Homosexual relationships in the bible?

[laurendc]

I am gay, I have been in serious relationship for over a year-and-a-half and and I feel like I am up against a wall with my parents and their convictions regarding homosexuality and Christianity.

I have been struggling with them on the issue for 5 years, but have left it alone for about a year.

Anyhow, I'm reopening the dialog with them and just last night after discovering this site and reading much of the content, I referred it to them. I felt like everything couldn't debate with them was answered here. Then this morning, the question popped into my head:

I understand that the manner in which Christians use the Bible to condemn homosexuality can be refuted on almost every front...mostly by pointing out to misinterpretation, misrepresentations,etc. But, if these are misinterpretations, etc...why doesn't the bible mention any homosexual relationships?...no stories...no glorifications, not anything I can recall at least.

Am I wrong? I just know my parents might ask this, so I am curious if any there is anything to say about this. At one point I suggested that David and Jonathan might have had somewhat queer relationship...but that is just stretched speculation on my part.

[Daniel]

Originally Posted by laurendc

I understand that the manner in which Christians use the Bible to condemn homosexuality can be refuted on almost every front...mostly by pointing out to misinterpretation, misrepresentations,etc. But, if these are misinterpretations, etc...why doesn't the bible mention any homosexual relationships?...no stories...no glorifications, not anything I can recall at least.

Laurencd- welcome to the forum! If you've been here before, I've missed you.

Congrats on your relationship!

I certainly don't mean to discourage you! Just keep in mind that these things take a great deal of time to deal with, especially if your parents are very conservative. That's been my experience anyway. I've been out to my parents since 1986 and in a relationship for 16 years and my parents still have a hard time talking about it!

All that aside, what you say is true. There is ample evidence to reframe one's biblical concerns if one wants to do that. Wanting to do that is the key it seems.

But speaking to your question: the bible doesn't mention gay people or homosexuality as such because the word wasn't even invented until the late 19th century.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?...archmode=none]
homosexual (adj.)

1892, in C.G. Chaddock's translation of Krafft-Ebing's "Psychopathia Sexualis," from homo-, comb. form of Gk. homos "same" (see same) + Latin-based sexual (see sex).

" 'Homosexual' is a barbarously hybrid word, and I claim no responsibility for it." [H. Havelock Ellis, "Studies in Psychology," 1897]

The noun is first recorded 1912 in Eng., 1907 in French. In technical use, either male or female; but in non-technical use almost always male. Slang shortened form homo first attested 1929. The alternative homophile (1960) was coined in ref. to the homosexual regarded as a person of a particular social group, rather than a sexual abnormality. Homo-erotic first recorded 1916; homophobia is from 1969.

[Joe Brummer]

While I can understand the reasons behind this quest, I might not advocate this being the best idea. Something doesn't have to be in the bible for it to be blessed by god. I am pretty sure chemotherapy isn't mentioned in the bible, but we know god has blessed it for the good it has done for others.

Their is lots of talk about gay relationships in the bible. Ruth and Naomi is one of which I have heard much talk. I just suggest not going this route. So many things are not mentioned in the bible. Intersexed people are not mentioned, but we know they exist and that they are loved and blessed.

A better argument lies in the fact we are taught to discriminate and the bible has been used as a tool and a guise for discrimination for 100s of years.

Examples would be slavery, separation of the races, blocking interacial marriage and of course homosexuality. I think once someone starts to see how the bible is often misused in history they are much more able to see that it is still being misused.

[Daniel]

Joe- you raise a salient point which speaks to how one sees the issue as a whole. Is it about putting something into the bible that may or may not be there? Or is is about putting the bible itself in a larger context? I agree with you, the latter approach probably has better mileage. This reminds me of a saying that is applied to conductors and orchestras.

"Have the score in your head, not your head in the score!"

Perspective, as always, changes how things proceed.

[cahubble05]

"Homosexuality and the Bible" is most frustrating for me precisely because there are so many amazing resources available today that "set the record straight" (pardon the unfortunate pun). There is no need for confusion on this issue:

1. Mel's booklet
2. "What the Bible REALLY Says About Homosexuality", Daniel Helminiak
3. "Jonathan Loved David", Tom Horner (my all-time FAVORITE read on the subject)
4. "Our Tribe", Nancy Wilson (find the original edition if you can, it's out of print... but she devotes an entire chapter to eunuchs.
5. "Lord Given Lovers: The Holy Union of David & Jonathan"... I always shudder a bit recommending my own work, but I believe the scriptural evidence to be irrefutable (of course everything can be refuted, but you understand my feelings, I hope). To avoid accusations of self-aggrandizement, a free, .PDF is available online at my website: http://www.hubblebooks.com/lgl/. Just click on the link.

Finally, I agree that we ought to avoid projecting our own cultural norms into the Bible--but that shouldn't prevent us from looking closely enough to discover that we too have a place in our society's cultural lineage.

[andrewlittle]

laurendc asked:

But, if these are misinterpretations, etc...why doesn't the bible mention any homosexual relationships?...no stories...no glorifications, not anything I can recall at least.

I agree, to some extent, that searching for identified LGBT in the scriptures may be problematic. You are not alone, however, in needing to be able to recognize yourself in biblical narrative.

The crux of feminist theology - which spans a wide range of theological strands from the very liberal to quite conservative and Catholic (they can't all be dismissed as "feminazis" by neo-cons) - has been to find the significant roles and identities of women in scripture. Their reasoning is that if they are not present in the bible, how can they accept the bible as their own. I think that's a very reasonable question.

It is also mirrored in virtually all liberation or post-colonial theologies of the "Third World." We each have to be able to identify ourselves in the biblical stories in order to to feel embraced by the message of God's love.

The difference is, I think, related to the purpose of finding identity within the pages. If it is a personal or community pilgrimage, it is of vital importance, in my opinion. DO NOT STOP.

If it is, however, to find "evidence" that will convince someone who is disinclined to be convinced, hang it up. There are actually myriad representations of strong, effective,important women in scripture, but ultra-cons have no difficulty dismissing women in leadership roles, anyway. They see what they want to thru the disfiguring tint of their own bias.

So, continue to strive for biblical identity if it is for your own spiritual growth and sense of belonging.

I have always found the Ethiopian eunuch to be "my story". I have never been fully sure of why. The more I have read and studied, the more I equate with this character in the narrative.

Recently, I found articles about "natural" eunuchs verses damaged men, and the scriptural, legal (in Roman and Greek law) and social distinctions for which there is quite the catalogue of evidence. To be able to comfortably find affinity with "eunuch", however, requires losing the MODERN notion of what that meant. Legally and socially, the eunuch was born without the "sexual fire" for women that "whole men" had, but were not considered damaged goods or half-men, just a different category of person - a different expression of sexuality. Damaged (castrated) men were not considered as whole men and were differentiated from the notion of "eunuch".

Some great scholarly work on this can be found at http://www.well.com/user/aquarius/ along with a plethora of scholarly references to many writings.

This, however, is just one avenue of finding your identity in scripture. I personally think they abound in scripture, and the identities have been clouded (as have women's) by the successive rounds of re-interpretation by dominant cultures. The "victors" write history, the "dominant" have the final say in interpretation. Each and every one of us has to be able to look beneath the surface for truth.

[Steven E. Webster]

On the subject of same-gender relationships in the Bible, I offer you the link to my blog where I published the homily I wrote for the wedding service that legally joined my spouse and I in Toronto this past September 1st:

http://morevile.blogspot.com/2006/09...t-married.html

I've written, but not yet published, a much lengthier paper on Ecclesiastes 4:9-12. In short, I believe that there were what we might call "gay people" among the ancient Hebrew scribes. In this passage they preserved a literary reference to the ancient Babylonian story of Gilgamesh and Enkidu. Despite the fact that same-gender love and literature about it was repressed, ancient scribes still wrote about it in covert ways.

Steven Webster