Thread by @JoLuehmann

Ok, let’s keep on educating so we all have tools to stand up to those who weaponize the Bible against people.

This is part II addressing LGBTQ+ people and their divinity and leadership inside the church.

A thread

(1)

Part I on proselytizing here.
(2)

https://twitter.com/JoLuehmann/status/1276156875172610049

We start with Matthew 19:4-6 (though the graphic only adds vs 5)

(3)

This verse was said by Jesus in the context of divorce. Let us pause there for a min and think about that. This has nothing to do, NOTHING to do w/homosexuality. This is about divorce.
(4)

And of course he would say marriage is between a man and a woman in the context of divorce, marriage didn’t exist but in the context of man and woman, and marriage was a business agreement more so than a romantic endeavor at the time.
(5)

That doesn’t mean whatsoever that LGBTQ+ people are not made in the perfect image of God or that Jesus was condemning them at all. Jesus says nothing about homosexuality. You’d think he would if it was such an important thing.
(6)

Moreover, the word homosexual cannot be found in the Bible at all, it appeared in English Bibles only beginning in 1946 (the story of why that change was made is interesting and long and you should google it, because someone paid for this!).
(7)

There are Greek words to signal same-sex relationships and yet they aren’t used at all in the NT. The words used in the Bible are ἀρσενοκοίτης (arsenokoites) and μαλακός (Malakos),

(8)

which would be more appropriately translated as pederasty and pedophilia (or a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man). Which we can all agree is wrong in every possible way. Remember children can’t give consent, non-consensual sex is always rape. Rape is always wrong. (9)

There are many books and articles on this on the link in my bio under LGBTQ+ and Christianity.

And this all falls under Queer Theology, which is awesome, and fun, and insightful, and one of the avenues through which we decolonize theology.

But I digress...
(10)

Now let’s take a look at Lev 18:22 and Levi 20:13. Hebrew has 3 word for man: אִישׁ ('iysh), זָכָר (zakar), and גֶּבֶר (geber). And those verses look different in Hebrew than they do in English where it seems to simply imply male homosexual relationships are an abomination*
(11)

Hold this thought. We are coming back. But first...

It is worth noting here that female homosexual relations are not mentioned at all in the OT and the only place where ppl claim there is a mention in the NT is Romans 1:26-27 and the reference is to unnatural relations**,
(12)

which is not the same as consensual, lesbian relationships.

We’ll talk more about this when we cover sex positivity, but per Levitical sexual ethics, unnatural relationships or violations entail: incest, intercourse during menstruation, adultery, child sacrifice,
(13)

male-male anal rape, and bestiality. The Bible allows however for: raping women, lesbian sex, sex before marriage, polygamy, sex slavery, and a whole bunch of other things. Which is why the Bible SHOULD NOT be a book we use for sexual ethics.
(14)

Back to Leviticus and homosexuality, now we have to break these 2 verses down and see how interesting they are:

Lev 18:22 - You shall not lie with a male (זָכָר - zakar), as with a woman. It is an abomination.
(15)

Lev 20:13 - If a man ('iysh) lies with a male (זָכָר - zakar), as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination.

So what is זָכָר (zakar)? Why use two different words for man if it’s just sex between two men?
(16)

Well זָכָר (zakar) means male, young boys, mankind… many words in Hebrew have many different meanings. This one has different meanings and we get to decide which meaning we are going to go with based on context and cultural/historical understanding.
(17)

If we read the entire ch and book I’d argue it is talking about abuse of power. Women had less power over men in the time, men didn’t get to lie with other *men* (the change in word is significant here), as they lie with women.
(18)

So basically no male rape where anal penetration happened. Other type of male rape was allowed though 🥴 (the Bible is NOT a book to follow on sexual ethics)
(19)

Of course you don’t have to read it that way and instead assert the change in word is not significant at all and this is talking about no sex with men ever. And that would be you trying to hold unto your homophobia by using the Bible to excuse it.
(20)

So here we have to make a parenthesis again to speak about what using the Lord’s name in vain is:

Cursing – Wishing harm upon another
Swearing – Making promises we don’t intend to keep
Using the Lord’s name in vain – empty religion, using the name of God to harm another.
(21)

With this understanding let’s finish this up

LGBTQ+ people are made in the image of God. No caveats. No buts. No maybes. They are divine because God made them all in their perfect image.
(22)

If the church listened to LGBTQ+ ppl (which is leading), the church would learn a lot and be a safer space for all people. But instead the church decided to call LGBTQ+ ppl sinners based on verses taken out of context, and by doing so the church has caused
(23)

serious complex trauma upon way too many ppl. That’s a way to weaponize the Bible to harm others. Harm in the name of God is using the Lord’s name in vain. And yet another reason why it’s important to understand the Bible is NOT the word of God. But more on that in a few days.

I made a mistake. I apologize. Thank you @TeresaCree