Ask the Amateur Theologian!

"What's this?" you're wondering. Well, there was a question left on last week's post that is central enough to the whole MRTB, uh, mission that it seemed worth a post of its own. So, figuring that a change of format is a pretty risk-free move for a blog that only has two regular readers anyway, we're going to push tonight's reading back a few days and use the regular Sunday night space for the world debut episode of....

Ask the Amateur Theologian!

Is Homosexuality Bad?

ChuckDaddy2000, of Portland, Oregon, asks:

What do you recommend as a snappy comeback for someone who says homosexuality is wrong because it goes against the Bible? I've heard before, "Yeah, and the bible also says you shouldn't grow beards or eat oysters." First off, when did the bible say this (I remember something about shellfish, nothing about beards). And, do you have a better line? Your blog has helped me with some ideas, but I thought I should go to the source for the snappiest comeuppance.


Dear ChuckDaddy,

First of all, it is extremely important to remember that The Amateur Theologian has only read the first tenth or so of the Bible. For all we know, the book of Joshua begins with an injunction to disregard all that has gone before. For all we know, there are whole chapters of Matthew where Jesus says repeatedly that God hates gay people, and that they are going to hell, every one of them.

Having said that, let's take a look at what we've got so far:

The creation stories in Exodus certainly imply a natural order in which males and females are to be paired off. God's displeasure with the inhabitants of Sodom might imply a problem with homosexuality -- it's often cited as such -- but the evidence is really pretty thin there. Much more to the point is Leviticus 18, which includes male homosexual intercourse on a list of sexual taboos, and Leviticus 20, which assigns it the death penalty.

It is always fun to parse. What about a male homosexual relationship in which anal intercourse is avoided? What about lesbian relationships, of whatever sexual intensity? These questions are not addressed, which is to say that neither is forbidden, and this in a text which in other contexts goes into great detail as to exactly which behaviors are and are not acceptable. Still, I would have to say that the balance of evidence implies that the category of "other homosexual relationships" is not exactly encouraged by Old Testament law.

OK, that brings us to the question of whether Old Testament law really matters. The "beards and oysters" argument makes the proposition that, if there are specific laws in the Old Testament that the vast majority of people routinely flout, than picking other laws out for enforcement or moral judgement is invalid. Leviticus 19 prohibits cutting beards (and most haircuts), Leviticus 11 prohibits shellfish (and pork), and Leviticus 18 prohibits homosexual intercourse; if you fail to take either of the first two seriously, what grounds do you have to worry about the third? This is a powerful argument. Its only real weakness is that Leviticus 20 death penalty, which could be construed as elevating the homosexual taboo to a level of seriousness above the others.

However, as colorful as haircuts, pigs, and shellfish are as examples of routinely ignored Old Testament prohibitions (private land ownership would be another good one, by the way), they are really small potatoes. Easily the most important aspect of Old Testament law -- again, as far as I have read -- is the sacrifice system. Above all else, God wants you to understand what animals you need to surrender to the priests, and how, in order to keep yourself in a state of ritual cleanliness. Far more space and detail is lavished on this aspect of the Law than on anything else. So, The Amateur Theologian would have a hard time respecting the reasoning of someone who was citing God's instructions to Moses regarding homosexuality, unless that person was also rigorously keeping up with his or her sacrificial obligations.

This gets cloudy, however, since most Christians believe that the sacrifice of Jesus Christ took care of everyone's sacrificial obligations in perpetuity. So let's go down a notch, and look at the aspect of Old Testament law that gets the most attention, repetition, and clarification, after the sacrifice system. That would be the necessity of keeping the Sabbath, which even gets a mention in the traditional Ten Commandments. There is no ambiguity on this point; anyone who performs work on the Sabbath must die. You will recall the story from a few weeks back of a man caught gathering wood on the Sabbath, whom God condemned to an especially grizzly public execution.

So, ChuckDaddy2000, my response to your question, based on my reading so far, would be this -- Old Testament law does indeed condemn homosexuality. However, it also condemns breaking the Sabbath, and to a far greater extent. This suggests that we should comdemn homosexuals, at the very most, to the same extent that we condemn those who work on Sunday. Or who work around the house on Sunday. Or who make purchases on Sunday. For all of these things, the Bible says in no uncertain terms, the punishment is death.


If YOU have a question for the Amateur Theologian, knock yourself out! I'll do my best.