What is the Theology of Christian GBLT?

Question

I once visitted a Pentacostal Church pastored by two partnered men. I listened to the sermon, sang songs with them, and danced up and down the aisles with them. Afterword, I stayed and socialized, come out confident a fist wouldn't be landing in my face. The pastor took me aside and asked, "Do you think homosexuality and the Bble are compatible?" I told him no for there are verse in both Old and New testements condemning sexual acts between genders. He told me something for which I have no knowledge: All those references believed to condemn homosexuality actually condemn temple prostitution, not loving relationships.

How true is this? What is the common theology of Christians gays, lesbians, bisexuals and trans-folk?

Lingua,
This church, New Life in Michigan City, IN, is a Pentacostal church run by two partnered gay men.

Here's their website.

http://www.nlcch.org/default.htm

Answer 1

In our Judeo-Christian society, the documents collectively known as the Bible serve as the primary guide on most issues. It is interesting that many Christians take literally the references to homosexual acts, while interpreting other text with great flexibility. One person reported listening to a nationally-known woman speak in her campaign against homosexuality. She spent quite a bit of time quoting impressively from Leviticus. The listener accepted much of what the speaker said until he realized that, by Levitical standards, the crusader herself had broken many biblical laws – she spoke in church (1 Corinthians 14:34), she taught men (1 Timothy 2:12), she was wearing a dress made of cotton and polyester (Deuteronomy 22:11), and others of which he was probably unaware.

What does the Bible really say about homosexuality? Actually, very little. Most significantly, Jesus said nothing at all. Considering the relatively small amount of attention the Bible pays to the subject, we must ask ourselves why this is such a volatile issue. Other subjects about which the scriptures say a great deal (e.g. judgment, pride, hypocrisy) receive much less passionate attention. Before looking at specific passages, it is important to note that everyone understands the scriptures based on, and through, the light of what they have been taught. The Bible was not written in a cultural void, and many of its instructions and laws are simply classified as less relevant today (e.g. prohibition against eating pork).

Nowhere does the Bible actually address the idea of persons being lesbian or gay. The statements are, without exception, directed to certain homosexual acts. Early writers had no understanding of homosexuality as a psychosexual orientation. That truth is a relatively recent discovery. The biblical authors were referring to homosexual acts performed by persons they assumed were heterosexuals.

The Sodom Story
A chief text used to condemn homosexuality is the Sodom story (Genesis 19:1-29), often interpreted as showing God's abhorrence of homosexuality. In the story, two angels, in the form of men, are sent to the home of Lot in Sodom. While they are there, the men of the city “both young and old, surrounded the house - everyone without exception” and demanded that the visitors be brought out “so that we might know them.” (Genesis 19: 4-5) Lot begged the men to leave his guests alone and take his daughters instead. The men of the city became angry and stormed the door. As a result, they were all struck blind by the angels.

There are several problems with the traditional interpretation of this passage. Whether or not the intent of the men of Sodom was sexual, the inhospitality and injustice coming from the mob, and that generally characterized the community, were “the sin of Sodom.” (Ezekial 16:49-50, Isaiah 13:19, Jeremiah 49:18; 50:40) Jesus himself refers to the inhospitality of Sodom. (Luke 10:10-13) If the men were indeed homosexuals, then why would Lot offer them his daughters? What is threatened here is rape. The significant point, then, is that all rape is considered horrible by God. The story deserves another reading.

It should be noted that not all of the men of Sodom could have been homosexual or there would have been no need to destroy them. If they had all been homosexuals, they would have all died off leaving no heirs. Quite likely, they were a mixed group of evil men attempting to be abusive to people who were different. Ironically, lesbian and gay people are often the victim of that same sin.
Although the traditional interpretation of the Sodom story fails as an argument against homosexuality, there are several other Old Testament passages that do condemn homosexual acts. Again, it should be noted that these passages do not deal with same-sex orientation nor is there any reference to genital love between lesbian or gay persons.

Homosexual Acts
Of thousands of Old Testament passages, only two make explicit reference to homosexual acts: Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13. Both of these passages are a part of the Levitical holiness code, which is not kept by any Christian group. If it was enforced, almost every Christian would be excommunicated or executed. It has been logically argued that science and progress have made many of the Levitical laws irrelevant. For example, fundamentalist author Tim LaHaye states that, although Levitical laws prohibit intercourse during menstruation, medical authorities do not view it as harmful, and, therefore, it should not be viewed as sinful. He further explains, “Those laws were given 3,500 years ago before showers and baths were convenient, before tampons, disinfectants and other improved means of sanitation had been invented.” (The Act of Marriage, p.275) With that, LaHaye makes this law irrelevant and rightly so. Ironically, though, in his book, The Unhappy Gay, the Levitical laws are one of the chief cornerstones of his arguments. Much of the holiness code is now irrelevant for us as moral law. Thus, having children, which was of exceptional importance to the early Hebrews, is now made less relevant by overpopulation, just as the prohibition against eating pork and shellfish has been made irrelevant by refrigeration.

The Bible never addresses the issue of homosexual love, yet it does have several beautiful examples of same-sex love. David's love for Jonathan was said to exceed his love for women. (2 Samuel 1:26) Ruth's relationship with Naomi is an example of a deep, bonding love, and Ruth’s words of covenant to Naomi are often used in heterosexual wedding ceremonies. (Ruth 1:16-17) The Bible clearly values love between persons of the same sex.

Jesus' Attitude
In the New Testament there is no record of Jesus saying anything about homosexuality. This ought to strike us as very odd in light of the great threat to Christianity, family life and the American way that some would have us believe homosexuality is. Jesus saw injustice and religious hypocrisy as a far greater threat to the Realm of God.

Episcopal priest Dr. Tom Horner has written that the Gospels imply in two places that Jesus' attitude toward lesbians and gays would not have been hostile. (Jonathan Loved David, p. 122) The first is found in the story of Jesus healing the Centurion's servant. (Matthew 8:5-13) The word used for the servant is “pais,” which in the Greek culture referred to a younger lover of an older, more powerful or educated man. Clearly, the story demonstrates an unusually intense love, and Jesus' response was wholly positive.

The other hint of Jesus' attitude is seen in his comments about eunuchs. (Matthew 19:10-12) Jesus opposed divorce in opposition to the abuses experienced by women. It is in the context of marriage that Jesus said “some eunuchs were born so; others had been made eunuchs and still others choose to be eunuchs for the Kingdom's sake.” Jesus' remarks about celibacy and castration are clear, but a male child being born without testicles is a rare birth defect. It is only in our day that the Kinsey Institute has demonstrated that sexual orientation is likely determined prior to birth. It could well be that those to whom Jesus refers as being “born eunuchs” are the people we call lesbian or gay.

Jesus' attitude toward eunuchs differed greatly from the fundamentalist Pharisees of his day. To them, eunuchs should have been excluded from the covenant and barred from worship and participating in the community of faith. Jesus' graceful approach to eunuchs is beautifully pictured in the promise of the prophecy of Isaiah, “To the eunuchs...I will give them an everlasting name that will not be taken away.” (56:4-8)

In Jesus' day there were three types of persons called eunuchs: celibates, those who were slaves and were castrated so that children would not be born to them, and those who were “born eunuchs,” or homosexuals. Royal and wealthy households used castrated slaves to work with and guard the concubines and female slaves. However, when assigning slaves to female members of the royal family, they would choose homosexual slaves. With female members, the concern was not just unwanted pregnancies but also rape.

It is against this background that we must read the story found in Acts 8:26-40. In this passage, the Holy Spirit sends Philip the Deacon to witness to and baptize an Ethiopian eunuch of Queen Candace of Ethiopia. One of the earliest converts to Christianity was a person excluded for sexual reasons from the Old Testament community.

Paul's References
Paul's statement in Romans 1:18-32 has been taken as the strongest New Testament rejection of homosexuality. He is concerned about the influence of the pagan culture on the Roman Christians. After giving a detailed description of a world that “exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshipped and served created things rather than the Creator,” he continues, “Therefore, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lusts for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men and received in themselves the due penalty of their perversion.”

A complete reading of these passages, in their original context, clearly shows that what Paul was actually referring to was homosexual temple prostitution, which was performed by various cults (though far more cults used heterosexual prostitution). Again, Paul is not referring to same-sex love, and he clearly has no concept of persons for whom this lifestyle is “natural.”

Paul's other reference to homosexual acts in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 is similar to 1 Timothy 1:8-11. These two passages contain lists of persons to be excluded from the Realm of God. The interpretation of these passages depends on two Greek words that have always presented a problem for translators. In the King James Version, they are translated “effeminate” and “abusers of themselves with mankind.” In the Revised Standard Version, they were combined and rendered as “homosexuals,” however, these are not the Greek words for homosexual, so these translations reflects the scholars' bias. The New International Version illustrates the difference in these two words by translating them “male prostitute” and “homosexual offenders.” The Jerusalem Bible uses the terms “catamites and “sodomites.” Catamites were youth kept especially for sexual purpose, who were usually paid large sums of money. Neither passage refers to persons of same-sex orientation but to people who used their sexuality for personal gain.

The Love of Christ
Jesus did a great deal to change many social customs and ideas. He elevated the position of women, and, ultimately, they were his best and most faithful disciples. He did this by example and by commandments that were absolutely inclusive of the rights of all people. Yet, in the name of the Christ whose love encompassed all, the Church has been the most homophobic of all institutions. This should not be surprising when we realize that the Church is still the largest institution which is primarily racially segregated.

The final, and central, message of the New Testament is that ALL persons are loved by God so much that God's Son was sent as a means of redemption from a disease by which we are all afflicted. The cure for this disease cannot be found in any set of actions. Neither homosexuality nor heterosexuality is redemptive. God's love through Christ was given to all people.

The Theological Reflection
For the Christian, sin must be understood as a disease that results FROM a broken relationship with God and that results IN a broken relationship with one another and with ourselves. Hence, Jesus' supreme command is to love God and to love our neighbors as we love ourselves. Christianity is not a religion with new rules and laws but rather is a new relationship with God. Those things that the legalists are fond of labeling “sins” are actually just symptoms of the much deeper disease of alienation and estrangement. Much of the energy of the Church has been spent dealing with symptoms while leaving the disease intact. Jesus did not seem overly concerned about the legal transgressions of those to whom he ministered. Rather, he was much more concerned with healing the physical, spiritual, emotional and relational brokenness of people. Perhaps if the Church would again give itself to the healing/reconciling ministry of Jesus, then some of the symptoms about which we are so concerned would begin to disappear.

That brings us to the question: Is homosexuality a symptom of brokenness? In a very few cases, perhaps. Yet, pointing fingers of blame and accusation is not Christ's way. Rather, Jesus accepted people as they were and allowed love and acceptance to work its miracle. However, most lesbians and gays have been lesbian or gay for as long as they can remember. For them, it is a much a natural characteristic as their eye color or their handedness. Kinsey Institute research (University of Indiana, 1981) has suggested that homosexuality may well be genetic or, at least, linked to some prenatal factors. (Sexual Preference, Bell &Weinberg) Certainly most competent psychologists would concur that sexual orientation is set prior to the age of five in most persons. It is, therefore, not a matter of choice, so it cannot be a moral or ethical issue.

Many Christians insist that God can change/cure the homosexual. In the book The Third Sex there are six reported cases of homosexuals whom God has “cured.” Of these six, at least four are known to have returned to their gay lifestyle. (Christianity Today, February 1981) Many lesbians and gays spend most of their lives trying, with no success, to persuade God to change them. It is like trying to get God to change your eye color. What option, then, is left to these persons? They have been told that they can't be gay and Christian. Since all efforts have failed in their struggle not to be gay or lesbian, then their only recourse, according to the Church, is that they can't be Christian. So, the Church has discounted or discarded as much as 10% of the population.

If they are excluded from the life of the Christian community, who, then, will tell them of God's inclusive love and of Jesus' reconciling death? Are they left to assume that God is so narrow-minded as to exclude them for something over which they have no control and for a choice they did not make? When will the Church finally be brave enough to say with Paul, “in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave or free, male or female,” gay or straight? God has enough love for all!

Answer 2

I don't know that there's a "common theology" to all Christian GLBT folks. But I will say that most believe that the BIble is not to be taken literally. One must look at the intention behind the words. If Jesus could teach in parables, is it that radical to think that the scriptures would do something similar? I think that SOME of the passages that some translations throw "homosexuality" into are indeed not about homosexuality. In other places, something very different is meant.
In some places, there is a very direct ban on male homosexual behavior, but if you look at where this ban is, it's in a list of religious restrictions that modern Christians, by and large, ignore. We don't need to wear our hair a certain way to tell the world we're Jewish anymore, cause....we're kinda not really Jewish. It's akin to the Catholic fish-on-fridays thing. There's nothing inherently immoral about eating fish; it's something that's done out of religious devotion to demonstrate unity as a group and distinction from other groups.

Furthermore, we DO know more about sexual orientation now than they did then; there is room for some people to believe that maybe in some places it was mentioned as a bad behavior: but it was mentioned as such because of the understanding of the people in that culture. This part ties very heavily into how you think the bible was written / inspired and what that means.

Answer 3

First of all I would like to thank Everybody still loves Chris for his educational answer. I could never have done so well.

Second, I will give my limited versin of the same answer. People will find answers in the bible to support anything they want to support. During the pre-civil war the angry southerners found quotes to support slavery. Wanna have a go at that? Were minority races really created to be slaves to the white man according to the bible? I think not! It was just crazy people who were pretending to be christians trying to keep the black man down (I am white by the way)

It has been proven over and over that someone does not choose to be gay. Do you 'choose to be straight'? It is genetic. More and more people are figuring it out before they hit their teens. heck, many are aware of it before they even go to school. Same with transgendered folk. If God has an issue with it why did he make us this way?

Answer 4

You are asking a very broad question. There are so many versions of Christianity. Some accept it, some condemn it.

As Christian Religions go - you can't get much more anti-gay than pentecostals. That is a hardline evangelical group and they condemn gays harshly. I would reccomend that you find a more gay friendly version of Christianity for your own personal mental health.

Don't take the bible literally.

Stay away from evangelicals.

Don't believe that we are hated. God did not make us to damn us to hell. We are loved. He made us the way he did because that is how he wants us to be.

Ask Jesus to be in your heart.

Answer 5

The Bible was written in Ancient Hebrew and Ancient Greek. Neither of those languages even has a word for homosexuality. The ancient text talks of two kinds of same-gender sexual acts. The prostitution, usually of young boys by older men, and the violent act of humiliating rape, as in the story of Sodom. The people of that day had no concept of a respectful and loving relationship between two members of the same gender.

Jesus taught us about love. Love God and love your neighbor as yourself. These words are also found in Leviticus, curiously enough. Christ was an inclusive person. When his deciples sought to exclude certain persons, persons who were outcast or on the fringe of society, or otherwise different from them, Jesus corrected them, and included the others.

The only references to homosexual acts in the New Testament were not words spoken by Christ himself, and in fact were references to the Old Testament text. Christ told us that we are a new Creation, that we are a wonderful creation of God, and that God loves us. The entire theology of Christ is Love.

Answer 6

properly, the Methodists have confidence that it relatively is no longer unfastened will. To them there is pre-ordained notwithstanding in case you would be a Christian or no longer. you haven't any longer any determination in the subject. no remember how or what you have confidence, while you at the instant are not a sort of specific decide on it relatively is no longer proper in the slightest degree. Paul is going returned and forth in the bible. One 2nd he says it is election and then yet yet returned he says only faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. To get returned to the component nevertheless, it is ridiculous to take the stance that one is being stuborn in the event that they do no longer have confidence in you. i will use the bible as an occasion. Thomas did no longer have confidence that Jesus had risen till he unquestionably touched the holes from the spikes and he supposedly knew Jesus in my view yet yet many Christians think of you stupid in case you do no longer have confidence in Jesus purely as a results of fact they advised you to. unfastened will does not artwork that way. If that does happen, it is pronounced as strategies washing. ultimately, the bible specially says in Proverbs to no longer stand in the way of sinners. in the event that they chosen to no longer have confidence or in the event that they sin, you bypass away them on my own however the church does not teach spreading the word, they coaching beating concept into somebody till they ultimately supply in.

Answer 7

I picked up a booklet at our recent Pridefest in St. Louis a couple months ago. and someone in one of my myspace groups found a link to the same info. it's long, but a good read. check it out! the things your pastor touched on can be found here....

http://www.soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bible-gay-christian

Answer 8

http://godmademegay.com/