Homosexuality has been known throughout human history but it was not until 1973 that the American Psychiatric Association (APA) finally removed “homosexuality” as a psychiatric diagnosis in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). Since that time the APA “has opposed stigma, prejudice, discrimination, and violence on the basis of sexual orientation and has taken a leadership role in supporting the equal rights of lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals.”[1] Better late than never. Churches have not been so quick to follow suit. Out of the 66 books of the Bible there are only a few verses addressing male homosexual behavior and only one passage purports to address the root of such behavior. Paul gives quite a rant about the behavior of pagans in Romans 1:18-32 including same-sex acts (how did he know?), but Paul may have had his own hang-ups about sexuality in general (see 1 Corinthians 7). Nonetheless, many (most?) churches have taken these passages as a blanket condemnation of anything sexual outside of heterosexual monogamous marriage (let’s ignore all the polygamy and concubines in the Bible). Anyway, I wonder if there is more in the Bible about this than meets the eye, but perhaps it was toned down as the Jewish law developed and affected the writing of what we now know as the Bible.
The Sacred Band of Thebes was a troop of soldiers in the Theban army (central Greece) during the 4th Century BCE. It was said to be composed of 150 pairs of male lovers. Three-hundred gay men, that is. Even in Plato’s Symposium they discuss the possible advantage of such an arrangement, as perhaps love would motivate them to greater bravery in defense of one another. Is it possible that Israel had its own version of such a military unit?
First, I am going to make the outrageous assertion that being left-handed was sometimes used as a euphemism for being gay in ancient literature. This is not a new concept: in 19th-century Europe homosexuals were sometimes referred to as “left-handed.”[2] There have been a number of studies which have found that left-handedness is more common in the LGBTQ community; enough that Wikipedia has an entry devoted to it.[3] Being left-handed has long been associated with certain traits, probably because the right-handed majority looked down on it as odd, an aberration. The word “sinister” is derived from the Latin for “left.” “Sinister” took on an evil connotation while “dexterous,” from the Latin for “right,” took on a good connotation. Recall that even Jesus in Matthew 25 says that the “goats,” those displeasing to God, would go to the left; good people to the right. Christians said Jesus sat at God’s right hand, not His left (Mark 16:19, etc.).
On the positive side, some cultures like the ancient Celts and peoples of the Andes associated being left-handed with good traits. But even today in certain cultures the left hand is the “dirty” hand. (I really do apologize to all you left-handers!) It is used for functions like defecation, while the “clean” right hand is used for eating. Thus the “unclean” left hand is sometimes associated with the genitals and sex. And there is a Biblical story that I think illustrates this.
The book of Judges has some of the most interesting stories of the Bible, and in chapter 3 we read that “the Lord raised up a deliverer for Israel named Ehud… a left-handed man.” I think there was a point in specifying that he was left-handed. He went to King Eglon, who was oppressing Israel. Ehud strapped a short sword inside his right thigh, which makes sense if he is going to reach across and grab it with his left hand. After Ehud pays Eglon the required tribute he whispers, “I have a secret message for you, O king.” I suspect he said this with a wink of his eye; it was a sexual come-on. So Eglon meets Ehud alone in his “cool roof chamber.” Ehud reaches under his robe with his left hand, his unclean hand, and while Eglon may have been expecting Ehud to pull out his penis and thus was unalarmed he instead brings out a sword and thrusts it into Eglon’s belly. I realize one can interpret this without the sexual angle, but it makes sense that Ehud was using a sexual tryst as a ruse, first to get him alone, and then with Ehud being left-handed Eglon was expecting sex, not a sword, causing Eglon to drop his guard. That’s the significance of pointing out that Ehud was left-handed: it clues the reader in to what is happening.
Fast forward to Judges 20:16. In describing the soldiers from the tribe of Benjamin it points out that while most “drew the sword” there were 700 “choice men” that were “left-handed; each one could sling a stone at a hair and not miss.” These 700 were singled out as left-handed, and good with a sling. A sword requires more strength, whereas a sling requires skill and technique; that’s why David was able to overcome stronger Goliath. Now I am going to take a chance on saying something that might sound offensive. A sling requires a supple wrist; it is a stereotype that gay men are limp-wristed. Before you chastise me, I’m not the first to associate being limp-wristed with certain athletic skills. This was parodied in the classic film (well, cult classic) Revenge of the Nerds (1984) where the gay fraternity member fashions a flexible javelin specially adapted to his limp-wristed throwing style. You may think I am being silly, but I seriously wonder if the ancients made the same joke 3,000 years earlier at the expense of their gay comrades. “Those Benjamites,” making a twirling motion with his left hand, “were really good with a sling!” (wink-wink, ha-ha!). Thud! He falls over after being hit by a Benjamite’s stone. I don’t doubt that the ancient story tellers were just as likely to poke fun at gay men as people today (unfortunately), human nature being fairly consistent over time. And that passage in Judges may not be poking fun: it is just noting this “chosen” group of soldiers, maybe it’s even a compliment. So, possibly the Greeks were not the first to come up with the concept of a special troop of gay soldiers; the Israelites did it earlier. Possibly.
There is another hero of the Bible who was noted for being excellent with the sling. You know the story even if you didn’t grow up going to Sunday School: David, of David-and-Goliath fame. Young David was sent to the front line with supplies where he finds the giant Goliath taunting the Israelite soldiers. David is incensed. Recall Plato’s idea that gay soldiers may be more passionate about defending one another. So, David takes his preferred weapon, the sling, and goes out and slays Goliath, setting himself on the path to fame and glory. But surely David wasn’t gay, was he? Well…I’m not so sure. He had multiple wives and concubines, and one of his most notorious stories involved getting a married woman pregnant. Surely he was all man! Right? Not necessarily. Let’s look at the details.
When Saul takes David into his household we are told in 1st Samuel 18 that Saul’s son Jonathan “was knit [bound] to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as himself.” Later in 1st Samuel 19:1 we are told the he “greatly delighted in David.” Nothing wrong with that, certainly. In the next chapter we are told the touching story of David and Jonathan having to part ways because of Saul’s vendetta against David. At the end (20:41) we are told “they kissed each other and wept together, but David more.” Literally, David “became great” or “grew,” in the Hebrew. Um, which part of him “grew?” I don’t mean to be crude, but it is an odd phrase, as the two are kissing and weeping together. It probably just means David wept a greater amount, right?
How did David feel about Jonathan? We are told by David himself, after learning of Jonathan’s death in battle. “I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan. You have been very pleasant [delightful, lovely] to me. Your love to me was more wonderful than the love of women.” (2nd Samuel 1:26) That is a fairly strong affirmation of love, but it could still be just platonic or brotherly love; he does call him “brother,” after all.
However, compare his relationship with Jonathan to his relationship with his wives. Note in 1st Samuel 18 that David at first refused to be married to Saul’s oldest daughter Merab as well as the younger daughter Michal. It was only when Saul asked David for a dowry of 100 Philistine foreskins for Michal that David accepts the challenge. I’m not sure if he really wanted to marry Michal or if he just liked the challenge of killing Philistines; he went overboard and killed 200 of them, after all. We are told twice (1st Samuel 18:20, 28) that Michal loved David. Not once does it ever say that David loved her. And their relationship clearly soured in the end. In 2nd Samuel 6 David is bringing the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem and we are told that “Michal the daughter of Saul looked down through the window and saw King David leaping and dancing before the Lord; and she was contemptuous of him in her heart.” She goes on to tell him, “How the king of Israel dignified himself today! For he exposed himself today in the sight of his servants’ female slaves, as one of the rabble shamelessly exposes himself!” It would seem David was dancing with abandon while scantily dressed. Still, why did Michal take such offense? I suspect it was because David was showing passion in his dancing before the rabble that he did not show her in the bedroom. Did she know his true sexual orientation, and resent it? The story concludes by telling us that Michal “had no child to the day of her death.” Some may want to read into this a punishment from God for her rebuke of David, but I see a much simpler explanation: they never had sexual relations. No wonder Michal had a bad attitude toward the one who was her “husband” in name only.
What about his other wives? He took rich Nabal’s widow Abigail as a wife, but no mention of love; it may have been a profitable business arrangement for David. In the same story it mentions he also took Ahinoam of Jezreel as a wife; possibly a political move for the productive land there (Jezreel being a fertile area). In 2nd Samuel 3 we are told David had four more wives while in Hebron, and one is noted to be the daughter of another king. David was no fool; he knew how to use political marriages to expand his influence in the land. Each of these six wives are said to have borne him a son; that helps his growing dynasty. Then when he returns to Jerusalem “David took more concubines and wives from Jerusalem,” and had more sons and daughters. Surely David was thoroughly heterosexual to have so many wives and children, yes? No, gay men throughout history have often married and had children, and in ancient times it was particularly important for kings to marry and have children to cement or expand their power. Ah, but what about the love affair he is best known for?
In 2nd Samuel 11 we learn of David’s affair with the married woman Bathsheba. He sees her bathing and she “was very beautiful in appearance.” He sends for her, lies with her, and gets her pregnant. Ah, this proves David was straight! Not really. He could have been bisexual. Or perhaps he was experimenting. Throughout history gay men have been known to have sex with women just as straight men have been known to experiment with other men. That’s why sex researcher Alfred Kinsey developed his 0-to-6 sexual orientation scale; it is not a strictly binary behavior. Or perhaps even in that day it was necessary to keep up appearances, lest his enemies make sport of him and think less of him. Whatever. But as with his other wives it never says that David loved her. Never.
But David was best known as a great warrior, yes? Indeed, but that has nothing to do with his sexual orientation. Consider the Sacred Band of Thebes. Alexander the Great, who conquered one of the largest empires in history, may have been gay (but this is not uniformly accepted). There are some parallels between David and Alexander: along with being great warriors they both were involved in political marriages, had a love of the arts, and both were distraught when their closest male friend died. A member of our current U.S. cabinet, Pete Buttigieg is openly gay but served as a soldier in Afghanistan in 2014. Being a warrior and being gay are not mutually exclusive.
In summary, David’s closest relationship, the only person with whom he expresses love, was Jonathan. We are never told that he loved any woman. His first wife despised him, his last wife manipulated him on his death bed (see 1st Kings 1), and the others appear to be trophy wives or political necessities. His relationships with women appear to be shallow, while his closest relationships were men. David also was an artsy kind of guy: he is said to have loved music, poetry and dancing. That doesn’t make him gay, but it certainly doesn’t argue against it. To be sure, he had a reputation as a great warrior, but then so did other ancient gay men. So, was David gay? Bisexual? Other? And does it matter?
Truth is, the stories of David and Ehud and the rest are so shrouded in legend that it is ultimately impossible to know anything for certain about them. Perhaps Israel had its own version of the Sacred Band of Thebes, or maybe not. Maybe David was gay, or maybe not. But I think it is interesting to consider the possibility while conservative Christians look up to David as “a man after God’s own heart.”[4] Regardless of his orientation he was certainly promiscuous, with multiple wives and concubines and getting a married woman pregnant. It’s almost as if God doesn’t judge one on his sexual habits;[5] after all, there are much bigger issues in the world.
Also consider that being LGBTQ is not a new invention: sexually different people have been with us throughout history. Surely there have been members of this community intermingled with the ancient Jewish and early Christian people. It just seems that their presence has been downplayed or marginalized in the recorded history, which seems typical in most cultures.[6] However, look forward to my next post as I examine a group of sexually different people that are mentioned in the Bible.
One parting shot: it’s fun to think of how conservatives cling to their King James Version of the Bible, not knowing that in King James’ day the saying was, “Elizabeth was our king, and James is our queen!” But that’s another argument…
Thinking exercises:
1. Gays serving in the military continues to be a controversial topic today. Do you think a viable solution is to form separate gay units, like the Sacred Band of Thebes?
2. There are laws against male-on-male sex in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 (but not woman-on-woman), but many scholars believe the law we find in the Pentateuch was probably not formalized until after the Babylonian captivity ca. 600 BCE. Is it possible that attitudes changed as priests enacted these laws, and any references to gay men or soldiers in Israeli history had to be edited out or toned down?
3. What is your explanation for why David had deep relationships with men but superficial or disastrous relationships with women? Can you think of any New Testament figures who also were closer to men than to women?
[1] “Resolution on Appropriate Affirmative Responses to Sexual Orientation Distress and Change Efforts” by the APA, last updated: June 2022, date created: 2009.
[2] The source I have seen cited for this is Evans, Dave (2007) The History of British Magick after Crowley. Hidden Publishing. Unfortunately, I haven’t found a copy to confirm this.
[3] See “Handedness and sexual orientation” in Wikipedia.
[4] 1 Samuel 13:14
[5] I am speaking only of “victimless” sexual activity, with mutual consent. Adultery is prohibited in the Ten Commandments (the spouse being the victim) and Jesus spoke out very clearly against it. Rape also was against their law. Note that brides were expected to be virgins (Deut. 22:13f), but there is no such requirement for men. Many of the patriarchs had concubines, after all.
[6] Sex and Religion: Teachings and Taboos in the History of World Faiths by Dag Ølstein Endsjø (Reaktion Books, 2011) is an interesting history of how various religions have sometimes tolerated and other times persecuted sexual divergence.