Was the Apostle Paul a Gay Man?

[MineralMan]

Many have wondered this, after reading some of the passages in his Letters. Apparently Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong considers this a distinct possibility, and that has brought him considerable criticism, both within his church and from other religious leaders.

He summarizes his thoughts on this topic in the Beliefnet article at the link below:

http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2004/04/Was-The-Apostle-Paul-Gay.aspx

Here's a brief quote from the article:

"Some have suggested that that Paul was plagued by homosexual fears. This is not a new idea, and yet until recent years, when homosexuality began to shed some of its negative connotations, it was an idea so repulsive to Christian people that it could not be breathed in official circles. This is not to say that our cultural homophobia has disappeared. It is still lethal and dwells in high places in the life of the Christian church, and it is a subject about which ecclesiastical figures are deeply dishonest, saying one thing publicly and acting another way privately. The prejudice, however, is fading slowly but surely. With the softening of that homophobic stance we might consider the hypothesis that Paul may have been a gay male. We might test that theory by assuming it for a moment as we read Paul. When I did this for the first time, I was startled to see how much of Paul was unlocked and how deeply I could understand the power of the gospel that literally saved Paul's life."



It's an interesting read, with plenty of detail from Paul's own writings to the early church. If you're interested, I encourage you to visit the link and read it for yourself. If true, it certainly belies the current attitudes of much of Christendom about GLBTQ issues.

[SwampG8r]

1. as a christian

i pretty much reject all paulist teachings
i would remove him from the bible if i could.
i will read his writings one more time though as this suggests and see if i can find anything in paul worth linking to christ

[MineralMan]

2. As an atheist, I pretty much reject all of it, but I find

The Bible a worthwhile thing to study, since it purports to be the scripture followed by so many. Sadly, it is followed only in part by most, and is used to support things I cannot accept. That is why I consider a thorough knowledge of it to be important for anyone who is serious about U.S. politics. It's a hobby of mine.

[white_wolf]

6. Can you be a Christan and reject Paul? Are you Gnostic?

I believe that was the sect that was the biggest challenge to Pauline Christianity.

[PassingFair]

10. I have heard Christianity being characterized as ...

the triumph of Paul over Jesus.

I believe that "Paul"/Saul existed,
but I don't think that "Jesus" ever did.

[stopbush]

3. There's no proof that Paul even existed.

His epistles can no more be proven to have been written by a specific person than can the 4 gospels, which came later.

Theological arguments are on par with arguing over what fairy wings are made of.

[MineralMan]

4. It doesn't matter, really. Those writings are read and

used by so many people that understanding them is a crucial part of understanding this society. Someone wrote them. Or maybe even several persons. They are believed by a huge proportion of people in the US, even if not read by most of those people.

I don't make theological arguments. I discuss a book.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

5. Actually, some of the letters of Paul were obviously written by the same person

He has a distinctive style, really long-winded, with lots of asides. I'm a lector in church, and when I'm assigned to read one of Paul's epistles, one of the genuine ones, I always have to take a deep breath before each sentence.

However, some of the other epistles were obviously written by someone else. These include Timothy, second Thessalonians, and several others, although I don't remember which ones.

(It's been a few years since I studied this stuff, so I'd have to dig out my textbooks to find the exact list of genuine and spurious letters.)

In ancient times, unknown authors often tried to give their works greater circulation by writing them under the name of a famous person.

Anyway, I've read Spong's book, and his hypothesis about Paul makes sense to me.

[raccoon]

9. Wouldn't it be nice if we could do that now?

"In ancient times, unknown authors often tried to give their works greater circulation by writing them under the name of a famous person. "

[Boojatta]

13. You can do that now.

Write something truly excellent and include in all copies that you distribute this notice: "Copyright 2011 by Righthaven LLC."

[trotsky]

11. So those would be indicators of a real Paul?

Or perhaps of some other person who wrote the letters? Or maybe someone who transcribed, translated, or edited the works in the last 1900 years?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

12. We can assume (as we would for literary works) that the letters that are in the same style

are by the same author. Call him Paul or call him Mortimer.

No reason to assume that there wasn't a real person named Paul, though, although one may reasonably argue about what he said.

T

[trotsky]

15. No reason to assume there WAS a real person named Paul either.

At least no more reason than there is to believe Joseph Smith really did find and translate golden plates.

[Pterodactyl]

7. Paul considered the "thorn in his flesh" to be a curse.

Whatever was wrong with him, he considered it a weakeness or an obstacle. We don't know for sure what it was.

[obholmen]

8. A Wretched Man novel

I am a novelist, and the central premise of my characterization of the apostle Paul was that he was a conflicted gay man (A Wretched Man, a novel of Paul the apostle) It was my intention to treat the subject with nuance and subtlety, and one reviewer commented that my characterization was "artfully understated".

A reviewer of the novel, the dean of the school of ministry in New Zealand wrote, "Augustine once suggested, to the shock of some of his fellow bishops, that St Paul may have been ‘greatly tainted by sexual desires’.

As MineralMan suggests, Bishop Spong is a leading proponent of the idea that Paul was gay. Last fall, in a personal conversation with Bishop Spong, he told me that the idea came to him from a 1930's article by British theologian Arthur Darby Nock.

So, the idea has been around awhile.

www.awretchedman.com
www.rwholmen.com

[Boojatta]

14. Are you talking about gay orientation without any gay sex?

If you're talking about gay sex, then are you talking about a single sexual encounter, a series of sexual encounters in a single relationship, or something approaching slut status?