Watchtower views on Homosexuality

by ttm1988 29 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • openmindnow
    openmindnow

    I had a conversation with my wife, an active JW. We talked about changes in the Org we see on the horizon ("New Light"); yep she had the conversation with me and seemed to enjoy the topic.

    I live in California and like New York, and Massachusetts, California is in the forefront of sexual orientation equality rights. Some of the big changes in this area will be the illegal treatment of persons based on there sexual orientation in areas not related to "work" or "housing" which are already legislated against discrimination, an example of what I writing about would be marriage, financial (i.e. banking, wills) and medical decisions (i.e. same sex spousal visits in critical care wings of hospitals).

    Here is were the rubber is going to hit the road for the WTBTS, imagine if you can for a moment if you heard that a brother and sister in good standing were DF'ed for getting married because one was black and one was white. That did happen to witnesses, now ask yourself could that happen today. NO, so what's going to happen in a few years, say in California when two brothers get married in a civil wedding and then show back up at the KH on Sunday? If the only reason they are DF'ed is because there "GAY", all hell is going to break lose in the courts, you can bet that's coming!

  • jworld
    jworld

    Searill,

    Yes I was addressing your comments. They are common and the reason is most people read the bible in an effort to find scriptures that support what they know, or their own biases. That is called eisegesis and its been talked about quite extensively on here.

    The bible’s internal culture is totally foreign to us at this point. Slavery, weird marriage arrangements the list goes on and on.

    Everyone assumes the apostle Paul was a rabid homophobe. But we have to look at the culture of the time to try to understand what he was talking about.

    Aside from Romans, the only other New Testament reference to homosexuality occurs in two passages known as "vice lists," in which Paul casually mentions the "arsenokoitai" as a group of sinners. People spend a lot of time debating about the translation of this word, because it appears only rarely in ancient writings. Even the translators of the NIV couldn't seem to make up their minds about it; it's translated as "homosexual offenders" in 1 Corinthians, but as "perverts" in 1 Timothy.

    The word arsenokoitai is a compound word in Greek, and the parts of the word make reference to "male" and "bed," which indicates that this word probably referred to some kind of male homosexual behavior. The same Greek words ("male" and "bed") appear in the Greek translation of the Leviticus passage I'm going to discuss in a moment, which tells men not to lie ("bed") with a man ("male"), giving support to this theory. On the other hand, we must be careful not to assume too much; Greek compound words don't always mean what they might appear to mean. "Cyclops" in Greek is a compound word literally meaning "round eye," but we know from ancient literature that a cyclops was a mythical giant man having only one eye - which makes sense once we get the connection, but isn't something we could have figured out without all the literary references.

    Still, I think that it's fairly safe to assume that the arsenokoitai of Paul's day were men engaging in some kind of homosexual behavior. But what kind of behavior? That's pretty much impossible to know for sure. Whatever it is, it would have to be something fairly common and well-known to Paul's audience; these are very short lists of common sinners (e.g. thieves, greedy, liars, etc.) everyone would be readily acquainted with. The most likely explanation is that Paul is referring to a practice that was fairly common in the Greek culture of his day - married men who had sex with male youths on the side.

    The extramarital relationships of men with boys in ancient Greece are infamous even today. Archaeological and literary evidence prove that these relationships were common for centuries in Greece, though they were frowned upon by many even while they were publicly practiced. This would make a perfect target for Paul's vice lists, and it would explain why, in both lists, he mentions the sin of the arsenokoitai separately after he mentions adultery - because technically, by Greek thought, having a boy on the side wasn't adultery.

  • Blind_Of_Lies
    Blind_Of_Lies

    The fact that gay marriage doesn't appear in the bible doesn't mean it condems it.

    Ahhhh and therein lies the catch.

    Premarital sex of *any* kind is an offence punishable by shunning. Certainly any sort of Homosexual erotic activity would be included in this. Currently a handful of states allow same sex marriage and they have done this by discounting the bible’s teaching of marriage being between a man and a woman and approving this union. The federal government in the US still does not recognize those marriages, in fact married gay couples still have to file as single on their federal income tax.

    Beyond whatever biblical reason they have for not liking gays… they can stand behind the law and wrap that up with their moratorium on any sort of sexual contact between non married people.

    I have heard of openly gay men being witnesses but claiming they live a life of celibacy. They are given absolutely no “privileges” and I actually think they are not allowed to go out in service as well. I could be wrong about the service thing. JW’s look at gays as if they were mentally ill.

    However… I’m sure anyone who spent time at Bethel has some stories….

  • blondie
    blondie

    I was in a congregation where a gay man studied, was baptized. The understanding was that while he might feel an attraction to men he would not practice or live in that "lifestyle." Eventually he married and was appointed an MS and later an elder.

    I was told by several Bethel elders that homosexuality was a worse sin than adultery or murder, that it was a GROSS sin. Like the punishment under the Law was different, execution; like God would resurrect the person and kill them twice or tear them asunder.

    I also know a brother who eventually was appointed an elder, served several years, and then realized he had to leave and married a man. The holy spirit missed on that appointment.

    What is in print in the WT publications is not always found in practice in individual jws.

  • No Room For George
    No Room For George

    I was told by several Bethel elders that homosexuality was a worse sin than adultery or murder, that it was a GROSS sin. Like the punishment under the Law was different, execution; like God would resurrect the person and kill them twice or tear them asunder.

    This is interesting to me because I've heard elders say, and it's also my personal belief that, being that homosexuality is not mentioned as much as adultery and fornication, it can't necessarily be worse than the other two, or even other sin. It's all sin, and falling short of God's commandments. 1 Cor 6 immediately comes to mind where Paul talks about a variety of sins, and nowhere does he imply that any one sin worse than the other sin.

  • Blind_Of_Lies
    Blind_Of_Lies

    blondie- I actually know a guy who did the same thing. He was gay, studdied, got dunked, got married, had 3 sons... 2 of them are openly gay the third is maybe 10 years old now.

  • Searril
    Searril

    jworld, thank you for your response. What you wrote is what I have read on other sites regarding this issue, so I assumed it was where you were going, but I wanted to make sure before commenting.

    While I have read that argument before and on the surface it does appear to have some merit (I have not researched it extensively to gauge exactly how much merit it does have), I am struck by this:

    Aside from Romans

    Which is where I was afraid the issue would end. I haven't yet seen an argument for why the comments in Romans may mean anything other than the typically accepted meaning.

    For the record, I should state that I'm one of those rare Christians who just doesn't care about homosexuality. I'm not "liberal" in my Christianity by any other measure that one would typically use, but I just cannot ever find it in myself to care whether someone is gay or not (although I will never support or make excuses for the whackos who dress up in diapers in pride parades or act flamboyantly). I have wondered if I will be judged harshly by God for not having a stronger aversion to it when I see it. I honestly just don't know.

    But if there is information that could lead me to believe the traditional view of homosexuality is incorrect, then I would really like to see it even if just to give myself peace of mind for not hating it. But all explanations seem to always fall flat in the face of Romans, which has so far lead me to the inescapable conclusion that I am wrong.

    I hope you understand why I was asking.

  • jworld
    jworld

    Searill,

    I haven't yet seen an argument for why the comments in Romans may mean anything other than the typically accepted meaning.

    How do you know the past thinkers that came up with the "currently accepted meaning" are correct? They have been wrong about so much. That's why we see the problems we do in the organizations these people ended up creating.

    I guess my question is how do you get around the other cultural references in the bible? Held up literally against our current world culture the bible is a whacked out book full of crazy stories that on the surface would have no application today.

  • Disillusioned Lost-Lamb
    Disillusioned Lost-Lamb

    The contemporary bible is a compilation of books chosen by men for what the catholic church wanted to further it's cause; it doesn't have all the answers.

    The WTBT$ is doing the same thing by handpicking scriptures to fit it's view of homosexuality and further it's cause.

    While bible thumpers rake the LGBT community over the coals by using a few loose scriptures, they neglect to acknowledge that homosexuality has been around since the dawn of man. They also don't mention that, until the last few centuries or so, homosexuality was a widely accepted part of many cultures. Why do you think that is?

  • mP
    mP

    But David was screwing Jonathan and we also have the scripture of Samuel fooling around naked all night with King Saul. We also have the case where Abraham asks his man servant to grab his dick while making an oath to get a wife from thehomeland for Isaac. I always wondered why brothers didnt make promises this way, it sounds so efficient.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit