Skip to main content

A Search for LGBTQ+ in Scripture: To Lie in Leviticus (part 6)



Apparently, of all the issues of this human existence, who a consenting adult chooses to lay with is of God’s greatest concerns and potential offenses.

According to the current teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as well as many conservative Christian faiths, anything outside of a legal monogamous heterosexual relationship is a major transgression and warrants harsh consequences in this life and God’s condemnation in the next.

One of the most commonly used references to support a biblical stance against members of the LGBTQ+ community, especially against anything to do with homosexuality, is found in Leviticus.

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. (Leviticus 18:22)

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. (Leviticus 20:13)

Without context and on the surface these verses appear to speak against homosexual behavior. Failure to take context into consideration can lead to incorrect interpretations that negatively impact people’s lives. To misinterpret the biblical authors, either intentionally or unintentionally, is to ignore the author’s intent and purpose in their writings and replace it with our own.

Context is important. In many cases, it is critical.

Leviticus also says:

And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat. (Leviticus 26:29)

Yet, believers don’t read this verse and think that God expects them to start practicing cannibalism. Context matters just as much in Leviticus 26 as it does in Leviticus 18 and 20. It suffices to say that the number of biblical passages that can be taken out of context with significant negative implications is numerous. Before we take a closer look at Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 it is important to understand the purpose of Leviticus and who it was written for.

Leviticus is believed to have been developed over a long period of time. The book reached its current form sometime between the conquest of Jerusalem by the Babylonians (587 BCE) and the conquests of Alexander the Great (332 BCE). At this point in history, the Jewish people were in contact with a variety of other peoples and cultures including Babylonian, Egyptian, Greek, Canaanite, and others. These external cultural influences that surrounded the people of Israel in some ways shaped the purpose and content of Leviticus.

The book can be divided into two distinct sections. The first section, comprising chapters 1 - 16, is part of what is referred to as the Priestly Code. The second half, found in chapters 17 - 26, is known as the Holiness Code.

The Priestly Code is, as the label suggests, directed to the priests of the tribe of Levi, from which the name of the book of Leviticus is derived. This section is largely focused on the duties, rituals, purity standards, and behaviors that were required of the Jewish priests.

The Holiness Code was directed to the people of Israel. Looking at this section as a whole, certain high-level themes emerge that indicate the purpose of the Holiness Code. First and foremost is recognition and respect to the one true God of Israel. Throughout the Old Testament, the worship of other gods and idols was constantly an issue and was considered an abomination in the eyes of the Lord. Second is the preservation of the tribe, the people, the culture, and national distinction. Many of the guidelines and laws specified in Leviticus are directly related to the preservation of a distinct people with a clear lineage and inheritance that could not be disputed by other groups. Additionally, there are many laws of a symbolic nature to further reinforce a distinct people in culture and practice such as the grooming, clothing, and farming laws. For instance, in Leviticus 19:19 we find examples of these symbolic laws prohibiting mixing of animals, seeds, or even the types of materials in a garment. The third theme that we find in the Holiness Code is the condemnation of acts of injustice such as lying, stealing, dealing falsely, etc. And finally, the fourth theme is showing kindness to others which includes "… thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself…" (Leviticus 19:18) and being kind to strangers.

One last thing to understand contextually concerning the Holiness Code is the godly mandates. There are multiple times within the Holiness Code where the Lord requires His people to keep all of His statutes, ordinances, and judgments (Leviticus 18:4-5, 18:26, 19:37, 20:22). The Holiness Code was not a set of guidelines where believers were allowed to pick and choose what was convenient; this was law that was expected of the Jewish people at this time. In addition to the verse in question (Leviticus 18:22), many other commandments are specified in the Holiness Code such as:
  • The ordinances of animal sacrifice (Leviticus 17:3-5, 23:12)
  • The use of animal blood during ordinances (17:6)
  • Leaving a portion of the harvest for the poor (19:9-10)
  • No wearing clothing with mixed fabric/thread (19:19)
  • Forgiveness through animal sacrifice (19:22)
  • No trimming of beards or shaving heads (19:27, 21:5)
  • Death penalty for cursing one's parents (20:9)
  • Death penalty for adultery (20:10)
  • Priests may only marry virgins (21:13-14)
  • Priests must be without blemish (21:18-21)
  • Sacrificial scapegoat offerings (23:19)
  • Eye for eye recompense (24:20)
  • Justification for slavery (25:39-46)
Yet how many of these commandments would modern-day followers of Christ be in violation of?

From a high-level context, the Holiness Code had specific purposes and was for the people of Israel at that time. Besides the fact that Jesus Christ fulfilled the law and that the Holiness Code no longer applies to His followers, if one were to cherry-pick Leviticus 18:22 or 20:13 to support their anti-LGBTQ+ position, they should know that there is much more that comes with that passage that they would be in violation of or not willing to practice themselves. If the Holiness Code is to be followed, is it acceptable to enforce some commandments while ignoring others?

Now, for the verses in question, Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13.

Regardless of the applicability of these verses as part of the Holiness Code, it is still important to understand what these verses are actually addressing.

Chapter 18 contains numerous examples of various sexual relations and acts in addition to the sexual act mentioned in verse 22. While various sexual acts make up a majority of the chapter, the purpose has to do with the practices and customs of the Egyptians and the Canaanites. The beginning of the chapter specifically references the "doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do: and after the doings of the land of Canaan, whither I bring you, shall ye not do: neither shall ye walk in their ordinances" (v. 3). We also find a closing of this framework at the end of the chapter, "Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance, that ye commit not any one of these abominable customs…" (v. 30).

When we see in verse 22 that "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination" it appears to fit in with the many other sexual prohibitions in this chapter, but on closer examination, this verse does not address homosexual behavior in a general sense. To demonstrate this let's take a closer look at the structure of the chapter, the specific words that are used, and how they relate to the framework in which they are found, namely the customs of the Egyptians and the Canaanites.

Verses 6 - 18 are detailed prohibitions against incest which was likely practiced in Canaan.

Verse 19 forbade sex during menstruation, this was considered to be an unclean practice. To do so would require the participants to be cut off from among the people (20:18).

Verse 20 prohibited adultery. While adultery is prohibited many times throughout the Bible, there is evidence that adultery was common in Egypt, particularly "in the lower classes."

Verse 21 strongly condemns idol worship of the Canaanite god Molech which included the horrific practice of child sacrifice. Notice the switch in the text to idol worship.

Verse 22, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." With this verse, it is important to note the use of the word abomination. As previously discussed in part 4 of this series, abomination was primarily used in conjunction with idol worship. Given that this verse describes the act as an abomination, and also follows a strong verse that also speaks against idolatry, this points to the conclusion that this verse is not condemning homosexuality in a general sense; this is specific to male sexual prostitution in conjunction with the worship of other gods.

Again, it is not the homosexual act itself that is the abomination, it is the act in conjunction with cult or idol worship that is the abomination. This is also consistent with other instances of male prostitution, and even female prostitution, as part of idol or cult worship (Deuteronomy 23:17-18, 1 Kings 14:22-24). Of which, the Canaanites were known to engage in ritual sex as part of their worship of their fertility gods Baal and Asherah.

Furthermore, verse 23 prohibits laying with beasts which has ties to both ram and goat worship in ancient Egypt and cult worship in Canaan. This makes three verses in sequence (21, 22, 23) that are about cult and idol worship.

In chapter 20, we find much of the same content that we find in chapter 18.

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. (Leviticus 20:13)

Again we have the declaration of an abomination indicating cult or idol worship. The key difference in this verse is the addition of the penalty. Many of the items mentioned in chapter 18 are repeated in 20 with the addition of a penalty.

Neither Leviticus 18:22 nor 20:13 condemn homosexuality in a general sense.

Given that 1) the act is described as an abomination indicating cult or idol worship, 2) the act is declared in chapter 18 between two other instances of cult or idol worship, and 3) the consistency in usage with other instances of sexual acts in conjunction with cult or idol worship, let alone the broader context and applicability of the Holiness Code, it is evident that these verses reference specific sexual acts in specific circumstances. As stated in part 4 of this series, just because a specific heterosexual act is condemned (Deuteronomy 23:18) does not mean that all heterosexual acts are condemned; the same applies to homosexual acts.

Besides the points explored here, there are other perspectives on the interpretation of Leviticus 18:22, specifically in the translations from Hebrew of "mankind", "as one lies with", and other parts of the verse. One perspective indicates that this passage refers to the practice of pederasty which is the practice of sexual relations between an older man and a young boy. Another perspective indicates that this passage has to do male-to-male incest. Regardless of the interpretation, in each of these cases, we find specific circumstances by which specific homosexual acts are condemned, but we still do not find the condemnation of homosexuality in general.

Only a superficial interpretation of this passage allows for the condemnation of homosexuality in a general sense.

Justification of one’s prejudices with incorrect, superficial interpretation of scripture is not what Christ taught, and goes directly against His gospel in significant ways.

Real, tangible harm has been done to the LGBTQ+ community in the name of God, often justified by Leviticus. To justify one's personal prejudices in the name of God is to take His name in vain.

Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. (Exodus 20:7)

Who really stands in the face of condemnation?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Dropping General Conference

The last remarks of the final talk hung thick in the air, and all I could muster was, “I can’t do this anymore.” I was exhausted.  After sitting through yet another 10 hours of the church’s semi-annual General Conference I sat and reflected on what I had just experienced and what I had gained. All I felt was a weariness that had saturated me; it was more than just the mental effort of focusing on so many hours of one somber talk after another.  I was spiritually exhausted.  I had not been spiritually fed… I was not inspired, uplifted, or edified. There were a couple of talks that offered brief glimmers of hope but were quickly extinguished under the weight of the rest. I was left spiritually drained.  A few years ago, I would have blamed myself for not being dedicated enough. I would have placed myself at fault and held myself responsible for somehow failing to be righteous enough to end the conference feeling this way. Everyone around me always talked about how grea...

A Search for LGBTQ+ in Scripture: The Sin of Sodom (part 5)

The “sin of Sodom” has become synonymous with homoerotic sexual behavior in modern usage and was derived from an interpretation of the events described in Genesis 18. Even so, does the dominant modern-day usage of the terminology derived from Sodom (e.g. sodomy, sodomite, etc) align with how it was used in the Bible? What was the actual “sin of Sodom” as defined by the authors of the Old Testament and how was it used during that time? Taking a look a the story of Lot and his family, prior to the arrival of the angelic visitors, Sodom was already condemned for destruction. There are not many details in Genesis as to what the sin of Sodom was specifically, just that it was “because their sin is very grievous” (Genesis 18:20). Upon the arrival of the angelic visitors to Sodom, Lot invites them to his home. Later, the men of the city of Sodom surrounded Lot’s home and demanded that the visitors be turned over to the mob so that they may “know them” (Genesis 19:5) which was a euphemism that...

In Debt to Faith

  I was in debt the moment I was born into this church. For more than four decades since I took that first breath, I continued to fall further and further into debt. In debt to my parents. In debt to God. In debt to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Expected to give everything that I have and am, even laying down my life if necessary, for the church. At least, that is what I was taught. “…knoweth that ye are eternally indebted to your heavenly Father, to render to him all that you have and are…” Mosiah 2:34 An eternal debt that could never be repaid. No matter how much you do, you are never out of debt. There are many types of debt. By far, the most commonly understood debt is of the financial kind, but there are others. In systems where there is an exchange of value in one form or another there is the potential of creating a debt; for example, technical debt in software development or emotional debt in relationships. With regards to the church, it has not been in fi...