Homosexuality And The Bible [NOOK Book]

Not a Worthy Book From A Scholarly Perspective

Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views, as it¿s title states is a book about what the Bible says about homosexuality written from two different perspectives. Dan O. Via, Professor Emeritus of New Testament at Duke University Divinity School states that while the Bible does, in fact, decry homosexual acts, he doesn¿t feel that this prohibition should extend to homosexuals in committed relationships. Robert A. J. Gagnon, Associate Professor of New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, disagrees with this position, as he sees any homosexual act 'or ¿homosex¿' as a violation of God¿s commandments. In my view, from a scholarly perspective, I find the book to be absolutely useless and not worth reading. The main problem I have with the work is the reliance on an English interpretation of the Scriptures. Both men read the Levitical prohibition against male-to-male sexual intercourse with the familiar ¿A man shall not lie with a man as with a woman,¿ yet neither of them translate the wording as it accurately should be translated ¿With a male you shall not lie the lyings of a woman.¿ This does not say the same thing as these authors would have you believe, and for this reason, their work is terribly misleading. Of the two views, I have to think that Via does the better job of making a convincing argument, but mostly because Gagnon does such a horrible job on his side. In particular, Gagnon distorts the Scriptures, and at times blatantly lies in order to make his point. For example, he creates analogies to justify his position that have never been used in any argument in favor of same sex relations. He states that ¿There is no virtue to being more consistently disobedient to Jesus¿ teaching.¿ '47' As a professor of New Testament Studies he knows fully well that Jesus never taught anything against homosexuality. In fact, Jesus never mentioned it. Gagnon claims that same-sex intercourse creates problems such as mental health issues and gender identity disorders, and quotes himself as his source. First, anyone who quotes himself as a source is either extremely egomaniacal, or hasn¿t bothered to take the time to research his topic properly, and in Gagnon¿s case, I fear it¿s a bit of both. In the first ten pages of his argument, he cites himself as a source six times. In fact, throughout his writing he rarely cites anyone else. Second, his arguments are not supported by psychiatric studies, which he simply ignores. In short, if it doesn¿t help his argument, it doesn¿t exist. He compares homosexuality to incest and loosely mentions bestiality, which is a clear indication of his own internal homophobia. The man does not like homosexuals and goes to great lengths to attempt to make a logical, scholarly argument to justify his position. He fails miserably in this endeavor. In the few cases where he does deviate from his English interpretation to the original language, he does so with deliberate confusion and obfuscation of the truth. He implies that words are used in contexts where they are not used and uses modern day meanings for words that do not show such context in the first century '55'. He also deliberately misquotes the Scriptures whenever it serves his argument. His statement that Ezekiel refers to homosex is completely false, as Ezekiel clearly names the sins of Sodom and never refers to homosexuality in any form. He states that Deuteronomy speaks out against ¿homosexual cult prostitutes¿ '59' when he knows that the word he is translating cannot be translated as homosexual. It speaks out against cult prostitutes both male and female, but never infers that the males are having sex with other males. This is a complete lie on Gagnon¿s part, and clearly shows his homophobia. One of his weakest arguments is when he states that Jesus ordered his followers to

4 out of 10 people found this review helpful.

A good survey of the debate

This book written by scholars is not overly scholarly, allowing the interested reader coming from any level or perspective to see the arguments from both sides. It also allows for the possibility that both arguments are being made with the bona fide *intent* of biblical faithfulness. With so much heat in the debate, this is a little light in the darkness. Don't take it for more than it is, but rather as a primer or overview, and see what comes. Maybe after reading this the person you disagree with won't be as bad as you thought.

1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

No text was provided for this review.

No text was provided for this review.

No text was provided for this review.