violet’s bible interpretations part 4: lesbians
In the Christian Bible, there are 61 verses about divorce, 57 about sex between people who aren’t married, 7 verses about promiscuous male to male anal sex and one verse that mentions female to female sex. Here it is:
Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. Romans 1:26-27
In this chapter, we learn that the god God inflicted a punishment for idolatry on a group of women who were not naturally gay, by making them have sexual relations with other women. It’s an odd punishment, but then the god God isn’t known for his logical punishment decisions (see the stories of Noah or Jonah) and forcing people to have sex with people they’re not naturally attracted to does indeed sound like a punishment.
So, there is only this one mention tenuously related to lesbianism in the Bible, and it’s not to condemn it. This leads to some rather awkward conclusions for Christians:
- the Bible was written by men who either were gay and afraid of being discovered because of the cultural implications, or were straight and afraid of gay sex
- in the haste of these closest gays/homophobes to cover their tracks, they forgot that women actually exist, and that the rules they were writing were not exclusively for men
And, of course, the interesting thing to note as Christianity continues it course, is that Christian men discussing same sex marriage are still making the same kind of mistake. Take this comment on the post entitled Hundreds of Christians Prosecuted Over Same Sex Marriage Law:
Man and a man is not equal to a man and a woman. never was, never will. God says men lying with men is abomination God says the union between a man and a woman is holy. An abomination is not equal to holiness. No way no how.
My friends, the male Christian of this ilk doth protest too much methinks, and across a suspiciously narrow understanding of same sex marriage. Luckily for lesbians, this means they can partake in the natural partnership of their choice, and Christians have no ammunition to suggest it could be sinful.
“God gave them over to shameful lusts,” means that God let the women go their own lustful way.
Freewill is basic to human nature and must be foremost in the mind when trying to understand the meaning of Bible verse.
Further, Judeo-Christianity is in harmony with human nature which is male and female.
Male and female exist because natural sexual reproduction is not possible without gender.
LikeLike
How do you explain homosexuality being observed in over 1,500 species, SOM?
LikeLike
John,
All of life is subject to disorders.
It is obvious that homosexuality is a disorder because if everyone were homosexual our species would go extinct.
LikeLike
One or two species, perhaps, but 1,500+ species all exhibiting homosexuality can’t be called a disorder, SOM. More the case its a perfectly natural occurrence in all populations.
If you are going to limit sexuality to mating only, then how do you explain grossly ugly people who will never find a mate? Are you saying they are a “disorder”?
LikeLike
Or people who have ‘psychological disorders’ and choose not to breed? Infertile people?
LikeLike
John,
Homosexuality is a disorder whether all species suffer from it or whether 1500 species suffer from it.
Disorder isn’t determined by democracy but by nature.
The nature of sexually reproducing creatures is male and female.
The means homosexuality is a disorder since it deviates the afflicted from his intended nature.
LikeLike
“Disorder isn’t determined by democracy but by nature”
So you ARE saying grossly ugly people (millions upon millions of sex-starved, virginal men and women) are a disorder.
How very Christian of you.
LikeLike
John,
If the ugliest man in the world married the ugliest woman in the world and they spent some time with each other humping like little bunnies they would have children.
If the best looking gays married and turned each others’ anuses into hemorrhoidal mush via blood engorged ganglion, they would never have children.
A hemorrhoidal mush of an anus does not human nature make.
And Mother Nature doesn’t discriminate against ugly, only people like you do.
LikeLike
“means that God let the women go their own lustful way.” The passage specifically states it was against their nature. Also the verb English translations of the verb indicating the god God’s role in it run from “delivered” to “handed them over” to “gave them up”. He made it happen.
LikeLike
Wisp,
Lust is against human nature.
That is why God is so against it.
But freewill comes first.
If we choose to violate our human nature by sinning, God lets us go our own way.
LikeLike
God gave them over to shameful lusts. It is a judgment of abandonment. The text is emphasizing the fact that “even their women exchanged natural relations to unnatural ones.” Essentially, this society was so depraved that the women were wholeheartedly participating in abominable behavior.
I believe that America today may be facing God’s judgment of abandonment as the affirmation of homosexuality as normal is widespread. This affirmation is so pervasive that it appears that at least some people view homosexuality preferable to God ordained relationships.
LikeLike
Ted,
From what I’ve gathered conversing with people concerning gay marriage in particular and social issues in general, is that people who are say, pro gay marriage or pro abortion, feel that they are being compassionate, empathetic and broad minded, not evil.
So the problem is really one of not being educated properly in the “Laws of Nature and Nature’s God.”
Since the Reformation split Christianity into a gazillion different voices, it has become nothing more than a part of postmodern culture’s noisy racket.
If we are to see our culture as the New Sodom, then we need to ask if will God destroy it even if there are millions and millions of his disciples living among the misguided.
I believe our society is collapsing of its own accord, not because of God’s judgment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, God has more than one type of judgment at His disposal. When I say He may be abandoning the country, I don’t mean to imply He is also abandoning believers. God will always protect His own. He has proven that numerous times in scripture.
Speaking of Sodom, the angels were not able to destroy the city until they physically removed Lot, the one person that was righteous in God’s eyes. Perhaps that is a shadow of the rapture.
LikeLike
Ted,
I think what I was trying to say in a roundabout way is that if anyone is open to judgment, it is Christians.
God does not punish the ignorant.
Ignorance is punishment enough.
But what about the people who supposedly know God’s will yet consistently outsource their Christian duties to the education system and Big Government?
For crying out loud, 4 million Christians sat home in 2012 and allowed Barack Obama to be elected for a second time.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You make a good point regarding ifnorance, yet the ignorance that ushered in Obama could potentially be felt for quite some time in the future. In a sense, bad decision making could result in a “generational curse.”
I’m not sure where I stand with ignorance and judgment. Generally speaking, I can see how it can be judgment unto itself. However, one cannot claim ignorance to the sovereignty of God as the whole of creation testifies to it.
LikeLike
This is a remarkable and provocative reading, you put forward.
LikeLike
Thank you! I’m pleased you found it interesting.
LikeLike
You are always interesting.
LikeLike
Oh, nice find! I have to now find an anti gay post and pose the question to them.
LikeLike
What’s a nice find?
LikeLike
That lesbianism (is that even a word?) is OK
LikeLike
Funnily enough, I questioned that word too and did some amendments to avoid using it. It would be interesting to see what a normal Christian (as opposed to a troll like SOM) would say, but I reckon I can predict it starting with, “you’ve taken it all out of context …” followed by “you have to understand the culture …”. Yawn.
LikeLike
Ah, the Magic Decoder Ring. I’ve been arguing with a confused young lad who’s in possession of a fine one.
LikeLike
Lesbianism is a word, which simply means female homosexuality.
LikeLike
If homosexuality is a disorder and we are made in His(sic) image then maybe we are not to blame?
And it’s just a wee bit odd that Yahweh, in either guise is not noted for his serious bonking of the opposite sex. And in his first guise he ditched his missus, I believe.
I think Jesus was in all likelihood a bit light in the sandals.
Just an observation
This is a commenting a sex post not religion, which I am self-banned form doing
LikeLike
Oh, and I think Yahweh just had a thing for lesbians…kinky bugger.
LikeLike
The homosexual acts condemned by the Mosaic Law might be related to divine pedagogy since eating pork was also an abomination. Christians do not consider themselves under this law.
The most debated of the biblical passages seems to be the one you pointed out in Romans 1. Elsewhere Paul uses “nature” to say it is unnatural for men to have long hair and women to have short hair which goes more with cultural expectation. So, is Paul saying that God gave up the idolaters to break their cultural expectation? If so, what does this say about the morality of gay sex? It’s difficult to tell. . .
There’s a debate within Christianity about gay sex. Type A Christians think gay sex is not immoral and Type B Christians think gay sex is immoral. Check out the Gay Christian Network for information about this if it interests you.
Violet, one of your criticisms of the bible is that it is patriarchic. There’s no question, it definitely is. But, should that be something that makes you question whether all of it is divinely inspired? I hate the fact that it has been used to suppress women, but I’m wondering if it’s better to blame the underlying culture in which scripture was penned rather than the theological messages. What about the egalitarian threads? “There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male or female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.”
LikeLike
“Violet, one of your criticisms of the bible is that it is patriarchic. There’s no question, it definitely is. But, should that be something that makes you question whether all of it is divinely inspired?”
I know you’re being kept busy on another thread at the moment, but I saw this (having an argument with a flower arranger so was looking for ammo) and just realised I missed it first time round. I am quite sure that the repulsively loud sexist tone running through almost the whole Bible shows that it is not even slightly inspired by anything other than male humans. I can understand how other men might miss just quite how horrendous it is, as they’re used to life being about THEM, but it does trouble me that so many women continue swallow it hook, line and sinker.
LikeLike
Hey, Violet, mind if I link to your post?
LikeLike
Not at all, any time.
LikeLike
Thanks! This post reminded me of my latest post. I’ll go add the credit now.
LikeLike
Actually it was the comment section in the one before.
LikeLike