Jonathan Bailey
Well-Known Member
Not all churches, even in the South, wave "God Hates F_gs" banners.
The United Methodist Church claims that "Homosexuality is not compatible with Christian teachings."
This is questionable since no commandment in the bible forbids it and Jesus never says a word of it.
Affirming churches or denominations do not consider homosexuality or transgender as sins.
The Bible, Christianity and Homosexuality | GayChurch.org
For one of the men in the sexual encounter to be treated as one would treat a woman, the man would have been taking a lower status. To do so would have been reducing him to property and in effect defiling the image of God, which man was considered. To fully understand this law, we must consider the historical context in which it was written.
The Old Testament was initially a part of the Hebrew Scriptures of the Jewish people. The Septuagint was an ancient translation of the Old Testament from its original Hebrew into Greek. It was the “version” of the Old Testament that the New Testament writers quoted from when they cited Old Testament scriptures. The Hebrew word in this specific law we are looking at that was translated into English as “abomination” was translated in the Septuagint into the Greek word bdelugma. A quick search through a lexicon for the word bdelugma brings up the following definition:
This seems to point to the idea that this specific law has more to do with a matter of ritual purity and with the Hebrews not being like the idolatrous Babylonians or Canaanites. As we see, this law isn’t as simple as it appears. First of all we have a very unclear law (“And with a male you shall not lay lyings of a woman.”). Second of all, we must consider the historical context of how men treated women in sexual encounters. Thirdly, as revealed through Christ, the fulfillment of the law is truly love. Rape, stealing, hating, etc. are immoral because they are not in line with the Law of Love, which Christ frames so perfectly when questioned about the law. Is a committed homosexual relationship in violation of this law? We could become like the Pharisees and Sadducees trying to pick apart this law forever, but if we look closely, Christ’s life truly reveals the Spirit of the Law. Surely this is what Paul meant when he wrote, “But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive, so that we serve not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit” (RSV Romans 7:4-6).
Leviticus 18:22 King James Version (KJV)
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
In other words:
You (male) will not take an inferior (female) social status with another male: it's a shame.
In other words, a man shall not be reduced by another man to the status of property as like cattle
and asses.
Does "lie with" even mean "have sex with" here? Is it a mistranslation? Is it OK for a man to have sex with another man BUT just not in the same manner as a man has sex with a woman? A man has no vagina so I don't even see how a man could possibly have sex with another man as if he were a woman.
In Genesis, it says Adam KNEW his wife and she conceived. It does not say theta Adam lay with his wife and she conceived. Nowhere in the bible is a man expressly forbidden to KNOW (or have carnal knowledge of) another man.
The writing of Paul negates this old purity law of the Jews anyway in Romans 7:4-6. I would say a same-sex committed adult relationship is not forbidden under new life in the Spirit.
The United Methodist Church claims that "Homosexuality is not compatible with Christian teachings."
This is questionable since no commandment in the bible forbids it and Jesus never says a word of it.
Affirming churches or denominations do not consider homosexuality or transgender as sins.
The Bible, Christianity and Homosexuality | GayChurch.org
For one of the men in the sexual encounter to be treated as one would treat a woman, the man would have been taking a lower status. To do so would have been reducing him to property and in effect defiling the image of God, which man was considered. To fully understand this law, we must consider the historical context in which it was written.
The Old Testament was initially a part of the Hebrew Scriptures of the Jewish people. The Septuagint was an ancient translation of the Old Testament from its original Hebrew into Greek. It was the “version” of the Old Testament that the New Testament writers quoted from when they cited Old Testament scriptures. The Hebrew word in this specific law we are looking at that was translated into English as “abomination” was translated in the Septuagint into the Greek word bdelugma. A quick search through a lexicon for the word bdelugma brings up the following definition:
- a foul thing, a detestable thing
- of idols and things pertaining to idolatry
This seems to point to the idea that this specific law has more to do with a matter of ritual purity and with the Hebrews not being like the idolatrous Babylonians or Canaanites. As we see, this law isn’t as simple as it appears. First of all we have a very unclear law (“And with a male you shall not lay lyings of a woman.”). Second of all, we must consider the historical context of how men treated women in sexual encounters. Thirdly, as revealed through Christ, the fulfillment of the law is truly love. Rape, stealing, hating, etc. are immoral because they are not in line with the Law of Love, which Christ frames so perfectly when questioned about the law. Is a committed homosexual relationship in violation of this law? We could become like the Pharisees and Sadducees trying to pick apart this law forever, but if we look closely, Christ’s life truly reveals the Spirit of the Law. Surely this is what Paul meant when he wrote, “But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive, so that we serve not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit” (RSV Romans 7:4-6).
Leviticus 18:22 King James Version (KJV)
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
In other words:
You (male) will not take an inferior (female) social status with another male: it's a shame.
In other words, a man shall not be reduced by another man to the status of property as like cattle
and asses.
Does "lie with" even mean "have sex with" here? Is it a mistranslation? Is it OK for a man to have sex with another man BUT just not in the same manner as a man has sex with a woman? A man has no vagina so I don't even see how a man could possibly have sex with another man as if he were a woman.
In Genesis, it says Adam KNEW his wife and she conceived. It does not say theta Adam lay with his wife and she conceived. Nowhere in the bible is a man expressly forbidden to KNOW (or have carnal knowledge of) another man.
The writing of Paul negates this old purity law of the Jews anyway in Romans 7:4-6. I would say a same-sex committed adult relationship is not forbidden under new life in the Spirit.
Last edited:
