In considering the issue of LGBTQ+ acceptance in the church, Preston Sprinkle spends chapter three of his book* discussing Sodom and Gomorrah.  My comments on his ideas are in the previous post “Building Bridges or Accommodation Theology.”  He also deals with what he calls “clobber passages” in Leviticus [18 and 20].  If the story of Sodom and Gomorrah cannot be seen as a way to “clobber” gay people, certainly Leviticus 18 and 20 are.  These passages are very direct in their condemnation of same-sex intimacy.

Let’s look at these verses.  Leviticus 18: 22 says “Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.”  Leviticus 20:13 says “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable.  They are to be put to death; their blood is on their own heads.”

Of course, these are very strong words.  They sound like there is no room for discussion.  Sex with a member of the same sex is bad.

Sprinkle tries not see it that way.

Number 1:  Do these verses refer to all forms of homosexual acts or just to what he calls “exploitative” acts [e.g. rape or prostitution]?  What if a couple is engaged in an consensual, monogamous, loving relationship?  Number 2:  Do these verses carry authority for Christians today or is this just another example of outdated Levitical law?

Sprinkle has a Ph.D. in New Testament theology from Aberdeen University in Scotland.  He has never shied away from difficult theological topics.  His website describes him as “Preston loves talking and writing about hot-button cultural and theological issues with thoughtfulness, honesty and grace. He is passionate about approaching topics that everyone wants to know about, but few are willing to talk honestly and graciously about. Topics like sexuality, gender, race, violence, patriotism, hell, politics, war, and what it means to follow a Jewish prophet-king who was executed for treason. He works hard to challenge himself and others to read the Bible with conviction and humility, while holding their predetermined beliefs loosely.”**  Maybe he will attack Leviticus 18 and 20; maybe he will hold his predetermined beliefs loosely.  We will see.

He admits that the defense for Leviticus 18 and 20 revolves around the idea that both verses refer to exploitative sex [rape, temple prostitution or a man forcing himself on a boy].   Remember, I chose Dr. Sprinkle as the “bridge-builder” between an openly gay pastor [Peter Gomes] and a pastor who condemns same-sex behavior as a mortal sin [Kevin DeYoung].

He does not accept this defense.  He states “A close reading of the texts suggests not.”  “There is no mention of rape, coercion, age difference or anything else that we saw in the Sodom story” [45].  The verses are referring to consensual sex and both partners are condemned.

Other interpretations point to the idea that the verses refer to cultic prostitution, but Sprinkle knows a lot about that subject.  He references study he has done on this topic and says that continuing to assume that the ancient world was filled with cultic prostitution is a mistake.  “It probably did not exist in the world at that time, let alone in Israel.” 

Another interpretation is that Israelite culture had a “high view of men and a low view of women.”  To have Scripture to support the idea that men should not have sex with other men is understandable in this male-centered society.  This would put one man as a passive partner in the homosexual sex act and that would be very unacceptable.  Scripture should support the idea that no man should assume a passive position in the sex act. Sprinkle condemns this view as “Neanderthal.”  This also makes the Levitical verses highlight gender differences, the idea that one sex is inferior to the other.  The interpretation moves away from condemning homosexual sex.

Ok, we see that Dr. Sprinkle sees little support for defending these Scriptures as cultic sexual abnormality or inappropriate for a male-dominated society, but are they relevant today?

In essence, are these just weird laws that no one follows anymore?  The Bible forbids tattoos, but that seems irrelevant today.  One is not supposed to wear mixed fabrics, eat pork or seed lawns with mixed grasses.  Those laws seem outdated and peculiar to most Christians.  What about other laws, especially laws regarding sexual behavior.  Incest is forbidden.  Adultery is forbidden.  Bestiality is forbidden as well as using one’s daughter for prostitution income.  Those  laws are binding but what about same-sex activity?  Do we just declare Leviticus outdated and say that we should dismiss Leviticus 18 and 20 because well, after all, it is Leviticus?

It is not that simple.  Sprinkle is not willing to dismiss 18 and 20 regarding same-sex  behavior just because “it is Leviticus” and nonaffirming*** interpreters should not do that either.  He feels evidence should be provided for these laws being binding or not.  A further point is these verses appearing in The New Testament.  If Old Testament law is referenced  in The New Testament, what does that mean?  Same sex judgement occurs in Leviticus but Paul also refers to this very idea in Romans as well as in First Corinthians and First Timothy.  If Christians look on The Old Testament as a book for the Jewish people, what does it mean when the same laws get referenced in the Christian book, The New Testament?

When we come back to Sprinkle’s discussion he will widen his discussion to understand the world of The New Testament. 

“We’ll look at how Judaism viewed same-sex relations within the context of the Greco-Roman environment.  After all, Christianity was born out of Judaism, and despite some theological disagreements between Jews and Christians, they still agreed on a good number of ethical questions” [53].

But for now, we will return to the discussion of The Good Book written by a gay pastor, someone who affirms the acceptance of the LGBTQ+ community in the church.  His focus will be timely.   Given the nature of current events, Gomes’ topic will be “The Bible and Anti-Semitism.”

*People to Be Loved: Why Homosexuality is Not Just an Issue

**from the website Theology in the Raw accessed on 10/31/2023.

***nonaffirming means “not affirming LGBTQ+ Christians.”