I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; you have been very pleasant to me; your love to me was wonderful,surpassing the love of women.
— 2 Samuel 1:26
When people talk about the Bible being against LGBTQ+ individuals, one of the things I think about is the verse above. In gay theology, many people claim that David and Jonathan were lovers and gay. If they were, it would certainly not be the only incidence of two male lovers who were in public positions. Plato believed that the love between Achilles and Patroclus in The Iliad had the purest kind of love, that between two men. Alexander the Great had his great love Hephaestion. The Roman Emperor Hadrian was madly in love with Antinous to the point that when Antinous died, Hadrian declared him a god. The list could go on, but those are the most prominent and the list goes on from ancient times forward.
Whether any of these men were gay lovers or not has been a debate for centuries. We will never know for sure because we cannot ask them. In the passage above though one thing is clear: Jonathan and David were two men who deeply loved each other, whether romantic or not. Often, we are taught that a deep love is not a masculine virtue, especially if those two men are both very masculine individuals. The exception is the Greek scholars who followed Plato’s belief that true love can only come from two equals, which in Plato’s time meant two men, not a man and a women because women were inherently inferior to the Ancient Greeks.
Gay or straight, people often look disparagingly on men who are more feminine than masculine. You often see “Masc 4 Masc” on gay dating profiles. However, the wider world, i.e, the straight world, doesn’t believe that two masculine men belong together, although they often have no issue with two “less manly” gay men or they think most masculine gay men belong with more feminine gay men. The problem is that we are taught at a young age that gender roles are very rigid. Yet, they obviously are not. Not all gay men are fully feminine and flamboyant or stoic and masculine. Those gender roles mean that men are supposed to be masculine and not show emotion, while women should be feminine and more emotional. Yet, there are sweet and tender masculine men and mean and unemotional queens out there.
There is nothing wrong with being masculine or feminine, no matter what your primary sexual characteristics are. Being masculine does not mean that you can’t love and show emotion. There is nothing wrong with masculinity. It’s toxic masculinity that is the issue. I’ve always called toxic masculinity testosterone poisoning. The problem with masculinity is the belief that masculine individuals cannot show gentleness, affection, or love. This belief creates fear and hatred. It’s why some deeply closeted gay men are rabidly homophobic. If we were not taught strict binary attitudes about male and female, and encouraged people to be who they are, we would likely not have self-hating gays or as many young suicides by LGBTQ+ people.
We need to be who we are, not what is expected of us. Sort of a gentler version of “let your freak flag fly.” The Bible shows us that two strong, decisive, masculine men are capable of loving one another. But more than that, it shows us that love can come in many forms and dynamics. If we are able to be ourselves and express our sexuality and not be tied to strict gender roles, we will be happier individuals.
4 comments:
I don't think David was gay. The episode of Bathsheba shows that he loved women ( 2 Sam 11 ). Maybe bisexual
Great read this morning.
Again we as iving in the 21st century have to transport to the ways of how those in ancient civilisations like Greek, Roman, Arabs had no notion of whet is the word «gay».
In those times and even now in some Islamic countries, women were inferior and were there to serve the men and give them children to assure their descendant.
After, those men did have «close friends» to go out with and develop real affection and sexual attractivity berween equals in society.
I have a friend, teaching English litterature in Istanbul, Turkey, and saw it that men are gathering together with close friends while the women stay at home to take care of kids and howsekeeoing etc.
Some of them have an appartment where they can have intimate encounters and sex with those who are lovers.
Not anusual to see two men walking side by side holding hands because in Muslim countries this shows that those are real close friends.
Saying those are hypocrits is just what I think too.
Our comprehension of the Bible era cannot be compared to our era.
Whet is hypocrite from those nmodern Evangelicals is that they will be blinded on some part of the Bible or Gospel but will put outfront those parts who will sustain their hate of people who are living differently than them.
Good Evening, Sir -
Thanks for an enlightening and thoughtful commentary about understanding David’s relationship with Jonathan
I would certainly agree with your assertion that folk tend to exaggerate David & Johnathan’s relationship. Doing so is little more than a fallacious extension of logic that applies today’s behaviors to biblical times; and then draws unfounded conclusions about one’s sexuality.
Good thinking: Customs, traditions, values, and behaviors change with time and cultures. There is little doubt that David was a man, who lusted for Bathsheba; that is not disputable. His lust for her was the reason Uriah was sent into battle to die.
It remains to be determined if David even truely loved Bethsheba according to Rabbi David Wolpe of Sini Synagogue. David seem to more absorbed with his own carnal, selfish pleasures than anything else. (Sounds like a certain former US President.).
What one can know with certainty is that Jonathan loved and respected David, and valued him as a brother. And that is all than can be surmised.
Thanks for adding a wholistic, appropriate context to a familiar Biblical story.
Wellness & Peace be with you…and Joe for the topic.
Post a Comment