Anti-Queer Christian Arguments

In the current debate over homosexuality, the Bible has very little to say at all— though you certainly would not know it from listening to many church leaders, both fundamentalist and mainline. In this case especially, the use of claims to biblical authority for supporting textually tenuous positions is manifestly apparent. At the most generous estimate, the entire Bible contains only nine brief references to homoeroticism, six in the Hebrew Bible and three in the New Testament, occupying in all less than twelve verses of text. And even those numbers are misleading, since four of the references in the Hebrew Bible… may actually simply be prohibitions against prostitution by men and women and two of the references in the New Testament… are based on interpretations of Greek words whose exact meanings are actually unknown or unclear. This leaves two references in the Holiness Code of Leviticus… and Paul’s one assertion in Romans as to what he thinks is “natural” and “unnatural” (the only citation in the Bible that even mentions female homoeroticism, if that is indeed what it is about) as the sole biblical witness for a modern Christian rejection of homosexuality. Jesus in the gospels says absolutely nothing about the subject…
—Mary Ann Tolbert

Let’s also consider that the 2 remaining references in Leviticus are among many other prohibitions that we blatantly disregard in light of the New Covenant through Jesus. Unless you’re also upholding Sabbath laws, purity laws regarding periods and ejaculation, and Kosher food laws, among many others, don’t selectively claim that business.

Since that leaves us with one remaining quotation from Romans, let us consider that Paul’s ideas of what is natural and unnatural are derived from understandings of gender roles. He suggests it is unnatural for women to be dominant or men to be submissive, as he sees as a requirement for the act. Are we willing to accept these views of gender roles as part of adopting this last attempt at biblical support for anti-homosexual views? Additionally, even if we can accept those gender roles, we have to consider again, “natural” and “unnatural.” Animals in nature practice homosexuality. What do we make of that? Animals aren’t capable of sin, are they? Why would God create homosexual animals?

Bible-based anti-homosexual perspectives are ones that give preferential treatment to those Biblical passages which are vastly outnumbered by other prohibitive themes and require specific translation uses to even suggest that they are, indeed, prohibitive of homosexuality. Such passages are tenuous and overwhelmed by other, contrary Biblical themes which have far more textual support than the maximum of nine passages that folks claim, but which we can see should dwindle to a singular passage that must elevate Paul to the paramount voice of Biblical authority. Such a treatment of the Bible necessarily gives selective authority to an extremely small section of the scripture in such a way that it is completely indefensible and validates one’s own worldview (or the worldview of folks in power in your religious institution). Claiming anti-gay rights perspectives as religiously justified is hypocritical. People like to claim the Bible as justification because it validates preconceptions and fears that are perpetuated in certain circles, just like the Bible was used to support oppressing women and minorities. Anyway…