not-so-golden rules

After I read this story about an airline worker making an anti-gay announcement over the public address system at the airport, it occurred to me how utterly ridiculous it is to base one's modern sense of moral judgment on a code that was written over 3,000 years ago for a tribe of Jews living in the desert. What exasperates me is not the code itself but the selective manner in which we apply it. This is not a new problem. However, the most cursory glance at the Bible destroys any argument as to its ultimate moral authority and I am becoming intolerant of hearing it cited to justify mere personal prejudices. Here's what I mean.

1) It is the unfortunate stance of the Christian religion that either the Bible is either true or it's not. If you are Christian, you must accept the Bible as the ultimate God-authored authority. If you do not, you cannot be a Christian. If you are to call yourself a Christian, it is unmitigated doctrine that no selective reading is allowed--you are not allowed to claim one passage in the Bible is truth and another is not.

2) Long ago Thomas Paine pointed out that this extremely strict doctrine has important consequences, namely that Christians are ultimately responsible for everything in the Bible, even the most unsavory parts.

3) To my knowledge, there is no official doctrine that excuses Christians from living by every rule prescribed in the Bible. If I am wrong, please correct me! In the absence of such a doctrine, therefore, a particularly thorny problem is presented by the Christian who asserts that homosexuality is wrong because the Bible says it is.

4) The problem is that the Bible says many things are wrong, but most Christians just ignore the rules that aren't important to them. (actually, the problem is that things considered "wrong" 3,000 years ago don't always apply to modern thinking. But that fundamental issue aside...) Specifically, Leviticus 20:13, the most clear prohibition against homosexuality in the Bible,** states that "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." If we are to accept this as moral law and enforce it as such, shouldn't we also be enforcing the other rules concerning sex in the Bible? To wit:

• If it is discovered that a bride is not a virgin, the Bible demands that she be executed by stoning immediately. (Deuteronomy 22:13-21)
• If a married person has sex with someone else's husband or wife, the Bible commands that both adulterers be stoned to death. (Deuteronomy 22:22)
• Divorce is strictly forbidden in both Testaments, as is remarriage of anyone who has been divorced. (Mark 10:1-12)
• The Bible forbids a married couple from having sexual intercourse during a woman's period. If they disobey, both shall be executed. (Leviticus 18:19)
• If a man dies childless, his widow is ordered by biblical law to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir. (Mark 12:18-27)
• If a man gets into a fight with another man and his wife seeks to rescue her husband by grabbing the enemy's genitals, her hand shall be cut off and no pity shall be shown her. (Deuteronomy 25:11-12)
• If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:9)
• If a man sleeps with his daughter-in-law, both of them must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:12)
• A man or woman who is a medium or spiritist among you must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:27)

Obviously we can't do any of these, as we have for the most part escaped the frightening barbarism of our past. But if we no longer put virgins to death, how can we at the same time claim homosexuality is wrong on the basis of biblical authority? If we base our morality on the Bible in any way, then we are required to follow the Bible literally and fully in every other way. I'm not being simplistic or unfair here--if the Bible is the infallible Word of God, that's the rule.

The reality is that Christianity doesn't work like this. The official rule may be that the Bible is authoritative, but nobody except the kooks really believe or act like this is true. Which strikes me as a glaring hypocrisy. The problem, though, is that when it comes to passing judgment on people, we don't want to look like mere jerks so we look around for some authority on which to base our prejudices. Voila! Here's a handy Bible verse! But nobody talks about this. Well, almost nobody. But for me, I will remain a skeptic until someone can show me any biblical authority for the proposition that some biblical truths are more relevant than others.

---

** (disclaimer: I intentionally did not cite Romans 1:26-27, another possible exhortation against homosexuality, because it is so vague, confusing, and clearly subject to the ravages of poor translation. See this article. 1 Timothy 1:10 cannot be relied upon for the same reason. Nor did I cite the destruction of the Sodomites because there is simply no mention of homosexuality in Sodom. The only "sins" of Sodom were that "she and her suburbs had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not help or encourage the poor and needy. They were arrogant and this was abominable in God's eyes." (Ezekiel 16:48-49).