exegesis and sexuality from What does a liberal think?

From: bivalve (bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com)
Date: Fri May 17 2002 - 14:19:59 EDT

  • Next message: Stuart d Kirkley: "Re: Proof?"

    >Besides, the TEN commandments which are the ONLY things in the bible
    >etched in stone refer to adultery NOT homosexuality. <

    Although certainly not identified as a scholarly attempt at exegesis,
    such dubious interpretation seems common in popular attempts to claim
    that homosexuality is Scripturally acceptible. Like the sloppy
    science common in young-earth contexts, it makes me wonder, if better
    arguments exist, why are they not used?

    This particular claim suffers from two related problems. First,
    there is the assumption that the decalogue is a full enumeration of
    all moral regulations that apply to us today. Secondly, it gives an
    extremely narrow interpretation of the command. In contrast, Jesus
    declared that lustful thoughts were in violation of the command.
    Interpreted in such a broad sense, the decalogue does provide a
    complete summary, but this means that Do not commit adultery rules
    out all types of sexual sin. This does not establish whether
    homosexuality is a type of sexual sin; for that, other passages must
    be considered.

    Another claim of this sort that I have encountered is that Lev. 20:13
    actually only prohibits sexual relations between males in a woman's
    bed. It may be grammatically possible, but silly, to interpret the
    passage in that way. Again, the claim that the prohibition of
    homosexuality is a mistranslation of in the KJV, slavishly copied in
    all later versions, merely displays ignorance of history, especially
    the history of translation and of views on homosexual behavior.
    (E.g., Geoffrey of Monmouth was not influenced by the KJV when he
    identified homosexuality as a sin a few hundred years before 1611,
    nor were the translators of the Geneva Bible in the mid-1500's.)

    >Seems to me people in the church never reference a good chunk of
    >folks in church who have been, or currently are in an adulterous
    >situation. <
    It is a legitimate criticism that homosexuality is often singled out
    as a preeminent sin, whereas heterosexual sin is ignored. However,
    this does not mean that all sexual sin should be condoned. A good
    counterexample comes from Harvest
    Ministries (http://www.harvestusa.org/) who seek to address
    "homosexuality, pornography, and other sexual addictions".

         Dr. David Campbell
         Old Seashells
         University of Alabama
         Biodiversity & Systematics
         Dept. Biological Sciences
         Box 870345
         Tuscaloosa, AL 35487 USA

    That is Uncle Joe, taken in the masonic regalia of a Grand Exalted
    Periwinkle of the Mystic Order of Whelks-P.G. Wodehouse, Romance at
    Droitgate Spa

    ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
    From: "Shuan Rose" <shuanr@boo.net>
    Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 12:00:10 -0400

    >This from my brother. Forwarded without comment.
    >-----Original Message-----
    >F(Name snipped)
    >Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 11:26 AM
    >To: shuanr@BOO.NET
    >Subject: Re: FW: What does a liberal think?
    >Thanks Shu, I sometimes wonder why people make such a big deal about
    >something that people have no control over. Seems to me there are much
    >more pressing issues in the world. Besides, the TEN commandments which
    >are the ONLY things in the bible etched in stone refer to adultery NOT
    >homosexuality. Seems to me people in the church never reference a good
    >chunk of folks in church who have been, or currently are in an adulterous
    >situation. Maybe conservative folks need to focus their energy on hunger,
    >war, famine, poverty etc than whom one finds to love in this world.
    >Especially after 9/11, these conservative folks need to BACK OFF and
    >think about more important things, Okay I have ranted enough, hope all is
    >well, lets talk later this week so we can catch up, okay, Love, G. Oh, if
    >there are any such folks you want to forward this ranting to, don't
    >hesitate to do so. Another book that addresses this and other issues and
    >is a really good read is THE GOOD BOOK by Peter Gomes.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 17 2002 - 14:42:31 EDT