Luke 5:12-26
I do love it when people quote the bible as the literal word of God when the words themselves have been translated, mistranslated, blurred beyond recognition or simply never really appeared in scripture as we have translated them. Here we have the word "leprosy". This brings into focus a great deal about scripture, then and now.
The term leprosy ( then ) referred to a variety of disease states that we would not refer to a as leprosy. It is important to note that the actual disease "leprosy" was not clearly identified until recent history and the age of microbiology. The ancients were aware that real leprosy existed but it was not differentiated from other diseases. I was happy to see that the source I predominantly use, lectionary readings of the Episcopal church, have a footnote that leprosy covered a variety of diseases. So psoriasis or a fungal infection as well as real leprosy were all included in the ancients' terms for "leprosy". In my studies I have come to know that the term leprosy even applied to animal skins (like as in a cloak) that may have had a blemish or wasn't tanned properly. It was abroad term indeed.
What is my point? Th term we know specifically as leprosy ( Mycobacterium leprae ), does not cover all sorts of other diseases. M. leprae is a curable, single disease and not the variety the ancients considered it as. The ancients had no scientific background or knowledge of leprosy. They had a broad definition and played it safe.
So, what other words might we have "assumed" is an accurate reflection of what the ancients knew? We cannot simply take a word we have today and transpose the depth of knowledge to the ancients. Case in point is the word "homosexual". That word was not even invented until the 1800's. The notion of strictly defined sexual orientations was not even created until recent times as well, evidence shows it was perhaps the 1900's. So when we read the word homosexuals in the Bible, what did they mean? It certainly is not what we may mean today. We cannot transpose our concept of sexual attraction, monogamous same sex relationships or even a specific kind of act onto what the ancients believed. Ancient history shows relationships more fluid than ours. Ancient history shows a variety of same sex relationships, not all of which were bad or even an abomination.
What did "lying with another man" mean? There are whole books on that subject, I suggest God vs. Gay as an excellent book on the subject. A couple of important points can be gleaned however. One is that it was considered wrong to treat another grown man as they would treat a woman. It would also be wrong religiously to have a relationship with a man because it was an imperative for the Jews to procreate. No mention that same sex relationships were bad, just that they did not promote the survival and growth Jewish people which was always being threatened. The fact that Paul railed against "homosexuality" ( again a recently invented word ) is not a sign of prohibition or wrongness of loving same sex couples. Relationships between men were well known and practiced in Greece. The proviso was that it could not be prostitution, it could not be usery or rape. It could not involve children. All of these were considered wrong.
I know I am only touching the surface and I am not a true Biblical scholar. However, I am wise enough to know that words and translations are often at the root of misunderstanding scripture. Words and translations are used to promote agendas, male domination and a warped sense of sexual modesty or roles.
Perhaps another time we can look at other words. When all else fails or the meaning of scripture seems in doubt or confuses you, you can either place that passage aside until a later time, do some serious research and lastly, know that scripture is at it's heart all about love. Love rules and is the final arbiter of scripture.
At another time perhaps, what does 'abomination' mean??
12 Once, when he was in one of the cities, there was a man covered with leprosy.* When he saw Jesus, he bowed with his face to the ground and begged him, ‘Lord, if you choose, you can make me clean.’ 13Then Jesus* stretched out his hand, touched him, and said, ‘I do choose. Be made clean.’ Immediately the leprosy* left him. 14And he ordered him to tell no one. ‘Go’, he said, ‘and show yourself to the priest, and, as Moses commanded, make an offering for your cleansing, for a testimony to them.’ 15But now more than ever the word about Jesus* spread abroad; many crowds would gather to hear him and to be cured of their diseases. 16But he would withdraw to deserted places and pray.
17 One day, while he was teaching, Pharisees and teachers of the law were sitting nearby (they had come from every village of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem); and the power of the Lord was with him to heal.* 18Just then some men came, carrying a paralysed man on a bed. They were trying to bring him in and lay him before Jesus;* 19but finding no way to bring him in because of the crowd, they went up on the roof and let him down with his bed through the tiles into the middle of the crowd* in front of Jesus. 20When he saw their faith, he said, ‘Friend,* your sins are forgiven you.’ 21Then the scribes and the Pharisees began to question, ‘Who is this who is speaking blasphemies? Who can forgive sins but God alone?’ 22When Jesus perceived their questionings, he answered them, ‘Why do you raise such questions in your hearts? 23Which is easier, to say, “Your sins are forgiven you”, or to say, “Stand up and walk”? 24But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins’—he said to the one who was paralysed—‘I say to you, stand up and take your bed and go to your home.’ 25Immediately he stood up before them, took what he had been lying on, and went to his home, glorifying God. 26Amazement seized all of them, and they glorified God and were filled with awe, saying, ‘We have seen strange things today.’
No comments:
Post a Comment