Some preachers are guilty of scriptural abuse

Each Monday at Bibles and Beer, we study scripture, acknowledging that around the table there are at least a dozen different translations of the Bible. We first consider any differences in the words chosen by various translators. Many times, the differences are meaningless. In a surprising number of instances, they are substantial enough to alter the meaning of the text.

This is the story of such an instance.

In “Forging a Sacred Weapon: How the Bible Became Anti-Gay,” Ed Oxford and Kathy Baldock trace the history of how the word “homosexual” found itself in the Bible and how words intended to refer to sexually abusing little boys became a condemnation of responsible, consensual sex between adults. (See forgeonline.org March 29, 2019).

Their research began with a review of older translations in many languages. The 1611 King James Version of Leviticus 20:13 says, “If a man also lie with mankind as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination.” Before that, however, there was Martin Luther’s 1534 German translation.

Luther used the word “Knabenschander.” Knaben means “boy.” Schander means “to molest.” The verse actually says it’s an abomination to sexually abuse little boys.

David Hart Bentley, described by colleagues as “a brilliant scholar with a mastery of Greek,”

recently published an extraordinary translation of the New Testament. Believing most translations are contaminated by personal agenda and bias, i.e. the translator’s own “theological or moral principles,” Hart strives to translate the Greek into words the authors would have used. 

Historians document that in the ancient world it was not uncommon for powerful men to sexually abuse young boys. It makes sense that 1^st century biblical writers would have been concerned, not with loving, consensual relationships between two adults but with pederasty, which explains why Paul’s laundry list of people whose sins will keep them out of heaven included the Greek word “arsenokoitai” in 1^st Corinthians 6:9-10.

The KJV says they are fornicators, idolators, adulterers, the effeminate, people who abuse themselves “with mankind,” thieves, coveters, drunkards, revilers, and extortioners. Both the Modern Language (1969) and Living Bible (1971) translations add “homosexuals” to the list of the doomed.

However, Hart says translations choosing to deploy the word “homosexuals” are wrong. “Arsenokoitai,” does not mean “homosexuals,” Hart says, but most likely spoke of a powerful man’s “exploitation of young male slaves.”

Christian theologian and writer Mel White agree. White says using “arsenokoital” is a condemnation of “married men who hired hairless young boys (malakois) for sexual pleasure.”

Log on to https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/6-9.htm and you’ll find that while many translations include “homosexuals,” there are many others that do not. It is, therefore, distressing when preachers get to pick and choose from a variety of translations to support a sermon condemning anyone.

A case in point are the Revised Standard Version (RSV) and subsequent New Revised Standard Version of the Bible.

David (last name undisclosed), a young, gay seminarian, read the RSV, noting translators used the term “homosexual.” He knew an accurate translation conflicted with that word. David wrote the publisher, offering a linguistic analysis arguing the word “homosexual” was inaccurate. Dr. Luther Weigle, head of the RSV translation team, thoroughly reviewed the matter and informed David he was correct. 

Weigle’s team made a different choice the next time around. “Homosexual” does not appear in the New Revised Standard Version.

Instead, it used the term “sodomites,” which Jewish scholars say refers to the violent rapes at Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis, not consensual sex between two adults.

These letters are in the Weigle collection of Yale University’s archives. An essay on this piece of Biblical history is at http://canyonwalkerconnections.com/forging-a-sacred-weapon-how-the-bible-became-anti-gay/  

This is not new information to theologically educated preachers. They know. Kathy Baldock spoke of clergy who willingly ignore it. “Knowing how damaging inserting ‘homosexuals’ has become, their lack of academic integrity, curiosity, or a loving desire to ‘get it right, shocked us.”

Before preaching one more sermon about homosexuality, my clergy colleagues should study Oxford, Baldock’s and Hart’s research. Continuing to rely on questionable or just plain wrong interpretations is sinful unto itself.

RE: Romans 1:26-27 https://www.patheos.com/blogs/unfundamentalistchristians/2013/10/romans-126-27-a-clobber-passage-that-should-lose-its-wallop/?utm_content=buffer2d8a2&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=FBCP-PRX