By The Rev. Ed Pickup
Rector, Emmanual, Franklin
People often ask, “what does the Bible say about sexual orientation?” The correct answer is: “the same thing it says about vacuum cleaners.”
In 1869, the Austrian writer Karl‑Maria Kertbeny first coined the words heterosexual and homosexual.[1] Prior to that time, there was no idea that people had a sexual orientation. [2]
In the same year Chicago inventor Ives W. McGaffey obtained a patent for the first hand-pumped vacuum cleaner. Named the “Whirlwind” it was manufactured by American Carpet Cleaning Company of Boston and cost $25.00.
So the Bible doesn’t have much to say about either sexual orientation or vacuum cleaners, since neither concept was known at the time.
Well then, what was Paul writing about in Romans 1:26-27? The answer is what Paul knew at the time: temple prostitution. Beginning in verse 18, Paul condemns idolatry - the worship of pagan deities, images resembling a mortal human being or birds or four-footed animals or reptiles.
The historian Strabo records that the temple in Corinth, dedicated to Aphrodite, the goddess of love, employed 1000 temple prostitutes, both female and male, to service the sailors who stopped at the commercial port there.[3] When Paul hit town, the rebuilt Corinth was only 100 years old (having been completely destroyed as depraved by the Roman army). But vice makes quick money, and Corinth became the largest city and the richest port in ancient Greece with five times the population of Athens.[4]
Corinth was located at the narrowest point on the isthmus between mainland Greece and the Peloponnesian peninsula. Ships would stop there, and while they were being dragged on rollers from the Aegean to the Mediterranean Sea, the sailors went into town to do what sailors have done since time immemorial. In fact, the verb korinthiazomai (act like a Corinthian) was slang for fornication. You can think of Corinth as a cross between Las Vegas and Panama City. Like Las Vegas it had architectural wonders like elaborate Corinthian columns and a fifty-seat public stone outhouse with running water! Like Panama City it was full of officially sanctioned corruption, the proceeds of which ran the government.
No wonder Paul would condemn such behavior. Any remotely moral person would condemn human trafficking in prostitution today. But to compare pagan temple prostitution to two people of the same gender who freely want to make a public commitment to live together in an intentionally lifelong monogamous relationship is literally to compare whore houses to holy living. As a judge I knew used to say, “that field has too many stumps to plow.”
But the Bible (particularly Jesus) does have some general guidelines to life that do apply. Try Matthew 7:1 “Do not judge, so that you may not be judged.” Or perhaps John 13:34 “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another.” Or perhaps all of 1 Corinthians 13, or Philippians 2:1-18. Maybe it is time for us to let our caritas for one another “shine like stars in the world.”
[1] See: article on Karl-Maria Kertbeny at the following internet address. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl‑Maria_Kertbeny . Last accessed on February 29, 2012.
[2] For an interesting article on the history of human sexuality see: Erwin J. Haeberle
“Bisexuality: History and Dimensions of a Modern Scientific Problem” first published at E. J. Haeberle and R. Gindorf (eds.): "Bisexualities ‑ The Ideology and Practice of Sexual Contact with both Men and Women", New York: Continuum 1998, pp. 13‑51. Now available in a condensed form at http://www2.hu‑berlin.de/sexology/GESUND/ARCHIV/SEXOR4.HTM . Last accessed on February 29, 2012.
[3] See article: S. M. Baugh “Cult Prostitution in New Testament Ephesus” accessible at http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_ephesus_baugh.html . Last accessed on February 29, 2012.
[4] See article: “Corinth” in Bruce Metzger and Michael Coogan, The Oxford Companion to the Bible, Oxford University Press (New York:1993) pp 134-138. See also http://www.abrock.com/Greece‑Turkey/corinth.html . See BibleGateway article on Corinth at: http://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/IVP‑NT/Acts/Witness‑Corinth‑Return‑Antioch. Last accessed on February 29, 2012.
Katie Hager, St. Thomas,Chesapeake,VA (Great Bridge)
ReplyDeleteThank you Ed for a very enlightening and factual blog. We could add that portion of our Baptismal Covenant "respect the dignity of eery human being" Again well stated and BRAVO
James Jorden, Norfolk, VA (Ocean View)
ReplyDeleteThank you for the history and the most likely probabilty of what Paul was referring too. You gave great reasoning and thought to promote love and tolerance to every human. Great read!
Leviticus 18:22 states: "Thou shall not lie with mankind as with womankind: it is abomination." The term abomination (to'ebah) is a religious term, usually reserved for use against idolatry; it does not mean a moral evil. The verse seems to refer to temple prostitution, which was a common practice in the rest of the Middle East at that time. Qadesh referred to male religious prostitutes.
DeleteLeviticus 20:13 states: "If a man also lie with mankind as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they should surely be put to death....". The passage is surrounded by prohibitions against incest, bestiality, adultery and intercourse during a woman's period. But this verse is the only one in the series which uses the religious term abomination; it seems also to be directed against temple prostitution.
It is likely that the prohibition thou shall not lie with a male as with a woman came about for one of the following reasons:
Only sexual acts which could lead to procreation were valued as the tribes needed to grow in numbers in order to survive.
Male homosexual sex may have been connected in the Hebrew mind with idolatry. Notice that Lev. 18:2 deals with idolatry. In fact many of the prohibitions in the Holiness Code were probably connected with idolatrous practices, see 19:26-29.
Women were second class citizens in the Hebrew culture and were generally treated as property. If a man was penetrated in sexual intercourse he was being treated like a woman and so was degraded in the Hebrew mind. The offense was not that this was a homosexual act, the offense was that a MAN was treated like a WOMAN.
If this line of thinking is correct it would serve to explain why there is no prohibition against female homosexual acts in the Old Testament. Women could not be degraded by such an act as they were already not held in high esteem. There is a theory that the Hebrew people believed in a perfect order of creation and anything that violated that order was considered unclean or an abomination. A probable example would be that fish were considered the perfect sea animal, hence anything in the sea that did not have scales and fins was unclean. (Lev. 11:9-10) Cattle were the perfect cud chewing animal, hence anything that chewed cud, but didn't have hooves was unclean. (Lev. 11:6). If this theory is correct then the prohibition against male sex acts would be violating the role of the perfect ideal human: man. It would seem to mix the sex role of the imperfect woman with the ideal role of the man. Jim Fisher Epiphany Norfolk
I appreciate that the weekly posts are incorporating important methods of biblical interpretation like this thoughtful & careful investigation of one of the difficult passages that often get brought up in conversations about LGBT folks & the life of the Church. Thanks for posting this--very well said indeed.
ReplyDeleteYou don't translate a word from Hebrew and Greek into English if there is no English equivalent. So, using the term "homosexual" in the English Bible could not have occurred until after the word had entered the English vocabulary. So, the question becomes when did the term "homosexual" enter the English vernacular? Here is a short timeline…
ReplyDelete1. In English the word homosexual was first used in 1892 in the English translation of Krafft-Ebing's "Psychopathia sexualis" which was a reference work, in German, on sexual perversions.
2. In 1897, H. Havelock Ellis’ book, Studies in Psychology, said "Homosexual" is a barbarously hybrid word, and I claim no responsibility for it. It is, however, convenient, and now widely used.”
3. In 1929, the slang, or shortened form, homo, surfaces.
In 1892, ours was a less technologically advanced society, and it would take time for a word to move from academic to popular use. Translations to the Bible took even longer than other books. Still, that timeline explains why the English term "homosexual" did not appear in the Bible until the 1940s.
As interesting as that is, it begs another question – what is the definition for the words used in the Bible?
In New Testament, the Greek word used for homosexual is arsenokoites. Here is what it means according to Greek dictionaries: An adult male who practices sexual intercourse with another adult male or a boy homosexual, sodomite, pederast / A man who lies in bed with another male, a homosexual / A male partner in homosexual intercourse / Male homosexual, one who takes the active male role in homosexual intercourse. An example is found in 1 Cor. 6:9 we read, "… do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God."
Kerry Holmes
The use of a word does not limit the reference to the act/behavior. Homosexual acts are clearly pictured in Gen. 19:1-11, “Now the angels came to Sodom in the evening as Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground. And he said, “Now behold, my lords, please turn aside into your servant’s house, and spend the night, and wash your feet; then you may rise early and go on your way.” They said however, “No, but we shall spend the night in the square.” Yet he urged them strongly, so they turned aside to him and entered into his house; and he prepared a feast for them, and baked unleavened bread, and they ate. Before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people from every quarter; and they called to Lot and said to him “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them.” But Lot went out to them at the doorway, and shut the door behind him, and said, “Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly. Now behold, I have two daughters who have not had relations with man; please let me bring them out to you, and do to them whatever you like; only do nothing to these men, inasmuch as they have come under the shelter of my roof.” But they said, “Stand aside.” Furthermore, they said, “This one came in as an alien, and already he is acting like a judge; now we will treat you worse than them.” So they pressed hard against Lot and came near to break the door. But the men reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with them, and shut the door. And they struck the men who were at the doorway of the house with blindness, both small and great, so that they wearied themselves trying to find the doorway.”
ReplyDeleteIgnorantly, some argue that sexual relations are pictured above, and inhospitality instead is the meaning. Left to itself, that argument could stand, except the term “relations with them” (“know them” according to King James) is yada in Hebrew. A few verses down, Lot utilized the same word, yada, when he tries to get the Sodomites to take his two young daughters. He says neither had had relations with [yada] man. Still these men so craved to know [yada] the visitors, and not the girls, that even after being blinded, their lust continued to drive them toward their objective. Interestingly, the New Testament is not quiet on this narrative. Jude provides commentary in the 7th verse: “Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example, in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire.”
For Christians, words do matter, and despite all attempts to downplay its relevance, the Bible has MUCH to say about homosexuality. Should we simply cut out those sections? More importantly if we start cutting where do we stop?
Kerry Holmes
CORRECTION:
DeleteIgnorantly, some argue that sexual relations are NOT pictured above, and inhospitality instead is the meaning.
Kerry Holmes
CORRECTION:
ReplyDeleteIgnorantly, some argue that sexual relations are NOT pictured above, and inhospitality instead is the meaning.
Kerry Holmes
Kerry,
DeleteI have responded to several of your comments on other posts on this blog through the last few weeks, but have yet to see a response from you on any of them. I would like to say more about the scripture passages you raise here, but would appreciate if you would please reply to my earlier questions.
Warmly,
-Ben