I've studied scripture all my life, and Theology was my major in college. It's often said that "Evangelical" (born-again) Christians take the Bible literally, and others don't. The implication is that non-Evangelicals take the Bible as some kind of code, or that it doesn't mean what it says, or something like that - and based on that, Evangelicals condemn others for "not really believing the Bible."

But that's not the case, I think. In varying degrees, Evangelicals deny the context of the Bible. They fail to consider the historical and cultural context, linguistic and literary structures, and the intent and limitations of the authors - all things we should consider when we closely study any book, but especially when we study a book that is considered sacred.

Evangelicals will tell me that I don't consider the Bible to be "true" if I condone homosexuality when it is condemned in Leviticus and in Paul's letter to Timothy, and in other places. Of course it's true - there's no attempt at deception in the Bible that I've been able to find. Leviticus contains several moral codes, and some of those codes don't agree with each other on every point. But it's clearly stated that at the time Leviticus was written, Jewish leaders considered homosexuality to be immoral. And Timothy shows clearly that Paul considered homosexuality to be immoral. Those condemnations were written with a cultural and historical context that existed 2,000 years ago or more.

But culture and morality have evolved through the centuries, and what society considered immoral then, may not apply to the present time. Conservative Christians were slow to accept the fact that while Paul and Leviticus considered slavery to be moral, Christians can no longer use the Bible to defend slavery or racial prejudice. Were Paul and Leviticus "wrong" about slavery? No, I don't think so. They simply reported the moral standards of their times, a context completely different from ours. Same goes for homosexuality and gay marriage - times have changed, and so must religion.

The basic moral principle of most religions is the Golden Rule, the requirement to love your neighbor, and that doesn't change. Individual rules like marriage and sex and diet and such have changed, but the underlying principle remains. When people focus on the legalities and forget the underlying principle, that's where religion gets into trouble.

As DMcG pointed out, Jesus focused on the principles, not the rules - and the Buddha and Mohammed and the Jewish Patriarchs and Moses and all the other founders of great religions were the same - they focused on principles, not legalities.

As time goes on, I hope that the fundamentalists will be able to figure this out: homosexual marriage is not going to bring about the condemnation of the world. It's our failure to love our neighbor that will bring about our destruction. And that destruction will most probably be a natural consequence of our hatred, not some sort of punishment from Above.

How look will it take the fundamentalists to wake up and accept gay marriage? It may take a good, long time. I'm not sure all of them are quite ready to accept the end of slavery.

-Joe-