Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!husc6!seismo!lll-crg!lll-lcc!styx!twg-ap!amdahl!pyramid!decwrl!glacier!SU-ISL!brad
From: brad@SU-ISL.STANFORD.EDU (Bradley Clymer)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: New question for biblical scholars
Message-ID: <247@SU-ISL.STANFORD.EDU>
Date: Fri, 19-Sep-86 13:35:40 EDT
Article-I.D.: SU-ISL.247
Posted: Fri Sep 19 13:35:40 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 23-Sep-86 03:38:31 EDT
References: <1575@felix.UUCP> <1576@felix.UUCP>
Reply-To: brad@SU-ISL.UUCP (Bradley Clymer)
Organization: Information Systems Lab, Stanford University
Lines: 112

I wrote this letter to daver in reponse to his posting, then I decided that 
it might be good to post it to the net with the idea that it might either
begin stimulating discussion, or provide confort and support to someone
who is gay and christian and trying to deal with the apparent conflicts
in these seemingly different identities:


To: daver@felix.UUCP
Subject: Re: New question for biblical scholars
Newsgroups: net.motss
In-Reply-To: <1576@felix.UUCP>
References: <1575@felix.UUCP>
Organization: Information Systems Lab, Stanford University
Cc: 
Bcc: 

In article <1576@felix.UUCP> you write:
>>More than once on the net, I have seen someone comment that they were a homo-
>>sexual christian or jew.  This has usually been followed by questions as to 
>>how they could be both, that they are mutually exclusive, etc, etc.  
>
>An additional question for soc.motss readers:  Since I'm pretty sure that 
>homosexual acts ARE specifically condemned in the Bible, how do homosexual
>christians reconcile the problem?  Do they have special Bibles that have had
>those references removed, or what?  
>
>Again, please respond by email, and do not cross-post to religious groups.
>
>D.R.

I am interested in discussion of this topic...

I am the coordinator of the young adults group at the local United Methodist
Church here in Palo Alto.  Last fall, part of our program included a series
of lectures and discussions about homophobia in the `church', and its
history. 

One of the speakers had a PhD in English literature with specialization in
the era in which the King James Version of the bible was written.  She
has done extensive research into the references in the bible in which sex
is mentioned either explicitly or implicitly.  Her research included study
of the Jewish culture in the times that are estimated that the stories and
laws were recorded. 

She gave us several interesting insights:

(1)

The laws that specificly condemn `man laying with another man as if
a women' are part of the deuteronomic and priestly codes...the same codes
that establish kosher eating and cleaning rituals, and are thought by many
scholars to be largely social in origin.  

As much as anything, this a display of the hatred between the Jews and the
tribes of the surrounding areas (a hatred that still exists thousands of
years later).  The Babylonians commonly practiced fertility rituals.
This included homosexual as well as heterosectual orgies, and festivals.
When the Jews were captive by the Babylonians, there was considerable 
concern among the Jewish priests and prophets that the race would be 
corrupted by the teachings and culture of the `heathens' that were occupying
them.  The laws were part of an effort to separate the two cultures, and
preserve the identity of the Jewish people.  Today, many Christians disregard
the kosher eating laws as being primarily social, however the adhere to the
sexual laws (to varying degrees) because they tend to reinforce the culture
of the majority.

(2)

All specific stories in which motss sex is condemned (for example the story
of the destruction of Sodom, the story of Noah and his son, etc.) involve
RAPE.  In these cases, the sex involved noncomplicitity of the part of at least one of the  participants.   In most cases, the action included threats of 
physical violence (as with Sodom) as well as intent to socially debase the
person being attacked by forcing into a position lower than a woman's (and
women were regarded as being socially invisible objects of possession).
Many scholars see  these stories as condemnation of rape rather than
homosexuality.  The specific examples tend to involve men raping men because
that was socially considered the most degrading and violent form of rape.
As I recall in the story of Sodom, Lot offered his virgin daughters that
the angels be spared.  This is as much a statement of the prevaling opinion
of women as it is the `nobleness' of Lot in his effort to save his guests.

(3)

There is absolutely no mention of women having sex with other women.  Either
that was considered allowable behavior or (more likely) women had such low
standing socially that the powers of the church ignored their sexual 
practices unless they involved infidelity to a man.

(4)

There is a story of King David and a friend, Jonathon, in which a homosexual
relationship is strongly inplied, although not specifically cited.  This 
relationship is not treated in a negative manner.  Granted, not everything
that David did was entirely honorable and should be copied, but he is 
definitely considered one of the most famous heroes of the old testiment.

(5)

In Christian interpretations of the messages of Jesus in the new testiment,
many sects emphasize that the principal commandment is to `love your
neighbor as yourself," and that this christian love transcends all laws of
the old testiment.  He gave examples of working on the Sabbath when the
done out of love.  Many gay christians see this as an acceptance of themselves
and their lifestyles; how can an act of love be a sin?   Granted, many 
gay relationships are not loving, but many heterosexual ones are not either.

Well, this letter has already become much longer than I intended.  I welcome
discussion on this or other subjects.  I am glad that you posted to net.motss.
This is a topic that is not often discussed, and should be.

brad clymer     brad@su-isl.arpa or brad@isl.stanford.edu (I'm not
		sure of the uucp path)