cornellcrawford said...
Part three:
Please, please consult exegeses that refute a fundamental application of Scripture. You will find there are very intelligent, God-fearing, open-minded, and critical essays that go beyond the surface of these passages in Leviticus and Romans to debate what the writers really meant. Historically, you will find that fundamentalism festers in an environment in which the society is largely uneducated, or is under the pressure of fear to keep control. Look beyond conservative, fundamental "experts;" most likely, if they have any sort of academic background, it is from a conservative institution that only reinforces itself with fundamental instructors.
Take the example of Jesus, himself. He challenged the fundamental nature of both the Pharisees and Sadduccees. He subverted the system--he didn't play by the "rules." He said "the Kingdom of God is within you." He came to free us from the Law. Part of that Law was a misunderstanding and shunning of homosexuality. Though it was obviously extant, the larger society could not understand it. Today, the American Psychological Association states it is not a disease, that it is natural (though it is in the minority), and cannot be changed. Just because homosexuality is not the majority doesn't automatically mean it's wrong. It's found in mammals as well. It's part of nature. I know, you may argue that that nature is wrong, but quite honestly, who are you to say it is? Do you have the qualifications in psychology or theology to assert such a claim, or is this just "something you know" based on years of exposure to an interpretation that is based on ignorance, judgment, and fear? Are you going to live the rest of your life miserable and bound and interpretation of scripture that makes you a second-class citizen?
My reply:
Just because those writers are out there, does not mean they are right. There are still a lot who say the opposite, and a lot of Christian Psychologists who say the opposite.
As for Jesus... He never contradicted the Old Testament. Much as been made of the fact that He never said anything about homosexuality. Possibly because it was not much of an issue in Israel - hence Paul addressing it instead - He also didn't address bestiality or incest - or other things the Bible clearly condemns, but I digress.
On to mammals. I love that argument - that other mammals/animals do it. I don't mean to be unkind, but that is a bad argument. Some also eat their young, and all mammals will have sex with any animal of their kind, whether it be their sibling or parent - so the animal/mammal argument does not carry over well, unless you're going to say incest is ok, since it occurs all of the time in animals - and far more than homosexual sex. Reminds me of a funny story - years ago - I was about 15, our neighbor girl, about 8 years old, got 2 kittens, a male and a female. I made the statement that in the near future, they would be having kittens. Her reaction - "oh, no! They are brother and sister!" - animals don't care.
And no, I have no psychological degree, but I can read - and I can read my Bible and see that it says sex between 2 men is wrong - a sin.
And by the way, Jesus did have a lot to say about lust - and there is a lot of lust in homosexuality.
No comments:
Post a Comment