Homosexual Theology. Does the Bible condemn homosexuality?

The Sin of Sodom–Genesis 19

For hundreds of years the response to that question felt obvious, in the previous couple of years pro- homosexual commentators posses attempted to reinterpret the relevant biblical passages. Within topic we shall take a look at their particular exegesis.

Initial reference to homosexuality within the Bible can be found in Genesis 19. Contained in this passage, Lot entertains two angels who arrive at the town to analyze their sins. Before each goes to sleep, all the males (out of each and every an element of the town of Sodom) encircle the home and purchase him to take from the men with the intention that “we possibly may understand all of them.” Usually commentators constantly assumed that Hebrew keyword for “know” meant that boys of city planned to have sex because of the travelers.

Now, supporters of homosexuality argue that biblical commentators get me wrong the story of Sodom. They believe the people of this city simply wanted to fulfill these subscribers. Either these were stressed to give Middle-eastern hospitality or they planned to interrogate the males and make certain they certainly weren’t spies. Either way, they argue, the passage has nothing regarding homosexuality. The sin of Sodom is certainly not homosexuality, they do say, but inhospitality.

The keys to comprehending this passing is the proper interpretation in the Hebrew word for “know.” Pro-homosexuality commentators point out this particular term may also mean “getting familiar with” plus mean “to possess intercourse with.” Actually, the word appears over 943 circumstances inside Old-Testament, and only 12 circumstances can it imply “for sex with.” For that reason, they determine that the sin of Sodom have nothing at all to do with homosexuality.

The challenge using discussion is actually context. Reports isn’t the identical to exegesis. Term matter by yourself shouldn’t be the only criterion when it comes down to concept of a word. And also if a statistical amount must utilized, the discussion backfires. On the 12 era the term “to learn” is used for the guide of Genesis, in 10 of those 12 it indicates “for sex with.”

Second, the context doesn’t justify the understanding that the people best desired to have acquainted with the complete strangers. Realize that whole lot chooses to offer his two girl rather. In reading the passageway, one could feel Lot’s panic as he foolishly supplies their virgin girl for the crowd as opposed to the people from other countries. That isn’t the experience of a guy responding to the crowd’s consult “being acquainted with” the guys.

Notice that whole lot talks of their girl as ladies who “have not evident” a person. Certainly therefore intercourse and does not suggest “as knowledgeable about.” It’s not likely that first utilization of the word “to understand” is different through the 2nd utilization of the word. Both instances your message “understand” should-be translated “getting sex with.” This is basically the just steady translation for any passageway.

Finally, Jude 7 provides a commentary on Genesis 19. This new Testament resource states the sin of Sodom included gross immorality and pursuing peculiar tissue. The phrase “strange flesh” could suggest homosexuality or bestiality and gives further evidence the sin of Sodom had not been inhospitality but homosexuality.

Unlike what pro-homosexual commentators state, Genesis 19 was a definite condemnation of homosexuality. Next we’ll view another group of Old Testament passages handling the condition of homosexuality.

Mosaic Law–Leviticus 18, 20

Now we’ll check out the Mosaic rules. Two passages in Leviticus label homosexuality an abomination. Leviticus 18:22 claims, “Do not sit with a guy together is with a women; definitely detestable.” Leviticus 20:13 says, “If a man sits with one jointly consist with a woman, each of them have done something detestable.” Your message for “abomination” is employed 5 times in Leviticus 18 and it is a strong term of disapproval, implying that things was abhorrent to God. Biblical commentators read these verses as an expansion on the 7th commandment. Though not an exhaustive directory of intimate sins, they might be representative of this common sinful practices of places encompassing Israel.

Pro-homosexual commentators have significantly more issues working with these easy passages of Scripture, but generally offer 1 of 2 responses. Some believe these passages come in the Holiness laws on the Leviticus and only pertains to the priests and routine love. Consequently, relating to this viewpoint, normally spiritual prohibitions, not ethical prohibitions. Rest argue that these prohibitions comprise simply for Old Testament theocracy and are maybe not relevant these days. They suggest that if Christians planned to be consistent making use of Old Testament laws signal in Leviticus, they need to stay away from ingesting uncommon steak, wear blended fabric, and having marital intercourse throughout the monthly period stage.