Essay About Conservative Views And Given Passages

Sdagh
Essay Preview: Sdagh
Report this essay
Homosexuality in the Church
With homosexuality being more visible and more accepted in our modern,
liberal society, the church, which has always been founded on very old and
very conservative views, must now struggle to decide where homosexual
Christians fit into the church. Several questions have been raised
surrounding this issue, such as the argument of right versus wrong, and the
debate on how people “become” gay.
Hayes and Furnish, in the first section of the book Homosexuality in the
Church, express their opposing views on whether or not the Bible clearly
answers the question of right or wrong. In examining various biblical
passages in order to prove their conflicting points of right or wrong, they
both come to one similar conclusion: one cannot simply use passages in the
Bible to prove without a shadow of a doubt that homosexuality is wrong, nor
to prove it should be an accepted part of the Christian lifestyle.
Hayes, a New Testament scholar, bases his discussions from a conversation he
held with his dying homosexual friend. Because of this, his views are much
more readable, and are also more substantial due to the context of his
views. Hayes and his friend both feel that the writings of the gay
apologists “did justice neither to the biblical text, nor the depressing
reality of the gay subculture (4).”
Furnish throughout his essay looks at ” how the given passages functioned in
its original, multidimensional context (18).” According to Furnish, one can
rarely base specific moral views on direct quotes from the bible, especially
moral issues from modern society. In this case, he examines the idea that
no concepts nor terms existed for heterosexuality, homosexuality nor
bisexuality. He also points out that one must be wary of translations, and
argues the entire context of a word is just as important as its modern
translation.
The first biblical passage they discuss, is The Men of Sodom found in
Genesis verse nineteen. Hayes believes “the gang-rape scenario in this
passage exemplifies the wickedness of the city, but there is nothing in the
passage pertinent to a judgment about the morality of consensual homosexual
intercourse (5).” Furnish also views the theme of this passage not to be one
of homosexual behavior but the intent to do violence to strangers. ” Sodom
s sin is identified with inhospitality in general, without any sexual
reference at all (5).”
In the next passage that appears in Leviticus, the opinions of the two
authors differ on what they believe the Holiness code states. Hayes finds
the passage as an explicit rule regarding homosexuality, as it reads, “You
shall not lie with a male as with a women; it is an abomination (Lev.18:
22)(5).” Whereas, Furnish believes that the Holiness code must be looked in
the context of the culture. If looking within the context “defilement does
not mean moral defilement but uncleanness in a literal, physical sense
(20).” Furnish determines the “Holiness Code prohibits such things as
breeding animals with a different kind, sowing a field with two kinds of
seeds, and wearing a garment that is made made of two different materials
(Lev. 19:19) (20).”
These two authors have proved that you cannot base an argument for or
against homosexuality strictly from the reading of scriptures. Rather than
arguing the acceptance of homosexuals in Christianity, Stanton Jones, Don
Workman and Chandler Burr discuss the origins of homosexuality in order to
raise the issue of “rehabilitation” of Christian homosexuals.
Jones and Workman believe that homosexuality is a choice, as both
individuals feel that the issue of homosexuality is ” biblical, theological,
ethical, and ecclesiastical;