« If God Doesn't Heal Amputees, He Doesn't Exist | Main | Relativism’s Moral Hero Disproves Relativism »

May 26, 2015

Comments

No scientific data regarding homosexuality? Wrong

"If all who have a desire for the same sex do so 'naturally,' then to whom does this verse apply? Pagans for one, straight men who rape other men in prison, rapists since rape is about power, not pleasure

The argument does not self destruct because constitutional homosexuality was foreign to Paul. It actually increases it's validity. The 'orgy' of 'unnatural' sex acts is what is being condemned, not concentual loving monogamous same-sex relationships.

BECAUSE homosexuality was not a known concept, he doesn't have to clarify whether he's speaking of constitutional homosexuality.

Then on to 'natural' "Homosexuals do not abandon natural desires; they abandon natural functions" There are bibles that do not have the word 'function' in the scripture. You cannot make a valid argument based on the word function in relation to the word natural. Furthermore, natural desires do NOT go with natural functions in homosexual people. Same-sex attraction is the natural desire. So you may argue that homosexuality is unnatural, but you cannot make this argument based on Romans 1.

Further note, Matthew 19: 4-5 is about divorce.

Please include the surrounding verses, and the context in which verses are given. You may be unecessarily condemning children of God.

The greatest commandment is love of God; the second is to love your neighbor. Matthew 22

Thanks for your comment, A Drake Mason. I recommend Kevin DeYoung's excellent, short book What Does the Bible Really Teach about Homosexuality for responses to all the points you've raised here.

As for two of the points—"homosexuality was not a known concept" and the implication that loving your neighbor means affirming people's sexual behavior—I'll cover those over the next couple of days on the blog. One post I had already written (a happy coincidence!), but the second I'll write in response to your comment. Thanks for posting.

Drake, Romans 1 is all about consensual, adult homosexual relationships: v.27 "..the men gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men...."
I also challenge your premise that 'homosexualty' was not a known concept. It was quite prevalent in Roman society and in the ancient world.

Where in Scripture can you point out homosexual activity of ANY kind is treated as a neutral or a positive practice?

The comments to this entry are closed.