck, I’ll give you a “quick and dirty” verison of it.
#1: Sacrifices - Sacrifices can only be offered on the altar in Jerusalem. Since it does not currenty exist, no need you can’t offer the sacrifices to begin with.
#2, #4: Slavery - Since slavery is outlawed in the U.S., you cannot sell your daughter under the Talmudic principle of dina d’malchusa dina (the law of the land is the law).
#3: Contact w/ a menstruant - Only applies between a man and his wife.
#5, #10: Death Penalty - Only applies when the Sanhedrin exists. Since it doesn’t exist, you cannot kill your neighbor. In addition, a non-Jew can break the Sabbath all he wants with no penalties.
**#6: Shellfish ** - Kosher laws only apply to Jews. Let her eat her shellfish.
#7: Altars, physical blemishes - Only applies to the altar in Jerusalem (which doesn’t exist), only applies to kohanim and a loss of 20/20 vision doesn’t count.
#8: Hair - Only applies to Jews.
#9: Pigskin - Footballs aren’t made of pigskin :rolleyes:
Zev Steinhardt
Sodom was punished for being a bad place all around. And last I checked in the dictionary, “sodomy” wasn’t synonymous with “inhospitality”.
I was a religion major in school (as well as a science major). There was never any doubt in the minds of my profs about what Lev. 18 said. When confronted by students who argued the point, the answer was “wishful thinking.” I don’t think followers of the Judeo-Christian tradition do themselves any favors by glossing over the reality of Biblical literature. Sure, some things are hard to translate and interpret. Others simply aren’t.
You have to remember that it is the Christian Bible who considers Lot to be righteous. The Jewish Bible makes no such judgement. My take on the matter has always been that Lot was spared because of Abraham’s merit, not based on any personal merit he may have had.
Personally, I cannot condone Lot’s actions.
Zev Steinhardt
**
Well, you are right that the chapter starts off by saying (to the effect) “Don’t do as the Canaanites do.” But then it goes off and lists prohibitons A, B, C, etc. If “temple prositution” was one of those things that were being banned, don’t you think it would have been on the list? However, it’s not.
In any event, the point is moot because under Jewish law (derived from this very verse) all male homosexual intercourse is forbidden, whether done in the temple or anywhere else.
But then again, OTOH, there are those of us who still do observe those commandments. 
But I understand your meaning. A few years ago I started a thread asking why certain OT commandments (prohibitions on homosexuality, witchcraft, etc.) continue to survive post-Crucifixion while others (kashrus, shabbos, holidays, etc.) did not and what was the crucial factor in determining which commandments still apply to Christians today and which do not. I never really got a complete answer. You can search the archives for the thread.
Zev Steinhardt
Zev, I’d like to make an attempt at that in another thread if you’re still interested.
Go right ahead. The original thread where I asked the question can be found here: Q for Christian Dopers.
Zev Steinhardt