Where Are the Pro-LGBT Religious Voices in Mainstream Media?

[kwassa]

38. Many gay Christians disagree with your viewpoint, as do many other Christians.

There is much dispute about the translation of some of the words in the King James version.

Here is a long and interesting essay on the subject.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibi.htm

A small excerpt:

The Bible's six "clobber" passages:

Two of the six texts, one in Hebrew and one in Greek, clearly condemn certain specific homosexual acts:

Men attempting to engage in bestiality -- sexual acts with another species (Jude 1-7), and

Heterosexuals who engage in homosexual acts which are against their essential nature (Romans 1:26-27).

Interpretations of four additional "clobber" texts differ among Christians: Religious progressives have often interpreted these passages as condemning men who sexually abuse boys, men who engage in homosexual ritual sex in Pagan temples, men attempting anal rape, etc. They view the Bible as being silent on sexual behavior within a consensual, monogamous committed homosexual relationship.

For example, they might identify the sin of the men of Sodom as explained in Genesis 19 as attempting to rape strangers as an act of humiliation. Alternatively, they might quote other biblical passages mentioning Sodom to show that the main sin of that city was their uncharitable behavior towards strangers, and their uncaring conduct towards the poor, the widows, and needy.

Religious conservatives often interpret all of the Biblical passages that touch on same-sex activity as condemning homosexuality in all its forms.

Edit to add a critique of the translation of Romans:

http://epistle.us/hbarticles/clobber2.html

BISEXUALITY AS A NORM IN ROME – The final major passage is Romans 1:26-27, where Paul writes, "even [the pagan] women did change [NIV: 'exchange'] the natural use into that which is against nature [para phusin]: [27] And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another [doing unseemly things and] receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet." (The "recompense" here may refer to the pagans' general downward slide, to venereal disease, or [as Philo suggested] to sterility.) Right from the start, three important observations should be noted : (1) This passage is about heterosexuals – and therefore has nothing to do with those with a homosexual orientation. These persons were fully able to enjoy heterosexual passion and pleasure, but then they turned to indulge also in same-sex activities. As John Chrysostom noted in a 4th century sermon on this passage, "Only those possessing something can change it." (2) This passage, in its larger context, is about God-rejecters – and therefore has nothing to do with GLBTs who have been Christian their whole lives but still also have always known that they are "different." (3) This passage is about lust (brothel pickups, back-alley sex, and the like) – and therefore has nothing to do with homosexual love, devotion, and commitment or to GLBT people who would like to find a companion and a long-term relationship. The focus of this passage, then, is narrowly fixed on certain negative aspects of sex, that can, in some cases, characterize both heterosexuals and homosexuals. This is the first (and only) mention of “lesbians” in the Bible (although in ancient times everyone was married or was expected to marry), probably introduced because Paul wishes to show that both genders need to experience God's grace (just as do the pagans and the Jews).

I got an entire analysis from another source that disagrees that lesbianism is even being referenced.