Any Christian who blames their homophobia on the Bible either 1) hasn’t read the New Testament, or 2) is incapable of understanding it.

Anonymous wrote:Christian condemnation of homosexual behavior did not materialize out of the ectoplasm in 1946.

+1. I'm affirming Christian, my own denomination and parish both perform same-sex marriages, and my priest is a woman married to a woman. I think there are ways of being affirming while also taking scripture seriously, but I also think these attempts to make Christian opposition to homosexuality late in time and grounded purely in a particular word here or there make the problem seem much simpler than it is. John Chrysostom was writing in the 300s about how men having sex with each other is a worse sin than murder. Aquinas crafted a Christian sexual ethic that condemned homosexuality without any reference to the passage talked about here at all. Romans 1 does get a mention, but I don't think it's particularly crucial to his argument. Luther said homosexuality was of the devil, and none of these Christians were influenced by an English translation from the 1940s. Arguments like this feel like a sort of "Catholic Bishops hate him! Rid Christianity of its homophobic history with this one weird trick!" when the problem is actually much deeper than that and demands a more serious response.

Anonymous wrote:OP, just want to say thanks for starting this conversation!

-- another Christian who's all for acceptance

OP - 😀🌈❤️

Anonymous wrote:Probably. I think many American Christians don’t fully understand that the Bible is actually composed of multiple documents written at multiple times from multiple perspectives— that was then translated into English hundreds of years ago by people embedded in a particular culture and language which the translation reflects. While I’m thinking KJV, I think the overall issues related to translation of very old documents from very different cultures is worth considering with respect to other translations as well.

OP

Yes and that some translations were translations themselves from Aramaic, Hebrew or Greek.

That is why historical context is important - and looking for underlying transcendent truths. Agree with PP on the command to love others as ourselves (that together with loving God, fullfills all OT laws) - and to not judge.

It really is unfortunate that homophobia is held up as a sign of piety by some Christians.

Genesis 19 has incest (daughters sleep with their father) and we don't accept that.

Seems to me we shouldn't take the bible so literally. Jesus taught to love everyone. That should include homosexuals.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2019&version=KJV

Probably. I think many American Christians don’t fully understand that the Bible is actually composed of multiple documents written at multiple times from multiple perspectives— that was then translated into English hundreds of years ago by people embedded in a particular culture and language which the translation reflects. While I’m thinking KJV, I think the overall issues related to translation of very old documents from very different cultures is worth considering with respect to other translations as well.

Christian condemnation of homosexual behavior did not materialize out of the ectoplasm in 1946.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That was a weak argument. Clearly she's grasping based on her own life.

I say this as someone who does believe that the Bible should be looked at from a cultural and historical lens, rather than at face value.

OP - maybe that is so but am waiting to see the documentary to see how well the case is argued.

There is a lot of other academic work to support more tolerance for homosexuality.

Yes cultural and historical context is essential for interpreting scriptures.

I do think the level of conservative contempt for homosexuality is misguided and unhelpful.

PP here. I don't disagree. Jesus was about love, not hate.

But, this person is reaching.

The reason why God did not tolerate homosexuality has to do with the pagans who practiced it. Everything in the OT is about how God's chosen people need to set themselves apart from the Pagan culture. The practice of homosexuality is one such aspect.

Having stated that: a sin is a sin, and Jesus talked more about greed than sexual sin, yet we have so many so-called Christians who care more about money than anything else. Jesus certainly never told people to stone sinners, whether figuratively or literally. Quite the opposite, in fact.

But as to this person's argument, it's reaching.

Anonymous wrote:https://www.1946themovie.com

Not sure if we can buy tickets now the film festivals are over.

It had great reviews .

It looks like you can still buy it for $12.95, and then you have a week to start, then 48 hours to finish. It also looks like it won't be on sale forever. I'm going to purchase it.

-- Christian

OP, just want to say thanks for starting this conversation!

-- another Christian who's all for acceptance

ADAM ERICKSEN
Introduction: Unlearning Christian Homophobia

https://www.ravenfoundation.org/unlearning-christian-homophobia/

In this guide, we will explore the following topics:
* The Radical Inclusion of the Early Church
* Sodom and Gomorrah Is Not about Homosexaulity
* What about Leviticus? Part 1: Temple Prostitution
* What About Leviticus? Part 2: My Bacon-Eating and Polyester-Wearing Lifestyle Is a Choice
* Did Jesus Believe Marriage Is Between a Man and a Woman?
* Romans 1 Does Not Condemn LGBTQ Folks. But Romans 2 Does Condemn Judging LGBTQ Folks.
* The Misuse of Paul, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, and the Heterosexual Agenda
* The Biblical Rainbow Is the Perfect Symbol for the LGBTQ Community

Anonymous wrote:That was a weak argument. Clearly she's grasping based on her own life.

I say this as someone who does believe that the Bible should be looked at from a cultural and historical lens, rather than at face value.

OP - maybe that is so but am waiting to see the documentary to see how well the case is argued.

There is a lot of other academic work to support more tolerance for homosexuality.

Yes cultural and historical context is essential for interpreting scriptures.

I do think the level of conservative contempt for homosexuality is misguided and unhelpful.

https://www.1946themovie.com

Not sure if we can buy tickets now the film festivals are over.

It had great reviews .

That was a weak argument. Clearly she's grasping based on her own life.

I say this as someone who does believe that the Bible should be looked at from a cultural and historical lens, rather than at face value.

This recent doc makes sense to me. I am a straight Christian but value being part of a welcoming inclusive church. Jesus had nothing to say about homosexuality, many historians believe ast Owul’s condemnation was referring to ancient Roman practice of older men exploiting young boys (pedophilia) rather than homosexuality between consenting adults. The oft quoted Leviticus scriptures were in context of seemly conduct for the Temple - and if the reference to homosexuality being an abomination were a mistranslation, that makes sense to me.

We are all made in God’s image.

Did Christian homophobia come from a mistranslation of the Bible?

https://amp.theguardian.com/film/2023/dec/01/christian-homophobia-bible-mistranslation-1946-documentary

A new documentary challenges an alleged 1946 mistranslation that helped lead to a justification for Christian anti-gayness
Vivian Ho
Fri 1 Dec 2023

What if all the anti-gay, homophobic rhetoric that has come from the Christian right over these past few decades was rooted in a mistranslation of the Bible?
In the documentary, 1946: The Mistranslation that Shifted Culture, researchers and scholars delve into the 1946 mistranslation of 1 Corinthians 6:9 and explore how it fuelled the Christian anti-gay movement that still thrives today.