In the English translation of the Bible, the prohibition against homosexuality appears very clear because of a tradition that began with the King James Version. More accurate translations have begun to correct the error, but once a tradition has been set, it is hard to undo.
When we realize that another language didn’t have a word for a topic, we have to realize that it probably didn’t have a unified concept either. In this case, some translators are taking words for male prostitutes, child molesters, fornicators, etc. and using our unified concept of “homosexual” to translate them.
A few hours of honest research would be enough to convince anyone that the Bible coudn’t be talking about a word that wasn’t coined until 18 centuries later. Unfortunately, that’s more honesty than some researchers can muster.
God’s story has ALWAYS included ALL people and inviting them in. From the beginning with man then woman then Abraham & Sarah, Isaac & Rebecca and Jacob & Leah & Rachel then the 12 Tribes of Israel. Then Jesus shows up and the story expands to include disenfranchised and marginalized individuals and gave them a voice and a place at the table.
How does the ancient Hebrew read?
Irene, I have always heard the text understood as condemning some kind of sex between men. It could be all forms of same sex contact between men, or it could be condemning rape, or a male taking up a passive role with another man. Wayne is suggesting that it may have a different meaning. But I think to read scripture mechanically is a mistake any way. As you know the Jewish tradition has some safeguards in Biblical study that Christianity could benefit from using. One is the practice where various Rabbis would interprete the same text in different ways. So even if a text seemed to limit our capacity to be fair in new situations that scripture could not anticipate or to be honest about new information, that Rabbinic dialogue would find nuances in the text that would lead to wisdom and compassion as well as justice.
But that’s just my understanding. Hopefully a Rabbi will wander by and help us answer your question.
Irene, you can see it here in Hebrew. Only in these two verses in Leviticus is “mishkevei” taken to mean “have sex with”. In all other 44 occurrences of this and related words in the Bible, it just means “bed.”
To me, so far, it looks like “a man who lies with a male in a woman’s bed,” as opposed to “a man who lies with a “malebed” like a woman does.”
“Malebed” is Hebrew slang for … something like homosexual. It is used in the Hebrew Talmud with that meaning. It is exactly the Hebrew phrase Paul was using (in Greek) when he said “arsenokoitai.”
Personally, so far, I think they misunderstood this phrase for hundreds of years before Jesus and Paul, and we still misread it for the same reason: because otherwise there is nothing anti-gay in the entire Old Testament, and we surely can’t have that! 😀
http://biblos.com/leviticus/20-13.htm
Thanks for these insights Jim. I would very much like to have / see a serious academic conversation about this but have not yet found what looks like complete coverage. Two things in particular I would want to know:
(1) Is it at all possible to read the Leviticus phrase “mishkevei ishah” as “in a woman’s bed”? (as opposed to “as with a woman” which is definitely NOT what it means), and
(2) Is it true that the original Hebrew text has actually been completely lost, and all we have is the back-translation from the Greek? That is what the Figure below says, and I have not found solid information to support or refute it. That is extremely weird in itself – it makes me think we are being deliberately deceived. It seems to me that if all we have is a back-translation, then the authority is gone. It could have said anything.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TextsOT.PNG
Wayne, I don’t have any Hebrew texts around me right now so I’ll do this off the top of my head and hope someone with more knowledge, or who at least who has the Hebrew available will respond. I’ve not heard the “woman’s bed” possibility. It looks like “as with a woman” to me, but I would love to learn more about that possibility. As far as the Hebrew, it’s true a lot of the text was lost. What we call the Hebrew alphabet is actually Aramaic letters because they forgot even what the original alphabet looked like. But remember that originally the tradition was carried on orally. My understanding is that the Dead Sea Scrolls have basically reaffirmed the accuracy of the texts even though they’ve been through such transition. So it seems to me the text is intact, but we still don’t really know what the text means for us. As I say in the blog, if they were lacking a word for “homosexual,” then what we are really looking at when we see the the English word “homosexual” arewords that are much more specific and limited. The original text may or may not have been meant to condemn what we are calling homosexuality today. The “ace in the hole” it seems to me is not to weaken or deny the text, but to realize the entire Levitical or “Cleanliness” Code was overturned by the New Covenant. We don’t have to argue about the jots and tittles of the original text. The New Covenant includes the command to call no one “unclean.” That means don’t apply the Levitical Code to human beings, period. Thanks for your questions.
Check out Unprotected Texts: The Bible’s Surprising Contradictions About Sex and Desire by Jennifer Wright Knust. It doesn’t have all the answers, but helped to better explain the current debate.
I would highly suggest you posters read “Paul On Homosexuality” by Michael Wood. His other books are awesome too, but “Paul On Homosexuality” is a good one to start with due to the topic of discussion.
I encourage everyone to check out Facebook.com/ourheartsarewithyou. There are some great explanations of this topic of the bible and homosexuality.
The church throughout history has started out on the wrong side of social equality, and discrimination remained in America until the church was willing to concede that they were wrong. We are at that point now, and there are many like-minded Christians that need to come together to tell the world, “As Christians we do not believe in discriminating against gays.”
If the public saw how many churches actually consider what the Bible is actually saying, they might open up their minds on the subject.
Thanks,
Andy
from San Diego