Matthew Vines is the author of the bestseller God and the Gay Christian. Vines calls the book “an open letter to modern Christians” about why they should support same-sex relationships, and what the Bible really says about homosexuality.
In the wake of June’s Supreme Court’s ruling on gay marriage, some conservative Christians, seeing the writing on the wall, have actually stepped up their denunciations of all things LGBT. So we asked Vines to provide us with some thoughtful Bible-based responses to their arguments. Here’s what he had to say…
Many Christians have changed their minds about the LGBT community, but not all—and those who haven’t can be pretty vocal.
Whether it’s your parent, your co-worker, or a childhood friend who posts a Bible verse on social media to say that same-sex relationships are wrong, here are constructive ways you can respond to five commonly-repeated points…
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Argument #1: God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for being gay, so he’ll surely judge America soon.
Actually, God didn’t destroy Sodom and Gomorrah for being gay. According to Genesis 19, the men of Sodom threatened to gang rape God’s messengers. Their threat was about power and humiliation, not sexual orientation.
Not only does the Bible never connect the sin of Sodom to same-sex relationships, it explicitly teaches that the sin of Sodom was about something else entirely. Ezekiel 16:49 says, “Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.”
It’s worth pointing out that America has been guilty of those kinds of sins of oppression since our founding, from our brutal treatment of indigenous peoples to our practice of slavery and segregation. The Bible’s teachings about Sodom certainly highlight some of America’s sins—but marriage equality isn’t one of them. (Nor is it a sin at all!)
Argument #2: The Bible says that being gay is an abomination.
Leviticus 18:22 is the Bible verse most frequently quoted by opponents of same-sex marriage: “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” But Leviticus is part of the Old Testament law, and the New Testament teaches that Christians should live under the new covenant, not the old one.
Jesus said in Matthew 5:17 that he came to fulfill the Old Testament law, and the author of Hebrews wrote that the law is “obsolete and outdated” and “will soon disappear” (Hebrews 8:13). That’s why Christians today widely accept other things that the Old Testament calls “abominations,” like charging interest on loans (Ezekiel 18:13), sex during a woman’s menstrual period (Leviticus 18:19), and eating pork (Deuteronomy 14:8).
Argument #3: The Bible says that being gay is unnatural.
While Leviticus may be the most commonly quoted verse, the most important one for many non-affirming Christians is in the New Testament. In Romans 1:26-27, the apostle Paul condemns same-sex behavior he describes as lustful, unnatural, and shameful. “We can’t accept something that the Bible says is unnatural and shameful,” many people say. But in fact, most Christians already do.
Paul says in 1 Corinthians 11:14 that for a man to have long hair violates what “nature” teaches and is “a disgrace to him.” But most Christians who oppose same-sex marriage wouldn’t condemn long hair in men. In fact, the Bible itself speaks highly of long hair in men in the Old Testament (see Numbers 6:5, 2 Samuel 14:26, and 2 Kings 2:23). That’s why most Christians interpret “nature” in 1 Corinthians 11 as referring to cultural conventions of Paul’s day.
But if “nature” really means “custom” in 1 Corinthians 11, might it also mean “custom” in Romans 1? There’s good reason to think so. In the ancient world, same-sex relations were widely considered “unnatural” largely due to the fact that same-sex partners violated customary, patriarchal gender norms: Men were passive instead of active, and women were dominant instead of submissive. That’s a cultural convention in a similar way to norms about hair length.
So the next time someone says they can’t accept something the Bible calls unnatural, point them to 1 Corinthians 11:14 and ask: Do you feel the same way about long hair in men?
Related: 10 Bible-Based Reasons Why Christians Should Love Homosexuality
Argument #4: The Bible says “homosexuals” won’t go to heaven.
Before 1946, no Bible translation had ever used the word “homosexual” at all. But starting in the mid-20th century, many translations of 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10 changed to say that “homosexuals” will not “inherit the kingdom of God.” Fortunately, many New Testament scholars have been pushing back against those translations in recent years, from Dale Martin to James Brownson. Their case is simple: The word “homosexual” didn’t even exist in any language until 1869, nor did the concept of sexual orientation as we think of it today.
It’s perfectly possible that the apostle Paul was condemning certain forms of same-sex behavior in 1 Corinthians 6 and 1 Timothy 1, but the types of behavior that were most widely practiced in his day were things like prostitution, sex between masters and slaves, and pederasty (sex between men and adolescent boys). Same-sex marriages between equal-status partners weren’t on the radar screen at all, so the idea that he was condemning those kinds of relationships can’t be right.
Neither the word “homosexual” nor the concept it represents existed when the Bible was written, so it’s simply not true to say that the Bible teaches that gay people won’t go to heaven.
Argument #5: Jesus defined marriage as between one man and one woman.
Jesus actually never defined marriage in the Bible. In Matthew 19, some Pharisees ask Jesus whether a man can divorce his wife “for any and every reason,” and Jesus says no. He responds to their question—a question specifically about a man and his wife—by saying that God “made them male and female” and that “what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
Jesus wasn’t asked about same-sex marriage. That’s to be expected given that no one was talking about same-sex marriage in the first century. But while Jesus didn’t directly address same-sex relationships, the core principles of his teachings on marriage can be applied to same-sex couples today. Both Matthew 19 and Ephesians 5 teach that marriage is fundamentally about the self-giving covenant that spouses make and keep with one another, reflecting God’s self-giving love for us.
That’s something everyone—straight, gay, or bi—can live out.
Related: 10 Bible-Based Reasons Why Christians Should Love Homosexuality
Ladbrook
Great, now can we talk about Islam? Because at some point, those folks are going to turn their attention away from the Army recruitment centers and toward the Pride parades. And then what?
Ron Jackson
Religion is stupid. There is no need to argue about bible quotes as it’s just nonsense to begin with. Might as well argue about how many “angels” can dance on the head of a pin.
Josh Nollenberg
Who cares about such a corrupted, ridiculously outdated, and enormously self-conflicting text?
Atrius
Some of this is both true but misleading.
#1 reply is true. However the quote from Ezekiel is missing the next verse “And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.” Now what that abomination was, we aren’t told. It could be anything named as an abomination in the Bible or something else entirely. However that still doesn’t mean anything since the Bible was written by men who knew nothing about gay people. Even if it were actually speaking of homosexual sex acts…who cares? There is no credible evidence that those cities ever existed, so to make the claim that homosexuality was even remotely a cause in their destruction is an empty claim.
#2 reply. It’s true that Leviticus actually says that. However it is misleading to suggest that the quote from Matthew means what is being implied here although it’s a common interpretation. Upon reading the rest of that chapter one will also see these verses,
“18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.”
These are problematic for Christians because it specifically says that “till heaven and earth disappear”. The last time I looked the earth was still here so the law still applies. Then after verse 20 the Jesus character proceeds to imply that just following the law isn’t enough but that he intended to make it even more difficult on his followers. Don’t believe me? Read it for yourselves.
Yes, I know about the verse from Hebrews but if that verse were true it would contradict Jesus in Matthew 5. Here is the problem with the book of Hebrews. It wasn’t written by Paul, although it is was initially attributed to him. We don’t know who wrote it, and that verse contradicts the words supposedly spoken by Jesus in Matthew 5 so you can take it for what that’s worth. In my opinion it remains an unaddressed problem. So what does this mean for gay people? Not much as it’s pretty clear that Christians don’t want to follow the law and will interpret the Bible in whatever way is necessary to avoid having to do so. That being said, it’s probably not worth worrying about.
#3 reply. Who cares really? It’s all just Paul’s words, and since Christians are clearly not following the law as per #2 reply they’ve got no leg to stand on.
#4 & 5 replies. I generally agree with.
Xzamilio
Seriously? Anyone reading that nonsense can plainly see that it was pure mental gymnastics at its best. Vines never actually disputed argument #3… he just resorted to an ad hominem tu quoque fallacy, or appeal to hypocrisy. Great… so Christian cherry pick and don’t condemn long hair… now, what does that have to do with the anti-gay passages within its text? Gee, I wonder WHY Jesus in the bible was never questioned about same sex marriage… maybe it’s within the same vein of reason that Vines talks about when mentioning the word “homosexual” didn’t exist around those times… homosexual MARRIAGE wasn’t a concept in those times, either (at least in that region… where all of this supernatural crap happened but NO other neighboring city or region recorded it.; almost as if they didn’t see anything).
I’m surprised he didn’t go to Judges 19, the story about the Levite and his concubine. It is virtually identical to the story of Lot in that the men came to the door of the old man the Levite was staying with and demanded he come outside so that they can rape him. The old man offers his daughter and the Levite’s concubine, so the Levite throws her outside and they rape her all night and she dies the next day. The Levite takes her dead body home and cuts her up in twelve pieces and has those pieces delivered to the 12 tribes of Israel. Mmmmmm… such a beautiful tale of love and morality.
I’m sorry, but it boggles the mind why anyone would still follow and attempt to rationalize such iron age gobbledygook when it is as clear as day what immoral nonsense it is. Christianity, Judaism, Islam… the shit was born in the desert and that’s where it belongs.
Atrius
@Josh Nollenberg:Hear hear!
Atrius
@Xzamilio: Hear hear!
Xzamilio
@Atrius: Thank you!!! I was going to mention that myself. If it’s one thing I cannot stand, it’s when someone selectively cherry picks scripture to make it seem like it’s saying one thing, when literally the next verse over, it says something conflicting. I’m sorry, but the main problem I have here is that fundamentalists tend to go by what is said in the bible, while more progressive Christians tend to go by what is “implied” or not stated. Since Jesus in the bible never outright condemns homosexuality or even mentions it, he must be for it. But, then you have to ask them if they believe Jesus is God, and then there’s that whole 2 Timothy 3:16 bunch of noise lol
My grandmother told me that once I read the bible, my eyes would open and I would see the light, and boy she was right… and I’ve been a nonbeliever ever since.
Atrius
@Xzamilio: You’re welcome. Not to forget to mention that 2 Timothy is among the pseudepigraphic texts that are said to be written by Paul, but we can tell those texts are lying. He didn’t write them. They shouldn’t even be in the bible along with Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, and Titus. Those are all pseudepigrapha. It just goes to demonstrate how flawed the Bible actually is.
Ogre Magi
@Xzamilio: BRAVO
ingyaom
Why is this guy bothering to try to make sense of nonsense bible quotes? If he really wanted to make some progress in the world, he’d be trying to educate people about the misery of christianity and how dangerous (and stupid) its false consciousness is. Good luck, pal.
Xzamilio
Meanwhile, a young girl who was one of the stabbing victims in the gay pride parade over in Jerusalem just died. You know, it’d be nice if we could just eradicate the mental ailment of religion so that we don’t have to keep making a distinction between a run of the mill wack job and a religious wack job… although, the two aren’t mutually exclusive.
DistingueTraces
The Bible is not a unitary text, and can’t be made into one.
You can only pretend to read it that way by playing the same game of willful blindness and doublethink as the social conservatives you’re trying to argue against.
The letters of Paul (which you don’t address here) are simply and explicitly anti-gay. There’s simply no reason trying to tie yourself in knots to hand-wave that away — because there’s no reason to treat the writings of Paul as equivalent to the voice of God.
This isn’t to dismiss the Bible or the tradition of Biblical theology, both of which I love. But a clear-eyed view of the Bible for what it is — as a collection of disparate voices working within one tradition — is the only honest way to begin a conversation about Christian morality.
And it makes the question “What does the Bible say about gays” meaningless, because the Bible doesn’t say anything at all.
The authors of the various texts collected into the Bible say many things — all worth reading, none worth treating as the unfiltered voice of God.
BigG
All religion is awful and we would be better without it.
jwtraveler
@Ladbrook: Of course it’s more important to worry about what someone might do in the future than what others are already doing now. By the way, that guy who killed nine black people in a Charleston church wasn’t a Muslim. Should we be concerned about the violent behavior of Christians or doesn’t that count?
jwtraveler
@BigG: Agreed. Individual delusion is called mental illness; mass delusion is called religion.
SFHarry
Justifying this craziness by interpreting it is just as crazy. That being said, I’m going to be a little crazy and interpret…that God “made them male and female” and that “what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
It means straights cannot get a divorce once married but gays are free to. Too bad straight people.
dinard38
@Zxamilo: Your comment “My grandmother told me that once I read the bible, my eyes would open and I would see the light, and boy she was right… and I’ve been a nonbeliever ever since.” had me laughing. Because that’s exactly how it went down with me as well.
I grew up in an extreme Pentecostal-Apostolic church. I always questioned the bible, even when I was young. A lot of it just didn’t make sense. So when I got older, I pulled away from church. I remember years ago, me and a friend were watching the Ten Commandments on TV and there was the scene where Moses came down from the mountain with the commandments and those wicked Israelites were worshiping a golden calf. He split up the people who were on his side to those wicked evil idol worshippers, and the ground swallowed them up. I remember that we were confused because I didn’t remember them being swallowed up by the ground. So I pulled out my bible, blew the dust off, and start reading the passage. Wow!!! Well, needless to say, the Hollywood version was far less violent. In the bible, Moses had them ran through with the sword. Three thousand were slaughtered. Now, if I’m not mistaken, didn’t those ten commandments that he JUST brought down from God himself say “Thou shalt not kill”?
So this awakened a curiosity in me, so I started reading other passages. Not even going into real depths of the bible, I just started off re-reading the common stories that we all know of, and saw them in a totally different light. Here is an example; we’re always singing in church about how Joshua fought the battle of Jericho and the walls came tumbling down. Praise the LORD!!! What that little cutesy song doesn’t mention is that when those walls came tumbling down, the Israelites stormed in and…..quoting the bible itself…Joshua 6:7 “And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.” This is all on God’s command. So men, women, AND children all slaughtered. And what did the poor animals do to be slaughtered? And how does God promise the Israelites land that was already occupied by others?
The bible is full of stories like this. Heck, look at what he did to Job. He allowed Job to suffer TREMENDOUSLY over a bet with Satan.
Satan: “Hey you Highness. I triple dog dare you that if you take that hedge away from Job he’ll curse you and die.”
God: “Deal!!!”
What an awesome god!!!!
Ladbrook
@jwtraveler: Of course it counts. As a Southerner, I was appalled by what that animal did in Charleston. Outside of a few inbreds wearing hoods, I’ve yet to see any church praise him or encourage others to do the same. Have you? And there is certainly no government encouraging that sort of thing. Now, contrast that to how gays LGBT’s (and Christians and Jews) are treated in most muslim countries, or listen to how they’re/we’re talked about in any mosque on planet earth. Try hosting a big Pride parade in Dearborn… see what happens.
I’m simply pointing out that as bad as some Christians are to us right now, it’s nothing compared to what we might soon be experiencing from those who practice jihad. Trust me, we’re on their list.
AtticusBennett
this is all well and good, but as one who’s had these conversations, and used the same examples, for years….. you often get this from the bigots: *ahem* “NO!”
literally. “NO! That’s not true! because mah preacher said something else!”
yeah, well, your preacher and your church are all f***ing idiots.
some people are so worthless, and they know it, that they need someone else to feel better than. ever notice how all those confederate flag waving bigots are the epitome of classless pathetic white trash?
same thing.
yes – there are some who will be swayed. but most will cling to their bigotry til their dying day. why? being “not gay” is all they have left.
they have hypocrisy and piety, not actual fidelity to the bible.
just ask sarah “all three of my grandchildren are illegitimate bastards” palin
AtticusBennett
http://littlekiwilovesbauhaus.blogspot.ca/2015/06/the-church-i-grew-up-in.html
what “Christianity” should look like….
GTT
The bible is a book of mythology. It contains value in terms of metaphors and symbolism.
Anyone who thinks it is literally true is nuts – same goes for the koran, torah.
Gays are helping push society forward – our lives depend on it.
Women’s lives depend on it too in the Middle East.
Xzamilio
@dinard38: And they’ll swear up and down that Satan is the bad one in that story, even though everything he did to Job — including killing his children — he explicitly asked God each time before he did it, and God allowed it. The bible is a great read, but a terrible guide for morality.
Josh447
Would it help to call an all out war on the false god Yahweh of the Bible and put the thang to extinction? After all, millions have been murdered and suppressed by “his” its rule. Isn’t it time to kick the man made freak show off the planet? It seems most just deal with the symptoms/fallout of tyranny rather than the cause. Yahweh is the problem, and that is just smoke and mirrors.
The truth is …… God (pure peace) is what we have left after We have messed everything up.
Giancarlo85
The bible is a fictional work. It ripped off other fictional myths like the Epic Of Gilgamesh. Tell me why I should even entertain arguments made from the bible or any religious texts for that matter? You have to be smoking something serious if you even believe the bible… And if you believe it literally you must be insane.
@Ladbrook: Thanks for the red herring. It is what people like you do best. You sound like Fox News. Basically you are saying we should grateful that fundamentalist Christians don’t try to kill us and Muslims are worse lol. Maybe you should think about a far more dangerous internal danger. Right wing fundamentalist paramilitary types who want to bring down the government and execute those who oppose them. America is full of domestic terrorists. Yet not one word from you, asides from an overused deflection.
Giancarlo85
What about that deranged idiot who lives in a ranch in Texas and draws the most disturbing self portraits? He only killed 400,000 Iraqis. Not one word from ladbrook.
Xzamilio
@Ladbrook: Lawdy, ISLAM’S A=COMIN’!!!!!!!
Ladbrook
@Giancarlo85: Awww, that’s cute. At least you didn’t launch into one of your Israel-bashing rants to go along with your “right wing fundamentalist paramilitary” conspiracy theory crap. You’re slipping.
GTT
Ladbrook,
Israel is the greatest country in the middle east – but the right wing religious fundamentalists in the GOP support it for religious reasons – despite it’s pro-gay policies not b/c of them.
Billy Budd
This is all such an enormous amount of BULL. Religion is BULL.
Ladbrook
@GTT: I’m well aware of that, and I strongly support Israel… always have, always will. Giancarlo85, on the other hand, sees Israel as an evil entity, and regularly launches into unhinged tirades against them. I was merely pointing out how surprised I was that he didn’t try to slip a bit of his patented “joo-hate” into his (increasingly tiresome) attacks on those of us who aren’t sufficiently Marxist for him.
Derek Perron
My response ; “u lost get over it. “
Giancarlo85
@Ladbrook: You support mass murderers that have launched multiple wars and done many killings. It isn’t conspiracy theory crap you fucking moron. Paramilitary groups in the US are incredibly dangerous.
@Ladbrook: Only a fool would strongly support an apartheid regime like Israel. Israel doesn’t even treat certain citizens the same as others. Certain CITIZENS (like Arab Israelis) are treated as second class citizens!
I launch valid criticism of Israel as they are an extremely dangerous destabilizing force in the region and they possess hundreds of nuclear weapons. It’s a very scary and unstable situation.
You are a right wing nutcase who has mental delusions.
Giancarlo85
@GTT: Israel is NOT pro-gay. Stop being so delusional, like the Fox News drone Ladbrook (who only repeats what he sees on Fox News). Ladbrook is saying we should support a murderous regime like Israel… because of what? They aren’t democratic. Some citizens aren’t even allowed to vote or have the same rights. It’s an APARTHEID regime.
Ladbrook, you’re the one that has SLIPPED into dementia.
Giancarlo85
And this idiot Ladbrook has called me a marxist? What kind of insanity is that? I’m center left in most parts of this world. But for a loser like LADBROOK anything that isn’t right wing is communist.
Ladbrook
@Giancarlo85: LOL. Do you self-medicate these days, or is CVS just out of lithium? Either way, all that anger and venom must make you one hell of a party guest.
I just reread this thread full of comments. You’re “wisdom” is heavily featured. Nice work.
http://www.queerty.com/14-year-old-hanged-from-tree-for-being-gay-at-iranian-boys-summer-camp-20150717#comments
Desert Boy
Thank goodness I don’t have any family members, friends or colleagues who spout such Biblical drivel. I’m very lucky, I guess.
Joe Edwards
The moment I hear Bible -anything the conversation ends. No fairy tales for me.
Giancarlo85
@Ladbrook: I am not excusing a crime committed in Iran against gay people, you delusional shit.
I just recognize crime everywhere, including in the United States. You seem to suffer from massive dementia. But then again you’re willing to be accepted as a second class citizen so you can kiss republican ass all fucking day.
Giancarlo85
You are a RIGHT WINGER. Right wingers are naturally violent and angry every day. Most right wingers drop dead before they reach 50… heart attacks (look into Andrew Breitbart for example). Right wing political thoughts are unhealthy and dangerous.
Billy Budd
Right wingers are nuts, at least partially.
Will Moor
@Josh Nollenberg: over 2 billion human beings on planet earth, according to statistics.
Ladbrook
@Giancarlo85: I’m not angry. You’re the one ranting daily and attacking anything that moves, and often in caps! (Very stylish, BTW… practically Stalinesque in scope.)
I’m also not a “RIGHT WINGER”… but I do admire your attempts at redefining that term to mean “anyone who disagrees with me.” Anyway… you should send some of your rants to the HR Director over at Code Pink. I think the anti-Semites currently running that toxic gang are looking for a new PR person to run their Twitter feed. You’d be perfect. Fingers crossed!
Giancarlo85
@Ladbrook: You’re extremely unhinged and angry. You also seem to be a very unstable person with mental issues.
You are a right winger by the definition of the word. You need to look at reality. I am not anti-semite, you half wit. I am anti-Zionist. Learn the fucking difference. Israel is a disgusting apartheid nation.
You can be a PR person for Fox News. You’d fit in perfectly. “Stalinesque”? Are you kidding me? I am CENTER LEFT, you dumb ass.
Ladbrook
LOL. You wouldn’t know “center left” if Castro himself gave you a map.
Giancarlo85
@Ladbrook: CENTER LEFT in ANY DEVELOPED country, you fucking tool. What are you? You’ll probably make the British National Party look MODERATE.
Ladbrook
I’m an unaffiliated voter, and a registered independent. The only Republican I’ve ever voted for was GHW Bush in 1988. Four years later, I drove UNC-Chapel Hill students to the polls while wearing a rather larger Clinton-Gore button on my sweater. (Since you asked).
Now run along and finish whatever you’re reading… Das Kapital, I suspect.
Giancarlo85
@Ladbrook: That means nothing to me. That is a useless STATEMENT. You are going by the American system of politics. It is all right wing.
You are a disgusting piece of work who supports Israel. You are politically right. Just admit it please!
Giancarlo85
Why are so called “independents” in America more right wing than conservatives? Something reeks like a pile of bullshit to me…
Giancarlo85
Wait for it… Ladbrook will bring up an election that happened 20 years ago lol. Never mind… he won’t talk about the last few elections… which his voting record was most likely: Bush/Cheney – McCain/Palin – Romney/Ryan… lol.
Glücklich
Interesting article. I’ve actually never had a conversation in which bible verses came up at all, let alone as statements to be argued. Literally have never had a conversation with anyone who wants to argue against gay.
Greg C
Okay, let’s do this!! I can take the comments!!
hughhai
I regularly interface with Christians as a part of my work, so I have prepared myself for years with comebacks just in case one of them wanted to attack my identity. (It has yet to happen, mostly because the Christians I deal with are highly educated and extremely tactful.) The most adequate response I have found since Leviticus is the most used material against homosexuality is another verse that completely nullifies that argument. Paul said in Galatians that the old law (the Torah or first five books of the OT) had been resolved by Jesus’ death, and that we are no longer subject to it as a result of his sacrifice. I have yet to pull that one out, but I look forward to the dumbfounded looks it produces. I have been asked if I am a Christian, and I replied that I try to not allow religion interfere in my relationship with God. That one scrambles brains since no where in the Bible is there a clear requirement for church attendance (especially since Christian churches didn’t manifest until hundreds of year after Jesus’ death).
o.codone
@Ladbrook: Giancarla is not slipping, she’s just very busy figuring out how to get a messenger job.
“According to Genesis 19, the men of Sodom threatened to gang rape God’s messengers”.
jmurman
Matthew Vines is wrong.
God has said that homosexuality is sin. He has said that sex outside of marriage is immoral.
Now, most of you here will ignore that or get angry and start with the name calling. Please keep this in mind, God does love you, but He cannot put up with your sin, and will judge it. Whether it’s lying, stealing, using Gods name in vain, or homosexuality…God will judge, however God will forgive if you will turn to Him.
Ladbrook
@o.codone: LOL.
@jmurman: Who knew that Tony Perkins trolled gay websites over coffee. Come on out, Tony… we don’t bite.
Daggerman
…hopefully not that far into the future we/all nations will drop this extremely damaging long winded book! Which has never had any real purpose.
nature boy
@dinard38: great story and very true, i can definitely relate.
The fact remains that people including uneducated people (and people who receive most of their continuing education in church) continue to look for meaning in life and guidance in how to live life, and religion (including the bible) has developed over hundreds of years to try and provide the answers. So I value the author’s contribution to answering attacks based on the bible. Yes the bible is a real head-trip and there are a lot of spots that regularly get ignored or smoothed over in certain popular translations to better fit the ideals of the modern day. The bible is still fascinating as a 1700 year old widely read document. I applaud you for actually reading the bible yourself instead of just listening to verses read to you, and for questioning what you read. I am always amused how when they read from the bible in church they edit what they want to hear down to very specific lines very carefully leaving out certain adjoining lines that they don’t want to deal with.
But leaving the bible aside, it’s also true that a good CHURCH can be a really wonderful thing that provides support both to its members and to the community on levels that no other organization provides. Ignorant straights “get” this and enjoy the benefits, a lot of gays have never experienced this and don’t understand it. When I was providing in-home hospice care to a dying friend, I was super lucky to have become a member of a wonderful UCC church. They were like a well-oiled machine that knew exactly what to do and how to help both me and my friend both while she was dying and after she died. I felt so lucky to have become a part of that church at that time of my life. So at the same time as I just CAN”T with certain parts of the bible, and certain other churches, I’m VERY happy that I was in that church and made some life-long friends with very smart and caring people there. I was really amazed at what a beautiful organization that church had created, and how thoughtfully and dedicated they were to helping other people and becoming better people themselves. Something I’ve never seen in any other part of our secular society including family, higher education, and government. It was really wonderful to meet weekly with a group of people who were really dedicated to becoming better people and working together to help the less fortunate. If not in church, where? I haven’t seen the same thing happening anywhere else in society.
So I just encourage people not to let their problems with the BIBLE prevent them from experiencing a wonderful local CHURCH. They do exist and there are more and more great churches where being gay is just not an issue.
Michael Reid Perry
Religious arguments are all opponents have left. If LGBT supporters want to play their game – a game that sounds like baby-talk and doesn’t belong in adult discussions – let’s beat them at their own game.
Giancarlo85
@o.codone: You really have to stop listening to Rush Limbaugh. That is dangerous for your health.
@jmurman: First off, you are the one that is wrong on the entire basis of your argument. The bible was written by men, not by a god. And what god? Zeus? Apollo? Same nonsense. Keep believing your fairy tales.
nature boy
This thread makes me think back to the movie Life of Pi, which is basically about questioning and coming to terms with religion. The narrator tells two stories and then asks, which story do you prefer? The end result is the same. I choose the story with the tiger.
Atrius
@jmurman: Personally I don’t care what your god has to say. It has no baring on my life.
Daggerman
..excuse the pun but these god fearing twits (bible bashers) can’t even get their facts straight!
GayEGO
@GTT: Well said!
GayEGO
@jmurman: Is God’s voice a bass, baritone, or tenor? What? You don’t know? Based on your comments you are committing the sins by being hateful, judging, etc. You have obviously been brainwashed by your religion and are unable to use your brain to think so you just repeat this dark ages hateful hoopla. Try to learn to think for yourself so you may have a chance of a happy life. My lifetime partner of 53 years and I, married 11 years, are both retired and living the American dream, a happy one!
Josh447
jmurman,
If you are a follower of Jesus Christ then you know he came to offer the truth of who god is instead of the money mockery the Jews made of God, and that is why the Torah is to be dismissed. After his death the Jews took over his work and destroyed it with political stories that made him a martyr and a false religious idol. He didn’t get crucified to die for anyone’s sins, that’s a fairy tail. He got crucified bc he was teaching of the true God of peace and love only, that of which we are ALL fathered, the exact opposite of the evil god Yahweh via Judism/Christianity that teaches you are scum from birth, now BOW and OBEY and PAY.
Your baseless intimations are based in fear and death threats, by the god of which you adore, and this man made IT, is actually the antichrist, the horn of evil, designed for financial gain. You are just sharpening your horns on the uneducated, of which you yourself are rife. You sir, are living and promoting the antichrist. We as gay/bi people, are naturally occurring in human design. You have a choice in who you serve. We have a choice in accepting our reality. Both can be quite difficult for some. But you will probably be the hardest to overturn, bc you seem to be the most hypnotized. You therefore, as I am a true follower of Christ, are not my target market. You have some softening to do before you are teachable.
So be off with you to your next evil conversation, and feel the condemnation, as it is in you, and is of you, bc it is you.
TampaBayTed
Most religions have one purpose–control. The male dominated religions want to control everyone else’s sex lives, what they eat, what they drink, what one should or shouldn’t wear, and self-abnegation.
Xzamilio
@jmurman: Isn’t that an awesome sentiment. God created “sin” when he supposedly made “perfect humans” that were duped by a serpent (that HE also created) and did nothing to stop it (even though he absolutely could have) and then thousands of years later sends himself (depending on your denomination) to be brutally tortured and murdered in a blood sacrifice… TO HIMSELF. And this was all so he could forgive humans for his own fuckups. God sounds like a complete dick.
The kind of guy that will poison a well, blame you for getting sick, and then offer a cure that you have to beg and worship him for or he’ll just kill you.
Xzamilio
@Josh447: A “true follower of Christ”? Yeah, I’m sorry, but what you wrote was absolute drivel, on par with jmurman’s. There is NO evidence that this Christ ever existed except for the writings you claim are corrupted. Nothing else outside of the bible exists. Not Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, or any other contemporary accounts.
Is there any reason why most of the Christians you come across on the internet sound absolutely certifiable?
Jeff Lawrence
Thanks, Matt.
Charles Nyangaga Wandalo
Joshua Ortiz
Keith Sena
I can’t wait for someone’s five responses to your five responses to the five objections!
Claire Erickson
I’ve also heard that Leviticus was referring to prostitution rituals as opposed to committed relationships with monogamous intercourse.
If anyone’s interested – I would also recommend the “Gay Christian” YouTube channel. He’s got the same mission in mind as Matthew 🙂
David Crees
Hey Matt. I love your views. My father was a pastor and I try to share your articles with my mother and sisters as they struggle between their roots and the new truths that God is revealing. It does make it challenging, though, to show them that homosexuality is a life style and not just full of a bunch of sex-obsessed perverts (as many conservatives unfortunately think), when the links surrounding your article list things like “Closeted Navy Discusses Drunken One Night Stand”, “Guess How Much Gay Porn Stars Make” and “Photos: The Naked Rowers Return – Bigger, Longer, and Uncut”.
I know this doesn’t have anything to do with you. This is Queerty’s site. I know you are looking to show those in the homosexual community that they are loved by God. And I know that Queerty is not more sex obsessed than straight, Hollywood-type gossip sites. All I ask is, is it possible to share your article to conservative Christians who are willing to seek truth? Is there a “mom” safe website….?
Seth Everett
You rock
Andrena LeBlanc
Unfortuantely the objections come from people telling down on having faith altogether.
Claire Harris
You use another verse that has a different meaning too, let no one put asunder. Marriage is between a couple and God, it is between them and no one else if a marriage is over or not.
Asa DeMatteo
I prefer to dismiss the issue for two reasons: (1) I am an agnostic secular humanist and feel it arrogant and inappropriate for me to tell any person of faith how to understand their scriptures, even though I have read and know much about the Bible. (2) Neither the Bible nor any other religious scripture holds authority over me or my country. The United States was founded by men of the enlightenment who believed in reason and rationality as the basis for law and for choosing right action. I am their child.
Marcia Pratt
You are awesome……!
Mary Dullinger
Good information; thank you.
Kathy LeMaster Murray
Well I guess gay people will find out the truth when they are standing before GOD THE FATHER. My question is do you really want to take that chance?! Every sin is forgiven as long as you ask for forgiveness. But if you refuse to admit that what you are doing is a sin then you will not be forgiven. Heaven or Hell are you willing to roll the dice? As a mother that is my biggest fear,not knowing where my children are going in the end. That would break my heartð???
Giancarlo85
@Kathy LeMaster Murray: Keep talking. This is the same myth people have been spreading about their god(s) for centuries. Your “god” is no more valid than Zeus or any other of the gods. You are a liar too. Roll the dice… give me a break. Take your dishoensty somewhere else. You are probably a horrible mother.
Where did all these right wing christian fanatics come from?
Yvo Rances
nice work
John Pavlica
This author discredited his own theology in his article. He said in argument #4, “Neither the word homosexual’ nor the concept it represents existed when it (the bible) was written.” Then he just admitted that homosexuality is not something people are born with but rather it’s a perverted choice of sexual immorality which the bible speaks quite clearly about. Can I encourage everyone to consider re-reading the bible rather than trying to re-write it. God loves all people including homosexuals. His plan is that we all find hope and repentance in Christ.
Terri McGhee
I pray for you everyday son may God have mercy on your soul
David Garland
Interesting but basically irrelevant since mans rights dont derive from mysticism, supernatural speculation, or the ethics of sacrificing that which is good precisely because it is alleged to be good. The doctrine of human sacrifice, such as jesus, is disgusting
John Laubacher
His comment about Argument #1 says basically that the Old Testament doesnâ??t count and that itâ??s reference to homosexuality is, therefore, not valid. Then, in Argument #4, he says â??Neither the word â??homosexualâ? nor the concept it represents existed when the Bible was written.â? Heâ??s arguing against himself. The entire cities of S&G were destroyed, not just the people who attacked Godâ??s messengers. The threat of rape is not why the cities were destroyed.
Giancarlo85
@John Pavlica: “rather it’s a perverted choice of sexual immorality which the bible speaks quite clearly about. Can I encourage everyone to consider re-reading the bible rather than trying to re-write it. God loves all people including homosexuals. His plan is that we all find hope and repentance in Christ.’
Another bullshit artist. Maybe you are the one who should RE-READ it and also understand the bible has been rewritten many times over. Your “god” doesn’t exist.
Diane DeWitt Hall
good article Matt
o.codone
@Giancarlo85: So, you ARE looking for a messenger job, I knew it !
Giancarlo85
@o.codone: You are a messenger… you take messages in the local bathroom… right up your pimply ass.
Stephen Rowe
You really need to deal with Paul and Romans right away. Ignoring these texts while making a new covenant argument looks very unconvincing
Dön Elser
Matthew, you make a difference. Thanks for your work.
Brian Bowen
Next time you hear someone say â??HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN,â? do us all a favor and share this with them! Thanks!
HOMOSEXUALS in the BIBLE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EXWyPHZAXk
Indeed many forms of homosexual expressions are condemned throughout Scripture! In each clobber passage, the context is men who are married to women engaged in adultery–these are not LGBT people.
Full Exposition of All Clobber Passages:
http://brianbowenministries.com/clobber-passages.html
~Sodom was destroyed to purge fallen angels who mated with human women (which was heterosexual, even back then) See Genesis 6, Jude 1:6-7and 2 Peter 2:4-7 Full Exposition of the Sodom account: http://www.brianbowenministries.com/14-men-of-sodom.html
~Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13 both include the phrase “as with a woman” indicating the men who are lying with each other are MARRIED to WOMEN. This is why the penalty for adultery with a man (Leviticus 20:13) is the same as the penalty for adultery with a women (Leviticus 20:10). But how would we apply these passages to a boy being molested by a priest? Or a heterosexual man who was raped by another heterosexual man in prison? Leviticus 20:13 says both men should be put to death, yet do we honestly believe God intended this to apply to innocent victims of rape or clergy sex abuse….or was it confined only to that which violates the 10 Commandments: “You shall not commit adultery”
Full Exposition of Leviticus:
http://www.brianbowenministries.com/16-leviticus.html
~Romans 1:27 says the men “turned from” relations with women. But only men who HAD relations with women can “turn from” them. If they had relations with women, Paul considered them to be MARRIED (1 Corinthians 6:16). Romans 1:26 similarly says the women â??exchanged the natural useâ? for an â??unnatural oneâ? or â??one against nature.â? Again, only women who had â??natural useâ? can â??exchangeâ? it for one that is â??against natureâ? (sex with animals as worship to Roman gods). So the men and women were MARRIED and engaged in ADULTERY in order to worship Roman mythological gods represented by birds, beasts and reptiles (Romans 1:23). We see similar worship practices in Acts 14:8-18 when Paul and Barnabas are mistaken for Zeus and Hermes. A Google search on “symbols of Roman gods” reveals that indeed each god and goddess was represented by either a bird, a beast, or a reptile.
Notice the difference in Paulâ??s language when describing the womenâ??s acts in Romans 1:26 compared to the menâ??s acts in Romans 1:27. Only the womenâ??s acts are referred to as being â??against natureâ? or â??unnaturalâ? (because sex with animals indeed is). But Paul does not use that language when describing the menâ?? acts. Conversely, Paul does not say the women â??burned in lust for one another,â? but uses that language only to describe the menâ??s acts. This verifies the women were not having relations with each other, and the menâ??s acts are not considered by Paul to be â??against natureâ? or â??unnaturalâ? These acts violate 2 of the 10 Commandments: â??You shall not commit adulteryâ? and â??You shall have no other gods before Me.â?
That is why Paul later says in Romans 1:26-32 that these folks were â??deserving of deathâ? under â??Godâ??s righteous decrees,â? which God made in:
Leviticus 20:2-5 regarding the penalty for worship of other gods,
Leviticus 20:15-16 regarding the penalty for copulating with animals,
Leviticus 20:10 and Leviticus 20:13 regarding the penalty for adultery, whether with a woman (Leviticus 20:10) or man (Leviticus 20:13),
Leviticus 20:9 regarding the penalty for being disosbedient to parents,
Exodus 20:17 regarding covetousness,
Exodus 20:13 regarding murder,
Exodus 20:15-16 regarding stealing and lying,
Exodus 20:1-12 disregarding God,
and Leviticus 19:18 regarding loving your neighbor.
In each case, the sins listed in Romans 1:26-32 are violations of the 10 Commandmentsâ?¦yet being LGBT and Same Sex Marriage are not.
Full Exposition of Romans:
http://www.brianbowenministries.com/18-romans.html
~Finally 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 addressed a priest who was molesting boys in his congregation. The context of the details are provided beginning in 1 Corinthians 5:1 as an “impurity of a sort not even the heathen engage in it, for a man has his own father’s wife.” At first glance, this appears to be man/mother incest (which would be heterosexual), but that practice was so common among the heathen that Moses addressed it in Leviticus 18:7-8. We know by this that Paul is speaking metaphorically regarding the manâ??s own father (Jesus) and His wife (His Bride, the Bride of Christ, the Church). Paul confirms by asking â??Shall I take the parts of the body of Christ and make them parts of a prostituteâ? in 1 Corinthians 6:15-17.
Further, we see from 1 Corinthians 5:13 that only 1 person is expelled from the Church for what 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 lists out, yet nobody can “participate in homosexuality” all by themselves.
Full Exposition of 1 Corinthians 5, 1 Corinthians 6 and 1 Corinthians 7:
http://www.brianbowenministries.com/2-god-sanctioned-gay-marriage.html
While most Christians do not make all these observations, it is without question the context of the clobber passages have nothing to do with LGBT people or same sex marriage.
On the other hand, Jesus taught LGBT people are born naturally from our mother’s womb in Matthew 19:11-12, as he delineates 3 types of eunuchs:
Celibates
castrated men
and BORN eunuchs.
Jesus exempts all 3 types from hetero marriage.
If Born Eunuchs are not celibate, nor castrated, nor entering into heterosexual marriage, that means BORN EUNUCHS must include LGBT people.
Full Exposition of Matthew 19:11-12:
http://www.brianbowenministries.com/1-born-this-way.html
After 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, the Apostle Paul goes on to ordain single gender marriage in 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 (as part of the very same letter), for the very same Born Eunuchs Jesus exempted from heterosexual marriage in Matthew 19:11-12. And Paul goes on to recognize same sex divorce in 1 Corinthians 7:15 as he indicates that sometimes when a man leaves a marriage, it is a man who remains. And then the Holy Spirit comes along in 1 Timothy 4:1-3 with a warning to Christians to not forbid people to marry, saying that those who do have “fallen away from the faith, have been seduced by deluding spirits and doctrines that demons teach.”
Full Exposition of 1 Corinthians 5, 1 Corinthians 6 and 1 Corinthians 7:
http://www.brianbowenministries.com/2-god-sanctioned-gay-marriage.html
***More info available in the Frequently Asked Questions reference guide:
http://www.brianbowenministries.com/frequently-asked-questions.html
***This video is a guided “power point” tour that walks viewers through a side-by-side comparison of the Scriptures containing both Jesus’ and Apostle Paul’s teachings on marriage, adultery and divorce. I believe it reveals Jesus taught LGBT people are naturally born so in Matthew 19:12, and that Apostle Paul ordained Same Sex Marriage in 1 Corinthians 7:8-9:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUNRqiS2qDA
Brian Bowen
Jesus taught LGBT people are born naturally from our mother’s womb in Matthew 19:11-12, as he delineates 3 types of eunuchs:
Celibates, castrated men, and BORN eunuchs.
Jesus exempts all 3 types from hetero marriage.
If Born Eunuchs are not celibate, nor castrated, nor entering into heterosexual marriage, that means BORN EUNUCHS must include LGBT people.
http://brianbowenministries.com/1-born-this-way.html
Then Paul ordains same sex marriage for these very same born eunuchs in 1 Corinthians 7:8-9, after ordaining marriage for heterosexual couples in 1 Corinthians 7:1-7…
…and even goes so far as to recognize same sex divorce in 1 Corinthians 7:15
Jesus said to them, Not all men can accept this saying, but it is for those to whom the capacity to receive it has been given.
For there are eunuchs who have been born incapable of marriage; and there are eunuchs who have been made so by men; and there are eunuchs who have made themselves incapable of marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.
Let him who is able to accept this accept it. Matthew 19:11-12
In doing so, Jesus leaves two questions unanswered:
1. Is it better to engage in sexual relations without ever marrying in order to avoid the act and penalty of adultery?
2. Who are the born eunuchs Jesus exempted from heterosexual marriage, and why did He exempt them?
It’s important to pause here and recognize that Jesus was teaching Jewish people living under the Old Covenant, and not Christians who now live under the New Covenant. While recognizing this distinction, the Apostle Paul is confronted with these same questions in a letter he received from the Christian Church in Corinth. We will see him answer the 1st question in 1 Corinthians 7:1-7, and see him answer the 2nd question in 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 as he addresses two distinctly separate groups of unmarried people:
1 Now as to the matters of which you wrote me. It is well [and by that I mean advantageous, expedient, profitable, and wholesome] for a man not to touch a woman [to cohabit with her] but to remain unmarried.
2 But because of the temptation to impurity and to avoid immorality, let each [man] have his own wife and let each [woman] have her own husband.
1 Corinthians 7:1-2
We see in verse 1 that the people Paul begins speaking of are unmarried, and recognize that indeed some people in the early Church believed Jesus’ Disciples were correct in deciding not to marry in order to prevent adultery. Recognizing the sexual immorality the Disciples’ approach of not marrying could lead to, Paul specifically says in verse 2 to let each man have his own wife and each woman have her own husband. He goes on to add very specific reasoning for his conclusion:
3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights (goodwill, kindness, and what is due her as his wife), and likewise the wife to her husband.
4 For the wife does not have [exclusive] authority and control over her own body, but the husband [has his rights]; likewise also the husband does not have [exclusive] authority and control over his body, but the wife [has her rights].
5 Do not refuse and deprive and defraud each other [of your due marital rights], except perhaps by mutual consent for a time, so that you may devote yourselves unhindered to prayer. But afterwards resume marital relations, lest Satan tempt you [to sin] through your lack of restraint of sexual desire.
So that answers the 1st question. At first glance, Paul’s answer seems to overlook Jesus’ teaching that not all men could accept marrying heterosexually, but when we read verses 6-7 we see Paul recognize that Jesus indeed exempted some men (eunuchs) from heterosexual marriage. He first addresses celibate eunuchs saying:
6 But I am saying this more as a matter of permission and concession, not as a command or regulation.
7 I wish that all men were like I myself am [in this matter of self-control]. But each has his own special gift from God, one of this kind and one of another. 1 Corinthians 7:6-7
Here we see the Apostle Paul make the same exemption from heterosexual marriage for one of the three types of eunuchs Jesus mentioned in Matthew 19:12; (those who choose to not marry and remain celibate). Paul clarifies in verses 6-7 that his teaching “each man” and “each woman” to marry in verse 2 is not a command or regulation for every man, but instead is a matter of permission and concession to anyone so choosing to refrain from sexual relations. He further verifies he is speaking here of the celibate eunuchs as he only speaks of men, and does not mention women in verses 6-7, just as Jesus did in Matthew 19:11-12. Paul emphasizes here that his statement on marriage in verses 1-2 are focused on preventing sexual immorality for those who are not gifted with God given celibacy. It’s also important to notice that Paul considers celibacy only one gift from God while recognizing there is yet another God given gift pertaining to marriage as well, and that every man has either one or the other kind of these God given gifts.
In verses 8-9, we will now see Paul recognize Jesus’ teaching on marriage in relation to another of the three types of eunuchs Jesus exempted from heterosexual marriage (the born eunuchs) whom Paul refers to as “unmarried people.” In doing so, Paul recognizes that if Jesus had specifically exempted eunuchs from heterosexual marriage, they were obviously “unmarried” at the time Paul wrote this letter. But it’s important to recognize that in verses 8-9, Paul addresses these “unmarried people” separately and apart from the unmarried people he addressed in verses 1-2, and separately and apart from the celibate eunuchs whom he addressed in verses 6-7, and now says:
8 But to the unmarried people and to the widows, I declare that it is well (good, advantageous, expedient, and wholesome) for them to remain [single] even as I do.
9 But if they have not self-control (restraint of their passions), they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame [with passion and tortured continually with ungratified desire]. 1 Corinthians 7:8-9
For the first time since verses 1-2 we see Paul once again address women. We saw Paul had already clarified in verses 6-7 that his teaching “each man” to marry a person of the opposite gender in verses 1-2 was not intended to include every human being, but only those men who were so inclined to engage in relations with women. We further already saw he went on to clarify he did not intend his teaching to be a command or regulation toward celibate eunuchs being forced to marry contrary to their will and gifting. So far, Paul has addressed the same men and women inclined toward heterosexual marriage that Jesus taught on in Matthew 19:3-10, as well as the celibate eunuchs Jesus taught on in Matthew 19:11-12. Which leaves now only the castrated eunuchs, and the born eunuchs for Paul to address.
Paul clearly predicates his ordination of marriage in 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 on “it is better to marry than burn.” This means the eunuchs he is addressing here does not apply to castrated eunuchs (who would have had no sexual capacity or desire), but instead is addressing the born eunuchs (some of which must have had both sexual capacity and desire, based on Paul’s predication of marriage for them).
Full exposition with Scripture flow charts that color code and track Jesus’ and Paul’s teaching on heterosexual and same sex marriage here: http://brianbowenministries.com/ch-2-eunuch-marriages.html
dmanhart
There actually is one instance of gay marriage in the bible. David and Jonathan. “And it came to pass, when he (David) had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul. And Saul took him that day, and would let him go no more home to his father’s house. Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul.” The word used to describe their love was “ahab” and “qashar”, meaning the deepest love. Jonathan also gave his clothes and weapons to David, indicating a dowry. Jonathan’s father made David his son in law.
Not sexual though, right?
“And as soon as the lad was gone, David arose out of a place toward the south, and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed himself three times: and they kissed one another, and wept one with another, until David exceeded.”
Except that in the original Hebrew, the word “higdil” was used for “exceeded”. “Higdil” means “caused to become big”. So, Jonathan caused David to become “bigger”. Perhaps Jonathan made David become taller? Yeah, that’s it. I sure hope Jonathan did something to help David with his “problem”.
nature boy
Thanks for bringing that Jonathan/ David story to my attention. For some reason I’ve never heard it in church ! LOL. I’ve skimmed it over in the Message translation, and need to do a much more thorough read, but here are my first impressions.
David at one point goes off to marry a woman but then comes back to Jonathan “and all was it was before” 🙂 And Jonathan professes how their children will forever be bonded as they are, so obviously they are still living in the expectations of heterosexual marriage and family.
Saul is really mad at David too, trying to kill him many times and telling Jonathan how he has disgraced their mother with his behavior to David and trying to kill him as well.
My favorite part on this cursory first skim reading is how Jonathan stuck the tip of his spear in some honey and licked it off, then Saul decided he was cursed and had to be killed, but the men of the army refused to let Saul kill him.
David says “none of us has touched a woman.”
…”and then they kissed one another and wept, friend over friend, David weeping especially hard.”
Wow. This is a great read. Thanks again.
John Frels
Excellent article!
Mike Mikey
Nice if one puts a lot of value on the bible it’s like arguing over what characters said in the Hobbit or Game Of Thrones series. It’s a book of stories not relevant to the real world. I can imagine what the bible would say if it were written in the 21st Century.
Chris Cox
Not excellent at all. A grotesque and appalling example of twisting the words of our Lord in an attempt to make the Lord stand up, support and promote sin. This is Satan’s handiwork. Avoid.
Reggie Simbolon
Lol……. I just love science.
BrianAnthonyBowen
@Stephen Rowe: Indeed many forms of homosexual expressions are condemned throughout Scripture! In each clobber passage, the context is men who are married to women engaged in adultery–these are not LGBT people.
~Romans 1:27 says the men “turned from” relations with women. But only men who HAD relations with women can “turn from” them. If they had relations with women, Paul considered them to be MARRIED (1 Corinthians 6:16). Romans 1:26 similarly says the women “exchanged the natural use” for an “unnatural one” or “one against nature.” Again, only women who had “natural use” can “exchange” it for one that is “against nature” (sex with animals as worship to Roman gods). So the men and women were MARRIED and engaged in ADULTERY in order to worship Roman mythological gods represented by birds, beasts and reptiles (Romans 1:23). We see similar worship practices in Acts 14:8-18 when Paul and Barnabas are mistaken for Zeus and Hermes. A Google search on “symbols of Roman gods” reveals that indeed each god and goddess was represented by either a bird, a beast, or a reptile.
Notice the difference in Paul’s language when describing the women’s acts in Romans 1:26 compared to the men’s acts in Romans 1:27. Only the women’s acts are referred to as being “against nature” or “unnatural” (because sex with animals indeed is). But Paul does not use that language when describing the men’ acts. Conversely, Paul does not say the women “burned in lust for one another,” but uses that language only to describe the men’s acts. This verifies the women were not having relations with each other, and the men’s acts are not considered by Paul to be “against nature” or “unnatural” These acts violate 2 of the 10 Commandments: “You shall not commit adultery” and “You shall have no other gods before Me.”
That is why Paul later says in Romans 1:26-32 that these folks were “deserving of death” under “God’s righteous decrees,” which God made in:
Leviticus 20:2-5 regarding the penalty for worship of other gods,
Leviticus 20:15-16 regarding the penalty for copulating with animals,
Leviticus 20:10 and Leviticus 20:13 regarding the penalty for adultery, whether with a woman (Leviticus 20:10) or man (Leviticus 20:13),
Leviticus 20:9 regarding the penalty for being disosbedient to parents,
Exodus 20:17 regarding covetousness,
Exodus 20:13 regarding murder,
Exodus 20:15-16 regarding stealing and lying,
Exodus 20:1-12 disregarding God,
and Leviticus 19:18 regarding loving your neighbor.
In each case, the sins listed in Romans 1:26-32 are violations of the 10 Commandments…yet being LGBT and Same Sex Marriage are not.
Full Exposition of Romans 1: http://www.brianbowenministries.com/18-romans.html
Additional notes:
Consider the connection between Romans 1 and Leviticus 18 & 20.
Notice at the conclusion of Paul’s discourse in Romans 1 he says:
32 Though they are fully aware of God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve to die,
Now we know 1 of the things Paul condemned in Romans 1 was men who “turned from natural relations with women and were set ablaze (burning out, consumed) with lust for one another”
And we know that only men who HAD relations with women can “TURN FROM” relations with women.
And we know Paul considered any man who HAD relations with women to be MARRIED:
Or do you not know and realize that when a man joins himself to a prostitute, he becomes one body with her? The two, it is written, shall become one flesh. 1 Corinthians 6:16
So let’s review:
~These men were married to women and turned from relations with women to have relations with men. (We know that is automatically an act of adultery).
~We see Paul say that “though they are fully aware of God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve to die..” in Romans 1:32
~So now we turn to God’s righteous decrees, and there are only 2 times that men with men is ever mentioned. That means that the 2 times men with men is ever mentioned, it MUST have been referring to ADULTERY, or Paul would not have had any basis for declaring such as “deserve to die.”
*****************************************
Now let’s turn to the Leviticus passages.
Leviticus 18:22 simply forbids men to lie with other men “AS WITH A WOMAN”
22 You shall not lie with a man as WITH A WOMAN; it is an abomination.
Leviticus 20:13 now prescribes the penalty for violating Leviticus 18:22
13 If a man also lie with mankind, “as he lieth WITH A WOMAN”, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
*******************************************
Now let’s put it all together:
See the passage in Romans 1 again:
the men “turned from natural relations ***WITH WOMEN*** and were set ablaze (burning out, consumed) with lust for one another”
And Leviticus 18:22 again:
22 You shall not lie with a man as WITH A WOMAN; it is an abomination.
And Leviticus 20:13 again:
13 If a man also lie with mankind, “as he lieth WITH A WOMAN”, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
And we are left with only 1 possible accurate interpretation that applies to Leviticus 18, Leviticus 20:13 and Romans 1 and that is MEN who were MARRIED to WOMEN and were engaged in ADULTERY with other men.
*******************************************
Finally, as we see Jesus specify that BORN EUNUCHS do NOT MARRY WOMEN, there is no case wherein Leviticus 18, Leviticus 20 or Romans 1 can be applied to LGBT people who are NOT MARRIED and NOT ENGAGED IN ADULTERY!
You may disagree all you like, but you cannot change this truth, and if you do, you will condemn innocent people who are NOT ENGAGED IN ADULTERY and NOT MARRIED TO OPPOSITE GENDER SPOUSES! And may God have mercy on your soul if you do!
But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Matthew 18:6
~Jesus of Nazareth~
***More info available in the Frequently Asked Questions reference guide:
http://www.brianbowenministries.com/frequently-asked-questions.html
***This video is a guided “power point” tour that walks viewers through a side-by-side comparison of the Scriptures containing both Jesus’ and Apostle Paul’s teachings on marriage, adultery and divorce. I believe it reveals Jesus taught LGBT people are naturally born so in Matthew 19:12, and that Apostle Paul ordained Same Sex Marriage in 1 Corinthians 7:8-9. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Td0OKPUBPaQ
Ray Myers
These are all wonderful, but I wouldn’t waste my breath on bigots. The best help we can offer them is to live as an example. I say let them all howl at the moon!
Mike Childs
Just a personal note…you look better without the beard. It makes you look too much like a prophet, which isn’t bad, but, you are too young for the wild mountaineer, “Grizzly Adams” look.
Xzamilio
@Kathy LeMaster Murray: Yassssss for the Pascal’s Wager, that empty false dichotomy that hinges on the Christian religion and the Christian god being the ONLY true god… it removes all merit from any substantial argument and reduces you to one talking point: I worship God because I’m scared NOT to. It’s a copout, a threat, and admitting that you have nothing to offer except your unquestioning adherence to a sadistic holy man that will murder you because he loves you so much.
captainburrito
“That’s to be expected given that no one was talking about same-sex marriage in the first century.”
There was gay marriage going on in Roman empire and in the Han Dynasty in China so presumably Jesus would have known.