Thanks to all who have written letters recently regarding the HST board’s policies, pro and con, on acceptable staff lifestyles. This public discussion is healthy for our community; and does not indicate hate and resentment, as some believe. I’d like to add a few other elements to the discussion – other biblical references, some history, linguistics, a touch of science and a bit of logic.

In June Craft’s letter last week, she referred to three biblical passages which clarify lifestyle issues HST considers contrary to scripture, and cause for HST staffing banishment. They are, as translated in the NIV, Lev. 20:13 (advocates capital punishment for homosexual partners); Rom. 1:26-27 (homosexual practice is sinful); and 1 Cor. 6:9 (neither homosexuals, nor nine other types of sinful offenders, will inherit God’s kingdom). Those 10 offenses cover just about every human alive today. So who will inherit?

Now see Leviticus 11, in its entirety. It states, in part, eating unclean food is sinful, for example pork, rabbit, and any sea creature without fins and scales. This ban would include razor clams, oysters and shrimp, to put the passage into local context. Do HST board members follow Leviticus 11; or is that portion of the Bible regarding lifestyle exempt from consideration? In my six-plus years of non-denominational Bible study, I have never heard a good explanation of why such picking and choosing of which biblical passages to follow is acceptable if the Bible is the infallible Word.

Christ preached against many Old Testament teachings. I have never seen, in any of my four translations of the Bible, any statement by Christ condemning homosexuality. But he did speak about children often; and that we should cherish them (See Mk. 9:37 and Mk. 10:14-15). In ancient Greece and Rome, and to this day, pedophilia was a scourge in society. It was especially prevalent in Paul’s time. A few years ago, several theologians publicized their belief that the New Testament, especially Paul’s writings, condemned pedophilia, not homosexuality. They claimed some portions of the Bible had been mistranslated.

Based on the wording in my Zondervan Parallel New Testament in Greek and English (which includes King James and NIV), I could see this possibility. The Greek words in Rom. 1:26-27 for males and females, for example, are “arsenes” and “thaleiai,” respectively. Per my Greek lexicon, these words are not identified as representing either adults or children; but rather just male and female. And, based on my five years of studying classical Greek in high school and college, it is noteworthy that Greek language at that time used a small basic vocabulary; determining meaning by either a combination of words to make a bigger word, or by context of use, based in part on their location in a sentence. So was Paul, who practiced law for his profession, quoted out of context? The passage was, after all, written in basic Greek; and has been translated at least hundreds of times.

Last year, a team of scientists in Britain determined sheep could be identified as either heterosexual or homosexual by examining portions of their brains. It is premature to state such evidence applies to humans. But why would someone “choose” to be homosexual, when such a “choice” brings with it condemnation by large segments of society? Do heterosexuals “choose” to be attracted to the opposite sex? It seems unlikely, based on my personal experience. For me, it came naturally.

My point of all this is that even biblical quotes do not provide all the answers to our questions; and have the possibility of feeding our fears and prejudices. We all have fears and prejudices and a responsibility as a society to work on resolving them.

Tim Roth

Long Beach