Prologue
Congratulations on your interest in researching what the Bible has to say about Same Gender Sexual Behavior. In order to gain perspective on the cultural and contextual issues involved with this topic it is helpful to consider how the Western society and churches deal with other issues such as adultery, divorce, women, slavery, etc. Please read about these topics before proceeding to the study on "Same Gender Sexual Behavior and the Scriptures". Each section is followed by discussion questions to be used individually or in group discussion.
Adultery and Same Gender Sexual Behavior
The Bible verses on adultery listed below are to be reviewed in conjunction with a study on Same Gender Sexual Behavior and the Scriptures. Please read the text then consider the questions in the discussion section at the end of this section:
Exodus 20:14
"You shall not commit adultery."
Leviticus 20:10
"`If a man commits adultery with another man's wife--with the wife of his neighbor--both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death."
Deuteronomy 5:18
"You shall not commit adultery."
Proverbs 6:32
"But a man who commits adultery lacks judgment; whoever does so destroys himself."
Matthew 5:27-28,32
"You have heard that it was said, `Do not commit adultery.' " (Exodus 20:14) But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart... But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery."
Matthew 15:19
"For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander."
Matthew 19:9, 18
"I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery... Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony...' "
Mark 7:21
"For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery..."
Mark 10:11-12
"He answered, 'Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits
adultery.'
Mark 10:19
"You know the commandments: `Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, do not defraud, honor your father and mother.' " [Exodus 20:12-16; Deut. 5:16-20]
Luke 16:18, 20
"Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery... You know the commandments: `Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother.'
John 8:3-4, 7
"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, 'Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. Now Moses in the law (Lev. 20:10) commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do you say?'... So when they continued asking Him, He raised Himself up and said to them 'He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first...'
Romans 2:22
"You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery?"
Romans 13:9
'Do not commit adultery, Do not murder, Do not steal, Do not covet, (Exodus 20:13-15,17; Deut. 5:17-19,21) and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'[Lev. 19:18]
James 2:11
"For he who said, 'Do not commit adultery,' [Exodus 20:14; Deut. 5:18] also said, 'Do not murder.' [ Exodus 20:13; Deut. 5:17] If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker."
Discussion Questions:
1. In your opinion does adultery happen very often in the Western culture?
2. Generally speaking, among heterosexual males is a man who commits adultery shunned, harassed and even beaten up? What is the attitude generally portrayed in our culture when heterosexual men discuss another man's infidelity to his wife? Why?
3. Generally speaking, among heterosexual males is a man who has a sexual relationship with another man shunned, harassed and even beaten up? What is the attitude generally portrayed in our culture when heterosexual men discuss another man's sexual relationship with another man? Why? Now, what explains the difference between the reaction of heterosexual men in question 2 and the reaction in question 3?
4. In general, do heterosexual Christians get more upset about the issue of adultery or homosexuality?
5. If two married people of the opposite sex, who aren't married to each other, fall in love with each other and divorce their spouses, should they legally be allowed to marry, why or why not? Should their marriage by recognized by mainline Christian churches, why or why not? Should homosexuals be allowed to legally marry, why or why not? Should homosexual marriages be recognized by mainline Christian churches?
6. In many states in the United States there are laws prohibiting same gender sexual relations. In fact, in some places, like Topeka, Kansas, two people of the same gender can not, in a restaurant, bar or other public place even talk about having sexual relations without the threat of arrest. Should there be laws prohibiting adultery, why or why not? Should there be laws forbidding two married people, who aren't married to each other, even talking to each other about having sexual relations, why or why not? Should an adulterer lose their job because of their status as an adulterer, why or why not? Should they be verbally harassed or physically assaulted because of their status as an adulterer, why or why not? Finally discuss why those considered adulterers have full civil rights with no (or few) legal sanctions against them while homosexual people do not have full civil rights and do have legal sanctions against them?
Divorce and Same Gender Sexual Behavior
The following verses on the subject of divorce in the Scriptures are listed as a part of a study of Same Gender Sexual Behavior and the Scriptures. Please read the verses below and discuss the questions at the end of this section:
Deuteronomy 24:1, 3-4a
"If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house...and her second husband dislikes her and writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, or if he dies, then her former husband who divorced her must not take her back to be his wife after she has been defiled..."
Isaiah 50:1
"This is what the LORD says: 'Where is your mother's certificate of divorce with which I sent her away? Or to which of my creditors did I sell you? Because of your sins you were sold; because of your transgressions your mother was sent away.' " This verse seems to imply that this was a common practice among the Hebrew people.
Matthew 5:31-32
"It has been said, `Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.' [Deut 24:1] But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery."
Matthew 19:3-9
"Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, 'Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?' And he answered and said to them, 'Have you not read that he who made them at the beginning made them male and female and said 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and the two shall become one flesh?' So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.' They said to him, 'Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?' (Deut. 24:1-4) He said to them, 'Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.'
Mark 10:2-12
"The Pharisees came and asked him, 'Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?' testing him. And he answered and said to them, 'What did Moses command you?' They said, 'Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to dismiss her.' (Deut 24:1-4) And Jesus answered and said to them, 'Because of the hardness of your hear he wrote you this precept. But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. So then they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together let not man separate.' And in the house his disciples asked Him again about the same matter. So he said to them "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. And if a woman divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.'
1 Corinthians 7:10-15
"Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord: A wife is not to depart from her husband. But even if she does depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. And a husband is not to divorce his wife. But to the rest I, not the Lord, say: If any brother has a wife who does not believe, and she is willing to live with him, let him not divorce her. And a woman who has a husband who does not believe, if he is willing to live with her, not her not divorce him... But if the unbeliever departs, let him depart; a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases. But God has called us to peace..."
Discussion Questions:
1. Jesus and the Pharisees state that the command about divorce was from Moses. Is the book of Deuteronomy a list of commandments from God, Moses or both? See Deut 6: 1-2, 11:8, 11:27.
2. Jesus states that the command regarding divorce was really only Moses permitting them to divorce because of hardness of their hearts. Did the command, therefore, reflect God's will?
3. Although Jesus' words seem harsh they need to be taken in the context of that time. Women could be divorced by their husbands if the women displeased them. This thrust women back into a patriarchal society, where they had little social standing or a way to make a living. In this light Jesus' words might be seen as compassionate. Based on this possibility do you think that knowing the context of the society in which a scripture passage was written might prove helpful in interpreting that passage?
4. Can any Bible passages be written for a specific situation in a specific time period or must all passages be universally applied for all time and in all places?
5. The New Testament scripture passages seem to only allow for two causes of divorce: sexual immorality by one of the partners or abandonment by an unbelieving partner. Yet, is it possible, when taking into account the historical context, to say that these passages were written against a background in which most divorces were harmful to women? Since we now have a different cultural context in which women can be independent might it be possible the passages no longer apply?
6. Is it possible there were cultural influences at work in the writing of the scripture passages some interpret as being about homosexual sexual behavior?
7. Given the scripture passages about divorce why are most mainline churches silent on the subject of divorce yet very vocal on the issue of homosexual people?
8. Do those who are divorced for reasons not stated in the Scriptures need to repent of their divorce as a sin and either return to their former spouse or remain celibate? Why or why not? Do those who are of homosexual orientation and in a committed relationship with a person of the same gender need to repent of that relationship and either marry someone of the opposite sex or remain celibate? Why ore why not?
9. Should those divorcing for "unscriptural" reasons be legally allowed to remarry and enjoy full civil rights (such as not being fired from their jobs because of their divorced status, not being denied public accommodations because of their divorced status, being allowed to talk in a restaurant or bar or other public place to their new "unscriptural" spouse about sharing sexual relations without being arrested for such talk)? Do "unscripturally" divorced people currently enjoy those civil rights and practice them? Should homosexuals be legally allowed to marry and enjoy full civil rights even if seemingly violating scripture? Why or why not?
10. What role, if any, should grace play in dealing with those who are divorced for reasons other than sexual unfaithfulness or abandonment? What role, if any, should grace play in dealing with homosexuals?
Women and Same Gender Sexual Behavior
This section is prepared to be reviewed in conjunction with a study on Same Gender Sexual Behavior and the Scriptures. Please read the verses listed below and review the discussion questions supplied at the end of this section:
Genesis 3:16
"To the woman God said I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; in pain shall you bring forth children; your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you."
I Corinthians 11:3
"But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God."
I Corinthians 11:7
"For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man is not from woman, but woman from man. Nor was man created for woman, but woman for the man. For this reason a woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels." (Note: although the reference to angels is obscure Paul is clearly stating that women should cover their heads in worship as symbols of subjugation to men.)
I Corinthians 14:34, 35, 37
"Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. And if they want to learn something let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church... If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord."
Ephesians 5:22, 24-25, 28
"Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord... Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her... In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself."
Colossians 3:18-19
"Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them."
I Timothy 2: 8a, 9-15
"There I desire...that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works. Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived fell into transgression. Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control."
1 Peter 3:1, 7
"Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives... Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers."
Discussion Questions:
1. Based on the Scriptures listed above what is the role of a wife in relation to her husband? What is the role of women in relation to men?
2. Often times when we hear of a homosexual couple we might wonder who plays the role of the woman and the role of the man. What do we mean by that? Has God ordained for all time the role of a woman and the role of a man?
3. Basing your judgment solely on the scripture passages above should women be allowed to be ministers in the Christian church? Based on the scripture passages some deem to be related to the homosexual people should they be forbidden to be ministers?
4. If a woman is not submissive to her husband in all things is she sinning? If she doesn't cover her head in church is she sinning? If she speaks in church is she sinning? Why or why not?
6. Since God created woman from the rib of man, according to Genesis, doesn't this mean the natural order of things is for women to submit to men? Since God created a man and a woman in Genesis doesn't this mean that naturally only a man and woman can become spouses?
7. Read the text below written in the late 1800's by a man in support of women's civil rights. What is your reaction to his approach to scripture?
The Subjection of Women by John Stuart Mill, Longmans, Green, Reder and Dyer, London, 1869
"We shall be told, perhaps, that religion imposes the duty of obedience; as every established fact which is too bad to admit of any other defense, is always presented to us as an injunction of religion. The Church, it is very true, enjoins it in her formularies, but it would be difficult to derive any such injunction from Christianity. We are told that St. Paul said, 'Wives, obey your husbands': but he also said, 'Slaves, obey your masters.' It was not St. Paul's business, nor was it consistent with his object, the propagation of Christianity, to incite anyone to rebellion against existing laws. The Apostle's acceptance of all social institutions as he found them, is no more to be construed as a disapproval of attempts to improve them at the proper time, than his declaration, "The powers that be are ordained of God, " gives his sanction to military despotism, and to that alone, as the Christian form of political government, or commands passive obedience to it."
8. Now, if cultural context had an influence in the opinions expressed in the verses listed above would a different cultural context changed the way we apply those verses in regard to the role of women in the church and in society today? What about the role of homosexual people in the church and in society?
9. There are still a few denominations, such as the Catholic Church and the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, that forbid women to be ministers and quietly continue to teach that women should be submissive to men. Why is this cause not proclaimed vociferously from pulpits the way the cause against the homosexual people often is? Why aren't churches picketed which allow women ministers? Why is there so much hatred directed toward the homosexual people and not women who refuse to be submissive to men?
Slavery and Same Gender Sexual Behavior
The following texts are to be considered in conjunction with a study on Same Gender Sexual Behavior and the Scriptures. Below the reader will find verses showing the institution of slavery is condoned and upheld in the Bible. After reading these verses please consider the discussion questions at the bottom of this section:
Genesis 9:25
"...he said, "Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers."
Genesis 20:14
"Then Abimelech brought sheep and cattle and male and female slaves and gave them to Abraham, and he returned Sarah his wife to him."
Leviticus 25:44, 46
"Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves... You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."
1 Samuel 8:17
"He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves."
1 Kings 2:40
"At this, he saddled his donkey and went to Achish at Gath in search of his slaves. So Shimei went away and brought the slaves back from Gath."
Esther 7:4
"For I and my people have been sold for destruction and slaughter and annihilation. If we had merely been sold as male and female slaves, I would have kept quiet, because no such distress would justify disturbing the king."
Psalms 123:2
"As the eyes of slaves look to the hand of their master, as the eyes of a maid look to the hand of her mistress, so our eyes look to the LORD our God, till he shows us his mercy."
Ecclesiastes 2:7
"I bought male and female slaves and had other slaves who were born in my house. I also owned more herds and flocks than anyone in Jerusalem before me."
Ephesians 6:5-6, 9
"Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart... And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him."
Colossians 3:22
"Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord."
Colossians 4:1
"Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because you know that you also have a Master in heaven."
Titus 2:9
"Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them..."
1 Peter 2:18
"Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh."
Discussion Questions:
1. Based on the verses listed above would you say that it was in the past or is now God's will that some human beings be slaves? If not, how do you explain Leviticus 25:44. Is Leviticus 25:44 God's word?
2. Was the institution of slavery moral in the Old Testament and the New Testament times and is it moral now? Why or why not?
3. Can cultural bias ever be reflected in the Scriptures?
4. There are many passages cited above showing biblical support for the institution of slavery and there are many others throughout scripture. There are 13 passages which are often used to condemn homosexual people. Why are the passages on slavery no longer enforced but the passages thought to be about homosexuality strenuously proclaimed by some in Christian churches?
5. Would you consider someone Christian who supported the institution of slavery today? Why or why not? What if they show you the abundant scriptural support for their stand? Is there a higher ethic superseding the Scriptures which support slavery? How would you word that ethic?
The Ethics of the Hebrew (Old Testament) Scriptures
The text below was prepared to be read in conjunction with a study of Same Gender Sexual Behavior and the Scriptures. The listing below is primarily concerned with the ethics of the Hebrew Scriptures or "Old Testament" as they are commonly known. Please read the text below and discuss the questions at the end of this section:
Intercourse during menstruation was a serious offense: Lev. 18:19, 15:18-24 and Lev. 18:29 (which is contradicted in Lev. 15:24).
Unmarried sexual relations: Sexual relations between unmarried consenting adults is in no way clearly forbidden. (The word "fornication" given without explanation can not be assumed to refer to sexual relations between unmarried consenting adults as it can have a wide range of meaning.)
Prostitution: Married men apparently could have sex with prostitutes and it was not considered immoral in the Old Testament culture.
Adultery: Apparently married men were not considered adulterous for having sexual relations outside of the marriage bond if those relations were with a prostitute or unmarried woman. The same was not true for married women however. Adultery is defined by the marriage status of the woman, not the man: Deuteronomy 22:22.
Virginity: Only female virginity was valued in the Old Testament: Deut 22:13-21. The loss of male virginity is nowhere proscribed in the Old Testament.
In the Old Testament if a single female lost her virginity before marriage she violated her Father's property rights and would be stoned. Deut. 22: 19-21. If a man falsely accused a woman he just married of not having been a virgin he violated the reputation of the Father by impugning the Father's property, his daughter. The man had to pay the Father for the insult and then marry the woman. Further punishment was added by revoking the man's right to divorce her at whim: Deut 22:19., Deut 24:1-4.
Intercourse, semen, menstruation: Semen and menstrual blood made anyone who touched them unclean: Leviticus 15:16-24. Intercourse made you unclean till sundown. Menstruation made a woman unclean for seven days.
Prostitution: Prostitution was a normal part of Hebrew society. Genesis 38: 12-19, Joshua 2:1-7. Any denigration of prostitution was exclusively directed toward the prostitute. Paul tries to convince his readers in the New Testament times that prostitution isn't acceptable (I Cor. 6:16) so one might assume it was still an accepted part of the society of his time.
Polygamy: Polygamy was not considered unethical and was practiced in the Old Testament times and is not proscribed. The New Testament nowhere mentions polygamy but I Timothy 3:2, 12 and Titus 1:6 may refer to this practice and forbid it for bishops and deacons.
Male property rights as sex ethic: Male property rights over women seem to determine sexual ethics (i.e. rape, incest, adultery, prostitution) of much of the Hebrew Scriptures.
Supplying an heir for a deceased brother: In the Old Testament if a married man died childless his brother was required by law to marry the widow and the child from that union would be considered the child and heir of the deceased brother: Deut. 25:5-10. We don't know how Jesus felt about the practice but he didn't criticize it when it was discussed with him in Matt. 22:23-33.
Rape: The punishment for rape was determined by the marital status of the woman and where she was when raped. If she was engaged and raped in the country then she was presumed innocent and her rapist would be killed: Deut. 22: 25-27. If a woman was engaged and was raped in the city then it was presumed that she was as guilty as the rapist because someone would have heard her scream; if they didn't then naturally she was complicit in the act. In this situation both the rapist and his victim would be stoned to death: Deut. 22: 23-24. You may well ask what would happen if the woman was not engaged and was raped? Because the rapist had violated the Father's property rights over his daughter's body the rapist was to pay the Father of the rape victim: Deut 22: 28-30 and then as further punishment the rapist would be forced to marry his victim for life, waiving his right to divorce her at will: Deut 24:1-4.
Offering your daughters to be raped: While the people of Sodom have gone down in history for their immorality and inhospitality it is interesting to note that no word of condemnation is written in the Scriptures concerning Lot offering his daughters to be raped so that his guests would remain unscathed. (Genesis 18:8) Against the background of the extreme importance of the law of hospitality to strangers this act becomes understandable, though it serves to point out that a different set of ethics was at work. Would you offer your daughters to be raped? Would it be moral? Why in there so much invective in some Christian churches about the attempt by some men in Sodom to sexually humiliate the strangers in their city and none whatsoever about Lot offering his daughters to be raped?
Incest: While incest is certainly proscribed in the Hebrew Scriptures we see that Lot's daughters got him drunk and slept with him and conceived children. Against the background of the extreme importance of the survival of the tribe this becomes somewhat understandable. But, again it serves to point out that a different ethic was at work then the one that operates in our society. (Genesis 20: 30-38) Why is this act of incest usually ignored by Christian churches?
The holiness of the male image: If a woman was trying to defend her husband from physical assault and grabbed the perpetrator's testicles her hand would be cut off: Deut 25:11. This is because the testes were considered holy and an integral part of the holy male image. This is reflected in the name of our two major divisions of the Bible, the Old and New Testaments; the word "testament" has its origins in the word testes. In the Old Testament a covenant could be made by one man placing his hand over another man's testes and swearing an oath: Genesis 47:29 The male form was considered so holy that if the testes were crushed or mutilated then that man could not be a part of "the congregation of the Lord": Deut 23:1 and could not be a priest: Lev. 21:20.
Slaughter of women and children: It was not uncommon that in warfare God was presented as instructing the slaughter of women and children as well as men: "O daughter of Babylon, who are to be destroyed, happy shall he be who repays you as you have served us! Happy shall be he who takes and dashes your little ones against the rock!": Psalm 137:8-9. "Samaria is held guilty, for she has rebelled against her God. They shall fall by the sword, their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child ripped open": Hosea 13:16. See also Isaiah 13:16 ; I Sam. 15:3 ; 2 Kings 8:12
Discussion Questions:
1. Were the ethics of the Hebrew people in that time period different than the ethics that our culture operates with today? In what ways? Can ethics ever be relative? For example, Lot's daughters slept with their own father in order to keep their tribe alive. If ethics are relative then this act could perhaps be excused, however if the taboo against incest is an eternal truth never to be violated under any conditions they should be strongly condemned, shouldn't they?
2. Is it moral for a rape victim to be killed if no one heard her scream, or to force her to marry her rapist? Is it moral in today's culture to deliberately smash babies' heads and rip open pregnant women in the context of warfare? Does the fact it is written in the Bible and presented as the word of God make it moral? What implications, if any, can you draw from this about the authority of all scripture?
3. If some of the sexual ethics as contained in the Old Testament are largely driven by a standard of male property rights how does that differ from morality as we define it today? (You may take as an example why female virginity might be valued in the Old Testament versus why male and female virginity might be valued in our culture.)
4. Is the ethic of women as property reflected at all in the New Testament and in our culture today; if so, in what ways?
5. Do you ever detect a double standard in some of the sexual ethics of the Old Testament? If so, please give an example. Is a double standard unfair and/or immoral?
6. Is there a double standard at work today in regard to homosexuals (i.e. heterosexuals are not fired from their jobs because of their sexual orientation; heterosexuals can legally marry and get tax breaks; heterosexuals can make public displays of affection with impunity, etc, but the opposite is true of homosexuals). Is that double standard moral, why or why not?
7. Besides male property rights, can you identify other "ethics" that might be at work in Old Testament sexual ethics? (i.e., property rights seem to have influenced the laws on rape, but that ethic certainly did not create the prohibition against a woman grabbing a man's testes. How might you state that ethic in general? Reread the section "The holiness of the male image".)
8. Would the clash between the Hebrew culture and the nearby Canaanite culture produce any laws or rules? What would the purpose of those rules be?
9. If property rights actually do define much of the sexual ethics in the Old Testament versus what we consider "moral principle" is it possible that there is another ethic at work in the Old Testament passages which proscribe male Same Gender Sexual Behavior other than what we consider "moral principle"? What might that/those ethic(s) be? (As you answer the question take into consideration that there are no Old Testament proscriptions of female Same Gender Sexual Behavior.)
10. Finally, would taking into consideration the historical context and the original reason a Bible verse was written be important in how we apply it to people today?
Past Religious Conflicts
This section was taken off the Internet and is reproduced by permission of the Ontario Centre for Religious Tolerance, Box 27026, Frontenac, PO Kingston, Ontario Canada K7m8w5. It is included here as a part of a study on the Scriptures and Same Gender Sexual Behavior. Please read the following and consider the discussion questions at the end of this section:
Every age since Galileo has had at least one public debate with a religious component. Typically, the conflict has been between established religion and either a physical science, medicine, or a social science.
The conflict often goes through 8 stages:
1. A scientist or physician will propose a new belief system that is in conflict with established religious beliefs. Churches ignore the proposal.2. A growing number of people will start to disagree with church teaching.
3. Churches issue statements which condemn the proposal.
4. Support for the proposal grows among the public.
5. Churches issue statement pointing out that belief in the proposal negates the entire Christian message.
6. Support continues to grow.
7. Churches begin to ignore the proposal.
8. Many decades or centuries later, churches may incorporate the proposal into their belief system.
Shape of the Earth
St. Augustine reasoned that since the Bible contains no references to people living on the other side of the earth, that therefore there was no other side. The world must be flat. Lactantius ridiculed the idea that people could walk with their feet above their heads or that rain and snow could fall upwards towards the earth.
In the 6th Century, Hebrews 9 and other passages were interpreted as describing the earth as a great flat parallelogram, surrounded by four seas and walls which supported the heavens. This theory held for some 600 years until two men (Peter of Abano and Cecco d'Ascoli) revived earlier theories of a round earth. Peter escaped punishment by quickly dying a natural death; Cecco was burned at the stake for his beliefs.
Magellan's voyage around the world in 1519 provided firm evidence for a round world, but religious leaders did not fully accept it for two more centuries.
Solar System
The Christian church adopted Plato's geocentric principle: the belief that the earth was the centre of the universe and that the moon, sun and stars rotated around it.
Copernicus sounded the death knell of this principle in his greatest book Revolution of the Heavenly Bodies which described a crude model of a sun-centred solar system. In order to escape imprisonment, the book was presented as a hypothesis - a work of imagination. Copernicus was in many ways lucky. He died on the day that the first editions of his book were distributed, before he could be arrested.
To defend the status-quo, Protestant and Catholic churches quoted a passage in Psalms in which the sun "cometh forth as a bridegroom out of his chamber". From Ecclesiastes they quoted: "The earth standeth fast forever". Martin Luther mentioned Joshua's command that the sun stand still.
Giordano Bruno was the first supporter of Copernicus' theory; he was imprisoned and then burned alive. Early in the 17th century, Galileo's telescope revolutionized astronomy. He observed that the planet Venus went through phases, that there were spots on the sun and that Jupiter had moons.
The church arrested Galileo twice; the Inquisition showed him the instruments of torture that would be used to force his recantation. He abandoned his teachings under pressure and retired. It was not until the year 1835 that the teachings of Copernicus and Galileo were finally accepted by his Church.
Other Conflicts Between Science and Religion
Other battles were fought between science and religion:
There were a number of minor skirmishes between religion and science that were "hot" for a while, and later faded from view:
Interest on Money
Leviticus 25:36, Deuteronomy 23:19, Psalms 15:5 and Luke 6:35 prohibit interest payments on loans. This policy was carried over from Judaism into Christianity. The rationale given by theologians was based on "natural law": Only living entities can grow. Since money is not alive, it must remain fixed in size. St. Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas lent their support. Usury was defined as the charging of any interest whatsoever by 28 councils of the Church and by 17 popes. Pope Clement V made it a heresy to even suggest that the idea of interest could be acceptable.
Fortunately, Calvin argued that usury really meant oppressively high interest rates. The Roman Catholic church reluctantly followed the Protestant lead. By the 19th century, interest had become a non-issue.
Lightning
The churches had always held that Satan, the "Prince of the Power of the Air", controlled all lightning and thunder. But in 1752, Franklin's experiment during a thunder storm proved that lightning was an electrical phenomenon. The experiment was replicated by an experimenter in France, who was electrocuted.
Lightning rods were a logical development; they protected buildings wherever they were installed. Unfortunately, to install a "heretical rod" was to admit that centuries of theological teachings were false. Churches were reluctant to use them. Seventeen years after Franklin's experiment, lightning struck the unprotected Church of San Nazaro, near Venice. This ignited 200,000 pounds of powder which had been stored there for safe keeping. The explosion wiped out one sixth of the city of Brescia and killed 3000 people. Lightning rods soon appeared on spires across Italy.
Anesthetics During Childbirth
In 1846 James Simpson, a Scottish physician promoted the use of chloroform to relieve pain during childbirth. This was immediately opposed by the Church, citing Genesis 3:16 "...I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children". The avoidance of pain was seen as thwarting God's will. Fortunately, Simpson found a competing passage (Genesis 2:21) which describes the first surgical operation; it seems to support the use of anesthetic: "...God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam.....he took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh.." In time, the Church's opposition dissipated; pain killers have since lost their religious significance.
Childhood Inoculations
Early in the 17th Century, physicians in France and Great Britain promoted inoculations to prevent small pox. Theologians were quick to respond. Rev. Edward Massy in England preached a sermon blaming the distemper experienced by Job in the Bible upon an inoculation by Satan. Other clergy preached that the technique was being promoted by sorcerers and atheists. Smallpox was regarded as "a judgment of God on the sins of the people......to avert it is but to provoke him more". Inoculation was "an encroachment on the prerogatives of Jehovah, whose right it is to wound and smite."
Jenner's development of vaccination was similarly opposed on religious grounds. By preventing the spread of disease, they were "bidding defiance to Heaven itself - even to the will of God." In 1885, a serious epidemic of smallpox broke out in Montreal Canada. Few Protestants died because they had been mostly vaccinated. However the Roman Catholic clergy were generally opposed to the practice; their parishioners died needlessly, in great numbers.
Birth Control
Birth Control appears (at most) only once in the Christian Bible. See Genesis 38:1-10.
Judah (circa 1730 BCE) had three sons, Er, Onan and Shelah. The eldest son, Er, was "wicked in the sight of the Lord", and so God killed him. This placed the responsibility on the next eldest son to marry Er's widow, Tamar and to have a male child. The child would then be considered the son of Er.
Onan married the widow, but was unwilling to conceive a child which would not be considered his own. He practiced an elementary form of birth control (coitus interruptus). God did not approve of this, and so He killed Onan as well. It is not clear whether God disapproved of Onan's refusal to follow Jewish custom and provide an heir for his brother, or of his use of birth control. Most modern commentators believe the former; many ancient Christian leaders selected the latter.
St. Augustine (354-430 CE) commented on this biblical passage. He wrote that "where the conception of the offspring is prevented", sexual intercourse is "unlawful and wicked". St. Augustine did not differentiate between coitus interruptus and the rhythm method. This established Church policy for centuries. Interestingly enough, later clerics totally misinterpreted this same chapter; they said that Onan's crime was masturbation, not coitus interruptus. It was believed that God killed him for what became known as "self abuse"; Onanaism became a synonym for masturbation.
The Christian Church's stand on artificial birth control was adopted by the Protestant sects after the Reformation. All churches remained totally opposed to contraception until the courageous stand by Church of England in1930. Other Protestant churches quickly followed their lead. Pius XI issued an encyclical in 1930 which reiterated the traditional view of the Roman Catholic Church.
In 1951, Pius XII made the first break with tradition. He said that the so-called "safe period" or rhythm method was lawful under certain circumstances. Pope John later set up advisory committee of specialists to study the legality of "the pill". In 1968, Pope Paul ignored the majority recommendation of the panel and ruled against "artificial" methods of birth control in his encyclical Humanae Vitae.
Pope Paul's decision was met with widespread criticism from many within and without the Church. The laity in North America has generally ignored the encyclical and is now widely practicing birth control. It is difficult for the Church to maintain control over its flock in a multi-faith culture. The family size of Protestants now differs very little from that of Roman Catholics. This conflict is different from those described previously, because it is still an active concern within the Roman Catholic Church - at least among the leadership.
(This ends the section taken from the Ontario Centre for Religious Tolerance, Box 27026, Frontenac, PO Kingston, Ontario Canada K7m8w5.)
Discussion Questions:
1. A few times when this author was confronted by theologians who disagree with an inclusive stance on the homosexual people and the Christian faith the question was asked: "Don't you believe there is objective truth?". Based on the preceding section how would you respond to this question? Further, discuss what is God's truth concerning infant baptism, the meaning of the Lord's Supper and predestination.
2. Is it possible for the majority of Christianity to hold to a specific doctrinal belief and yet not have it be "the truth"?
3. Is it possible to have a belief system within the framework of the Christian faith and still affirm another person as Christian even if your set of beliefs differs from theirs? What about on issues such as infant baptism, the Lord's Supper, predestination, the role of women in the church, divorce and/or homosexuality?
On to a study of "Same Gender Sexual Behavior and the Scriptures"