tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11928317.post843973049713811870..comments2024-01-29T14:24:46.852-05:00Comments on Wes Ellis: The Bible and Homosexuality: Romans 1wellis68http://www.blogger.com/profile/06087588494600746854noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11928317.post-83325860990811713062012-04-13T08:11:41.228-04:002012-04-13T08:11:41.228-04:00Great thoughts Wes. Though I am on the "other...Great thoughts Wes. Though I am on the "other side", I would concede that homosexuals have been victims all too often of marginalization. I appreciate your thoughtfulness and scholarship. I do not agree with your assumption that anyone who believes the practice (same sex acts) is wrong is necessarily hating. That implies, quite frankly, that you know the heart of individuals and that permissible equates beneficial. I would not spend great length defending my love and experience in the homosexual community (both Christian and non-Christian). I would say that my belief on what is beneficial, though contrary to born desires, does not mean I or others have chosen to hate. We all believe and teach things that are wrong in God's sight. We all are, in some measure, going to be guilty of heresy. But we dare not tread on assuming people's hearts. Then any who disagree might be enemies. You and I, however, remain brothers because of our refusal to do this. Grace and peace to you.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04681200355928377615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11928317.post-48137125041185451482012-04-11T23:33:03.386-04:002012-04-11T23:33:03.386-04:00I would be interested to read a book on Roman temp...I would be interested to read a book on Roman temple practices in a book that is something like "Christians as the Romans saw Them," but about the way that Romans viewed their own sexual practices so that we can have some view of how the Romans viewed themselves (as this is often more telling than an outside polemic of such a practice). <br /><br />Any way that we slice it, as you note in the post, too much focus on the practice itself over people becomes a problem.Dannyhttp://coldfire.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11928317.post-51505645528536577972012-04-11T10:43:41.907-04:002012-04-11T10:43:41.907-04:00Jeff,
Good note on Dio. I should not have implied...Jeff, <br />Good note on Dio. I should not have implied that Dio was influencing Paul but their correspondence, along with others who were writing in roughly the same time period , seems to me to be our best evidence for what Paul may have had in mind... a particularly unethical form of homosexuality. <br /><br />I have written in the past on Wright's view on this and, as I mentioned, there's no issue here in Romans 1 if Paul was familiar with monogamous, Christian homosexual relationships. It would still be a mistake for him to apply this description in Romans 1 to those sorts of ethical homosexual relationships. I don't think that's what he's doing. I've also read Hayes and he's definitely the most convincing on that side. Like I said, the other side has made its case. <br /><br />I don't think that this is anymore hoop jumping than what is required to get out of the would-be sexist texts about women being silent in church and so-on. Yes, there is necessary exegetical work to be done, but that doesn't mean it's gymnastics. Ockham's Razor takes me the other direction...if the Bible's obsession with love and justice for the marginalized and oppressed is added to the evidence, then, since both sides have made their case, it seems simple for me to conclude that I should stand on the side of gay people who have been marginalized in our culture, especially by the church. <br /><br />Ockham's Razor, when I see Christian gay couples who love one another and love Jesus and have been faithful to one another, tells me that their relationship is ethical. i'd have to jump through hoops to show that they're "living in sin."wellis68https://www.blogger.com/profile/06087588494600746854noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11928317.post-6946088334357735352012-04-11T02:01:30.732-04:002012-04-11T02:01:30.732-04:00Wes, this is a very interesting post, but the refe...Wes, this is a very interesting post, but the reference is Dio Chrysostom as an influence on Paul is pretty off base. The dating of Romans is, at the latest, mid-60s as it is indisputably Pauline. Dio didn't write his discourses until Trajan was Caesar, which is almost to the second century. Dio more likely would have been borrowing from Paul rather than the other way around. It also appears that Dio is using Paul as a launching pad, adding his own specific commentary to Paul's more broad condemnation of homosexuality. Keep in mind, too that even if the discourses had been written during Paul's time, they would have been very new, most likely un-circulated volumes that would not have gained much traction by the time of Paul's death (Dio would have only been 26 at the time of Paul's approximate death).<br /><br />There's a larger argument here that Paul is basing on the creative order. The language (in Greek) alludes to the Septuagint words of creation throughout Romans 1. There is also evidence (from vases and other writings) that monogamous homosexual relationships were, in fact, present during Paul's time, and while they may not have been prevalent or even the norm, Paul would have been aware of them. Richard Hays has an excellent synopsis on Romans 1 in his "Moral Vision of the New Testament" and N. T. Wright, while not writing anything, has spoken on the subject as well and finds it difficult to say that Paul would not have been aware of monogamous homosexual relationships and seems to indicate that this would have been on Paul's mind as well in writing Romans 1.<br /><br />I've heard the arguments from both sides, and Ockham's Razor consistently leads me to believe that the simplest interpretation of Romans 1 is most accurate: Paul is broadly condemning homosexuality, not some subset or offshoot practice. More specifically, he seems to be condemning the act of homosexuality regardless of orientation. It doesn't seem to matter to Paul in what context the act is happening; the act itself is inappropriate. Every other interpretation I've seen requires so much hoop jumping and gymnastics that it doesn't hold up to scrutiny (in my mind anyway). Now, Christians have handled this issue horribly, particularly in recent history. I believe we are called to love everyone, to accept everyone, and to understand that it is God's job to judge, to change, to direct, and lead. We are simply witnesses of God's love, pointing back to Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit. When I see it in that perspective, peripheral issues like this (and I really believe theologically it is since the Bible doesn't devote much time at all while the theme of God sending his witnesses is practically omnipresent throughout Scripture) fall to the wayside.Jeff Dnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11928317.post-70760341457857726462012-04-10T19:32:13.887-04:002012-04-10T19:32:13.887-04:00Thanks for the comment Jonathan :-)Thanks for the comment Jonathan :-)wellis68https://www.blogger.com/profile/06087588494600746854noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11928317.post-707188062318681082012-04-10T19:09:31.070-04:002012-04-10T19:09:31.070-04:00Hi, just saw you on Twitter, thanks. You write wel...Hi, just saw you on Twitter, thanks. You write well, you're columnist? I have also dived into the Bible recently. Especially the so-called "clobber passages". Interesting, not to say fun to hear all opinions, both religious people as well as from more secular people of what the Bible says or not says about homosexuality. I started my journey with a completely different approach; what the Jewish Bible (Old Testament) says about the promises about Jesus... think I have been with Jews For Judaism to long, he, he. But, as a gay myself (not a big deal, really), I started to look for these mysterious Clobber Passages. It was a new concept for me, so I had to make a little research on that too. Well, I read Greek in High school, so when I became a Christian in 1980 (Pentecostal), I read the New Testament and soon realized that the preachers back home used the Bibel as a drunk uses a lamp-post; not so much for illumination, but as a support! I later learned Hebrew, sonow I can follow the Jewish Bible (O.T) too.<br /><br />Make an experiment!<br /><br />The word "homosexuals" is interesting while using Bible app from YouVersion©. I found that word literally speaking in 1 Cor. 6:9 and 1 Tim. 1:10 (NASB translation). The strange thing is that when you make a search in the Bible app, you even run into a bunch of verses that does not mention this word explicitly; from N.T: Matt. 19:5, James 4:12, Jude v7.<br /><br />O.T: Lev. 18:22, 20:13, Deut. 22:5. The last one is about hm... "transvestites" and "drag queens"?? So, you see, it's funny that Bible App knowingly place an "implicit" thought in the verses which is not so crystal clear. That is an old Judean-Christian concept. What we know, hoverever, is that neither the Christian nor the Jewish Bible speaks of homosexuality, this concept was unknown for the people of the Bible. And the opposite situation; the other side of the "agenda" tries to find supporting verses. They would love to see gay affirmative verses in the Bible, such as the story of David and Jonathan, or the story of Ruth and Naomi. It sounds so beautiful, but unfortunately it's a hasty conclusion.<br /><br />So to the sources; Tanach, the Jewish Bible. According to orthodox Judaism, the Levitical texts are really carved in stone, they have an eternal legitimacy, but modern conservative and liberal Jewishness have a lighter view on the topic. One thing is for sure; The Bible does not subject homosexuality, but that all loving relationships demand a certain order, to be performed in a righteous way. Note that the Levitical verses from chapter 18 and 20 is not about moral and ethics, but are included in the Holiness Laws.<br /><br />To be holy was very important for the Jewish people just days away from the promised land. "You shall be holy, because I am holy". They were about to enter into an area where the people used an unrighteous sacrificial system, a bad copy of a right way to make sacrifices, and to the wrong god too! The surrounding peoples performed explicit sexually sacrificies, and there were even peoples that also used to sacrifice their own children to Molech. If we read the Levitical texts in context, well, that's so interesting! Finally, later rabbinic thinkers in the past did not consider homosexuality a Jewish behavior problem.<br />Read more on Bible "thumb verse" picking on Twitter @Tzedaqyal.<br />\ JonathanJonathan Tzedaqyalnoreply@blogger.com