THE EDITOR, Sir:
I have resisted the desire long enough, and hesitated to speak on the controversial subject of homosexuality. However, with the useful and open-minded information given to us by The Gleaner and other news media, there are certain facts which may be considered simple, but have not been dealt with.
1. No one seems to know in what period of human history the divine plan of procreation was changed from heterosexual to same-sex unions.
2. There is not yet unanimous agreement even among the theologians who are supposed to be God’s spokespersons.
3. What were the reasons or conditions for this unnatural change?
4. Can anyone declare boldly that the spiritual Intelligent Being, whatever He or She is called, made a mistake in creating male and female?
5. Who sets the spiritual and moral standards for us sinful, mortal people?
These are fundamental questions for us to consider in our discussion of this worldwide problem created by the human mind, and being used effectively by evil spirits which have completed their work of deception.
The question to all who say homosexuality is not a transgression is, where in the Bible do we find the command to use that part of the body which ejects garbage from the body for sexual intercourse?
LINDSAY MONCRIEFFE (Rev)
Obviously this writer is just using the guise of entertaining discourse to spew putrid hate simply put but if I may answer with one overall observation I have of the whole thing then delve into some other matters, The books of the Bible when they were being put together certainly never had the concept of homosexuality directly infused in the writings and we are told by scholars that there was not even a word for to describe the person or the practices associated with such, there have been some references however in the old testament to what could amount as same gender loving unions in a sense for example David and Jonathan – There is no real need to bring out a passage showing approval of homosexuality. After all, the Bible condemns only those actions it actually condemns, and homosexuality is not one of those things.
However, even though they are not strictly necessary, there *are* several passages that show approval of gay relationships.
To mention just one, there is the love affair between David and Jonathan.
1 Samuel 18:1,3
“And it came to pass, when he [David] had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul . . . And Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul.”
And immediately afterward, Jonathan disrobed before David:
1 Samuel 18:4
“Jonathan divested himself of the mantle he was wearing and gave it to David, along with his military dress, and his sword, his bow and his belt.
Jonathan was not only disrobing, but was turning the symbols of his manhood over to David. This draws a very clear picture of what is happening here.
1 Samuel 20:30
“Then Saul’s anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he said unto him, Thou son of perverse rebellious woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse [David] to thine own confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother’s nakedness?”
Reference to the nakedness of one’s parents is one of the methods used in the Bible to refer to a sexual relationship. Jonathan had chosen David as his lover. And in the same conversations Saul says:
1 Samuel 20:31
Why, as long as the son of Jesse lives upon the earth you cannot make good your claim to the kingship!
This clarifies Saul’s problem. One of the most important duties of being a king was producing an heir. Obviously, Jonathan had no intention of producing an heir, and therefore could not provide the final step needed to make good his claim to the kingship. He loved David and *only* David.
or the The Centurion and His Pais
People who dislike homosexuals, disapprove of homosexuals, or are afraid of homosexuals for one reason or another, enjoy using their Christian Bibles to excuse their attitudes. Why? Apparently because it gives them permission, and helps them feel righteous and good about themselves while they do it.
“I’m loving the Sinner, but hating the Sin,” they say. Which helps them feel close to God, close to Jesus, following nothing more than what their Bibles tell them in Jesus’ own language of English.
Sadly, people who do so have never really read their Bibles, never really thought about the words.
How the words got there. What they meant originally, when the writers wrote them in the original languages (which, believe it or not, were *not English).
What the times, and the people, and the cultures, and the politics, and the level of scientific knowledge, and the history was like when the original writers wrote.
Nowhere is this phenomenon more evident, today, than regarding the question of “What does the Bible say about homosexuals?” Or, most importantly for Evangelical Christians, “What would *Jesus say about homosexuals?”
To support their prejudice against homosexuals, many Christians haul out the Genesis story of Sodom, or the Levitical priestly proscription, or the New Testament writings of St. Paul in Romans:1, or his letter to Timothy, etc. In reply, gay-friendly Christians offer the story of David & Jonathan, or Ruth &
Naomi, or Jesus & The Beloved Disciple.
Unfortunately, all the above passages from the Bible, whether Old Testament or New Testament, whether viewed as anti-gay or pro-gay, are extremely problematical. Pick a scholar — any scholar — and you can get an interpretation, backed by reasonable findings, to support your personal view one way or another about *any of the above passages.
There is only *one place in the entire Bible where we can find a glimpse of how Jesus personally felt, or might have felt, about homosexuals and their relationship to Him…their relationship to God, as we Christians know God. It’s the New Testament story of the Centurion and his Servant.
The story is told in two separate Gospels in our New Testament: Matthew 8:5-13, and Luke 7:1-10, regarding the Centurion who approaches Jesus so that his “servant” (modern English translation) might be cured. In Matthew’s version, the Centurion came directly to Jesus seeking His help. In Luke’s version, the Centurion called upon the Elders of Capernaum’s Jews, sending them in his place to seek help. In Matthew, Jesus went to meet the Centurion and spoke to him. In Luke, Jesus did not actually meet the Centurion but spoke to the city’s Elders about his request, instead. (So much for Biblical inerrancy)