View Full Version : Controversial Issue
Greetings All!
Under "Religion v. The Press", and interesting discussion occurred regarding whether religious reform applies only to the individuals in a religion, or to the religion itself.
In this discussion, I brought up a couple of times that my views on homosexuality differ from my Roman Catholic Church. The Church teaches that homosexual acts are a 'mortal sin' and the condition of homosexuality, while not necessarily sinful, is ordered toward a grave evil. There are five Biblical passages that are usually used to support that view.
Personally, I believe that Allah intended sexuality to express mutual love between two people in a permanently and publically committed relationship. Each sexual act is intended to be open to procreation. When sexual acts are expressed in this context, it becomes a graced act.
However, as a person grows and becomes aware of sexual desire and attraction, some people seem to find themselves consistently and predominately attracted to members of the same gender. Such people often turn to prayer and religious practice to try to change their desires, often to no avail. These people often describe their experience as something they were born with.
As I examine the Christian Scriptures about homosexuality, it seems to me that three of the five passages may be speaking about other issues than homosexuality, and the other two are referring to freely chosen homosexuality.
Thus, I think that maybe the Biblical passages do not apply to people who experience affections that they did not choose. I humbly admit that I could be completely wrong on this subject (Allah knows the truth). I won't bore Muslims with the Scriptural exegesis and theological arguments that lead me to doubt the Catholic position, unless you want me to....
Anyway, I have seen a number of places on this site that Muslims say homosexuality is an abomination. In another post a few months back on the Current Affairs Forum, I saw a Pakistani Muslim accusing Islam of promoting homosexuality. When I was reading the Qur'an a couple of months ago, I do not remember coming across the subject at all.
So, my question is this: What does the Qur'an and Islam say about homosexuality?
Peace and Blessing!
jcecil3
Here are some articles that I found and that i think might help explain what you need to know:
Question:
Could you please tell me that why is a homosexuality a sin in islam? I know it’s a great sin but my question is why? I haven't able to find the real reason why? So¡ if you could can you also tell me that what Allah has says in Quran or in hadith about it. Please let me know as soon as possible.
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
The Muslim should not doubt, even for an instant, that what Allaah has prescribed is wise. He should know that there is great wisdom in what Allaah has commanded and what He has forbidden; it is the straight path and is the only way in which man can be safe and at peace, protecting his honour, his mind and his health, in accordance with the natural disposition (fitrah) with which Allaah has created man.
Some heretics have tried to attack Islam and its rulings; they have denounced divorce and plural marriage and permitted alcohol. Those who look at the state of their societies will see the state of misery which those societies have reached.
When they rejected divorce, murder took its place. When they rejected plural marriage, men started to take mistresses instead. When they allowed alcohol, all kinds of shameful and immoral actions became widespread.
They (***s and lesbians) both go against the natural disposition (fitrah) which Allaah has created in mankind – and also in animals – whereby the male is inclined towards the female, and vice versa.
Whoever goes against that goes against the natural disposition of mankind, the fitrah.
The spread of homosexuality has caused man diseases which neither the east nor the west can deny exist because of them. Even if the only result of this perversion was AIDS – which attacks the immune system in humans – that would be enough.
It also causes the breakup of the family and leads people to give up their work and study because they are preoccupied with these perversions.
Since the prohibition has come from his Lord, the Muslim should not wait until medicine proves that harm befalls the one who does that which Allaah has forbidden. Rather he must believe firmly that Allaah only prescribes that which is good for people, and these modern discoveries should only increase his certainty and confidence in the greatness of Allaah’s wisdom.
Ibn al-Qayyim said:
Both of them – fornication and homosexuality – involve immorality that goes against the wisdom of Allaah’s creation and commandment. For homosexuality involves innumerable evil and harms, and the one to whom it is done would be better off being killed than having this done to him, because after that he will become so evil and so corrupt that there can be no hope of his being reformed, and all good is lost for him, and he will no longer feel any shame before Allaah or before His creation. The semen of the one who did that to him will act as a poison on his body and soul. The scholars differed as to whether the one to whom it is done will ever enter Paradise. There are two opinions which I heard Shaykh al-Islam (may Allaah have mercy on him) narrate.”
(al-Jawaab al-Kaafi, p. 115).
2. Lesbianism means one woman doing to another something like that which a man does to a woman. Homosexuality means having intercourse with males in the back passage. This was the action of the accursed people of the Prophet of Allaah Loot (peace be upon him). In sharee’ah terminology it refers to inserting the tip of the penis into the anus of a male.
What is mentioned concerning these actions in the Qur’aan and Sunnah:
A – Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And (remember) Loot (Lot), when he said to his people: ‘Do you commit the worst sin such as none preceding you has committed in the ‘Aalameen (mankind and jinn)?
Verily, you practise your lusts on men instead of women. Nay, but you are a people transgressing beyond bounds (by committing great sins)’”
[al-A’raaf 7:80-81]
B – “Verily, We sent against them a violent storm of stones (which destroyed them all), except the family of Loot (Lot), them We saved in the last hour of the night”
[al-Qamar 54:34 – interpretation of the meaning]
C – “And (remember) Loot (Lot), when he said to his people: ‘Do you commit the worst sin such as none preceding you has committed in the ‘Aalameen (mankind and jinn)?”
[al-A’raaf 7:80 – interpretation of the meaning]
And Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And (remember) Loot (Lot), when he said to his people: ‘You commit Al‑Faahishah (sodomy the worst sin) which none has preceded you in (committing) it in the ‘Aalameen (mankind and jinn)’”
[al-‘Ankaboot 29:28]
D – “And (remember) Loot (Lot), We gave him Hukm (right judgement of the affairs and Prophethood) and (religious) knowledge, and We saved him from the town (folk) who practised Al‑Khabaa’ith (evil, wicked and filthy deeds). Verily, they were a people given to evil, and were Faasiqoon (rebellious, disobedient to Allaah)”
[al-Anbiya’ 21:74 – interpretation of the meaning]
E – “And (remember) Loot (Lot)! When he said to his people, ‘Do you commit Al‑Faahishah (evil, great sin, every kind of unlawful sexual intercourse, sodomy) while you see (one another doing evil without any screen)
Do you practise your lusts on men instead of women? Nay, but you are a people who behave senselessly.’
There was no other answer given by his people except that they said: ‘Drive out the family of Loot (Lot) from your city. Verily, these are men who want to be clean and pure!’
So We saved him and his family, except his wife. We destined her to be of those who remained behind.
And We rained down on them a rain (of stones). So evil was the rain of those who were warned”
[al-Naml 27:54-58 – interpretation of the meaning]
These verses refer to the punishment that befell the people of Loot. With regard to the rulings on them:
F – Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning]:
“And the two persons (man and woman) among you who commit illegal sexual intercourse, hurt them both. And if they repent (promise Allaah that they will never repeat, i.e. commit illegal sexual intercourse and other similar sins) and do righteous good deeds, leave them alone. Surely, Allaah is Ever All-Forgiving (the One Who forgives and accepts repentance), (and He is) Most Merciful”
[al-Nisa’ 4:16]
Ibn Katheer said:
“The words of Allaah ‘And the two persons (man and woman) among you who commit illegal sexual intercourse, hurt them both’ mean, those who commit immoral actions, punish them both. Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him), Sa’eed ibn Jubayr and others said: By condemning them, shaming them and hitting them with shoes. This was the ruling until Allaah abrogated it and replaced it with whipping and stoning. ‘Ikrimah, ‘Ata, al-Hasan and ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Katheer said: This was revealed concerning a man and woman who commit fornication. Al-Saddi said, it was revealed concerning young people before they get married. Mujaahid said: it was revealed concerning two men if they admit it bluntly; a hint is not sufficient – as if he was referring to homosexuality. And Allaah knows best.”
(Tafseer Ibn Katheer, 1/463).
G – It was narrated that Jaabir (may Allaah be pleased with him): “The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: ‘There is nothing I fear for my ummah more than the deed of the people of Loot.’”
(Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 1457; Ibn Maajah, 2563. This hadeeth was classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani (may Allaah have mercy on him) in Saheeh al-Jaami’, no. 1552).
H – It was narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas said: “The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “… cursed is the one who has intercourse with an animal, cursed is the one who does the action of the people of Loot.”
(Narrated by Ahmad, 1878. This hadeeth was classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’, no. 5891).
I – It was narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas said: “The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: ‘Whoever you find doing the deed of the people of Loot, kill the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.”
(Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 1456; Abu Dawood, 4462; Ibn Maajah, 2561. This hadeeth was classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’, no. 6589).
And Allaah knows best.
Islam Q&A (www.islam-qa.com)
Question:
Salaam. I'm not *** but I'm just wondering from a moral standpoint that since homosexuality is forbidden under Islam, what would happen to *** or lesbian individuals? A lot of *** and lesbians say that their sexual orientation is natural and they are born ***. Assuming that they are correct since straight people don't know, if homosexuality is outlawed in Islam then why would Allah make them that way so that their existence is a tortured and sexually frustrated way?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
We do not agree with their claim that their sexual orientation is natural; rather it is a distortion of nature. Allaah counted their deed as wrongdoing and immoral, and He sent upon the people of Lut a punishment the like of which no other nation had seen. He also tells us that this punishment is not ever far from the wrongdoers.
Their claim that their orientation is natural serves only to propagate and spread immorality, and it is just an excuse for them. Many of them change their appearance so as to look odd, so how can we say that this is how they were created?
Allaah does not create anyone just to punish or torture them. He created mankind to worship Him, but He may try His slaves with hardship as a test of their faith, to expiate for their sins and to raise their status. Allaah is too Just to force a person to commit sin and then punish him. On the contrary, people commit sins by their own free choice – like these perverted people – and it is for this that they deserve to be punished. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“and your Lord treats no one with injustice” [al-Kahf 18:49]
And Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Nay, Allaah never commands Fahshaa’ (evil deeds, unlawful sexual intercourse). Do you say of Allaah what you know not?” [al-A’raaf 7:28]
And Allaah knows best.
Islam Q&A (www.islam-qa.com)
What does Islam say about homosexuality?
From 'Common Questions People Ask About Islam' by Shabir Ally
Islam teaches that homosexual acts are sinful and punishable by God. This teaching comes not from human beings, but from the Creator of all humans. God tells us in His own words how He punished the people of Lot for their homosexual behaviour.
The story of prophet Lot, on whom be peace, finds mention in several Qur'anic passages, especially Chapter 26:160-175 which reads:
"The people of Lut rejected the apostles. Behold, their brother Lut said to them: "Will ye not fear (God)? "I am to you an apostle worthy of all trust. "So fear God and obey me. "No reward do I ask of you for it: my reward is only from the lord of the Worlds. "Of all the creatures in the world, will ye approach males, "And leave those whom God has created for you to be your mates? Nay, ye are a people transgressing (all limits)!" They said: "If thou desist not, O Lut! thou wilt assuredly be cast out!"
He said: "I do detest your doings." "O my Lord! deliver me and my family from such things as they do!" So We delivered him and his family,- all Except an old woman who lingered behind. But the rest We destroyed utterly. We rained down on them a shower (of brimstone): and evil was the shower on those who were admonished (but heeded not)! Verily in this is a Sign: but most of them do not believe. And verily thy Lord is He, the Exalted in Might Most Merciful."
From these passages we learn that God saved Lot and the righteous ones of his family, and rained on the rest a shower of brimstone, so they were utterly destroyed. This is mentioned in the Qur'an not only for the sake of information, but mainly to serve as a warning to anyone who dares to repeat such acts.
Muslim believe that every human action leads to consequences. Good actions entail good results, and evil actions entail evil consequences. Some of these consequences may not become known for many years after a certain action. The consequences of some actions will become manifest only after death when one enters a new, everlasting life.... A common mistake among
humans is that if they don't see any negative consequences for their actions they consider it harmless. Human experience has taught us that a source of superior knowledge can be of tremendous benefit to humans.... God, the source of all knowledge, warns us of His punishment if people perpetrate homosexual acts. Let us pay attention and learn the easy way.
Some will say that a person may be born with homosexual tendencies. We say that everyone is a free agent. God lays before us two paths and has given us knowledge of where these paths lead. One is the path to which the devil call us. We must avoid that. One is the path leading to paradise. We must stick to that one. Everyone experiences evil prompting from time to time. We must resist those with all our might. If one feels a tendency to do something that God prohibits, he or she should seek help from a community of loving, caring, believers who would understand his or her difficulty and help him or her overcome it.
A common ploy of the devil is to convince people that they cannot avoid sin. Then they do not even try. But God promises that the devil can have no lasting power over those who sincerely seek God (see Qur'an 15:42)
Finally, our bodies are given to us in trust from God. One should not use his or her body contrary to the user guide provided by its Maker. Consenting adults also need God's consent.
HOMOSEXUALITY
THE COST TO SOCIETY
by MUHAMMED A. ASADI
Of all topics most popular in today's media, issues concerning homosexuals and homosexuality in general top the list. Homosexuality is generally defined as a sexual relationship between partners of the same sex. Debate concerning its causes and consequences has been going on for many centuries and almost in every period in human history. However, never before in human history has it been granted such wide scale acceptance in western society as it has now. The question that I seek to answer in this paper is whether such wide scale acceptance should in fact be granted to homosexual behavior? Is such behavior rational, scientifically functional or is it actually detrimental to the high level of civilization that we've achieved?
I) THE SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE:
Scientifically speaking, sex is a means to an end. The end being the propagation of the human race. This end can never be fulfilled by sex between males (in the case of ***s) or between females (in the case of lesbians). Therefore, the general conclusion is that homosexuality is irrational and illogical.
If we consider the construction of the bodies of the male and female, what is noticed at once is that the construction of a body of a male (the penis and the anus- i.e no vagina) does not accommodate having sex with another male. Nor does the construction of a body of a female (no penis, a vagina) accommodate sex with another female. What is obvious to common sense is that the construction and location of specific sexual organs in the bodies of a male and a female accommodate sex between a male and a female and not among members of the same sex. Therefore, the conclusion once again is that homosexuality is an unnatural and an irrational behavior.
The case with birth control is different to the "cause effect" argument above [this point was brought up in my meeting in class with the SMSU (Southwest Missouri State) *** Lesbian Alliance]. Birth control is simply the further delaying or prevention of a naturally occurring delaying process. The egg (ovum), which when fertilized develops into a zygote, which then eventually develops into the fetus, is released in the female's body in a specific period of time and pregnancy is caused only if a sperm fuses with the egg in that specific time period. If the egg is not fertilized during that period, then the cycle in humans ends in menstruation (Encyclopedia Britannica, vol 26, Macropaedia 701-703)
II) THE PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE:
It was clearly recognized by experts who were objective and unprejudiced, that psychologically speaking homosexuality is an abnormal behavior. However large scale lobbying by homosexuals and certain psychologists brought in biases into this scientific field of inquiry and hence the truth got masked and the results are stated below:
"Before 1973 the DSM [Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders] listed homosexuality as a sexual disorder. Protests by *** activist groups and many psychotherapists eventually led to its elimination from the manual as a sexual disorder per se, but the DSM did retain a category called "ego dystotic homosexuality- the feeling of extreme distress over one's homosexual preference". DSM III R has dropped even this category, and the issue of homosexuality is no longer mentioned (Comer 480)."
"Until the early 1970's the U.S psychiatric establishment classified homosexuality as a mental illness, but that designation was dropped amid increased political activity and efforts by homosexuals to be seen as individuals exercising different sexual preferences rather than aberrant personalities (Encyclopedia Britannica, vol 6, 31)."
Homosexuality is proven to be a learned behavior according to experiments with clinical cases of intersexuality. At puberty, the individuals in question were "generally attracted to the sex opposite to their sex of rearing [even if it be opposite to their genetic sex of males, having X Y chromosomes and females both X chromosomes] This suggests that sexual orientation is primarily established in post natal experiences (Encyclopedia Britannica, vol 27, 247)
There has however been great debate concerning the nature versus nurture question concerning homosexuality:
i) Brain Difference: The most recent one seems to indicate a certain difference in certain parts of the brains of homosexual people. What has however not been resolved is whether such difference in the brains was the cause or the effect of homosexual behavior. Further many people in the sample studied had Aids and Aids in its later stages affects the brain. Therefore no strong conclusions can scientifically be drawn from such a study.
ii) Hormonal Differences: when hormones are artificially altered in female animal's bodies [introducing excess androgen prenatally] it makes them behave more like males even showing mating preference for members of the same sex. (Britannica, vol 27 ,248-249).
The same source however, also narrates that changing the hormone level postnatally does not mean that sexual preference for partners will change. The only thing that will change will be the arousal level.
Therefore, based on the above, I believe I can justifiably conclude that abnormal sexual preference even when it becomes "normal" to a particular individual due to abnormal circumstances like the above, can be controlled. If every male took his sexual desires towards every attractive female to their conclusion, you can well imagine the galloping rate of rapes in this or any other society. Just because certain individuals experience sexual desires towards members of the same sex, because something went wrong somewhere, does not at all mean that they should engage in homosexual behavior or that their behavior be accepted without question or search for a solution.
III) THE RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVE:
There is absolutely no doubt that Christianity, Judaism and Islam, the three most widely embraced religions in America condemn homosexual behavior in the strongest terms:
According to the Old Testament the Koran, the people of Lot were destroyed because they engaged in homosexual behavior and were unrepenting and un accepting of God's admonishment (Holy Bible, Genesis chapter 13, 14, 18, 19; Koran 7:80-84; 4:16 etc)
In the book of Romans, in the Bible [New Testament], Paul states:
"Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error (Romans 1:22-27)."
The above verse also condemns those who worship God in the image of a man i.e those who believe in the concept of a "God- incarnate".
IV) SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES:
i) Aids: Among the groups that have directly and indirectly contributed to the wide scale spread of Aids to even innocent patients like children are homosexuals and their practice of anal sex.
"There are specific behaviors that place people at a high risk for Aids. The first is anal sex which can cause rectal bleeding and thereby allow easy transmission of HIV. This practice is therefore extremely dangerous and, of course, the greater the number of sexual partners, the greater the risk. Anal sex is commonly practiced by *** males in some cases with many sexual partners. For this reason about two thirds of persons with Aids are homosexual or bi-sexual males (Macionis 545)."
The above statistic of two thirds shows the trend in the spread of Aids a few years after it was recognized as a threat (1987). Now the pattern may have changed due to the initial wide scale spread of Aids which the above statistic suggests was directly or indirectly the result of homosexual behavior among men.
Aids results in many national cost problems too:
"....The cost of treating Aids already exceeds $150,000 per person and may rise further as new therapies develop....Added to the direct medical costs are the tens of billions of dollars in lost earnings and productivity...There is little doubt that Aids is a medical and social problem of monumental proportions (Macionis 545)."
GENERAL CONCLUSION
According to common sense, science, logic, psychology and religion - i.e all those aspects of present society, that have contributed to its civilization, homosexuality is irrational, illogical, abnormal and an immoral behavior. Those who practice is should not be personally condemned but their behavior should and solutions to their ills be found, and the free practice of homosexual behavior be stopped, so that our society prospers. If clear and concrete evidence were indeed found in the other direction, I would gladly change my above conclusions. Therefore let our end be towards the truth!
"..What is left after the truth except error? How then are you turned away."(Koran10:32)
if anyone needs more, let me know inshaAllah and i'll search for more. I think these more than explain what islam things of homosexuals and homosexuality.
wassalam
Rasha
Netcurtains
23-03-2002, 12:07
Hi,
Homosexuality. This is not a topic I know a great deal about so bear with me if I'm talking total nonsense.
1) Nature:
Colour blindness is not natural but we wouldn't dream of calling people who are colour blind evil. Of course in nature we often see homosexual behaviour - just look at the frogs in my garden (lol).
2) Un-Natural:
There are some aspects of culture that promote homosexuality amongst "straight" people. What are the causes of this aspect of homosexuality? In the Christian bible St Paul taught the Greeks that homosexuality (as practiced by Greek men) was wrong. In Greek culture homosexuality was rife. Older men would have sex with young boys - paedophiles? This was in some respect caused by women being "locked up" and unavailable. I guess this is why it is such a worry in some Islamic countries and this is why this "beard" thing might be so important? In prison (apparently) because there are no women, homosexuality is more common then in the general population? Is this true?
3) the "cure":
I guess women being fully active in society will cut down the "un-natural" aspects of homosexuality. The natural ones (eg where the man or woman is genetically wired that way) will not go away and thus religious organisations must cater fully - 100% for their needs?
Everything I have just sais could be 100% wrong as I have not the foggest idea, just random thoughts.
vancouver
23-03-2002, 14:04
1 Corinthians 6:9 ***
9 What! Do YOU not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God's kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men,
Change in Values
The 20th century has fulfilled the prophecy at 2 Timothy 3:1-5, which says: "In the last days critical times hard to deal with will be here. For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, self-assuming, haughty, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, disloyal, having no natural affection, not open to any agreement, slanderers, without self-control, fierce, without love of goodness, betrayers, headstrong, puffed up with pride, lovers of pleasures rather than lovers of God, having a form of godly devotion but proving false to its power."
To a certain degree, imperfect humans have always shown those characteristics. During the 20th century, such attitudes have intensified and spread. People who conduct themselves in the above-described ways were once considered antisocial-if not downright wicked. Now even people "having a form of godly devotion" increasingly view such behavior as normal.
At one time religious people considered it unthinkable for couples to live together outside marriage. Unwed motherhood was regarded as shameful, as were homosexual relationships. For most people abortions were out of the question, and so was divorce. Dishonesty in business was reprehensible. But today, as one source notes, "anything goes." Why? For one thing, "it serves the self-interest of those who do not want to be told by others what not to do."
The abandonment of high ethical standards in this century has caused priorities to change. The Times Atlas of the 20th Century explains: "In 1900 nations and individuals still measured their worth in non-monetary terms. . . . By the end of the century nations measured their success in almost entirely economic terms. . . . Similar changes occurred in the way people thought about wealth." Today widespread gambling fosters a love of money, while radio, television, movies, and videos encourage material desires. Even game shows and advertising contests send the message that money is, if not everything, at least almost everything.
Unitarians Endorse Homosexual Marriage
The Unitarian Church has become the first U.S. denomination to officially endorse same-sex marriages, reports the Christian Century. Delegates attending the religious group's annual convention voted overwhelmingly to "proclaim the worth of marriage between any two committed persons." The religious magazine says that "under church rules, each of the church's 1,040 congregations can decide for itself whether it will endorse the marriage of *** and lesbian couples and whether it will host such weddings."
More Clergy Problems
About 40 Episcopalian bishops signed a statement in November 1996 calling for the church to "provide clear and binding standards regarding the sexual behavior of clergy," reports the magazine Christianity Today. The church has been rocked by a number of scandals involving clergymen, which conservatives say result from "failing to state clearly church doctrine on sexuality." For example, the rector of an Episcopal church in Brooklyn, New York, resigned after admitting to having homosexual relationships. Todd Wetzel, the executive director of Episcopalians United, said: "The church is not facing a single scandal. It is facing many, of which this is the most lurid." Previously, the church had received much publicity when it charged retired bishop Walter Righter of heresy for ordaining a noncelibate homosexual deacon. The charges were dropped after an "Episcopal court ruled the denomination had no 'core doctrine' limiting sex to marriage."
Should Christians Hate Homosexuals?
God's View
The Bible does not call particular attention to homosexuals as a group to be ostracized or hated by Christians. Moreover, it does not teach that God will punish homosexuals-or any of his creatures-by burning them in a fiery hell forever.-Compare Romans 6:23.
However, the Scriptures do set forth the moral standards of our Creator, which oftentimes run counter to modern-day mores. Homosexual acts, heterosexual sex between unmarried persons, and bestiality are all condemned in the Bible. (Exodus 22:19; Ephesians 5:3-5) God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of such sexual practices.-Genesis 13:13; 18:20; 19:4, 5, 24, 25.
Regarding acts of homosexuality, God's Word pointedly says: "This is a hateful thing." (Leviticus 18:22, The New Jerusalem Bible) God's Law to Israel stipulated: "When a man lies down with a male the same as one lies down with a woman, both of them have done a detestable thing. They should be put to death without fail." (Leviticus 20:13) The same punishment was prescribed for those committing bestiality, incest, and adultery.-Leviticus 20:10-12, 14-17.
The apostle Paul was inspired to describe homosexual acts as expressions of "disgraceful sexual appetites" and as "contrary to nature." He writes: "That is why God gave them up to disgraceful sexual appetites, for both their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; and likewise even the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full recompense, which was due for their error. And just as they did not approve of holding God in accurate knowledge, God gave them up to a disapproved mental state, to do the things not fitting."-Romans 1:26-28.
The Scriptures offer no apologies, no concessions, no ambiguity; homosexual practices, adultery, fornication, are all repulsive in God's sight. Accordingly, true Christians do not water down the Bible's position on "disgraceful sexual appetites" merely to become more popular or more acceptable to modern culture. Nor do they agree with any movement dedicated to the promotion of homosexuality as a normal life-style.
All humans are born with base desires. It is giving in to these base desires that is wrong. If people with a desire to go around killing people was permitted for instance what would be the outcome. There has to be standards in any society. There are people who have the desire to abuse children. They are encouraged to go for counselling if they don't want to end up in prison for eventually giving in to these desires. There ought to be counselling for homosexuality also as this is a base desire that can get out of hand. It is a fact that the sexual appetite of homosexuals is out of control in comparrison to the sexual appetite of hetersexuals. Homosexuals in general have many more partners than hetersexuals. Those wanting to please God must seek help. Help is to be found and many have led happy and fulfilled lives after such help.
Netcurtains
23-03-2002, 16:06
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 23-03-02 AT 05:37 PM (GMT)]Hi,
Yes of course I know nothing about it.
I think peadophiles also have some genetic element and of course, even though they might not be able to help themselves, we must totally condem their way of life (even though they might not be able to stop).
So taking this further should this rule be applied to homosexuals?
I don't see how you can. Think of the logic. Many priests (and other clergy) give clear signs of "un-manlyness" (is that a word - lol). Indeed some say St Paul himself was struggling with latent homosexuality (not sure about that, but he seemed less at ease with women then Jesus did).
Most non-fundamentalists have a trinity of views that make up their christian/islamic belief:
These are:
1) The bible/koran. 2)Tradition. 3) Science.
If scientists say homosexuals are genetically wired that way and science also says they are doing no harm then we have to take that on board. We don't believe in Noahs Flood because there is no evidence of the world being totally destroyed (The Black Sea area maybe), the same must go for homosexuality. For sure homosexuality is wrong if it comes about due to cultural repression (eg prisions) or it is peadophiles or if it leads to over-indulgance. There are obviously aspects to homosexuality that I can see are unacceptable. However I am quite content to hear the gospel from a man who is homosexual but practices restraint.
NutCurtain....
personal i think ur suggestion is disgusting..(sorry) but I felt like throwing up!
"women being fully available"!!!!!
First, talking about my self and muslim sisters, we are not objects to satisfy any man's pleasure!!! And thus, We choose not to be "fully available". If a man has emotions, he can get married, and can satisfy his emotions, regardless of whether a woman is available or not.
as for those in jails, i guess they should start making separate cells!!!!!
Is that what the west wants?? "women fully available"!! I personaly prefer the islamic view! You want a woman, you marry. You don't marry, you better control yourself!!
Self decipline is the best way.... indeed this is a big principle in islam! It is done in many ways, fasting, praying, and certainly controling yourself!!!!!!
subhanaAllah ur comment gave me the shivers!
"science also says they are doing no harm "
What about STD's???
just to add,
i do not believe homosexuals can't help it. Its a state of mind like everything else. One must be able to control himself... or we'd be like animals... why did God give us a brain!!!
Netcurtains
23-03-2002, 17:56
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 23-03-02 AT 05:29 PM (GMT)]lol - sorry for the offence. I think you might have misunderstood me (although not necessarily). To clarify what I mean is such things as mixed comprehensive schools (as the UK has) - boys and girls mix. Sorry for the confusion. Weird things used to happen apparently in some boys only schools (I guess girl only to). When I was a teen some of my best friends were girls. I can't see why that is disgusting?
Just to clarify further - I know nothing about this subject either from a relgious view or a scientific view - all these thoughts are just my first impressions - if I was to study the situation in detail I might come up with a very different view.
If Religion, Tradition and Science all agree then I'm happy.
If two of the three agree I'm OK with it.
If just one of the three is putting foreward a case then it has to be conclusive. In this case Science is the one out of step by promoting homo-sexuality as acceptable behaviour. Science has to prove beyond all reasonable doubt to over-rule tradition and religion. I feel it might be in the verge of doing so - not sure?
vancouver
23-03-2002, 23:43
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 23-03-02 AT 10:44 PM (GMT)]If we believe in God then we have to see God's view on homosexuality and not mere so called scientists who are still probing in the dark.
Let Us Abhor What Is Wicked
JEHOVAH is a holy God. In ancient times he was "the Holy One of Israel," and as such he demanded that Israel be clean, unsullied. (Psalm 89:18) He told his chosen people: "You must prove yourselves holy, because I am holy." (Leviticus 11:45) Anyone who wanted to "ascend into the mountain of Jehovah" had to be "innocent in his hands and clean in heart." (Psalm 24:3, 4) That meant more than merely avoiding sinful acts. It meant "the hating of bad."-Proverbs 8:13.
Lovingly, Jehovah laid down detailed laws so that the nation of Israel could identify and avoid wrongdoing. (Romans 7:7, 12) These laws included strict guidelines on morality. Adultery, homosexual acts, incestuous relationships, and bestiality were all identified as unholy spiritual pollutants. (Leviticus 18:23; 20:10-17) Those guilty of such degraded acts were cut off from the nation of Israel.
When the congregation of anointed Christians became "the Israel of God," similar moral standards were laid down for them. (Galatians 6:16) Christians too were to "abhor what is wicked." (Romans 12:9) Jehovah's words to Israel also applied to them: "You must be holy, because I am holy." (1 Peter 1:15, 16) Such unholy practices as fornication, adultery, homosexual acts, bestiality, and incest were not to corrupt the Christian congregation. Those refusing to stop engaging in such things would be excluded from God's Kingdom. (Romans 1:26, 27; 2:22; 1 Corinthians 6:9, 10; Hebrews 13:4) In these "last days," the same standards apply to the "other sheep." (2 Timothy 3:1; John 10:16) As a result, anointed Christians and other sheep make up a clean and wholesome people, able to carry the name of their God as Jehovah's Witnesses.-Isaiah 43:10.
Keeping the Congregation Clean
In contrast, the world condones all kinds of immorality. Although true Christians are different, they should not forget that many who now serve Jehovah were once in the world. There are many who, before they knew our holy God, saw no reason not to indulge the desires and fantasies of their fallen flesh, wallowing in a "low sink of debauchery." (1 Peter 4:4) The apostle Paul, after describing the disgusting practices of degraded people of the nations, said: "That is what some of you were." Still, he went on to say: "But you have been washed clean, but you have been sanctified, but you have been declared righteous in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God."-1 Corinthians 6:11.
What a comforting statement that is! Whatever a person did earlier in life, he changes when the glorious good news about the Christ has an effect on his heart. He exercises faith and dedicates himself to Jehovah God. From then on he lives a morally pure life, washed clean in God's eyes. (Hebrews 9:14) The sins that he committed previously are pardoned, and he can 'stretch forward to the things ahead.'-Philippians 3:13, 14; Romans 4:7, 8.
Jehovah forgave repentant David for murder and adultery, and He forgave repentant Manasseh for immoral idolatry and much bloodshed. (2 Samuel 12:9, 13; 2 Chronicles 33:2-6, 10-13) We can be truly grateful that he is prepared to forgive us too if we repent and approach him in sincerity and humility. Still, despite Jehovah's forgiving David and Manasseh, these two men-and Israel with them-had to live with the consequences of their sinful acts. (2 Samuel 12:11, 12; Jeremiah 15:3-5) In a similar way, while Jehovah forgives repentant sinners, there may be consequences of their actions that cannot be avoided.
Inevitable Consequences
For example, a man who lives a life of immoral debauchery and contracts AIDS may accept the truth and turn his life around to the point of dedication and baptism. Now he is a spiritually clean Christian having a relationship with God and a wonderful hope for the future; but he still has AIDS. He may eventually die of the disease, a sad but inescapable consequence of his former conduct. For some Christians the effects of former gross immorality may persist in other ways. For years after their baptism, perhaps for the rest of their lives in this system of things, they may have to fight urges in their flesh to return to their previous immoral life-style. With the help of Jehovah's spirit, many succeed in resisting. But they have to wage a constant battle.-Galatians 5:16, 17.
Such ones do not sin as long as they control their urges. But if they are men, they may wisely decide not to 'reach out' for responsibility in the congregation while still having to struggle with powerful fleshly impulses. (1 Timothy 3:1) Why? Because they know the trust that the congregation puts in the elders. (Isaiah 32:1, 2; Hebrews 13:17) They realize that the elders are consulted on many intimate matters and have to handle sensitive situations. It would be neither loving, wise, nor reasonable for one waging a constant fight with unclean fleshly desires to reach out for such a responsible position.-Proverbs 14:16; John 15:12, 13; Romans 12:1.
For a man who was a child molester before he was baptized, there may be another consequence. When he learns the truth, he repents and turns around, not bringing that cruel sin into the congregation. He may thereafter make fine progress, completely overcome his wrong impulses, and even be inclined to 'reach out' for a responsible position in the congregation. What, though, if he still has to live down notoriety in the community as a former child molester? Would he "be irreprehensible, . . . have a fine testimony from people on the outside, . . . [be] free from accusation"? (1 Timothy 3:1-7, 10; Titus 1:7) No, he would not. Hence, he would not qualify for congregation privileges.
Hey Nutcurtains....
well.... see when u said "fully available" it just implies a lot. I mean... think of it, in the west here, men go from girl friend to another, "trying" one woman after another just like they would try a shirt or a car, until they find the one which they "think they like" and then they marry. See this is what it emplies fully available cause this is the only issue where muslim women are not available. For example, in schools and universities, women in the arab countries go to schools and universities. Universities are mixed (although this is not islamic it is done). Muslim women work.... muslim women do practicly everything other women do... except when it comes to men-women relations that's when we differ.
Men in the west usually see women as objects with little regard to their emotions... the typical american sleeps with his girl friend, then something happens he dumbs her like he would throw away any old used thing he has, then few months later, he's out with another.. and so on. Yes i know its a bit "nicer" than this, cause these men have emotions and so on and they do not see it this way, but then, women are not objects.
For a woman to be fully available is like saying, be there when i need someone to sleep around with!
In islamic countries, take Kuwait or Jordan for example, there aren't many mixed schools. The girls and boys are mixed only in university. I do not see of any problems with homosexuality at all..I've known teachers and people there for years.... (20 years now or more) and have not heard of such thing except in one case only! This shows u, although in the west here women are all "fully available" there are homosexuality problems, while as in middle eastern countries where most women are "not fully available" there is little problems!
Now that i think of it, i think the little that do happen in middle east is influenced by the western movies, music or by mixing!
I was raised in Kuwait, although i'm not kuwaiti... and went to non mixed school since i was a kid. I will let you know, we were taught about growing up and marriage and all that in schools, never have i ever heard of homosexuality...!!
this homosexuality thingy i think must have started somewhere here or something... i have no clue
"Weird things used to happen apparently in some boys only schools"
I don't know much since i am not a boy.... maybe here in the west or maybe even in the middle east... I do not know and have never heard of such thing though (in middle east that is)
"(I guess girl only to)"
This is extremely unlikely! As I said, I went to all girls school, all my cousins went to all girls schools, etc.. it has not even happened that i heard of such cases! Maybe here in the west its different!
Which is a good question to ask WHY??!!
"When I was a teen some of my best friends were girls. I can't see why that is disgusting?"
I am not refering to this being disgusting.... I do not see this as being "fully available"!! they are available for friendship and not FULLY available! I mean, i do not know what went on with you.. but i do not think you kissed, hugged, or touched any of ur female friends.. this is different.
I might not agree to it simply because it is against islamic teachings, and because of the many things that go on in such situations, but this is another issue.
now example why mixing is not good... let me tell u this, when a woman is around too many men, she loses her sense of shyness and femenism. She becomes more masculine!! This is a fact, look at the women in the west, they do things as if they are boys, i do not see the softer nature of women any more! Which is sad.
I understand that you do not know much, but here are some thoughts for u so u can build a good idea instead of making up things u do not know :)
Science = homosexuality spreads STD
Tradition = homosexuality ruins the society, corrupts it, breaks family bonds, etc.
Religion = God himself condemns it..
what else do you need?!
"in this case Science is the one out of step by promoting homo-sexuality as acceptable behaviour."
Did science say homosexuality is good??!! I'd be interested to see such an article!
vancouver
24-03-2002, 00:46
At least we agree with the moral standards of God which are set out quite fully in the bible.
Netcurtains
24-03-2002, 01:02
I'll not get in an argument about it as I clearly do not know what I'm talking about. Obviously I have just looked up "*** muslim" using google and there are islamic self help groups for *** men and lesbian women. I think I read somewhere that statistically it is about 1 in 100 men who have this urge. This percentage (apparently) is more or less equally spread throughout all religions, social groups and geographic locations. I have also read that some *** men used to get treated medically to stop them from liking the same sex. Some stories seem very sad.
Read the science - it is a sad tale - and then to have on top of it religious people say you are evil. I don't know Rashda - I do have sympathy with these people:
http://www.mlp.org/resources/packet/conversion/conversion.pdf
According to islam, a person who practices homosexuality is cursed. Just to back up what I am saying from the point of view of islam, I have picked a book agreed upon with Muslims. Many must know it "Fiqh Al sunnah" which is the book we refer to for the rulings on many issues.
and it mentions some of the diseases, side effects and bad things which are caused by homosexuality. I will not go into more details I think I said enough on this issue!
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 25-03-02 AT 09:34 PM (GMT)]Greetings All!
Thanks for such thoughtful responses. It seems the topic stirred up some thought. Here are some of my thoughts on the arguments raised:
Regarding sickness, such as AIDs, Christians (should) believe our responsibility is really to bring healing and find solutions -- not place blame and see it as a curse.
Regarding homosexuality.....
Let me preface my comments by stating that compared to other issues, the Bible has very little to say about homosexuality. Indeed, as far as I know, I am covering every conceivable text that deals with the subject even ambiguously below, and this post, while long, is nowhere near the length of the entire Bible. If one turns to statements by the historic Church, the picture becomes even more cloudy until the twentieth century, when this issue receives the most attention. Thus, even a Catholic argument from "sacred tradition" is weak. It just seems to me that even if I am wrong about this issue, homosexuality is not God's highest priority on his list of serious sins.
Islamic View: It seems from the articles posted by Rasha that the Qur’an has very little to say about homosexuality per se. Indeed, a person must know the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (land of Lut) before opening the Qur’an, because the Qur’an does not say why the cities were destroyed. There seems to be more reliance on non-infallible hadith traditions. In other words, Allah did not reveal that homosexuality is wrong in a clear expression found within the text of the Qur'an itself. Rather, Allah assumes you have heard a story elsewhere from some other non-infallible extra-Qur’anic source.
Natural Law Theology:
So an argument is made against homosexuality based on the notion that all people are born with a natural desire and attraction for members of the opposite sex in order to procreate. The natural "end", or goal and purpose of sexual acts is procreation and to express unitive love. In this world-view, Catholics and Muslims agree. Catholics call it natural law theory. However, we know that people are born with disorders that are not moral faults, such as blindness, deafness, etc….I’ll return to this in a moment.
Natural law theory does not only state things in the negative, such as ‘thou shall not kill', or 'thou shall not commit adultery'. Rather, each negative command protects a positive value. We can re-word the negative command as a positive, such as respect life and honor the dignity of human sexuality.
The positive value preserved by the negative commands against perversions of sexuality is that sex is most pleasurable, meaningful, and holy when the act occurs within the context of a consensual relationship between two people open to procreation and publicly committed to a life-long partnership. In this context, sexuality is transformed from a mere animal act, into love making. The act becomes a graced moment of sharing in the love of God and her creative power.
Turning back to the issue of people born blind…We do not expect blind people to drive cars, or lame people to walk. Nor do we hold them at moral fault if they need the help of society to function. Indeed, in the West, laws have been passed to make buildings more accessible to persons with various handicaps.
The psychological community has long known that among a small group of the general population, there are those who seem to have sexual attractions for members of the same gender. No cure has been found for this “disorder”, despite attempts at hormone therapy, talk therapy, and behavioral modification programs. Threats of civil punishment do not change the desires. Indeed, many who consistently experience these desires claim that they have tried everything from intense religious practice to medical treatment in order to change their desires – all to no avail.
Subsequent research in the field of genetics and biology has indicated that a twin separated at birth from an identical twin is statistically far more likely to indicate homosexual desire if his or her twin also experiences the desires. Likewise, family histories indicate that homosexuality manifest in siblings and seems to statistically run through generations matrilinearly. Furthermore, research on male brains in the 1990’s (by Dr. Levey) among known homosexuals who died of AIDs has indicated certain characteristics distinctive from brains of known heterosexuals who have died. It is not clear whether AIDs may have caused these distinctive characteristics. However, some of the characteristics are common to female brains, indicating the possibility that a homosexual male shares feminine traits with women at the biological level. All of these indications suggest the possibility that homosexuality is a condition that may have a genetic component, or that may form so early in childhood as to be irreversible.
In light of these recent findings, many believers in natural law theory argue that persons born in a condition of homosexual attraction should be encouraged to find ways of expressing their sexuality that are healthy and as close to the norm as possible. It may be unreasonable (and unfair to the potential spouse) to expect a homosexual person to enter in heterosexual marriage. However, so long as the values of mutual consent, permanent commitment, and an openness to children are maintained, perhaps we could honor and bless a *** union. This may be the most compassionate and humane solution for this particular condition.
Genesis 19: The story of Sodom and Gomorrah related in the Qur’an is more explicitly documented in the Christian Bible. Muslims believe the Bible is corrupted, so it would seem inconsistent for Islam to appeal to the Biblical witness, or to argue against alternate interpretations of the narration in Gn 19.
There are at least four possible inferences that can be drawn from the Genesis 19 account:
1) Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for the sin of rape.
2) Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for the sin of inhospitality.
3) Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for the sin of homosexuality.
4) Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for general wickedness and immorality.
Let’s look at the story closely…..
The context of Genesis 19 follows the story of three heavenly visitors coming to Abraham (pbuh) in chapter 18. Abraham had shown the visitors the customary hospitality expected among ancient Middle Easterners. My wife is from East Africa, and hospitality is still held among the highest of virtues in her country. In a world before hotels and motels, travelers relied upon the hospitality of strangers in order to survive.
Indeed, the Israelites cursed those who did not show hospitality: “Cursed be he who violates the rights of an alien, the orphan or the widow! And all the people shall answer, ‘Amen’” (Deuteronomy 27:18), and Deuteronomy also recalls the memory of Israel’s hatred for the Amelek’s because of their lack of hospitality while the Hebrews traversed the desert (see Dt 25:17-19).
At the end of chapter 18 of Genesis, after having shown the three heavenly visitors hospitality, Abraham (pbuh) pleads for Sodom and tries to bargain with God to save the righteous of the city.
In the opening sentences of chapter 19, the angels have entered Sodom and are greeted hospitably by Lot (pbuh): “Gentlemen, please come aside into your servant’s house for the night, and bathe your feet. You can get up early to continue your journey.”
In verse 4, before they go to bed, all the men in town (every last one, including the young boys) comes to Lot’s (pbuh) house. They demand to see the visitors that they may “know” them. The Hebrew word translated as know can have a sexual connotation. However, of the 943 times this word is used in the Old Testament, it only has a sexual connotation in about 10 other places. In other words, we cannot be certain that the townsmen were threatening to perform sexual acts with these men based on this word. They may have simply been saying, “Send them out so we can speak to them”.
Undoubtedly, Lot (pbuh) did believe that the townsmen had evil intents. Whatever those evil intents, the townsmen were perceived as inhospitable. Perhaps Lot (pbuh) did suspect that the townsmen implied sexual abuse in their use of the word, “know”, but the text does not provide certitude. If “know” is being used in a sexual sense, is the real sin homosexuality, or gang rape? Whatever the case, Lot (pbuh) is so disgusted by the potential for inhospitality that he attempts to bribe the townsmen with his own virgin daughters! What kind of morality is that for today?
At any rate, lest we doubt that Lot (pbuh) is trying to protect the virtue of hospitality, after offering his daughters, he says: “But don’t do anything to these men, for you know that they have come under my roof.”
In the New Testament, Jesus interprets the destruction of Sodom in terms of hospitality. In Luke chapter 10, Jesus commissions seventy-two disciples to go into the neighboring villages to preach door-to-door. Regarding villages that do not accept the disciples, Jesus instructs: “Whatever town you enter and they do not receive you, go out into the streets and say, ‘The dust of your town that clings to our feet, even that we shake off against you.’ Yet know this: the kingdom of God is at hand. I tell you, it will be more tolerable for Sodom on that day than for that town.”
There is a parallel passage in Matthew 10:14-25 that confirms this same point. It seems almost certain that the real sin condemned in the story of Lot’s (pbuh) escape from Sodom and the eventual destruction of the city is primarily and specifically a sin of inhospitality, and a general wickedness secondarily. If homosexuality is an issue at all, it seems to rank after inhospitality, gang rape, and general wickedness in the mind of the Biblical author.
Just to drive home, we can look at some passages that refer to Sodom and Gomorrah later in the Bible….
In Jude, verse 7, the New Testament indicates harsh judgement on evil-doers, and states: “Likewise, Sodom and Gomorrah, and the surrounding towns, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual promiscuity and desired after strange flesh, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.”
The words translated as “strange flesh” are “sarkos eteras”, and the translation is literal. Some Evangelical Protestants argue that the desire for “strange flesh” set in the context of sexual promiscuity might refer to homosexuality. Thus, Jude 7 might indicate that the primary sin of Sodom was homosexuality. However, in the context of Judaism, the desire for “strange flesh” could refer to a violation of dietary codes, and could be a desire for pig-flesh and other non-kosher foods. At any rate, the notion of a desire for “strange flesh” is not clearly homosexual desire.
II Peter 2:6-10 refers to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah within the context of general wickedness, particularly idolatry. The author also alludes to cruelty, deception and oppression, with only some hints at sexual sins including adultery and generally depraved desires. There is no specific hint at homosexuality.
In the KJV Old Testament, Deuteronomy 23:17 was mistranslated to include the sodomite with an apparent homosexual context. The Hebrew qadesh and qadeshah, however, refer to temple prostitutes, and there is no evidence these specific prostitutes were homosexual, or that there position became synonymous with homosexual activity. The KJV seems to have made an anachronistic mis-translation based on some Latin manuscript mistranslation dating to the fourth century.
Other Biblical passages that refer to Sodom or Gomorrah do not refer to any type of sexual sin. Throughout the Bible, Sodom and Gomorrah are said to have been condemned for inhospitality, oppression of the poor, idolatry, general wickedness, fornication, robbery and so forth. See Dt 29:23, 32:32, Is 3:9, 13:19, Jr 23:14, 49:18, etc….
Bottom line conclusions regarding Genesis 19: It seems highly improbable that homosexuality was considered the sin of Sodom. Historically, Origen and other early Church fathers interpreted the passage as a condemnation of inhospitality, which seems to be the best reading of the text. Jesus accepted and used this interpretation according to the gospels. Even if we do not fully accept the inhospitality inference, the text remains ambiguous at best.
Leviticus 18:22 & 20:13
Muslims believe that the Torah given to Moses is not faithfully preserved in the Books of Leviticus. Christians do not follow the Book of Leviticus in absolute literalness, since they traditionally see the rituals described in the text as a typological (symbolic) prefigurement of Christ. Few Jews follow the Book of Leviticus with absolute literalness, believing the writing to be merely an early history of their development as an ethnic people and a primitive understanding of their relationship with God. Yet, Leviticus contains what seem to be the most clear passages against homosexuality in the Bible.
“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. Such a thing is an abomination.” (Lv 18:22)
“If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for this abominable deed. They have forfeited their lives. (Lv 20:13)
The Hebrew word “Toevah”, translated as “abomination” and the root of “abominable”, indicates ritual impurity. It is the same word used more frequently for idolatry and violating the dietary regulations. It is not the same word used for breaking moral laws, such as theft, robbery, murder and lying.
Chapter 16 of Leviticus lays out the prescriptions for the day of atonement (Yom Kippur), including the scapegoat and the fast. Chapter 17 continues with regulations regarding kosher diet practice. Chapter 18 deals with sexual purity, and chapter 19 with various rules to keep from idolatry. Chapter 20 deals with penalties for sins and means of reconciliation, and chapter 21 deals with priesthood, leading up to sacrificial rules.
What I am pointing out here is the broad scope that Leviticus, and particularly chapter 18 and 20, are in a context of priestly rituals and purity for worship. It is not altogether clear that the Hebrews intended these passages to apply to all people. Perhaps these are priestly rules in particular. It is interesting to note that Leviticus does not condemn lesbianism (there were no women priests)!
Another point to keep in mind with taking Leviticus too literally is that the book tells us: “Anyone who curses his father or mother shall be put to death.” (Lv 20:9) Are we really ready to execute our teenage children the first time they say “damn it” to us? There are many moral demands in Leviticus that people do not follow today. How many of refuse to eat lobster?
Finally, it is important to note that the passages form Leviticus are not deal with at all with the idea of homosexual orientation, or a condition of unchanging homoerotic desire. It is improbable that the authors had conceived such an idea. Indeed, the first appearance of a word to describe such a condition in any language appears to be the nineteenth century. Even if we feel that we cannot interpret these passages as anything other than a moral judgment against homosexual acts, the passages are not condemning those individual persons who experience such desires!
Conclusion regarding Leviticus 18:22 & 20:13: I cannot speak conclusively for Jews, but Christians have never had problems with interpreting Leviticus in light of the gospel of Jesus Christ, and the mercy he displayed to the adulteress woman in John 8:1-11. In New Testament theology, we are freed from obsessive concern with following the letter of the levitical law, and encouraged to follow the spirit of the law. We have always read a more symbolic meaning in the OT text pointing to the NT. We have always tempered the more obscure moral demands in light of the two great commandments: love God with your whole heart, mind and soul; and love your neighbor as yourself. Our own historic tradition has developed more, not less, homophobic over that last 2,000 years. The issue then becomes whether our "tradition" is more a human tradition than a sacred development under the guidence of the Holy Spirit. Are we imposing an anochronistic meaning on the text?Using Leviticus to bash homosexuals does not seem consistent with a genuinely Christian attitude. The passage is ambiguous, at best, due to context and placement within the whole of Scripture.
Romans 1:26-27
“Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another.”
The context of much Paul’s writing is the Greco-Roman world, which included cultural mores where older and married heterosexual men often took young boys as lovers. These boys were young enough that by today’s standards, any of Paul’s condemnations could be directed at pedophilia or ephebophilia, rather than homosexuality. In many cases, these boys were obtained through the slave trade. In the passage above, Paul seems to imply that such a social condition arose as a punishment for sin. Note that the condition is a punishment in itself, rather than a punishable offense.
Another important issue is in the bolded words in the passage above. Paul is condemning freely chosen homosexuality and lesbianism. Natural law theory would affirm that heterosexual marriage is the normative model for establishing sexuality morality. However, we know today that some people seem to be born into a condition of homoerotic desire. Even if this condition is not purely genetic, such a condition seems to form before the age reason and becomes manifest in early puberty. Self consciousness of this condition will depend on the ability of the subject to refrain from complete repression of sexual desire in an attempt to become asexual.
In the modern world, we are able to distinguish the difference between pedophilia (which is an abuse of power over the young person), and homosexuality (which can occur between consenting adults). We are also able to distinguish between freely chosen and short term homosexuality (such as in prison), and a permanent life-long condition.
Conclusions regarding Rm 1:26-7 Paul is addressing freely chosen homosexuality by a heterosexual, and most likely that type associated with pedophilia and the sex-slave trade. He sees this condition as a punishment for deeper idolatry. However, Paul could not have conceived of or intended to address the condition of permanent homosexuality we have discovered since. This passage does not address people of homosexual orientation.
I Corinthians 6:9-10
“Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor malakoi nor arsenokoites nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.”
The first highlighted word in bold (malakoi) is translated from the original Greek variously as weakling, effeminate, and object of male lust. The word itself is very ambiguous. In some Bibles, it combined with the following word to mean homosexual. In others, it is translated as boy prostitute. Given the Greco-Roman context, I am inclined to see male prostitution as the issue here.
The second highlighted word (arsenokoites) is translated variously as sexual pervert, weak man, practicing homosexual, sodomite, or homosexual. In actual fact, this word is only found in one other place in all of ancient literature – I Timothy 1:10.
The origin of the word “aresenokeites” is “arsen”+”koite”.
Arsen comes from “arrostos”, meaning weak, sick, inform, or invalid.
Koite literally means bed, but has a connotation of a conjugal bed.
Literally, the word “aresenokoites” means “weak one lying down”. If we combine it with “malokai”, we may have a homosexual connotation. Literally, we would have “weaklings nor bedded invalids” (“oute” is the word for nor).
However, the context seems to point to something more than weak men due to illness. Yet, can we be certain that such a passage refers to homosexuality as we mean it today?
Conclusions regarding I Cor 6:9: This passage literally says weaklings and invalids will not inherit the kingdom of heaven. There was a sexual connotation to both “malakoi” and “koite” in secular Greek, but no clear connotation of homosexuality. In the historic context, it is just as likely that Paul was writing concerning pedophile sex-slave trade and boy prostitution, as homosexuality. Slavery and prostitution dishonor sexuality by squashing free consent and love. This passage is very ambiguous when applied to the modern concept of homosexuality, which includes two members of the same gender freely loving one another in a mutually consensual adult relationship.
I Timothy 1:8-11
“We know that the law is good, provided that one uses it as law, with the understanding that law is meant not for a righteous person but for the lawless and unruly, the godless and sinful, the unholy and profane, those who kill their fathers and mothers, murderers, the unchaste, arsenokoites, kidnappers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.”
We saw “aresenokoites” in our exegesis of I Corinthians 6:9 above. The word literally means a sick man lying down. We suggested above that the historic context for the use of the words included a world that traded in young boy prostitutes sold on the sex slave trade. This seems to be even more obvious in I Timothy 1:10, where the word “arsenokoites” is preceded by the unchaste and followed by kidnappers. It seems highly unlikely that this passage has anything to say specifically to what happens between two consenting adults who love each other.
I Thessalonians 4:3-7
“For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication: that every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honor; not in lust and concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God: That no man go beyond and defraud his brother in any matter: because that the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also have forewarned you and testified. For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness.” (Taken from the KJV)
This passage is sometimes misused to condemn homosexuality by interpreting the words “possess his vessel” as meaning that a man should keep his penis to himself, and not “….defraud his brother.” However, the more obvious meaning of the entire passage is to avoid adultery, and not take your neighbor’s wife. The passage is not referring to adult homosexuals.
Overall Conclusions: The Bible repeats certain truths over and over again. These are the truths that should guide our lives. Every book of the Bible tells us that God loves us with an infinite love, and that his love should inspire us to love him above all things. All moral codes are based on loving our neighbors as we love ourselves.
Persons struggling with homosexual desire often are the most devout among us, and turned to religion to try to find healing from these uncomfortable desires. Others who suffer with this condition often leave religion in anger, frustration, and bitterness. Islam has very little to say about homosexuality in the Qur’an. Christianity and Judaism have only ambiguous texts at best. The gospels do not mention homosexuality at all. The number of passages referring to homosexuality in the entire Bible (I think I’ve hit them all above) is miniscule compared to condemnations of idolatry, heterosexual adultery, murder, bribery, unfair business practices, oppression of the poor, drunkenness, and other forms of injustice.
Jesus taught the Christian to treat people with love and compassion, and to temper all justice with mercy and forgiveness. In this light, I believe that a complete review and reinterpretation of the Christian tradition on homosexuality is in order.
The weakness of my argument is simply that I argue much from ambiguity where the historic christian faith seems to militate against my interpretation, especially since the fourteenth century. While this argument may carry much weight with Roman Catholics, who believe in Scared Tradition, it should not carry weight with Protestants.
Note that I am not arguing for a sexual free-for-all. The moral principles I outline above would condemn rape, adultery, easy divorce, pedophilia, ephebophilia, heterosexuals acting out homosexually in experimentation, prostitution, bestiality and so forth. Yet, it treats people who are simply different due to circumstances beyond their control with dignity, mercy, and respect.
Peace and Blessings!
Jcecil3
please do not judge what the quraan has and what it does not by what i say. I am not a scholar but have simply presented what i know. Muslims have two sacred sources these are the quraan and sunnah. they go hand in hand. So, the quraan presents the story of Lot and i'm sure there is more, and there are more ahadith too.
Netcurtains
25-03-2002, 20:53
Hi Jcecil3,
I've been thinking. You know all the Papal stuff of infallibility - if you add all the papel sayings together doesn't that equate to a new bible book - "the 100% correct sayings of the popes?"
If we are at odds with the mormons for the book of mormon and the Muslims for the koran and the Jehovahs witnesses for their version of the bible (and watch tower) are we not also the same with our: "100% correct sayings of the popes"? Didn't the catholic church fall into some theological trap in the 19th century when this idea was sort of made "legal"?
What are your views - Have we gone too far with this pope thing? Should we back peddle on it?
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 25-03-02 AT 09:30 PM (GMT)]Greetings Rasha and Netty,
Rasha: I don't think I made any statement about the Qur'an based on anything that you did not provide me yourself. If I misunderstood you, I apologize. But as far as the sunnah, this is the first I am hearing that it is considered a source of divine revelation. What is the sunnah?
Netty: Regarding papal infallibility, I kind of like the idea, but have very nuanced view of it. I think if you asked all Catholics which statements of the Popes made apart from a Council are to be considered infallible, only the Immaculate Conception of Mary and the Assumption of Mary would be accepted by everyone. So it doesn't add up to another Bible. The Church needs to clarify the conditions for infallibility, and Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (on the ordination of women) is a perfect case of why we need clarification....
Peace and blessings!
jcecil3
Netcurtains
25-03-2002, 22:48
Hi,
I like the idea too but before I say why I wouldn't mind being directed to a web page that lists all the "infallible" sayings out (even if that web page is controlled via the Jehovahs witnesses or fundamentalists). Anyone have a link?
Netcurtains
25-03-2002, 23:18
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 25-03-02 AT 10:43 PM (GMT)]Anyroad - I'm going mad - enough religion for a while - I'm off back to the stock market.
Nice speaking to you all (even that servant_of_allah chap made me laugh) - see you all again sometime.
Cheers Netty.
What I meant is that there might be more on homosexuality in the quraan... i simply do not know.
Sunnah is the sayings of the prophet... the ahadith. and it is part of our creed to believe in all the sayings of the prophet.
Greetings All!
Rasha: I thought the ahadith were considered non-infallible, but helpful (kind of like Catholics view the writings of saints after the Bible was written).
Netty: A list of many (not all) papal documents of import can be found at: http://www.newadvent.org/docs/
But I also think the Church should be more democratic, and therefore, I prefer the Councils, which can be found at: http://www.newadvent.org/directory/14388a_04423f.htm
While I believe in a sort of democracy (since the whole Church is guided by the Holy Spirit), I think papal infallibility (as an idea) allows us to have an official spokesperson.
What is cool about the Immaculate Conception and Assumption is that Pius IX and Pius XII actually took a sort of poll of the bishops before making ex cathedra statements, and they asked their bishops to also ask the laity and theologians.
John Paul II did not do this with Ordinatio Sacerdotalis but he apparently doesn't claim ex cathedra authority in the letter either.
A Petrine ministry which would later historically develop into the notion of papal infallibility is Scriptural (Mt 16:16-19, Jn 20:15-18, Lk 22:31-32, and other passages).
I think the Popes should generally leave doctrinal decisions up to Councils, which should be decided by consensus rather than democracy(2/3 majority, rather than simple majority of 51 percent).
When Popes exercise "infallibility", they should either reiterate what prior Councils have already said, or they should have consulted the faithful. They should also be required to show how the statement is consistent with Scripture, or at least not inconsistent with Scripture.
In history, this has generally been the case with those papal pronouncements recognized as carrying the greatest canonical authority. So, I'm not introducing a new idea here, so much as saying that the next Church Council should make this implicit practice more explicit. If Popes always were forced to follow these principles by dogmatic decree, Protestants might have less problem with the idea.
I also think local churches should have more power to make local decisions through parish councils and local bishops synods.
Peace and Blessings!
jcecil3
Netcurtains
26-03-2002, 00:59
Hi,
thanks for that.
I have put down on the atheist board how I became a christian as I feel people are more interested in "why" there.
If you are interested in "whys" of individual people then my link is on your thread with lone wolf:
http://pub90.ezboard.com/finstituteforunicornresearchfrm4.showMessageRange? topicID=11.topic&start=49&stop=49
Well, the hadith is the secondary source. Muslims MUST accept ahadith that are sahih (i.e. the chain of narration for them is trusty). Every Muslim MUST accept them or his faith is not complete. They are not just like anyone's opinion. In Islam, not anyone can give opinion. The first ruling comes from Quraan, the words of God. If the rule is not in the Quraan, the sayings of the prophet serve as the secondary source we look at, Sunnah! These we cannot refuse. They are authority. i.e. both are sacred sources we must not deny. if the ruling is not found in these two (and that is not that much) then the ruling of the companions of the prophet follow, as they are the generation of the prophet and they were taught by the prophet. IF they have not yet issued a ruling on a specific issue that we need, then the Shora (i.e. community of scholars) must issue the rulings BASED ON quraan and sunnah. i.e. from similar situations or such.
This is my understanding of how rulings come about in islam. I am 100% sure about the status of Quraan and hadith however.
vBulletin® v3.6.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.