Skip to main content

View Diary: Wrong: Jesus did speak about homosexuality (291 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I admire your intent but you are trying too hard. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dirkster42, CalNM, happymisanthropy

    I'm not going to argue at too great length on your argument, but it is a weak one.  I admire your intent, though.  I just think that you're taking the wrong approach.  I think it's simpler to first accept that the Bible, both New and Old Testament, does have condemnations of male+male sexual acts, but then to put that into better context relative to other sins.  There are a number of silly sins in the bible that make no sense to us today.  

    First, though, about eunuchs.  I'm familiar with the passage, and with that interpretation of it.  However, a eunuch, by any definition you choose, is a man who can't be a lover of women.  Jesus acknowledgment of them in this passage is important.  However, it doesn't leap the gap to permission of sex between men.  I admire your intent, but that just fails.

    It's also important to note that there is no condemnation ANYWHERE in the bible of lesbianism.  NOWHERE!  Not in Leviticus, not in Paul, not in the Gospels, nowhere, nowhere, nowhere.  

    I asked a rabbi why that was, one time.  He told me, "I don't think they were imaginative enough at that time to think of such things."  Interesting answer, eh?  In the context of the ancient world, sex was about penises.  Women having sex with each other thus wasn't really sex.  No penetration possible, no sex.  From a male-dominated POV, in a world without Internet porn, it was a good-enough definition, one that reflected the limits of what they could grasp.  It didn't pose any threat to them because women were still chattel, no matter what they did when the men were not looking, so it wasn't an issue meriting great scholarly thought and debate.  A dude looking at you funny, THAT merited debate, especially in a world where rape was one of the traditional rewards of battle.

    But none of this will make any difference to those who insist on picking and choosing those Bible passages that best reflect their own prejudices, and that's what churches usually do, especially fundamentalist churches in the South, it seems.  Just as the Bible seemed to contain many passages justifying slavery for Africans when they wanted to justify that, so too it condemns homosexuality so greatly that it dwarfs everything else -- when they want it to.  They cherry pick the Bible then and use it as a basis to back up their peer group's hatred of others that are not like them.  And they even extend it, in a "penumbra," I guess, to lesbians, even though there is NOTHING in the Bible about lesbians.  It just stands to reason that since the Bible is against things you hate, and you hate lesbians, it must be anti-lesbian, too, right?  

    That's the level of biblical analysis you have to deal with.

    I quoted a different passage of the Gospels to MOT in his diary that I thought reflected better what Jesus might have thought about gays.  This one isn't some weird puny dated passage from Leviticus.  It's CORE.  It's the basis of much of what the Gospels are about.  It's not easily blown off.

    Matthew 25:41

    41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

    44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

    45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

    The way the religious right insists on treating "the least of these" is inconsistent with Matthew.  And they do it a lot.  It amazes me how they manage to justify their actions to themselves on the basis of religion.  

    I gladly extend the definition of "the least of these" to the gays in our society, because they've certainly had the holy living crap kicked out of them long enough.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site