Parables and miracles

[julesjones]

It should be obvious that I do not think that hatred based on sexual orientation has any business in Christianity. I think this is covered perfectly well by the Second Great Commandment[*], but there's other stuff as well. A couple of days ago I followed a link and found a spectacular one. The analysis on wouldjesusdiscriminate.org of the Roman centurion asking Jesus to heal his servant was an "oh, of course" moment for me. I think some gay-friendly interpretations of Biblical verses are stretching things a bit, but this just makes sense, at least to me.

It also fills me with the urge to go and write their backstory...

[* the detailed rant on that topic]

ETA: Watervole notes in comments at LJ that she's getting a warning from Avast on that link. Vaughan_Steph says the same with NOD32. I'm not getting anything from Norton -- but I can see that site being a target for hacking by people who don't like its message. So link cut, and a quick bit of copyright infringment to give you the gist:

The Greek word used in Matthew’s account to refer to the servant of the centurion is pais. In the language of the time, pais had three possible meanings depending upon the context in which it was used. It could mean “son or boy;” it could mean “servant,” or it could mean a particular type of servant — one who was “his master’s male lover.” (See note 18.) Often these lovers were younger than their masters, even teenagers.

To our modern minds, the idea of buying a teen lover seems repugnant. But we have to place this in the context of ancient cultural norms. In ancient times, commercial transactions were the predominant means of forming relationships. Under the law, the wife was viewed as the property of the husband, with a status just above that of slave. Moreover, in Jesus’ day, a boy or girl was considered of marriageable age upon reaching his or her early teens. It was not uncommon for boys and girls to marry at age 14 or 15. (See note 19.) Nor was it uncommon for an older man to marry a young girl. Fortunately civilization has advanced, but these were the norms in the culture of Jesus’ day.

In that culture, if you were a gay man who wanted a male “spouse,” you achieved this, like your heterosexual counterparts, through a commercial transaction — purchasing someone to serve that purpose. A servant purchased to serve this purpose was often called a pais.

The word boy in English offers a rough comparison. Like pais, the word boy can be used to refer to a male child. But in the slave South in the nineteenth century, boy was also often used to refer to male slaves. The term boy can also be used as a term of endearment. For example, Jeff’s father often refers to his mother as “his girl.” He doesn’t mean that she is a child, but rather that she is his “special one.” The term boy can be used in the same way, as in “my boy” or “my beau.” In ancient Greek, pais had a similar range of meanings.
.
.
{linguistic discussion re: "pais"}
.
.
Imagine how it may have happened. While stationed in Palestine, the centurion’s pais becomes ill — experiencing some type of life-threatening paralysis. The centurion will stop at nothing to save him. Perhaps a friend tells him of rumors of Jesus’ healing powers. Perhaps this friend also tells him Jesus is unusually open to foreigners, teaching his followers that they should love their enemies, even Roman soldiers. So the centurion decides to take a chance. Jesus was his only hope.

As he made his way to Jesus, he probably worried about the possibility that Jesus, like other Jewish rabbis, would take a dim view of his homosexual relationship. Perhaps he even considered lying. He could simply use the word duolos. That would have been accurate, as far as it went. But the centurion probably figured if Jesus was powerful enough to heal his lover, he was also powerful enough to see through any half-truths.

So the centurion approaches Jesus and bows before him. “Rabbi, my . . . ,” the word gets caught in his throat. This is it — the moment of truth. Either Jesus will turn away in disgust, or something wonderful will happen. So, the centurion clears his throat and speaks again. “Rabbi, my pais — yes, my pais lies at home sick unto death.” Then he pauses and waits for a second that must have seemed like an eternity. The crowd of good, God-fearing people surrounding Jesus probably became tense. This was like a gay man asking a televangelist to heal his lover. What would Jesus do?

Without hesitation, Jesus says, “Then I will come and heal him.”

It’s that simple! Jesus didn’t say, “Are you kidding? I’m not going to heal your pais so you can go on living in sin!” Nor did he say, “Well, it shouldn’t surprise you that your pais is sick; this is God’s judgment on your relationship.”

Instead, Jesus’ words are simple, clear, and liberating for all who have worried about what God thinks of gay relationships. “I will come and heal him.”

At this point, the centurion says there is no need for Jesus to travel to his home. He has faith that Jesus’ word is sufficient. Jesus then turns to the good people standing around him — those who were already dumbfounded that he was willing to heal this man’s male lover. To them, Jesus says in verse 10 of Matthew’s account, “I have not found faith this great anywhere in Israel.” In other words, Jesus holds up this gay centurion as an example of the type of faith others should aspire to.

Jesus didn’t just tolerate this gay centurion. He said he was an example of faith — someone we all should strive to be like.

ETA2: doire has found another MCC site with a copy of the full essay used by permission: http://www.marriagealliance.co.za/spirituality/would-jesus-discriminate/jesus-affirmed-a-gay-couple-matthew-85-13.html
Note that the essays are extracts from a book, "The Children Are Free: Reexamining the Biblical Evidence on Same-sex Relationships", ISBN 978-0971929609.

Comments

[zeborah]

That is an awesome website; thank you!

I'm a bit dubious about the Ruth/Naomi one because a mother-in-law/daughter-in-law relationship feels squicky to me and also because I think the parallels between Ruth and Boaz make them the perfect couple. And I'm agnostic on David/Jonathan - I don't think it's unusual for a man to love a male friend more than women in a world where women were badly educated and married only for convenience. And yet it's still very plausible.

But the stuff from the New Testament all seems not just plausible but the only sensical explanation, and makes me very very happy. :-)

[julesjones]

I think the Ruth/Naomi one is a bit of a stretch, for the reasons you cite. Plus I think there is a genuine and deep love between Ruth and Boaz, it's simply not a showy love (and you did a nice job of analysing that in one of your "women from the Bible" posts). But the story of the Roman centurion really does make a lot more sense to me as the story of a man terrified for his partner, desperate enough to seek out a wild priest from the local religion in the hope of saving him.

[watervole.livejournal.com]

Avast gave me a warning on that page you linked to.

[julesjones]

Hmm. I'm not getting anything from Norton, but I'll put a note in the main post.

[vaughan-steph.livejournal.com]

Nod 32 doesn't like it, either. Malware & trojans, it says.

[doire]

Clamwin blocked it too. It can still be a false positive, but several reports seems suspicious.

So thanks or the text.

[julesjones]

Link cut now. That's three different checkers throwing up reports, which too many for it to be dismissed as a false positive.

I don't want to copy the entire text, which is a shame because it's a good article and the extract I've given doesn't give it justice. But there should be enough there now for context.

[doire]

Googling brings up several examples. This has more text than your extract and gives the source as The Children are Free: Reexamining Biblical Evidence on Same-sex Relationships Publishers

It looks as though it will be worth tracking down.

[julesjones]

That's the source cited on the page I'd originally linked to. They give several other references for the topic as well. It's a shame about the site looking dodgy, because they have several essays that are worth reading.

[vaughan-steph.livejournal.com]

Neat article. I've read brief references to this before, but that's at least a partial discussion. Thanks, Jules.

[hafren.livejournal.com]

I got the warning too.