From: (Dave Hutchison)
Subject: Re: Where does which Bible condem Homosexuality?
Date: 14 Mar 1996 00:57:00 -0700

Summary of The New Testament and Homosexuality
by Robin Scroggs, professor of New Testament,
Union Theological Seminary, a happily married heterosexual
who has been acclaimed in many Christian publications for
his serious research about what the New Testament really
says about homosexuality.

Scroggs reason for his research was a discussion of
homosexuality by ministers. "I sat amazed as I heard the
Bible being invoked in ways that were wholly inappropriate
to any canons of biblical scholarship. Perhaps something
snapped in me...for better or worse I decided somebody
needed to provide resources that would give both clarity and
honesty." He says he has no personal interest but sees the
tragic results of false biblical scholarship and the tragic
rejections of homosexuals in the name of Christian
righteousness or even love. It is about time someone spoke
honestly about the issue, not just from emotional homophobic
assumptions of what the New Testament really says.

Conclusions: 1) The NT church was not very concerned about
homosexuality as a problem,  All three instances referring
to homosexuality are from preformed traditions, either Greek
or Jewish.  No single NT author considers the issue
important enough to write his own sentence about it!  The
argument "against nature" is the most common form of attack
on pederasty in the Greco-Roman texts. Pederasty involved
forced male rape even by heterosexuals and slave boy
prostitutes.  It says nothing about today's loving
homosexual relationships.  Even in Romans 1, where Paul
integrates the illustration of homosexuality into his larger
theological arguments, there is no advance beyond idolatry
and pagan vices of 1 Cor 6:9.

2) Female homosexuality gets even less attention appearing
only in Romans 1, and here with less emphasis than male
homosexuality.  This is doubtlessly because little was said
in the Greco-Roman world about lesbianism, and because in OT
law no penalties attached to such female practices.  This
again suggest pederasty was the vice, not homosexuality in
general.  In Romans 1 Paul's language "about male
homosexuality, must have had, could only have had, pederasty
in mind."

3) The two vice lists attack very specific forms of
pederasty, not homosexuality in general.

Scroggs concludes:  "The basic model of today's Christian
homosexual community is so different from the model attacked
by the New Testament that the criterion of reasonable
similarity of context is not met.  The conclusion I have to
draw seems inevitable: Biblical judgements against
homosexuality are not relevant to today's debate.. should in
no way be a weapon to justify refusal of ordination, not
because the Bible is not authoritative, but simply because
it does not address the issues involved".  He concludes with
more discussion that pederasty was the issue of the biblical
texts, not today's homosexual relationships. This is just a
sample of one sincere Christian scholar who like many reach
the same conclusions regarding biblical truth, not just
traditional Church dogma.

Dave, Liberated Christians, Phoenix Az
Teaching Positive Intimacy and Women Centered Sexuality
Exposing False Traditional Biblical Teachings
For Free Info request from
Over 1600 subscribers get our Free Internet Newsletter
Return to Gay:Religion
The Bibble Pages, Christian Molick,