XML RSSGet our feed

XML RSS
Add to Google
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to My MSN
Subscribe with Bloglines

Home
Welcome! Find It Fast SEARCH This Site
Our News Blog
FREE Downloads
eDisciples
Bible Studies
Find A Gay Church
Interact With Us Gay Christian FAQ
Ask A Question
Tell Your Story
Contact Us
Thanks For Your Support Our Store
Donations
Get Our Incredible Book GC101 Feedback
Gay Christian 101
What The Bible Says Adam, Eve, Steve?
Sodom - Genesis 19
Lev 18:22 & 20:13
David and Jonathan
Christians & The Law
The Gay Centurion
Eunuchs Are Gay
Romans 1:26-27
1 Cor 6:9 - Malakoi
Arsenokoites
Rom 1:31-2 Tim 3:3
Jude 6-7
Gay Analogies
Issues & Answers Transgender Issues
Gay Marriage Yes!
Beastiality - No Way
Exodus International
Coming Out 101
Discover Jesus Who Is Jesus?
Good Person Test
How To Be Saved
How To Witness
Resources
Technical Stuff Copyright Notice
Privacy Policy
Our Info About Us
Our Mission
What We Believe
My Coming Out

What Bible are you using to defend your gay Christian position?

Rick Brentlinger Answers -



Christians around the world, gay or non-gay, use many different versions of the Bible. I believe the King James Version is the most accurate and the most gay-friendly English translation of Inspired Scripture.

I tend not to place much faith in translations which use the word homosexual since that word is a modern construct which was never used by any human author of the Bible.

I use 45 translations to discuss the Greek word malakoi in 1 Corinthians 6:9.

Basic views of gay Christians


  1. There are only a few verses in the Bible which allegedly condemn gay and lesbian partnerships.

    a. Genesis 19 - The Sodom Story

    b. Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 - The Holiness Code

    c. Deuteronomy 23:17-18

    d. Romans 1:26-27 and Cybele Worship

    e. 1 Corinthians 6:9 - Arsenokoitai and Malakoi

    f. 1 Timothy 1:10

  2. Anti-gay Christians must isolate these verses from the context in which they were given in order to impose their anti-gay interpretation on the verses.

  3. Only by ignoring the cultural, doctrinal, historical, literary and religious context can these verses be interpreted as condemning all gay and lesbian partnerships.

  4. Words like natural and unnatural, as used by Paul, describe what was natural or unnatural to first century Roman culture.

  5. Many passages of scripture which were culturally significant in Bible times, are not culturally significant today.

    In plainer words, what was considered sin by our ancient Jewish and Christian ancestors, is NOT considered sin today by most of the body of Christ.

    A few examples of culturally prohibited things which most Christians ignore today


    a. Leviticus 11 prohibits eating certain kinds of meat, not because it was morally wrong but to set Israel apart from the pagan idolaters surrounding them and to keep them from eating meat offered to idols.

    Most Christians do NOT consider it sinful to eat bacon, catfish, ham, oysters, pork, scallops, shark steak, snails (escargot) and shrimp although God specifically forbad eating those things in Leviticus 11.

    b. Leviticus 19:19 prohibits cross-breeding animals or plants (heterosis), not because it was morally wrong but to sanctify (set apart) Israel until Messiah came.

    "Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed (Jesus) should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator." -Galatians 3:19

    Many modern Christians own cross-bred animals today or consume cross-bred animals when they eat meat from the grocery store or restaurant. Examples include: cattle, sheep, llamas, dogs, cats, horses. Older cross-breeds include mules (a cross between a female horse and a male donkey).

    Most Christians do NOT consider it sinful to cross-breed animals or eat meat from a cross-bred animal although God clearly forbad cross-breeding animals in Leviticus 19:19.

    Much of the body of Christ today eats food which is the result of seed-mingling. If you've ever eaten store-bought spaghetti sauce or corn chips, both are made with hybrid vegetables and would have been prohibited under Leviticus 19:19.

    Most Christians do NOT consider it sinful to eat cross-bred vegetables and fruits, although God specifically forbad cross-breeding plants in Leviticus 19:19.

    c. Leviticus 19:19 prohibits wearing mixed fabrics, not because it was morally wrong but to teach Israel her distinctive place in God's plan of redemption.

    Most Christians do NOT consider it sinful to wear mixed fabrics, although God specifically forbad wearing mixed fabrics in Leviticus 19:19.

    d. 1 Timothy 2:9 prohibits women from wearing braided hair, gold, pearls and expensive clothing. Yet most Christians do NOT consider it sinful for Christian women to wear braids, gold jewelry, pearls or expensive dresses although God specifically forbad those items in 1 Timothy 2:9.


    Some argue,
    Yes but on sexual issues, it would be dead wrong to interpret Biblical teaching as merely a cultural issue which does not apply today.

    Okay, so why do most Christians
    ignore Jesus' teaching on divorce.
    Isn't it crystal clear?


    e. In Mark 10:11-12, Jesus forbids divorce and instructs us that when a divorced man or woman re-marries, they commit adultery.

    "And he (Jesus) said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her,"

    and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.

    -Mark 10:11-12, ESV

    Most of the body of Christ ignores the teaching of Jesus so that in the modern church, about 1/3 or more of church members, including many pastors and deacons, are divorced and remarried.

    Most Christians today do not view divorce and remarriage as adultery yet Jesus clearly forbids divorce and remarriage and calls it adultery in Mark 10:11-12. Why?


    These are culturally specific things which are part of inspired scripture BUT are not regarded as binding on most Christians today.

    The verses alleged to prohibit homosexuality were culturally specific prohibitions of shrine prostitution and idolatry, no more applicable to gay and lesbian Christians today than the other culturally specific things we've listed here.


  6. The rare Greek word arsenokoitai, which is translated as homosexual in the NIV, was never used to mean homosexual in the first 600 years of church history. Click the Link and read the facts.

  7. When dealing with the alleged anti-gay verses, Gay Christians are more faithful to the meaning of the Bible (prohibiting idolatry), than most anti-gay Christians.

  8. The ONLY same sex relationships condemned in the Bible involve (1) idolatry by male or female shrine prostitutes or (2) a rape scenario (anal rape is one of the primary meanings of the Greek word arsenokoitai).

Helpful Links


Romans 1 and Homosexuality - did you miss this information?

We've answered the question, What Bible are you using to defend your gay Christian position? Click here to return to Gay Christian 101 Home Page.

Comments for
What Bible are you using to defend your gay Christian position?

Average Rating starstarstarstar

Click here to add your own comments

Jul 23, 2009
Rating
starstarstarstarstar
As usual, Rick...
by: Dorothy

....your answer is thorough, well-thought-out, studied, and ultimately, true to the Holy Word.

Jesus Himself said that some "eunuchs" were born that way from the womb. He did not state it condemingly, but matter-of-factly.

Shouldn't He, the Creator of all, know????

Why do we never hear about that from anti-gay Christians?

Jul 28, 2009
Rating
star
It's not all Greek to me
by: Anonymous

I'm surprised to hear the The King James Version is your choice for the most "gay friendly" bible since it is the same one I read.

I can assure you nothing like what you are squeezing out of it is in there. How do eunuchs play into the gay argument. The bible indicates the they were formed through no fault of their own so because they're missing an organ they're gay? And it's a "natural" thing. How did you swing that interpretation?

Also, the Greek word "Pais" is not a "companion lover" as you describe in the Gay Centurion". It means young child or servant. Did you think no one would actually look that up? Just because you can pull whatever interpretation you want out of the clear blue sky does not make it true.

Aug 15, 2009
Rating
starstarstarstarstar
Well thought out argument!
by: Michael Paul

I was pleased to read your article regarding the KJV and translational errors found in more modern versions that seem to make it even more difficult to discuss gay issues in the bible.

I prefer the NKJV because of it's modern tone but refuse to succumb to more contemporary "updates" that use the culturally tainted "homosexual" word, among others.

If we stay open to the context in which these words were not only written but intended through the original Greek/Hebrew, we very quickly find the anti-gay agenda holds no water. Thanks for bringing your opinions to light - you help us to know that we are not alone!

Jan 13, 2010
Rating
starstarstarstarstar
Its never clear, but kudos
by: Draek

I agree that there are many things people force when it comes to the Bible.

A lot of things are not clear, and you need to invoke the Holy Spirit when reading I'm sure.

Just like the guy above who tries to limit the word "Pais" when CLEARLY if you really study the word, it had sexual connotations and does NOT simply mean young child or servant.

Someone who hates gays, will refuse meaning. Someone who is gay will infer meaning. No one is free of bias when reading the Bible, because it is so personal.

Click here to add your own comments


footer for Gay Christian 101 page