[eDebate] RE: God and homosexuality

Thu May 20 20:13:39 CDT 2004

I'll try to address this in order.  You are right, Genesis 2:24 does say a man and a woman.  However, the fact that Jacob had two wives and is considered an extremely important patriarch in both the Jewish and Christian traditions, and the fact that G-d never got mad at Jacob for this, suggests that it was, at least at that time, acceptable to G-d for polygamous relationships to exist.  Also, the later passage you quote seems to suggest that divorce is basically adultery, but that has never been Jewish law and I doubt very many Christians would support that view anymore either. Remember that I don't believe any of the New Testament stuff, so talking about Jesus in response to what I say isn't appropriate really.  Divorce is and has always been acceptable to Jews as far as I know.

Next is the argument that values don't change over time.  Of course they do, and that's as they should.  If the Bible is to be believed literally, G-d made a mistake with the Great Flood and apologized to Noah and made a pledge that He wouldn't do that again!  That's not an all-knowing and never-mistaken deity but rather one just as fallible as we are.  That's the Jewish G-d anyway, maybe the Christian one is more perfect.  Also, in older times womyn were considered inferior to men, which is in fact a value judgement.  The Christian Bible even says so straight out!  That has been remedied, and I think that is as it should be.  

Next is the claim that I said Christians disregarded all Old Testament laws.  Not so, they just pick and choose which ones to follow.  As I said before, Christians don't follow the dietary laws laid out in Leviticus, and I don't think Jesus ever specifically said not to.  Why pick the law on homosexuality to follow?  And, in the Jewish tradition no one is born in sin nor is it inevitable that people will.  So I really don't understand what that has to do with anything.  Claiming that sin is inevitable violates the doctrine of free will completely, as everyone has a choice all the time whether to do the right thing or not.  
Oh yeah, the animal sacrifice in the Old Testament is not in fact indicative of Jesus in any way, it was a sin offering just like gentile sin offerings of the time.  Jews take responsibility for their actions and so do not ask someone else to die for them.

Finally, I agree that desire does not imply legitimacy or lack of sinfulness.  But the G-d that I worship is one of love, and anything that makes the world a better place would get a stamp of approval.  When two people love each other and wish to ritualize and make permanent their relationship, often with the intent of having or adopting children, that is an unqualifiedly good thing that makes the world happier.  

Melissa

Steve Trask <trasksteve at hotmail.com> wrote:

>Ok, minor things first. Leaving aside the question of the existence of 
>G-d, G-d did not in fact create marriage as a monogamous relationship, but 
>rather a polygamous one in which one man married several wives and could 
>sleep with the wives' servants if he so chose. Only later did this 
>relationship become one man and one woman.

I do not think this is necessarily correct. You are correct that in the Old 
Testament there are many examples of people engaging in polygamous 
relationships, but there is never any specific endorsement of those 
practices. In Genesis 2:24 is says, "24 For this reason a man will leave 
his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one 
flesh." this seems to indicate to me that God's purpose since the 
insitution of marriage at the time of creation was for it to be a monogomous 
insitution. And from a Christian perspective in the New Testament, Jesus 
further clarifies this passage when he says, ""Moses permitted a man to 
write a certificate of divorce and send her away." 5"It was because your 
hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied. 6"But at the 
beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.'[1] 7'For this reason 
a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife,[2] 8and 
the two will become one flesh.'[3] So they are no longer two, but one. 
9Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate." 10When they 
were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. 11He 
answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits 
adultery against her. 12And if she divorces her husband and marries another 
man, she commits adultery." This seems to indicate that marriage is to be 
limited to one partner and having more than one partner is adultery except 
after death of the partner.

>I am from the Jewish tradition, not Christian, so I don't really know what 
>the New Testament says about a lot of things. However, the Biblical 
>injunctions against homosexuality come from Leviticus 18:22, at least 
>that's the only place I found them. The verse is pretty specific- "Do not 
>lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence." However, 
>there are lots of things in both the Old and New Testaments that have been 
>found to be outdated and I believe this to be one of them. Judaism has 
>always found that traditions and values change over time, that's why there 
>is a multi-volume set of commentary on commentary on commentary on the 
>Torah. Modern Judaism, at least outside of the Orthodox community, is 
>accepting of homosexuality as the way people are. Homosexuality is not a 
>sin because it is not a choice but an integral part of who a human being 
>is, while committing a sin implies choice to do evil over good.

I do not think that there is any evidence that homosexuality is genetically 
determined. I have no doubt that social or environmental factors can 
influence homosexuality, but I do not think that makes it morally 
acceptable. The idea that traditions and values change over time concerns 
me a little and seems to be inconsistent with a belief in God. If God is an 
all knowing transcendent being that reveals himself to the world through the 
scriptures, why should the moral law need to change? That would seem to be 
an indication that God messed up, which does not seem possible with an all 
knowing and perfect God.

>Also, most Christians disregard most of the rules of the Old Testament, 
>including the dietary laws, by claiming that the New Testament overrules 
>that. Since Jesus does not say anything against homosexuality, why would 
>Christians go back to the Old Testament for that rule? Why not ignore it 
>like they do most other Old Testament rules?

Christians do not disregard the Old Testament law. They see Christ as being 
a fulfillment of the Old Testament law. For example, traditions in the 
Jewish law like animal sacrafice were a symbol for the future blood 
sacrafice that would come through the atonement of Christ for the sins of 
the world on the cross. Therefore, animal sacrafice was no longer necessary 
because Christ was a fulfillment of that tradition. In regard to the 
elements of the moral law, Christians do not see Christ as abolishing these 
either. For example, it says in the old testament "thou shall not steal." 
Christians still believe that it is wrong to steal. However, they also 
believe that it is inevitable that everyone because of the sin condition 
will violate the law, and therefore, will be deserving of punishment for 
violation of the law. The justification provided by Jesus Christ is 
necessary for salvation because Christ took the penalty for the sins of the 
world upon himself by dying on the cross. Therefore, the moral law still 
stands, but there is salvation through Christ for all who inevitably violate 
the law.

>Another thing. If G-d does in fact exist and did in fact create people "in 
>His image", why would he allow homosexuals to exist? The fact that some 
>people are attracted to others of the same gender would suggest that G-d 
>does not in fact find that idea offensive.

God did create all people in his image. But he did not create people to be 
Gay. As I stated above, I do not think homosexuality is genetically 
determined. The fact that some people are attracted to people of the same 
gender definitely does not prove that homosexuality is acceptable. There 
are many things that people have a desire to do. Some people desire to 
commit adultery, some people desire to rob banks, and some people desire to 
lie. This desire to sin is a product of the sin condition. The mere fact 
that people desire to engage in immoral acts does not mean that God is 
endorsing the immoral acts.

>Just a few thoughts,
>
>Melissa Litwin
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70/year

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page ? FREE 
download! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/

_______________________________________________
eDebate mailing list
eDebate at ndtceda.com
To subscribe, UNSUBSCRIBE, and see the subscriber list, go here:
http://ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70/year
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20040520/18117442/attachment.html 