Jennifer Knapp on CNN
The whole of the Jennifer Knapp / Larry King Live session has been put on YouTube. I’ve put it together in a player so you can watch it all in one go.
I find it interesting that until she met her partner she hadn’t considered herself lesbian. That indicates what many of us accept – that human sexuality is a lot more complicated then “you’re born that way”.
Watched the first 20 minutes or so of this so far. Interesting, though I find the whole US news "thing" quite annoying and distracting – and I'll probably bail when Ted turns up.
Jennifer Knapp's not exactly James Alison when it comes to articulating theology. But then, James Alison's probably a rotten singer-songwriter. ;-)
My recent post Image and imitation
UPDATE: I bailed when Ted turned up.
My recent post Image and imitation
Lev 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.
Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
Rom 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.
God hates homosexuality and does love the homosexual, but if they don't repent they will die in their sins.
Rom 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
So if you're not homosexual but you approve of that lifestyle, you're just as wrong as they are.
This is so easy for heterosexuals who are homophobes, isn't it? Is the Christian position on the phenomenon of same-sex attraction that easy? I somehow doubt it and think people should be wary of slick answers, especially when they line up bits of scripture taken out of context, both textual AND cultural.
Nothing out of context here. God views the sin of same-sex relations as unnatural (against his clear physical design for human bodies) and an abomination. He also views an arrogant look, a tongue that lies, someone who kills the innocent, those who spread gossip, etc., etc., etc. as abominations, too. He is holy, and His Word will not be twisted in order to turn what He deems abominable into something sinful man desires to be acceptable, just so man's innate guilt can be quelled.
So is it true that the new testament references to homosexuality in acts and romans only referred to homosexual acts perfomed as part of pagan/idol ritual/worship? I have heard this preached by the ELCA, so that it is saying a homosexual act between Christians is neither condoned nor condemned, but any act done for or as a result of idol worship is the abomination (in other words homosexual sex is bad in the same category as eating meat offered to idols or eating strangled things is bad)
No Michele, one rather has to twist things about to come to that conclusion, and Biblical scholars are pretty much in agreement that that isn't the case – with those with the aim of advocating homosexual sex acts as exceptions. There has been a lot of extensive study on this and it's fairly conclusive. Even Walter Wink, who is much in favor of homosexual sex acts, says that it's quite reprehensible to reason to assert that these texts have some kind of deeper or hidden meaning.
AES to suggest that the biblical study is "conclusive" is rather disingenuous. There are hundreds of books on the correct interpretion of scripture on this issue and they reach a range of conclusion. There is no consensus. Perhaps we can respect that a range of views are availiable and respect each person's interpretation of scripture.