On Sunday, January 31, 2010, we discussed “What the United Methodist Church (UMC) Thinks About Human Sexuality and Homosexuality.” As you might expect, this created much discussion!
CLICK HERE for official statements of the UMC on these topics.
Scripturally speaking, it was easy to affirm the UMC statements about human sexuality. As my Hebrew Bible seminary professor, Dr. Toni Craven, said in talking about the Song of Songs (aka the Song of Solomon), “It’s about sex.” Many throughout the centuries have tried to allegorize away any of the sexual connotations, but literally speaking it is about sex.
In a similar vein, 1 Corinthians 7:1-9 affirms sex within marriage, giving EQUAL conjugal rights to men AND women – each having equal authority over the other’s body.
Homosexuality proved more controversial in our discussion. Here is a very boiled down version of what the UMC says in terms of homosexuality:
- The UMC defines marriage as being between one man and one woman;
- The UMC does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching;
- The UMC welcomes gays and lesbians into the life and membership of the church, recognizing that all people are in need of ministry and God’s grace;
- The UMC deplores all hate crimes against homosexual persons;
- The UMC seeks to protect the human and civil rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender persons;
- The UMC asks for the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the United States Military Services to be repealed;
- The UMC will not allow homosexual unions to be conducted by UM clergy or in UM churches; and
- Citing again that homosexuality is not compatible with Christian teaching, the UMC says that self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be certified as candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve in the UMC.
Though not brought up in our discussion on the 31st, some have asked in the past why the UMC says that homosexuality is “not compatible with Christian teaching,” instead of saying “not compatible with Scripture.” The issue is INTERPRETATION. Let me share with you another possible interpretation of Scriptures pertaining to this topic.
Genesis 19:1-11 recounts the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (for an interesting parallel, read Judges 19:15-30). Many say that the reason these unrighteous cities were destroyed is because of homosexuality. That is too simple a response and misses several larger issues in the scriptural text.
First, let’s backup to Genesis 18:20 where the LORD said, “How great is the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah and how very grave their sin.” The key word here is “outcry,” a term used elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible when there has been injustice and the social mistreatment of people – especially the disadvantaged such as the poor, widows, and orphans. There’s more wrong in these cities than we want to see.
Second, in this story, Lot is seen as being righteous while everyone else in the city is not. Yet, this supposedly righteous person thinks it is okay allow his own daughters to be raped instead of the heavenly visitors who have come to save him. It is sad to say it, but in that culture, women were essentially seen as being of little value. As we see in this story, strangers were more important in that culture. Hopefully no Christians today really think women are of little value, even though this story, which is used to condemn homosexuals, supports that idea.
It is also interesting to point out that the men of Sodom and Gomorrah do not want to have a relationship with the men but want to rape them.
Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 both declare that a male shall not lie with a male as with a woman. Interestingly, both verses speak only to males, not females. There is no edict against lesbianism in these passages although other verses in these contexts speak specifically to women as well as men see Leviticus 18:23 and 20:15-16. In a patriarchal culture that thought polygamy and concubinage was okay, it is not too hard to see why there is not an edict against two women.
It is also interesting to realize that sandwiched between these two passages is Leviticus 19:19: “You shall keep my statutes. You shall not let your animals breed with a different kind; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed; nor shall you put on a garment made of two different materials” (NRSV). What about the mules our forbears used to farm their land? Science has proven that one should rotate crops planted in a field to make sure nutrients can be replenished. How would our cotton socks stay up with out elastic in them? Why do we cling to 18:22 and 20:13 but ignore 19:19?
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 reads, “Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God” (NRSV). Many of our English translations ignore the two Greek words here translated as male prostitutes and sodomites. Instead of two words, many English translations just put one word: “homosexuals.” That, however, misses some very important distinctions.
The Greek for “male prostitutes,” which does not focus on relationship – only a man selling himself for sex. In ancient Greek word usage, the term translated “sodomites” is used for those who pay money to male prostitutes for you know what. Again, this gives no indication of relationship – only sex. In a similar vein, 1 Timothy 1:10 uses the Greek term translated sodomites.
The last passage for our consideration is Romans 1:26-27, but I’d encourage you to read the full context: Romans 1:18-32. In the full context, Paul’s primary concern is talking about idolatry, worshiping the creature instead of the creator. Here, we need to consider 1st century pagan worship. Idolatry, of course, was a major part of the worship practices as was sex – often sex between persons of the same sex. There was nothing inherently in this arrangement about relationship. So, it is possible, that here Paul is talking about sex taking place in the context of pagan worship, which included idols. It may say nothing about a relationship between people of the same sex.
Interestingly, in this Romans passage, Paul calls these sexual acts between people of the same sex “unnatural.” Yet, he also says that Gentiles being able to participate in God’s salvation is also “unnatural” (aka “contrary to nature”) using the same Greek word (see Romans 11:13-24, specifically vs. 24).
Consider these alternate “Christian teachings” above.
-
How do you respond?
-
What difference do these alternate understandings make?
-
Why do many Christians put so much energy into defending these passages while ignoring others (such as Paul talking more about “greed” or “greediness” than homosexuality)?
-
John Wesley was concerned with finding a “middle road” in controversies. What do you think might be a middle road here?
Read the rest of this entry »
Join the monthly study group known as the 3rd Thursday St. Simeon Group to learn some of the history behind the Greek manuscripts of the New Testament from which our English translations come. Would you believe there are more differences between the thousands of manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament? Do these differences matter? Come to one of these classes and lets discuss it!
Lenten Book Review:
