Date:         Sun, 26 Jun 1994 12:38:59 EDT
From: PMDAtropos@aol.com

[ Send replies to Russell131@aol.com ]

     Bible not clear on homosexuality

   By Randy Bailey, for the Journal-Constitution
     As an ordained Baptist minister and a professor  of Hebrew Scripture
(commonly called the Old  Testament), I was confused by the statement
 released June 2 by 271 Cobb County ministers  supporting the County
Commission's resolution  condemning the gay "lifestyle."
     What confused me was some of the language  included in the ministers'
statement, which  referred to the "clear teaching of Scripture,"  "God's
standard of righteousness," "the clear  design of our Creator" and being
"called to be  scripturally correct."
     Do these phrases supposedly refer to laws in  the Bible? That puzzles
me, because such  unequivocal statements imply that there is no  debate on
the meaning of Bible passages within the  church and in academia. Nothing
could be further  from the truth.
     Take, for example, Leviticus 18:19-23, which is  often referred to by
those purporting to interpret  "God's will." These passages could be argued
to be  part of a strategy of repopulation during the  postexilic period of
Israel's history, and  involved outlawing activity that would lead to
 "wasted sperm" not involved in reproduction. This  could be why verse 19
speaks to prohibiting sex  with one's wife during her menstrual period and
 why verse 23 prohibits bestiality.
     Does this mean that verse 22, which prohibits a  man lying with a male,
is speaking of intercourse  and not the homosexual lifestyle? This could also
 explain why lesbians are not mentioned in this  text, since sperm is not
involved in their sexual  practices.
     Are the Cobb ministers really asking the  commission to endorse a 6th
century B.C.  repopulation strategy? If so, why not also  prohibit sex during
menstruation, since that too  is part of the Leviticus text?
 In fact, why stop there? Why not advocate rewriting the adultery laws for
Cobb County to be  in line with the biblical understanding of  adultery,
which is consensual sex between a  married or engaged woman with a man other
than her  spouse, as Leviticus 18:20 and Deuteronomy 22:22-  24 proclaim? For
you see, as defined by the Hebrew  Bible, a married man having sex with an
unattached  woman is not adultery.
     But why stop at adultery? The ministers ought  to push commissioners to
change the laws regarding  rape to be in line with biblical law, as spelled
 out in Deuteronomy 22:28-29, where the penalty for  rape is to pay her
father a dowry, marry her and never be able to divorce her.
     Similarly, why isn't Cobb County following the  Bible's clear
instructions to impose capital  punishment for all adulterers and for women
who  marry and are discovered later not to be virgins,  as Deuteronomy
22:13-22 demands?
     If the Cobb ministers don't advocate all of  these measures, then their
claim of being  "scripturally correct" on the matter of sexuality  loses its
force. Rather, they appear to be  singling out one group for oppression. In
so  doing, they leave themselves open to the charge of  quoting Scriptures to
suit their own purposes.
     So what should the Cobb ministers do with those passages of Scriptures
that lead them to condemn the gay lifestyle?
     Well, they can do what they appear to do with  the injunction to pluck
out their right eye if it  causes them to sin (Matthew 5:29): Ignore it, or
 say it doesn't really mean what it says, for it  has a spiritual and not
literal meaning.
     Failing that, the Cobb ministers can take a  lesson from the black
religious tradition, which  says the injunction, "Slaves be obedient to your
 master" (Ephesians 6:5), may be in the Bible, but  it's not scriptural. Or,
the Cobb ministers could  follow feminist theologians who debunk patriarchy
 in the Scriptures.
   As a black male whose people have experienced racism in its most vicious
forms -- often  rationalized by appeal to Bible verses called out  of and in
context -- I have decried such  biblicism. My sisters of all races have
 experienced sexism justified by appeal to  patriarchal biblical injunctions.
I have decried  such injustice.
     In the same manner, I can do no less than decry  oppression of gays and
lesbians who are part of my  family as children of God.
      Randy Bailey is an associate professor of Old  Testament and Hebrew at
the Interdenominational  Theological Center in Atlanta.