For queer Christians attempting for the first time to resolve the apparent contradiction between their sexual or gender identity and Christian belief, the first hurdle is likely to be dealing with the popular perception that their ideas are clearly and unequivocally in conflict with the clear teaching of the Bible, and so contrary to God’s will. The message seems clear. The Lord wreaked terrible vengeance for the sins of Sodom, Leviticus called for homosexuals to be killed by stoning, and St Paul’s condemnation is well known. 60 years ago, this perception was a reasonable one, a universally held view that underpinned all formal Church teaching on the subject, and which ensured that Christians who were in any way non-conformist in their sexual identity, remained deeply closeted. The concept “Gay Christian” was an oxymoron, LGBT Christians, especially queer clergy were invisible - and with good reason.

Today, the same perception, that queer sexuality is condemned by scripture, remains widespread but is no longer the only view. Instead, there is a widespread and growing recognition, especially by those who have studied the matter most closely, that the biblical message either does not condemn loving LGBT relationships, or is at worst ambiguous on the subject. I want to outline the course of that transformation, and stress just how far it has gone.

Chronicling the Reassessment of the Bible and Homosexuality

Traditional assumptions began to unravel once people began to examine the Biblical texts, instead of simply repeating the slogans. That process began in the early 1950’s, when Canon Derrick Sherwen Bailey led an Anglican study group on the broader issues of homosexuality and society. He began to explore the texts, expecting to find corroboration for the traditional views, but instead reached a surprising conclusion: the biblical evidence is inconclusive and ambiguous. Bailey’s book, “Homosexuality and the Western Christian Tradition“, published in 1956, was a landmark, opening up a whole range of new considerations in biblical interpretation of the subject.

After a short chapter by John McNeil in “The Church and the Homosexual” (1976) “, the next landmark took a different tack. Rather than merely contesting the meaning of the infamous clobber texts, Tom Horner’s “Jonathan Loved David” (1978) also drew attention to the broader contextual background, and to some of the many queer affirmative passages.

Soon afterwards John Boswell, in an important chapter in Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality (1980) drew on Bailey’s earlier work, and his own extensive linguistic skills, to argue that the traditional interpretations were badly flawed, and based on a combination of mistranslations and misinterpretations of the texts. Later writers drew heavily on Boswell’s analysis.

Two notable full - length treatments published over the next ten years were Robin Scroggs’ “New Testament and Homosexuality” (1984), and William Countryman’s “Dirt, Greed, and Sex” (1988). Thereafter the floodgates opened, with an abundance of new titles during the nineties and noughties re-evaluating the scriptural verdict on homosexuality. By last year, it was noticeable that some of these titles were even being aimed by publishers at the mass market, in marked contrast with the earlier works, which had either scholarly works primarily for academics, or aimed at niche markets, such as clergy and the LGBT community. These more recent works varied substantially in their approach, and their conclusions.

Varied Approaches to Reassessing Scripture and Homosexuality

The early pioneers, like Bailey, Boswell and Countryman, had focussed primarily on countering the half dozen clobber texts. Later writers emphasised the importance of reading the Bible in context, with its greater message of love and inclusion. For these writers, focussing on just a handful of clobber texts represents an abuse of scripture, as they argue in works with titles like “Practicing Safer Texts” (Stone, 2005 - my favourite title), “The Savage Text: The Use and Abuse of the Bible ” (Thatcher, 2008), and “The Sins of Scripture: Exposing the Bible’s Texts of Hate to Reveal the God of Love ” (Spong, 2005).

A third theme that has emerged recently, has been to highlight explicitly queer affirmative readings of scripture. Following the early example of “Jonathan Loved David“, “Take Back the Word” (Goss, 2ooo) examined selected books and passages to illustrate same-sex love or gender bending themes. The culminating achievement of this approach is the monumental “The Queer Bible Commentary” (2006), for which a team of scholars from a wide range of Christian and Jewish backgrounds collaborated, to produce a detailed queer reading for every single book of the bible. (Most books are given a complete chapter. Minor books are grouped in thematic chapters).

The most recent books also includes work by a wide range of denominational and faith backgrounds. The early pioneering was done almost entirely by Catholic and Anglican scholars, but more recent titles show more diversity: Jack Rogers for instance ( Jesus, the Bible, and Homosexuality )is Presbyterian, Steve Greenberg (Wrestling with God and Men) is Jewish. A complete listing of the probably hundreds of new books will show many more.

However, it would be wrong to claim that revisionist readings now hold sway. Inevitably, traditionalists have responded with counterarguments. The surprise is not that they have done so, but that they appear now to be in the minority - at least in terms of the number of books sold.

The Balance of Competing Views on Scripture and Homosexuality

I have seen somewhere a claim that “the majority” of biblical scholars now agree that the traditional reading of the Bible and homosexuality is incorrect. I have no way of evaluating that claim, but a simple test seems at least to support the suggestion. A book search on either Amazon.com or Google books for “bible and homosexuality” will throw up hundreds of titles, of which the majority appear to argue either that the traditional condemnation is wrong, or that the evidence is mixed and ambiguous.

Here are the top 20* titles listed by Amazon.com for a search on “Bible and homosexuality”, which I have loosely grouped into affirmative / neutral / traditional (based on my reading of Amazon’s book descriptions).

* (The 20 listed below exclude the Holman Bible Dictionary, which is not specifically about sexuality, and does not attempt interpretation)

Queer affirmative interpretations of scripture

(ranking, author, title):

1) Helminiak: What the Bible Really Says about Homosexuality

3) Rogers: Jesus, the Bible, and Homosexuality: Explode the Myths, Heal the Church

4) Cannon: The Bible, Christianity, & Homosexuality

5) Dwyer: Those 7 References: A Study of 7 References to Homosexuality in the Bible

7) Patterson: Hate Thy Neighbor: How the Bible is Misused to Condemn Homosexuality

10) Thelos: God is not a Homophobe: An unbiased look at Homosexuality in the Bible

12) Greenberg: Wrestling with God and Men: Homosexuality in the Jewish Tradition

14) Cannon: Homosexuality in the Orthodox Church

16) Goss: Take Back the Word: A Queer Reading of the Bible

Queer neutral interpretations of scripture

(ranking, author, title, publication date ):

9) Via: Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views

19) Gibson: Discerning the Word: The Bible and Homosexuality in Anglican Debate

(No information for assessment):

18) Ide: Zoar and Her Sisters: Homosexuality, the Bible, and Jesus Christ

2o) Barnett: Homosexuality and the Bible: An Interpretation

Traditional interpretations of scripture and homosexuality:

(ranking, author, title, publication date ):

2) Gagnon: The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics (2002)

6) Himbaza: The Bible on the Question of Homosexuality

8) Haley: 101 Frequently Asked Questions About Homosexuality

11) White: Same Sex Controversy, The: Defending and Clarifying the Bible’s Message About Homosexuality

13) Dallas: The Gay Gospel?: How Pro-Gay Advocates Misread the Bible

15) De Young: Homosexuality: Contemporary Claims Examined in Light of the Bible and Other Ancient Literature and Law

17) Swartley: Homosexuality: Biblical Interpretation and Moral Discernment

The analysis above is crude and simplistic, but the message is clear: only 7 of the top 20 titles attempt to affirm the traditional interpretation of the Bible and homosexuality, and even these generally soften the harshness of earlier presentations, to emphasize the importance of compassion in pastoral care. Even allowing for my possible bias in assessing where to place these titles, it is clear that the field is a divided one. The traditional, hostile view is no longer a universal one.

The Impact of the Reassessment of the Bible and Homosexuality

Whereas the Bible could once be freely used as a weapon against us, we can now use biblical counter arguments in favour of full inclusion. The gradual recognition of this has been important in giving confidence to LGBT people in church, has forced many fair - minded straight leaders in the churches to reconsider their own positions, and has been an important enabling factor behind the other transformations affecting the place of LGBT people in church:

• the development of independent LGBT ministry and support groups
• the emergence of openly queer clergy, stepping out of the closet
• the development of a distinctive body of gay/lesbian and queer theology
• the emergence, and inclusion in ministry, of modern queer families.

I will be covering these later in this series, to mark February as LGBT history month (UK), and 2012 as Queen Elizabeth’s diamond jubilee year. (I have already posted as a preamble, a summary of changes over the previous 2000 years)

Related articles

• “Blessed Are The Queer in Faith”: Preamble
• English Bishop Backs Gay Marriage: Queer Ferment in the Anglican Church
• Towards Full GLBT Inclusion in Faith: Some Signs of the Times.
• Christian Repentance for Sin (of Homophobia)
• Bringing the “Good News” to Queer Christians: My Vision for Queering the Church.
• The Bible and Textual Abuse: The Case of “malakoi” and “arsenokoites”.
• Homosexuals and the Catechism