St Luke's Church, Eccleshill - The Link magazine

The Link is published monthly at 40p (Senior Citizens 35p), and we deliver free within the parish and post copies (at the reader's expense) to those who request it. Please contact us if you would like a free copy for a trial period.

August 2003, Pages 8-9.
 

Instead of a local “Questions to the clergy”, we are using this space for some background to the big debate which has hit our news this month. There will doubtless be more discussion.

What does the bible say about homosexuality?

The report “Issues in Human Sexuality” from the House of Bishops of the C of E (£2.50 from Church House Publishing) tried to answer this question, so here is a summary of what chapter 2 - “Scripture and Human Sexuality” - says.
 

The bible says ...

... not a lot about homosexuality! The Old Testament begins with the creation account of Genesis, where God deliberately makes one humanity in two sexes. It celebrates the power of the attraction between the sexes, notably in the Song of Songs. It reflects a slowly evolving morality which regulates sex outside marriage. Leviticus lists a variety of activities which are shameful, including homosexual acts, but also including others such as intercourse during menstruation. There is also a story which may or may not be relevant: the destruction of Sodom in Genesis 19. (#2.5-2.12 in Issues).

The New Testament builds on what the Old Testament has laid down. So when the Pharisees ask Jesus about divorce, he quotes Genesis at them (Matthew 19:3-9, Mark 10:1-12), probably showing that he regards heterosexual love as the God-given pattern. Likewise, St Paul follows the Old Testament prophets in thinking that if men refuse to accept the divine order, and worship idols instead of God, they themselves will become disordered, and their sexual identity will be scrambled (Romans 1:18-32, discussed in #2.15). So there are four NT passages which refer to homosexual behaviour: Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:10, and Jude 7. (It is worth pointing out that some bible translations overstate what the Greek says, and neither the NIV nor the NEB are as precise as the AV!)

Did the world of bible times recognise a class of people who were homosexual by orientation? Issues doesn’t answer this!

And what about same-sex friendships? The bible is positive about Ruth and Naomi (Ruth 1:16) and David and Jonathan (2 Samuel 1:26), but Issues doesn’t give any space to discussing whether perhaps Jonathan was homosexual and David bisexual? (This is a pity, because it’s a good question!)

And was Jesus himself a homosexual (being unmarried)? No, says Issues - if he was, how come the Pharisees never criticised him for it, and how come the opponents of the early Church never accused it of having a homosexual leader?
 

The bible means ...

Well, says Issues (#2.18-29), to begin with, ignore Genesis 19. “What many Christians have failed to see is that this story of gang-rape and mob violence is simply not relevant to the case of two men or two women who are deeply attracted to one another and want a sexual relationship. (#2.23)” But surely (this sentence is my comment) Gen 19 is relevant as part of the answer to the question of whether people are “naturally” homosexual.

Having read this, I expected Issues to go on and rubbish Leviticus and St Paul as well, but it doesn’t do so. You can’t just say that homosexual acts (Lev 20:13) are as insignificant as beard-trimming styles (Lev 19:27), it says, because Leviticus is about inner purity as well as outer purity (#2.24-25). It is true that Christ has put an end to the sacrifice laws of Leviticus, but it isn’t true that all the purity laws of Leviticus are therefore abolished. Our bodies are still to be “temples of the Holy Spirit” and Leviticus helps us to see what purity is.

As for St Paul in Romans 1, “it is clear that he regards all homosexual practice as sinful in itself” (#2.28). There are two aspects to sin, says Issues (#2.27). There’s the “God’s opinion” part, and St Paul believes homosexual acts are objectively wrong in God’s divinely-revealed view. And there’s the “consciously committed rebellion” aspect of sin as well. Paul is at pains to point out that God has revealed his opinions, but men have turned their backs on him. But Issues would prefer to leave a little question dangling - what about those who genuinely are made that way and do not see God’s opinion in the way that Paul sees it?

There’s also a lot to be said about 1 Cor 6, but Issues doesn’t go there. Another pity, I thought.
 

To summarise?

This part of Issues doesn’t spell out the “traditional view” - that a person’s feelings, however they might have arisen, are not sinful; and the sin comes only if feelings are turned into acts. So people who are homosexual in orientation but celibate in lifestyle are welcome at every level of the church, and the problem only comes with those who live in same-sex liaisons. There’s much more in Issues, and we’ll try to find space in The Link for a bit more next time.

John Hartley

 

This web page was last updated on 2nd October 2003.