Possible Homosexual relationships in The Bible.
I wasn't originally going to cover this at all, but I've decided I should.
of these are provable beyond any shadow of a doubt, they're all ones that
have been speculated about before; on all but the first I’ll cover my
position is, it's very likely. An important thing to remember is people didn’t
think in “Orientations” like we do now, it was much more normal for
Sexuality to be "Fluid". And men weren’t as insecure about their
masculinity. I for one don’t like to put people in boxes; I think most
people are more capable of being “Bisexual” then they might realize.
Ruth and Naomi
people see a Lesbian affection here, but I think that Ruth saw Naomi as
a surrogate mother. At any rate, Ruth's expression of devotion to
Naomi is often cited in wedding ceremonies. Symbolically, their
relationship is how the relationship between the Church (Ruth) and
Israel (Naomi) is supposed to be.
David and Jonathon
the most infamous Bromance in the Bible (Yes I actually used that word
in reference to a Biblical relationship). There are 3 things in the
narrative mainly that make people see a possible romantic affection
between the 2.
1. 1 Samuel 18: 1-4 “And it came to pass, when he
had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was
knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul.
And Saul took him that day, and would let him go no more home to his
father's house. Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he
loved him as his own soul. And Jonathan stripped himself of the robe
that was upon him, and gave it to David, and his garments, even to his
sword, and to his bow, and to his girdle.”
The thing about Jonathon disrobing here is that it’s symbolic of his normal right as Saul’s successor being given to David.
1 Samuel 20:30 “Then Saul's anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he
said unto him, Thou son of the perverse rebellious woman, do not I know
that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion, and unto
the confusion of thy mother's nakedness?”
This is often read as
Saul suspecting such a relationship, and not being happy about it. But
the main issue here is he’s accusing Jonathon of betraying his own
family. An unrelated note “son of the perverse rebellious woman” is a
pretty good literal translation of the Hebrew phrase used here, but the
thing lost in translation is that it’s also a vulgarity, some
translations have rendered it “Son of a Bitch” but I don’t think even
that is harsh enough to convey Saul’s intent here, but also that
expression has become more of a generic insult then what Saul is saying.
3. From David’s song mourning Saul and Jonathon’s deaths. 2 Samuel 1:26 “I
am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou
been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, surpassing the love of
That too can be interpreted different ways. Also the
timing to remember is this was written well before what would become
David's most significant female relationship, Bathsheba.
who like to compare various Biblical narratives to other myths from
Pagan mythology, like to equate David and Jonathon with various mythical
heroic Bromances, which are also often interpreted to have homosexual
undertones. Gilgamesh and Enkidu, Herakles and Iolaus, Achilles and
Patroclus, Orestes and Pylades, Alexander and Hephaestion ect… Modern
examples of relationships following this pattern include Hamlet and
Horatio, Echolat and Simolor Holmes and Watson, Batman and Robin, Frodo
and Sam, House and Wilson ect… The flaw in such an analogy is those
follow a more clear Mentor/Student or Hero/Sidekick pattern, in this
Biblical example Jonathon is older and yet is the lesser figure.
1 verse 9 “Now God had brought Daniel into favour and tender love with
the prince of the eunuchs. ” Again, we don’t have a great deal of
detail, but it is interesting.
The New Testament
8:5-13 and Luke 7:1-10, Tell the story of a Centurion who asked Jesus to heal his “Servant” and shows greater faith then all the children of
Israel as he knows Jesus can heal him without even being present. The
word translated servant has some ambiguity involved, it was common in
Rome for soldiers to be engaged in homosexual relationships with younger
servants or pupils. Some think this was such a relationship and I
think that’s highly possible.
Then there is what Jesus says in Matthew 19 verses 11 and 12. “All
men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. For
there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and
there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be
eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's
sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”
Clearly more then standard definition of “Eunuch” is what Jesus has in
mind here. Some see it as simply referring to people for whom a vow of
Chastity would be easier than others, or people who are Asexual. But
some see him as possibly having Homosexuals, or Transgender/Transsexual
or Intersex people ect… I think all those readings could have some
truth to them.
I feel like adding, that any Christian who objects
to transgender people by saying “God doesn’t make mistakes” does not
fully understand Genesis. God only directly created 2 people, Adam, and
then Havvah who he cloned from a sample
of Adam’s DNA. We are merely imperfect copies of Adam, because of the
Fall in Genesis 3 genetic mistakes often happen, and screw ups in the
Gender defining chromosomes/hormones ect… can certainly be among those.
Remember Biblically we all consist of 3 components, the Body, the
Spirit and the Soul. So yes I think a person meant to be a Man could be
born in a biologically female body, or visa versa.
And I don’t think such a person
seeking an operation would be wrong. A person born blind seeking an
operation to restore their sight certainly isn’t. I feel now like
directing readers to John Chapter 9.