alongside of context is language. The First Testament was written in ancient Hebrew although it was translated into Greek in Alexandria Egypt about 200 BCE. This version is called the Septuagint, and many of the First Testament passages that Jesus and Paul use come from the Septuagint rather than the “original” Hebrew scriptures. Some First Testament quotations in the Second Testament vary from our own Bible because our First Testament is based on the Hebrew scriptures. Also, we do not have the “original” versions of any book in the Bible; we have what has been passed down to us. Scholars may spend their entire career interpreting old manuscripts and trying to develop the most “accurate” reading in the original languages. Even so, there are several versions of manuscripts, and that number increased with the discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi Library. From these manuscripts, interpreters have written numerous translations in English. There are more translations of the Bible into English than can easily be counted. There are several reasons for so many translations: we have recovered more ancient biblical manuscripts through the years, for one thing, and different translators try to balance readability with accuracy while pressing their own theological agendas.
Context and language are particularly important for interpreting the “clobber” texts that were referred to earlier. The context is very important because four clobber verses (1-4) in the Old Testament are part of narratives that are the genre of myth or epic, and they are very important theologically. The theology is missed by plucking the clobber versus out of context. Two others (5-6) are short texts that are part of a large series of commandments that were related in ways that are very different from our way of thinking. The interrelationship of these commandments makes them difficult to translate to our culture. The last three clobber verses come from Paul or the Pauline literature in the New Testament. In each of these letters Paul is addressing specific early Christian communities that each has a unique relationship with Paul. He is addressing that relationship and preaching to them about various issues in those specific churches. We cannot ignore the context of these letters.
Language is a difficulty in the majority of these verses for the simple reason that neither Hebrew nor Greek had a word for homosexual in their limited vocabularies. So these texts that have been used to declare homosexuality a sin have done so without the advantage of simple word translation. Specifically, in the Pauline scriptures that we will study, the translation and interpretation are very challenging, and various versions of the English Bible have vastly different translations of the clobber verses that appear in scriptures 7-9.
Methodology
Frank Schafer was driven by love to break the doctrinal standards of the United Methodist Church. He performed a marriage for his son because … well, he loves his son, and he did the ceremony out of love. There is some argument that focuses on comparing the biblical commandments with the overarching theme of biblical love. Some argue that God loves all of his creatures, including gay people; that Christ expresses the ultimate love and mercy of God for humankind; that we are commanded to love one another by Jesus; and that God is love.5 However, others would point out that sin is sin, and while forgiveness and mercy is always available through the death and resurrection of Christ, the need to obey the biblical commandments is not abrogated. Adultery is still adultery and murder is still murder, and our loving God is also just. However, what do the scriptures say? Since I am a Wesleyan by training and belief, I count scripture as the primary source for determining what the church’s teaching and response should be on issues such as homosexuality. Reason, experience, and tradition—the remaining three legs of the Wesley Quadrilateral—also play a part in forming a sound framework for establishing moral positions. Hence the major portion of this writing is commentary on the nine clobber texts.
Other scripture exegetes have already plowed the ground of scripture and theology regarding homosexuality. Like many polarized questions, the answers are varied and also polarized. Although some authors are reasoned and objective, some seem to bring their own presuppositions to the subject, even when it comes to scriptural interpretation. Of course, exegetes are human and come to biblical interpretation with lenses impacted by culture, environment, ethnicity, experience, education, training, and personal and implanted paradigms. One of the overriding presuppositions is traditionally and culturally conditioned to find homosexual practice repugnant, distasteful, and very wrong. Hence, much of mainstream biblical commentary presupposes what is now assumed in our contemporary culture. On the other hand, those who have had and have intimate relationships with the LGBT community, either through pastoral relationships or secular relationships, tend to interpret the same scripture differently. Observing and pastoring LGBT individuals and couples has become a motivation for many to favor the relaxing of doctrinal standards relating to homosexuality.
Traditional Bible commentaries support the noninclusion interpretation. The accepted exegesis of these verses declares homoeroticism as sinful behavior. Since a lot of voices have already established the prevailing belief, the prevailing understanding requires little study. Most of my efforts are focused on individuals who have employed a contrarian interpretation. Logically, one should have to prove (through scripture, reason, tradition, and experience) that something is sinful rather than prove it is not sinful. However, homoeroticism has been accepted as a sin by many, so more attention has to be paid to the opposite.
There are several sources available for our study: scripture is the primary source; presumably neutral commentary on the Bible (although my assumption is that most commentaries declare homoeroticism a sin); presumably neutral works on Bible-based ethics; specialized studies on the clobber scriptures that conclude that homoeroticism is either a sin or not a sin; and views expressed by different denominations.
There are new books on this subject coming out constantly. The various angles that they are coming from are fascinating. However, the biblical arguments are pretty much defined by now, and I have tried to cover the major foci of the argument. Hence, my analysis is very much dependent on selected scholars, and it is not comprehensive. I do not cover everything that has been said about this subject.
Who is doing the teaching today? Arguing that homosexuality is not a sin
Jack Rogers is Professor of Theology Emeritus at San Francisco Theological Seminary, Moderator of the 213th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA), and author of the book Jesus, the Bible and Homosexuality. Although his experiences had to have had some effect on his stance, in the section of his book entitled “How My Mind Changed,”6 he credits his in-depth biblical study as the driving force for his efforts to effect change in the Presbyterian Church by giving equal status to the LGBT community. Of course, anyone who acts in a judicatory/administrative position within a major denomination and is making multiple decisions regarding the lives of congregations and preachers would have to be influenced by the relationships of the people and clergy. I find it fascinating that those clergy who deal with the gay community within their churches seem to be influenced positively and accept them as full Christians. The lens through which they read scripture may be different from those of us who do not minister to the LGBT community.
Adam Hamilton is pastor to the United Methodist Church of the Resurrection in Leawood, Kansas. It has become the largest United Methodist Church. Rev. Hamilton has also been swayed heavily by his ministry and relationships to the LGBT community in his own church. He is that rare individual who appreciates all of the counter arguments from other United Methodists but, over time, has taken a stronger and stronger position of his own. Chapter 29 in his most recent book, Making Sense of the Bible, expresses his scriptural interpretation of the biblical texts on homosexuality.7
J. Neil Alexander is a bishop in the Episcopal Church in Atlanta. Prior to becoming a bishop, he taught seminary and served parish ministry. In Chapter 3 of his short but important book, This Far By Grace, he details how he came to interpret scripture and how he now interprets it regarding homosexuality.8 In the first two chapters of his book he details his encounters with a gay mentor and other LGBT people, but his focus is on biblical interpretation done “the Anglican way.”
Daniel A. Helminiak published What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality in 1994 that went through seven printings.
