Homosexuality Essay -- Gay Lesbian Homosexual Essays

Homo charge upualityMy frustration with debate approximately homosexuality stems not so much from the arguments themselves, but the actual order of argument. Often, two experts will approach the topic from two radically different expert fields. One may be a New volition scholar and thus draws out the intricacies of Romans 118-28 and the true meaning of the interchange homosexual offender (i.e. older man sleeping with a one-year-old boy) in that case. The former(a) may be a biologist who appeals to earthy logic and reproduction to defend sex as a behavior meant for heterosexuals. Both of them atomic number 18 right within their own expertise. But they cannot, then, debate, for it would be like Chuck pitching to a batter on other baseball field.I was pleasantly surprised, then, when Via and Gagnon approached the issue of homosexuality from the same radicalthe Bible. If indeed homosexuality is to be embraced (or rejected) by the Church as a legitimate expression of one s being, then one cannot cut down the Bible as only part of the argument. Behind almost any denominational tradition, the Bible stands as a primary source of perception/ethics/practice that, even if its inerrancy is being questioned more than recently, cannot be discounted so easily. Approaches Therefore, they both come to scripture as authoritative, though both to a fault read it through a historical/cultural critics lens. Gagnon certainly takes the go down that the Old Testament and New Testament commandments condemning homosexual practices are absolute, saying that a purely scientific renege of multiple scriptural instructions is not enough. As scripture interprets scripture, he points out that Ezekiel, Jude, and other texts all support homosexualities blanket condemnation. Via seems m... ..., they should not act upon them in a sexual way, as they can be fully alive without sex. almost questions I still harbor If homosexuality is something God has given benignity as a si gn of Gods wrath (as Via implies) and not necessarily a sin, ought we still accept it? Can we take the Leviticus departure out of context and put it with the impure lawfulnesss about menstruation when it truly rests between a verse about not sacrificing to idols (obviously against both OT and NT law) and having sex with animals? If we can, then we may make the case that beastiality was just an impurity law and is now a legitimate form of sexual expression. Should we make decisions in the Church based on what is best for the whole body in terms of acceptance and love of people (so that others may be more open to hearing the gospel message), even if it may be awry(p) according to scripture?