An Abomination...Say What?

Leviticus contains the most straight forward references when it comes to verses about same-sex sexual relations. These verses specifically mention how the people of Israel are not to have same-sex relations with one another because it is an abomination. In Leviticus 18 it states, “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination” (18: 22) and Leviticus 20 reiterates that, “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them.” (20: 13) These two verses have been read literally as stand alone verses, as often happens with the book of Leviticus. It is because of these verses being taken alone, that the context that these verses were written in has been ignored. 

When we read Leviticus 18: 21 and 20: 1-2, we can see that the context of these acts being an abomination is in relation to the worship of Molech. Here God is saying that you are not to do these things because this is how the nations around you enact worship of their false gods. When we turn to the word that is used here for abomination (toebah), we can see its usage amongst the rest of the Old Testament as well. Throughout the Old Testament, toebah is used approximately 117 times and of these occurrences, 87 times it is translated as a combination of abominable, abomination or abominations. When you look at these other instances where these translations of toebah occur one will notice that the majority of the time it is in relation to the Israelites committing idolatry in some way, shape or form. When we take this into account, we need to now ask, why is same-sex relationships an abomination before the Lord? Is God condemning these actions because they are associated with the worship of Molech, or is God setting a standard for past, present, and future? It is easy to assume that God is saying all same-sex relations are bad, but in the historical and cultural context that these verses are written in, God is specifically mentioning same-sex relations because it has been used in Canaanite worship. 

In Old Testament Law for Christians, Roy Gane discusses how these verses have no interpretive problems but he neglects to discuss how these verses are connected to the verses around them, as well as how they may be connected to the worship of Molech. Gane then discusses how the New Testament also offers condemnation of homosexuality and therefore, these verses are intact and relevant for us today. He does note, however, that the consequence of stoning is no longer relevant, but does not discuss why. Instead he interpreted half of the verse as prescriptive, then employs a different set of hermeneutical principles to interpret the last half. This inconsistency is what will harm the LGBTQ+ community. He also then states that there is a difference between homosexual tendencies and actual homosexual acts which often happens for those who are trying to be ‘loving' but firm. (Gane, Old Testament Law, 361-5) This ‘loving but not affirming’ stance that is propagated by mainstream evangelicals is an interesting one. They try to draw a distinction between orientation and action but in doing so they are creating a somewhat false dichotomy. Instead they should be delving into the cultural, historical and linguistic background to these verses. They neglect the idea of male sacral prostitution altogether, and equate verses that may be referencing ungodly worship and equating it to discussing private, non-sacral homosexuality. This is the premise for the LGBTQ+ liberation theology that authors such as Richard Cleaver and George Edwards are trying to promote. 

Instead of using these two verses to condemn committed same-sex relationships, we need to ask ourselves if this what the levitical law is actually talking about? All of the same-sex couples I have met are not engaging in same-sex behaviour as a form of sacral worship, but as an expression of love and intimacy between themselves—in the same way that straight couples do. Far too often, and I would say the majority of the time, same-sex couples are only seen as a sexual thing—negating their passions, gifts, abilities and personhood. Are we allowing people, many of whom have cried out for change or sought orientation change, to become the ‘Other’ in our Churches? These simple two verses are used to dehumanize and negate the lived experiences of real human beings. People who are someone’s son or daughter, someone’s loved one. The Church needs to stand up to its own systems of oppression and fight for those they have pushed to the margins. This includes the homeless, the poor, the orphan, the widow and LGBTQ+ persons.

Bibliography

Brownson, James V. Bible, Gender, Sexuality: Reframing the Church's Debate on Same-Sex Relationships. Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub., 2013. 

Cleaver, Richard. Know My Name: A Gay Liberation Theology. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1995. 

Edwards, George R. Gay/Lesbian Liberation: A Biblical Perspective. New York: Pilgrim Press, 1984. 

Gane, Roy. Old Testament Law for Christians: Original Context and Enduring Application. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, a Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2017. 

Gushee, David P. Changing Our Mind. Kindle ed. Canton, MI: Read The Spirit Books, an Imprint of David Crum Media, LCC, 2017. 

Lee, Justin. Torn: Rescuing the Gospel from the Gays-vs.-Christians Debate. New York: Jericho Books, 2013.