O Freunde, nicht diese Toene

From: george murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Date: Thu May 16 2002 - 09:11:58 EDT

  • Next message: Shuan Rose: "FW: FW: What does a liberal think?"

         There has been a lot of discussion here recently about
    homosexuality. Much of it has been to the point but there has not been
    a lot of exploration of some fundamental theological questions which are
    crucial for the way we approach this - and other - issues. May I
    suggest that some attention to these would be useful?

         1. What are the relative roles and importances of (a) natural law
    arguments and (b) biblical injunctions in dealing with ethical issues?
         2. How do we understand the role of natural law in view of the fact
    that our understandings of what is natural
             (a) may change with time, and
             (b) may be culturally conditioned?
    [In illustration of the latter point: Paul does indeed describe
    homosexuality as "unnatural" (para phusin) in Rom.1:26-27 but in I
    Cor.11:14 he also says that "nature itself teaches" (he phusis aute
    didaskei) that it is degrading for a man to have long hair.]
         3. Can we differentiate between OT laws that (a) express
    permanently valid religious or ethical principles and (b) those that are
    essentially the civil law of ancient Israel which Christians are not
    obligated to follow? (Shaun Rose's post "Some questions for Kamilla"
    suggested, tongue in cheek, some examples in the latter category.) If
    such a distinction is legitimate, what criteria do we use to decide
    whether prohibitions of eating shellfish or of homosexual intercourse
    between males fall in category (a) or (b)?



    George L. Murphy
    "The Science-Theology Interface"

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 16 2002 - 12:43:02 EDT