The point he's trying to make seems to contradict itself.
It all comes off like, "Even though the Bible says
X, it really doesn't mean
X."
On the finer points of the article:
Before I start let me make clear, I take no stand on the issue of homosexuality. I used to but not anymore. Now, I couldn't care less what to people do in their bedroom. All people have the right to live their own lives.
Premise 1 - Most people have not carefully and prayerfully researched the biblical texts often used to condemn God's lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender children.
Granted.
In fact, most people don't bother to research the Bible at all.
"If the preacher man on the TV said it then it must be true."
Premise 2 - Historically, people's misinterpretation of the Bible has left a trail of suffering, bloodshed, and death.
Couldn't agree more.
Premise 3 - We must be open to new truth from Scripture.
Granted. However, we must also be careful that our own preconceived notions don't cause us to twist the scriptures to fit our own ends. I.E, "Even though the Bible says the sky is blue what it really means is the sky is red."
When we do that our own opinions and beliefs take over and the Bible becomes pretty much meaningless.
Premise 4 - The Bible is a book about God -- not a book about human sexuality.
Agreed.
* DEUTERONOMY 22:13-21
If it is discovered that a bride is not a virgin, the Bible demands that she be executed by stoning immediately.
Okay, so the Bible condemns adultery. We still consider adultery wrong today but we don't kill people for doing it.
* DEUTERONOMY 22:22
If a married person has sex with someone else's husband or wife, the Bible commands that both adulterers be stoned to death.
see above
* MARK 10:1-12
Divorce is strictly forbidden in both Testaments, as is remarriage of anyone who has been divorced.
Not quite. In cases of infidelity divorce is permissible.
* LEVITICUS 18:19
The Bible forbids a married couple from having sexual intercourse during a woman's period. If they disobey, both shall be executed.
Right, sex during a woman's period was considered an unclean thing to do. Again, we don't kill people for doing it but many cultures still consider it an unclean thing.
* MARK 12:18-27
If a man dies childless, his widow is ordered by biblical law to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir.
No, the brother is ordered to marry the widow. (Deuteronomy 25:5-10)
* DEUTERONOMY 25:11-12
If a man gets into a fight with another man and his wife seeks to rescue her husband by grabbing the enemy's genitals, her hand shall be cut off and no pity shall be shown her.
No comment
Premise 5 - We miss what these passages say about God when we spend so much time debating what they say about sex.
So what do the passages say about God?
Now what does the creation story say about homosexuality? Because the text says it is "natural" that a man and a woman come together to create a new life, some people think this means gay or lesbian couples are "unnatural." They read this interpretation into the text, even though the text is silent about all kinds of relationships that don't lead to having children:
* couples who are unable to have children
* couples who are too old to have children
* Anti-gay protest couples who choose not to have children
* people who are single
Are these relationships (or lack of relationships) "unnatural"? There's nothing said here that condemns or approves the love that people of the same sex have for each other, including the love I have for my partner, Gary.
This is where everything begins to go south.
I'll grant that there are cases where heterosexual couples cannot produce children. In some cultures these couples are condemned and even killed for this. However, at it's heart a union between man and woman can produce children. A union between two men or two women cannot, under any circumstances. That is why these unions were seen as unnatural. Love really never entered the picture.
The sexual act that occurs in the story of Sodom is a gang rape
If that were the case then the men of Sodom would have accepted when Lot offered to send his daughters out to them, but they didn't. They weren't interested in the women, just the other men.
Leviticus 18:22 reads: "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female. It is an abomination." A similar verse occurs two chapters later, in Leviticus 20:13: "A man who sleeps with another man is an abomination and should be executed." On the surface, these words could leave you feeling rather uneasy, especially if you are gay. But just below the surface is the deeper truth about God -- and it has nothing to do with sex.
Correction in bold
Okay, let's look at the verses.
Leviticus 18:22 - Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.
Leviticus 20:13 - If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.
Hmm, seems pretty cut and dried to me.
So what's a holiness code? It's a list of behaviors that people of faith find offensive in a certain place and time. In this case, the code was written for priests only, and its primary intent was to set the priests of Israel over and against priests of other cultures.
Leviticus 18:1-2a - The LORD said to Moses, "Speak to the Israelites and say to them...
This portion of Leviticus was addressed to all Israel, not just the priests.
What about this word abomination that comes up in both passages? In Hebrew, "abominations" (TO'EBAH) are behaviors that people in a certain time and place consider tasteless or offensive. To the Jews an abomination was not a law, not something evil like rape or murder forbidden by the Ten Commandments. It was a common behavior by non-Jews that Jews thought was displeasing to God.
TO'E'BAH
Outline of Biblical usage:
1) a disgusting thing, abomination, abominable
a) in ritual sense (of unclean food, idols, mixed marriages)
b) in ethical sense (of wickedness etc)
Seems like it means evil things too....
What does Romans 1:26-27 say about God?
Okay, let's look at the text.
Romans 1:26-27 - Because of this, 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 lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
This verse appears to be clear: Paul sees women having sex with women and men having sex with men, and he condemns that practice. But let's go back 2,000 years and try to understand why.
Okay
Paul is writing this letter to Rome after his missionary tour of the Mediterranean. On his journey Paul had seen great temples built to honor Aphrodite, Diana, and other fertility gods and goddesses of sex and passion instead of the one true God the apostle honors. Apparently, these priests and priestesses engaged in some odd sexual behaviors -- including castrating themselves, carrying on drunken sexual orgies, and even having sex with young temple prostitutes (male and female) -- all to honor the gods of sex and pleasure.
Okay
The Bible is clear that sexuality is a gift from God. Our Creator celebrates our passion. But the Bible is also clear that when passion gets control of our lives, we're in deep trouble.
When we live for pleasure, when we forget that we are God's children and that God has great dreams for our lives, we may end up serving the false gods of sex and passion, just as they did in Paul's time. In our obsession with pleasure, we may even walk away from the God who created us -- and in the process we may cause God to abandon all the great dreams God has for our lives.
Agreed. but what does this have to do with homosexuality?
Did these priests and priestesses get into these behaviors because they were lesbian or gay? I don't think so. Did God abandon them because they were practicing homosexuals? No. Read the text again.
"Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
Um....
In our Soulforce video, There's a Wideness in God's Mercy, the Rev. Dr. Louis B. Smedes, a distinguished Christian author and ethicist, describes exactly how the Bible says these promiscuous priests and priestesses got into this mess. Once again it has nothing to do with homosexuality:
SMEDES: "The people Paul had in mind refused to acknowledge and worship God, and for this reason were abandoned by God. And being abandoned by God, they sank into sexual depravity."
SMEDES: "The homosexuals I know have not rejected God at all; they love God and they thank God for his grace and his gifts. How, then, could they have been abandoned to homosexuality as a punishment for refusing to acknowledge God?"
SMEDES: "Nor have the homosexuals that I know given up heterosexual passions for homosexual lusts. They have been homosexual from the moment of their earliest sexual stirrings. They did not change from one orientation to another; they just discovered that they were homosexual. It would be unnatural for most homosexuals to have heterosexual sex."
SMEDES: "And the homosexual people I know do not lust after each other any more than heterosexual people do... their love for one another is likely to be just as spiritual and personal as any heterosexual love can be."
How are Dr. Smedes' conclusions relevant to the verse in question?
Premise 6 - The biblical authors are silent about homosexual orientation as we know it today. They neither approve it nor condemn it.
Sorry, my friend, but I have to disagree.
As we search for truth, we are to "love one another."
Agreed.
Whatever some people believe the Bible says about homosexuality, they must not use that belief to deny homosexuals their basic civil rights. To discriminate against sexual or gender minorities is unjust and un-American.
This has nothing to do with the original point you were trying to make. Nevertheless, I find myself in agreement. All people, regardless of sexual orientation, color, gender, or creed are entitled to the same basic human rights and dignities.
