How Not to Read the Bible

014

Judging from the number of letters it provoked, my previous column^a obviously struck a nerve with many people. A representative sample appears in the Readers Reply section, together with my responses. The letters of Joanna Saidel and Donald Wold, however, require a longer response, and I will devote this column to answering them at some length.

Ms. Saidel makes three points: 1. Though Sodomites were non-Israelites, they were destroyed for their homosexuality; 2. Subsequent “Sodomites” were purged by King Asa and his son Jehoshaphat (1 Kings 15:12; 22:47); 3. Non-Israelite nations residing in the Land of Israel were expelled because of their sexual immorality, including homosexuality (Leviticus 18:24–30).

In rebuttal to all these objections, I cite a simple fact: The ban on homosexuality and other illicit unions applied solely to the residents of the holy land, as Saidel herself emphasizes by italicizing the explicit biblical statement, “In all these the nations are defiled, which I have cast out before you” (Leviticus 18:24). This verse applies to the people of Sodom and to subsequent “Sodomites” who lived within the bounds of the holy land. What is the symbolism of the holy land? It is the sphere of God, like his Temple in Jerusalem. In this theology, all those who live in God’s extended Temple—the holy land—are accountable to a higher moral and ritual standard.

Elsewhere in Leviticus 18 Israel is enjoined, “You shall not imitate the practices of the land of Egypt where you dwelt, or of the land of Canaan to which I am taking you” (Leviticus 18:3). If it were incumbent on all as Saidel claims, one would have to conclude that the Egyptians would be just as culpable for the violation of these laws as the Canaanites. To be sure, the Egyptians are punished for Pharaoh’s refusal to release Israel from bondage, and the prophets repeatedly excoriate Egypt for their ongoing crimes against Israel. But not once do they condemn them for their sexual deviations. Ezekiel, for example, is familiar with the Pentateuchal literature, especially the last chapters of Leviticus, including Chapter 18. He is also fully aware of Egypt’s sexual appetites (Ezekiel 16:26), but in the four lengthy chapters describing their crimes and forthcoming punishment (Ezekiel 29–32), not once does he mention any of the several violations of Leviticus 18, let alone homosexuality. The conclusion is obvious: Since the Egyptians do not live in the holy land, their sexual aberrations are not sins against God and, hence, not subject to divine sanctions.

So why was Sodom destroyed? It is true that they practiced homosexuality (hence the term “sodomy”). Is that the reason for their destruction? Let us examine the text closely. God intervenes because “they have acted altogether according to the outcry that has come to Me” (Genesis 18:21). The angels are more explicit: “The outcry against them before the Lord has become so great that the Lord has sent us to destroy it” (Genesis 19:13). “Outcry,” then, implies those who are persecuted and oppressed by the Sodomites. The suffering is not identified, but some notion can be extrapolated from the behavior of the Sodomites to the angels (Genesis 19:1–9): their inhospitality—rather, their homicidal xenophobia (in contrast to Abraham’s reception of the angels, Genesis 18:1–8) and their violence as exhibited by their intent to commit homosexual rape. Additional illumination is provided by Ezekiel: “This was the sin of your sister Sodom: She did not support the poor and the needy” (Ezekiel 16:49). Thus Sodom’s homosexuality has to be seen in the larger context of its heartlessness and brutal acts to the unfortunate in their own society.

Further light on the homosexuality of the Sodomites is reflected from its mirror image, the incident at Gibeah (Judges 19). Residents of the Benjamite town of Gibeah want to violate a Levite who has been given hospitality by one of its residents. Instead the Levite sends out his concubine, who is ravished by the townsmen until she dies. The other Israelite tribes demand the extradition of the guilty townsmen. The Benjamites refuse and under the battle cry “an outrage has been committed in Israel” (Judges 20:6, 10) the tribes attack and decimate the Benjamites.

In this account, non-Israelite Sodom is replaced by Israelite Gibeah. But the crime is the same: gang rape ending in homicide. To be sure, homosexuality features in both incidents, but its purpose is not sexual fulfillment; it only serves as an instrument of violence. Sodom is evil because it is the epitome of inhumanity and brutality, not because it practices homosexuality. What, might we ask, would have been the case if Sodomite and Gibeahite homosexuality had been practiced by consenting adults? According to Leviticus 18, ultimately they would have been expelled from the land, but they would not have provoked the wrath of the Lord (or of the Israelites, in the case of Gibeah) to destroy them.

One who interprets Scripture and, above all, one who lives by it is obligated to 048understand what it says. Theoretically, the Hebrew Bible should be read in Hebrew and, if not, at least in a reliable translation. Unfortunately the King James Version, which Ms. Saidel relies on—with all its glorious cadences—is often inaccurate. The “Sodomites” whom King Asa purges from the land (1 Kings 15:12) are called qedeshim, which means “the consecrated ones,” not “Sodomites.” In this case, unfortunately, modern translations aren’t much better: “temple prostitutes” (NAB) or “male prostitutes” (NJPS, NRSV, NEB). The chances are this term refers to cultic devotees of some sort, but not to temple personnel who engage in prostitution. Indeed, there is no evidence that temple-sponsored prostitution existed anywhere the ancient Near East, much less so in the Israel.^b It may very well be that a “consecrated one” would have engage in prostitution for the benefit of a sanctuary. It was thus only logical that under Israel’s strict moral code the income derived from prostitution could not be donated to the Temple (Deuteronomy 23:18–19; 17–18 in English).

In response to Dr. Wold’s letter, let me say first that it is good to know that my erstwhile student, though fully (and successfully) engaged in business, has kept up with biblical scholarship and is about to publish a book on the subject of homosexuality. I shall respond to his arguments briefly:

1. That the Bible says God penalizes Israel for homosexuality does not imply that he approves of it for the rest of the world. But when God punishes Israel for it, he punishes no one else—unless they reside in the holy land. The parade example is Egypt, which is accused of the illicit sexual practices of Leviticus 18 but is never punished for any one them (see above). I believe there is only one conclusion to be drawn from the Hebrew Bible: If God never penalizes homosexual non-Jews living outside the holy land, why should we?

2. I cannot fully share Wold’s confidence that Ham’s act against Noah (Genesis 9:20–27) “was almost certainly homosexual rape.” Upon awakening from his drunken stupor, Noah cursed the younger son for what had been done to him. Ambiguity multiplies explanations. Among the many there is one that reflects the Greek myth of the castration of the god Uranus, not by spousal wrath, but by Kronos, the young son who would displace him. But most commentaries stick to the plain meaning of text: Ham proceeded to publicize his father’s nakedness to his brothers instead of covering him, a lapse of filial respect that the brothers did not emulate when they covered him while walking backwards so as not to look.

3. Does Wold wish to infer from the command “be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28; 9:1, 7) that single people and childless couples will suffer punishment?

4. True, the term ha’adam, which heads Leviticus 18, is generic for all humanity in the creation story. But Leviticus 18 is pan of the Priestly Code, where that same ’adam is used to designate those who offer sacrifices (Leviticus 1:2) and develop scale disease (erroneously rendered leprosy, Leviticus 13:2). This generic term includes Israelite men and women and, probably, the resident alien. For of certainty, sacrifices to Israel’s God are not permitted outside the land (see Joshua 22:19; Amos 7:17), and those who suffer scale disease outside the land are not subject to the mandated quarantine and purificatory rites.

5. If Wold were right that “sex with a menstruant is forbidden because she cannot conceive during her period” it would also be forbidden during pregnancy and after menopause. The Hebrew Bible affirms human sexuality: Barzillai the Gileadite declines King David’s offer to live out his years at the royal residence “I am now eighty years old. Can I tell the difference between good and bad [a euphemism for sexual activity]? Can your servant taste what he eats and drinks? Can I listen to the singing of men and women?” (2 Samuel 19:36). Barzillai is no longer capable of enjoying wine, women and song. However, if at age eighty he were still capable of sensual pleasure, is there any doubt that he would have accepted the king’s invitation?

Finally, a personal note. I am not for homosexuality, but I am for homosexuals. I grieve for their plight—their pariah status and their discrimination in the workplace and the military. But when the Bible is distorted to make God their enemy, I must speak out to set the record straight. I return to my contention that there is only one deduction to be derived from Leviticus 18 and 20: The ban on homosexuality is limited to male Jews and inhabitants of the holy land. The basis for the ban, as I have submitted, is the need for procreation, which opposes, in biblical times, the wasting of seed.

Judging from the number of letters it provoked, my previous columna obviously struck a nerve with many people. A representative sample appears in the Readers Reply section, together with my responses. The letters of Joanna Saidel and Donald Wold, however, require a longer response, and I will devote this column to answering them at some length. Ms. Saidel makes three points: 1. Though Sodomites were non-Israelites, they were destroyed for their homosexuality; 2. Subsequent “Sodomites” were purged by King Asa and his son Jehoshaphat (1 Kings 15:12; 22:47); 3. Non-Israelite nations residing in the Land of Israel were expelled […]