From: Robert Schneider (rjschn39@bellsouth.net)
Date: Thu Jan 23 2003 - 16:40:00 EST
Sheila writes:
> Another comment suggested that Jesus' silence on the subject meant that He
> also believed homosexual acts were wrong. Jesus Christ was not exactly
silent
> on the subject because He said that He did not come to add or subtract
from
> the law but to fulfill the law; therefore, the law still stands.
>
Bob's comment:
Sheila, I think you are refering to Jesus' saying in Matt. 5:17: "Do not
think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have not come
to abolish but to fulfill," and that not one jot and tittle should be
abolished. These sayings appear in the Sermon on the Mount in the section
on the meaning of the law and the prophets, that concludes, "Unless your
righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and the Pharisee you will never
enter the kingdom of heaven." Then Jesus goes on to show in what respect
his audience must exceed the latter in righteousness, by revising the Torah
to make its demands even stronger, e.g., love your enemies.
What is interesting is that before Matthew's gospel was composed
(between 80 and 90 AD), the early Christian community was already, by mid
century, in a major crisis over the extent to which the law of Moses was to
apply to Christian converts from among the Gentiles, as both Act. 15 and
Paul's argument in Galatians shows. The community eventually came to
conclude that some provisions of the Torah apply and some don't (the latter
including any cultic provisions, as well as circumcision). So, it is a bit
of a stretch to say that these words of Christ (5:17), which only Matthew
reports, are to be taken literally, and in our own day. At least the early
Christian community, however divided on the issue, eventually came to think
they should not be taken literally. One must discriminate, they decided,
when it comes to applying provisions of the Mosaic Code to Christian life.
I'm not saying that this fact rules out applying an interpretation of the
provisions in Lev. 18, 20 to Christian life, but it does not, in my view,
automatically apply them. And according to John Boswell, whose study I have
been citing, the early Christian theologians seldom refer to the Levitican
codes in their entirety, most of whose provisions they ignored, especially
the dietary laws; and when they express their hostility to gay sexuality,
their condemnations rested on other arguments, not the "same sex" passages
in Lev. 18 and 20, though some cite these passages to support their
arguments. (Boswell, _Christianity, Social Tolerance and Homosexuality_)
So, I do not believe that one can conclude simply from Matt. 5:17 that
Jesus condemned homosexual acts. One could just as well argue from his
silence on the matter that he didn't. I would be more confident of either
if I had had a word from him about the matter. But this is one instance in
which Jesus did not speak to a moral concern of our own society.
Grace and peace,
Bob
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 16:47:50 EST