Customer Reviews

Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I do not come to this with merely abstract interest. I was asked to read this book by a good friend who is a gay Christian man (his description of himself). As he and I have had a many month conversation about homosexuality and the praxis of Christian sexuality I was seeking to read some of the best of the pro-gay Christian writing. This book was the first he assigned.

Dan O. Via is a Professor Emeritus of NT at Duke (per back cover) and Gagnon is a PS USA guy at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary. Both are very able scholars and clearly very bright. One could get an adequate book review by simply looking at the pictures on the back cover of the volume. Via has this slick, "I know what I'm doing and I know I know it" hypnotist look on his face, and Gagnon has this preppy little tie tied over a well starched white shirt with his perfectly groomed ill advised beard.

Via's essay read like he looks. It's smooth, direct, authoritative. Via sees Homosexual orientation as, in the words of my friend, "part of God's diversity in creation". Specifically he says he regards gay people as "differently ordered rather than disordered." (pg. 4) Via takes two main tacks- one exegetical and one hermeneutical. Exegetically, he argues that the prohibition of homosexuality in the OT is parallel to uncleanness, not sin. He then goes on to note that the category of uncleanness is abrogated in the NT. He states "the OT category of impurity is annulled" (pg. 9).

Hermeneutically Via sees quite a lot of room between the ancient text and our present reality. In fact, it's best said up front: anyone looking to via for a pro-gay argument with a "high view of scripture" will be disappointed. Via seems to hold some view in the neo-orthodox trajectory and if you're looking for something else he'll loose you on page 2.

Gagnon is also as you would expect form his picture- a mathematical perfectionist in terms of grammatical argumentation, semantical occurrences, and general factual scholarship. While Via's essay is 39 pages, Gagnon's is 58, and even within that longer essay he points us to his web page for more on the issue at hand. The astute bibliophile will note he has published a 493 page version with Abingdon press in 2001. Gagnon has a more direct, less stylistic approach that could not be more stylistically different than his co-author. Generally speaking Gagnon disagrees with Via. He has a somewhat higher view of scripture, takes the biblical passages in a more historic way, sees homosexuality as non-essential in regard to personhood, and sees the hermeneutical gap between the ancient text and the modern context as much narrower than Via.

In terms of my assessment, Via frustrated me and I found Gagnon's arguments to be more clearly explained, better though through and well supported by verifiable facts. For example as Via explains that homosexuality in the OT is considered unclean and not sinful he makes the argument that the two different words for "abomination" in Leviticus are synonymous- implying that eating a dead bird is as offensive morally as homosexual sex. But this is a true claim that is also very false. It is true that the LLX (Greek translation of the OT 200 BCE) uses the same word to translate the word for the "abomination" of eating unclean animals, but it does so only once in 18 occurrences (the rest refering technically to animals that are unclean or in an unclean state). The other verb that is supposedly "interchangeable" is translated with two other verbs 38 times and the "interchanges"one only once. So Technically he's telling the truth, but to those of us with linguistic training and training in the Biblical languages, he's being intellectually dishonest or he didn't check an important claim in a source he didn't cite. This broke my trust, and Via was arguing uphill from page 8 on.

This is especially startling given the contrast of Gagnon's rigor. Gagnon's meticulous nature reminds me of the kind of person I'd never date but who I would love as an oncologist. His argumentation is superior in my view by a long shot, but then again, I don't think that's much of a feat since I think arguing scripture does not condone homosexuality does not take a tremendous amount of creativity. Via is very creative, but to a fault I think if one is attempting to write a Christian theology.

Via will not convince the unconvinced thinker with biblical specialization, and I would not recommend him as a spokesman for Gay Christians. For others having this conversation between heterosexual and homosexual friends, I would recommend "Homosexuality and Christian Community" ed. Choon-Leong Seow. Some articles are no better, but the spattering of Princeton Scholars that contribute to that volume construct a better overall volume I think.

Concerning this volume, quite frankly I expected more form a Duke Scholar and was badly let down by Via. I am still looking for a really good pro-gay writer who has put his/er view together with a high view of Scripture.

Having read several volumes in the Zondervan series edited by Stan Gundry and the IVP series of "four views" books, I had hoped this book would be representative of the best scholarship on each side. Sadly, it was a big disappointment.

I hoped to see both authors go beyond abstract analysis and discuss the practical implications from a pastoral and/or missiological point of view. I wanted the authors to approach the nitty-gritty question of what a Christian holding each view could say to a person in a committed homosexual relationship. While it is easy to deduce the implications of Via's arguments, Gagnon does not go beyond trying to prove that homosexuality is a really bad sin, from which people should repent. Because in my world there are real people in real homosexual relationships, sometimes already raising children together, I need to see something more than just judgment. I want the abstract theories at least tested by talking about what repentance might look like for this sort of person. Gagnon stops too far short of saying anything useful to the homosexual exploring Christianity or to the Christian dealing with real, flesh-and-blood homosexual persons. He has much to say in theory, but nothing useful.

If you are looking for a high-quality introduction to this topic, wait for one of the publishers experienced with this genre to commission a work demanding that their authors face the practical implications of their positions.

This is a scholarly and civil treatment of a controversial issue. Dr. Via admits the scriptures consistently condemn homosexual practice. The core of his argument is: "I maintain, however, that the absolute prohibition can be overridden regardless of how many times it is stated, for there are good reasons to override it" (p. 94).
Dr. Gagnon contends that there are no good reasons to override the clear teaching of scripture. He says, "It is hard, when one sees another struggling with temptations, not to alleviate the struggle by permitting what Scripture deems sinful" (p. 92). He argues against declassifying homosexuality as a sin regardless of societal pressure to do so.
I was unconvinced by Via's reasons to override the scriptures, but I found his arguments useful in understanding those who take his stand.
I would recommend this book as an introduction to a scriptural view of homosexuality.

If you're looking for a book that presents a one-sided view of the topic of homosexuality from a biblical point of view, there are plenty of propaganda books available for people who want a book that simply agrees with their existing thoughts on the subject.

If, on the other hand, you want a book that honestly points out the strengths & weakness of the arguments on BOTH sides of this question, this book is for you.

The book begins with Dan Via's presentation of the pro-homosexuality point of view, and Robert Gagnon follows with a presentation of the anti-homosexuality point of view. Both authors then follow up with a rebuttal to the other's presentation, an additional step which fairly well ensures that each's points are fairly presented & counter-argued.

On such a hot topic such as this, it is rare to find a book such as this one that treats the opposing point of view in such a fair and respectful manner. Unfortunately, most books on this subject (from both points of view) tend to be written in a very un-Christian manner, resorting to vitriolic name-calling rather than reasoned arguing.

(Note that my use of the terms pro-homosexuality & anti-homosexuality refer to the author's view of how God feels about the subject as expressed in the Christian Bible, and don't imply any personal hatred or bigotry by either author)

This book is a good brief introduction to both sides of this debate. It is one of the few works available that actually represents both sides. I would recommend this as a starting point for anyone looking into the debate. For those who are interested, Gagnon has also written the definitive work on the subject representing the Biblical position. It is entitled, "The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics."

For those who want to understand the current debate about whether homosexuality is condemned in scripture or not, this is one of the best resources I have found. It presents both sides of the debate, and leaves it to you to make your own decision. Extremely well presented.

This book will provide readers with the two opposing arguments concerning the Christian/Biblical perspective on the practice of homosexuality. The authors have excellent educational backgrounds and have written extensively about the topic of Christian ethics.

What you can expect from this book is to gain a picture of how each professor approaches his argument. Via proposes that homosexual relationships should be treated no differently that heterosexual relationships by Christians. Gagnon takes the position that any homosexual behavior is sinful and should be resisted and not accepted as normative by Christians.

Via makes his case by stating that the Biblical prohibition of homosexual behavior is quaint or merely contextual to the times of the writers of Scripture. He values cultural experience, scientific propositions, orientation and intentions over the authority of Scripture to dictate behavior for people and to determine what is congruent with Christian behavior. Via attempts to make the case that the Levitical prohibitions of homosexual behavior are categorized as related to "unclean" things like leprosy or food laws. He therefore tries to make the case that Jesus declared these things "clean" and removed the laws against homosexuality also. He also argues that people are bodily and sexual and that the abundant life Jesus promises involves sexual expression and fulfillment; therefore, to deny the homosexually oriented person his or her sexual fulfillment according to that orientation is preventing him or her from living the abundant life of Jesus. So, to thwart homosexuals is ultimately an anti-Christ work.

Gagnon, on the other hand, begins with Scripture as the ultimate authority on this and any other morality. For Gagnon, Scripture firmly shows that homosexual behavior is sinful and therefore harmful. There is no reason, culturally, experientially or scientifically that would overrule the prohibitions and clear teachings of Scripture on the subject. He also contextualizes the biblical view on homosexuality as rising from the Jewish tradition that assumed the sinfulness of homosexual behavior. He also sees the Jewish and Christian prohibition of homosexual behavior as being in contrast with the Greco-Roman culture that included all types of sexual relationships, so this affirms the Christian practice of viewing all homosexual behavior as sinful as opposed to just "exploitative" homosexual relationships, as some in Via's court argue.

My response to the two authors is that Via is attempting to read into Scripture what is clearly not present, that is that some New Testament authority in Jesus obliges people to live out their homosexuality in disregard for biblical prohibitions. Essentially, Via argues from an experiential, humanistic view that subjects Scripture to culture and the individual. Gagnon makes a firm, Scriptural argument against the normalcy of homosexual behavior. So readers will have to decide which is authoritative...Scripture or culture and experience. This book provides the basic arguments for both sides.

In the heated rhetoric of denominational debates over the Bible, ordination and homosexuality, this book helpfully provides a basic yet adequate introduction to the primary interpretative conclusions on the main biblical texts with two major alternative viewpoints where the authors present their arguments and then interact with each other's position. Robert Gagnon has written a much more thorough study of pertinent Biblical and historical materials elsewhere, but this book provides a simple summary of his conclusions for those beginning to study these somewhat complex arguments. Via helpfully summarizes some of the arguments and conclusions of those seeking change in the way in which Christians have traditionally interpreted and applied the biblical texts.

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 "take up their cross, deny themselves, and lose their lives for Jesus' sake." (52) It is appalling that as a scholar Gagnon does not utilize one of the most groundbreaking works of the 20th century in his research. A large group of Biblical scholars from around the world worked collectively on the five Gospels (Mark, Matthew, Luke, John and Thomas) and translated them from the oldest existing copies to modern English. Once the translation was completed, they worked for years to decide if the sayings attributed to Jesus were things he actually said, or if they were added after his death. In all instances, the saying that refers to taking up one's cross was agreed to have been added after his death, as the cross did not exist as a symbol during the time of Jesus. (Funk, Hoover and the Jesus Seminar; The Five Gospels) It is hardly appropriate for a New Testament scholar to insist that modern-day Americans follow a directive that Jesus never actually gave.



All-in-all, the book is truly not worth reading. Via's arguments are fairly good, though his use of an English version of the Bible doesn't help his case. Gagnon's arguments are clearly homophobic, and his dishonesty and deliberate misinterpretation of the writings indicate beyond a doubt that he can't be believed. I would suggest that if anyone is interested in this subject that they look at Daniel A. Helminiak's What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality.

The text was aggressively priced, was delivered well in advance of the stated delivery period, and was in excellent condition. This is a trustworthy seller whom I will do business with again.