Changes

*(Rom 1:26-27)  "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: {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."

*(Rom 1:26-27)  "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: {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."

[[Romans 1]] was written to both Jewish and Gentile Christians, and the apostle Paul appeals to both natural revelation, that of their Creator being manifest by what He made (cf. Ps. 19:1-6), as well as the account of creation in His word, which is a two fold approach he uses elsewhere. (Acts 13:16-41; 14:6-18; 17:2,22-31) In Roman 1 Paul reveals that as men exchanged the the true and living God for one made after their own desires, so God delivered them up to unclean desires, by which they exchanged their natural (as related to God's design and sanctification) sexual partner for that which is against nature,  and received in their own bodies the just reward for what they did with them.  The various theories which pro homosexual polemicists contend for range from asserting that Paul was ignorant of homosexuality as an orientation, and thus was only condemning heterosexuals acting as homosexuals, to supposing that Paul was only condemning pederasty, the of man/boy sex, which was common at both Greek and Roman cultures, to more complicated attempts that have Paul justifying homoeroticism to get back at the Jews.<ref>Scroggs, The New Testament and Homosexuality, p. 14; Heliminiak, What the Bible really says homosexuality (pro gay), p. 76; Hanks, Thomas D.; A Gay Apostle’s Queer Epistle for a Peculiar People: Romans 1:16-2:16; (compilation);  Countrymen, Dirt, Greed and Sex, pp. 98-123; Edwards, "Gay/Leban Liberation, pp. 85-102; Scroggs, The New Testament and Homosexuality, pp. 115-18; Boswell, ibid. pp. 108-113</ref>   

[[Romans 1]] was written to both Jewish and Gentile Christians, and the apostle Paul appeals to both natural revelation, that of their Creator being manifest by what He made (cf. Ps. 19:1-6), as well as the account of creation in His word, which is a twofold approach he uses elsewhere. (Acts 13:16-41; 14:6-18; 17:2,22-31) In Roman 1 Paul reveals that as men exchanged the true and living God for one made after their own desires, so God delivered them up to unclean desires, by which they exchanged their natural (as related to God's design and sanctification) sexual partner for that which is against nature,  and received in their own bodies the just reward for what they did with them.  The various theories which pro homosexual polemicists contend for range from asserting that Paul was ignorant of homosexuality as an orientation, and thus was only condemning heterosexuals acting as homosexuals, to supposing that Paul was only condemning pederasty, the of man/boy sex, which was common at both Greek and Roman cultures, to more complicated attempts that have Paul justifying homoeroticism to get back at the Jews.<ref>Scroggs, The New Testament and Homosexuality, p. 14; Heliminiak, What the Bible really says homosexuality (pro gay), p. 76; Hanks, Thomas D.; A Gay Apostle’s Queer Epistle for a Peculiar People: Romans 1:16-2:16; (compilation);  Countrymen, Dirt, Greed and Sex, pp. 98-123; Edwards, "Gay/Leban Liberation, pp. 85-102; Scroggs, The New Testament and Homosexuality, pp. 115-18; Boswell, ibid. pp. 108-113</ref>   

Traditionalists respond by pointing out that "nature" best pertains to creation, not the aberrant desires of fallen man, and that Divine inspiration transcends human limitations. In addition,  Paul was most likely quite aware of what was going on in contemporary Greek culture as well as Roman, and [[Greek Homosexuality|Greek homosexuality]] evidenced that it was aware of homosexual "orientation."  The [[history of homosexuality]] also manifests that homosexual affections and conduct was not limited to man/boy relations in ancient idolatrous cultures.<ref>Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice, pp. 256-67;  Richard B. Hays, "Awaiting the redemption of our bodies." pp. 6, 7-21; Hays, "Natural and unnatural: A response to John Boswell's exegesis of Romans 1." Journal of Religious Ethics 14 (1986), pp. 184-215);  Greg L. Bahnsen, Homosexuality" A Biblical View, pp. 47-61; The Bible Knowledge Commentary, by John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck, Louis A. Barbieri Jr., Dallas; The Bible and Sexual Boundaries, by Craig R. Koester; David E. Malick, "The Condemnation of Homosexuality in Romans 1:26-27," Bibliotheca Sacra 150: 599 (1993): 327-340.</ref><ref>[http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/10/32003b.asp One Flesh Why Sodomy Can Never Depict the Relationship Between Christ and His Church]</ref><ref>Gagnon, How Bad Is Homosexual Practice According to Scripture</ref><ref>[ http://www.ovrlnd.com/FalseDoctrine/Gay_Christians.html A Response to the 'Gay Christian' Movement, Vincent McCann, Spotlight Ministries]</ref><ref>[http://www.phc.edu/gj_haas_hermen.php Guenther Haas, Hermeneutical issues in the use of the Bible to justify the acceptance of homosexual practice]</ref><ref>[http://www.leaderu.com/theology/paulandsexuality.html Robert A. J. Gagnon, The Apostle Paul on Sexuality: A Response]</ref>

Traditionalists respond by pointing out that "nature" best pertains to creation, not the aberrant desires of fallen man, and that Divine inspiration transcends human limitations. In addition,  Paul was most likely quite aware of what was going on in contemporary Greek culture as well as Roman, and [[Greek Homosexuality|Greek homosexuality]] evidenced that it was aware of homosexual "orientation."  The [[history of homosexuality]] also manifests that homosexual affections and conduct was not limited to man/boy relations in ancient idolatrous cultures.<ref>Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice, pp. 256-67;  Richard B. Hays, "Awaiting the redemption of our bodies." pp. 6, 7-21; Hays, "Natural and unnatural: A response to John Boswell's exegesis of Romans 1." Journal of Religious Ethics 14 (1986), pp. 184-215);  Greg L. Bahnsen, Homosexuality" A Biblical View, pp. 47-61; The Bible Knowledge Commentary, by John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck, Louis A. Barbieri Jr., Dallas; The Bible and Sexual Boundaries, by Craig R. Koester; David E. Malick, "The Condemnation of Homosexuality in Romans 1:26-27," Bibliotheca Sacra 150: 599 (1993): 327-340.</ref><ref>[http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/10/32003b.asp One Flesh Why Sodomy Can Never Depict the Relationship Between Christ and His Church]</ref><ref>Gagnon, How Bad Is Homosexual Practice According to Scripture</ref><ref>[ http://www.ovrlnd.com/FalseDoctrine/Gay_Christians.html A Response to the 'Gay Christian' Movement, Vincent McCann, Spotlight Ministries]</ref><ref>[http://www.phc.edu/gj_haas_hermen.php Guenther Haas, Hermeneutical issues in the use of the Bible to justify the acceptance of homosexual practice]</ref><ref>[http://www.leaderu.com/theology/paulandsexuality.html Robert A. J. Gagnon, The Apostle Paul on Sexuality: A Response]</ref>

(1 Tim 1:9-10)  "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, {10} For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;"

(1 Tim 1:9-10)  "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, {10} For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;"

As this is the obscure term in the Greek, homosexual writers labor much on this in order in the hope of disallowing it from universally applying to  homosexuals, and and which attempts and their nature can be best seen in traditionalist responses which counter them.<ref>[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj3h.pdf THE SOURCE AND NT MEANING OF ARSENOKOITAI, WITH IMPLICATIONS OR CHRISTIAN ETHICS AND MINISTRY, James B. De Young]</ref><ref>[ http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/homosexuality_corinthians6.pdf The Condemnation of Homosexuality in 1 Corinthians 6:9 David E. Malick]</ref><ref>[http://www.catalystresources.org/issues/222dodd.html PAUL, HOMOSEXUALITY, AND 1 CORINTHIANS 6:9-11]</ref><ref>[http://www.theologicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/homosexuality_revisited.pdf Homosexuality Revisited in Light of the Current Climate 1by Calvin Smith]</ref><ref>[http://thetruthsetsyoufree.wordpress.com/2008/08/04/linguistic-grounds-for-translating-arsenokoitai-as-homosexuals Linguistic Grounds for Translating Arsenokoitai as “Homosexuals”] De Young, J. B. (2000). Homosexuality: Contemporary Claims Examined in Light of the Bible and Other Ancient Literature and Law. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications</ref><ref>[http://www.nwnet.org/~prisca/THE%20MALAKOI%20AND%20ARSENOKOITAI.htm THE MALAKOI AND ARSENOKOITAI (I COR 6:9): WHAT IS REALLY MEANT BY THESE TERMS?]</ref><ref>http://www.robgagnon.net/articles/homoBalchHBTReview2.pdf</ref>

As this is the obscure term in the Greek, homosexual writers labor much on this in order in the hope of disallowing it from universally applying to  homosexuals, and which attempts and their nature can be best seen in traditionalist responses which counter them.<ref>[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj3h.pdf THE SOURCE AND NT MEANING OF ARSENOKOITAI, WITH IMPLICATIONS OR CHRISTIAN ETHICS AND MINISTRY, James B. De Young]</ref><ref>[ http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/homosexuality_corinthians6.pdf The Condemnation of Homosexuality in 1 Corinthians 6:9 David E. Malick]</ref><ref>[http://www.catalystresources.org/issues/222dodd.html PAUL, HOMOSEXUALITY, AND 1 CORINTHIANS 6:9-11]</ref><ref>[http://www.theologicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/homosexuality_revisited.pdf Homosexuality Revisited in Light of the Current Climate 1by Calvin Smith]</ref><ref>[http://thetruthsetsyoufree.wordpress.com/2008/08/04/linguistic-grounds-for-translating-arsenokoitai-as-homosexuals Linguistic Grounds for Translating Arsenokoitai as “Homosexuals”] De Young, J. B. (2000). Homosexuality: Contemporary Claims Examined in Light of the Bible and Other Ancient Literature and Law. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications</ref><ref>[http://www.nwnet.org/~prisca/THE%20MALAKOI%20AND%20ARSENOKOITAI.htm THE MALAKOI AND ARSENOKOITAI (I COR 6:9): WHAT IS REALLY MEANT BY THESE TERMS?]</ref><ref>http://www.robgagnon.net/articles/homoBalchHBTReview2.pdf</ref>

==Historical teaching==

==Historical teaching==

Less extreme liberals, who may be termed Modern Orthodox, continue to uphold the Deity of Christ and other primary doctrines, and some officially hold the Bible to be wholly inspired, but render many historical miraculous accounts to be fables, designed to teach a lesson, but not historical fact, and also  overall do not emphasis the authority of the Bible in practical application. These tend to subscribe to the "historical-critical method," which tends to disallow the miraculous in favor of natural explanations.,<ref>[http://www.brfwitness.org/?p=603 The Bible’s Deadly Enemy, BRF Witness]</ref> contrary to conservatives,<ref>[http://www.abu.nb.ca/Courses/NTIntro/LifeJ/HistCrit.htm The historical-critical method, by Barry D. Smith]</ref> Such also hold to the liberal revisionist "Documentary Source Hypothesis", which renders the Bible to be the work of  editors who edited it over long periods of time, rather than what the text states.<ref>[http://www.ukapologetics.net/docu.htm Does Anyone Still Believe the 'Documentary Hypothesis'?]</ref> Many in this camp, in contrast to New Testament Christianity, are likely to doctrinally compromise on popular moral issues, or allow such in their denomination, and their doctrinal statements  regarding the Bible tend to lack doctrinal depth and firmness.   

Less extreme liberals, who may be termed Modern Orthodox, continue to uphold the Deity of Christ and other primary doctrines, and some officially hold the Bible to be wholly inspired, but render many historical miraculous accounts to be fables, designed to teach a lesson, but not historical fact, and also  overall do not emphasis the authority of the Bible in practical application. These tend to subscribe to the "historical-critical method," which tends to disallow the miraculous in favor of natural explanations.,<ref>[http://www.brfwitness.org/?p=603 The Bible’s Deadly Enemy, BRF Witness]</ref> contrary to conservatives,<ref>[http://www.abu.nb.ca/Courses/NTIntro/LifeJ/HistCrit.htm The historical-critical method, by Barry D. Smith]</ref> Such also hold to the liberal revisionist "Documentary Source Hypothesis", which renders the Bible to be the work of  editors who edited it over long periods of time, rather than what the text states.<ref>[http://www.ukapologetics.net/docu.htm Does Anyone Still Believe the 'Documentary Hypothesis'?]</ref> Many in this camp, in contrast to New Testament Christianity, are likely to doctrinally compromise on popular moral issues, or allow such in their denomination, and their doctrinal statements  regarding the Bible tend to lack doctrinal depth and firmness.   

Evangelical Christianity (which, as defined by Barna research, makes up approx. 6-7 percent of the United States <ref>[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/13-culture/111-survey-explores-who-qualifies-as-an-evangelical Survey Explores Who Qualifies As an Evangelical, The Barna Group, Ltd.]</ref><ref>[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/5-barna-update/173-godless-hollywood-bible-belt-new-research-exploring-faith-in-americas-largest-markets-produces-surprises]</ref>  is more distinctive in that it holds to [[sola scriptura]], that the Bible is the final, but not the only, authority, wholly inspired by God and inerrant, although most hold that this refers to the original  manuscripts. Their scholars hold to the historical contextual and grammatical method, which understands Scripture in the light of its immediate and larger contexts, as well as linguistically aspects , and affirms its statements as accurate and true, within their respective literary  genres, in contrast to revisionist theories designed to negate its authority.<ref>[http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BrugHC.pdf  Why the Historical-Critical Method of Interpreting Scripture is Incompatible with Confessional Lutheranism. by John F. Brug]</ref> Such also hold to [[salvation]] by grace through faith in the crucified and risen Lord Jesus Christ and His sinless shed blood, by which the contrite and repentant soul is justified before God, not on the basis of merit gained by their own works.<ref>Ibid. Barna.org</ref>

Evangelical Christianity (which, as defined by Barna research, makes up approx. 6-7 percent of the United States <ref>[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/13-culture/111-survey-explores-who-qualifies-as-an-evangelical Survey Explores Who Qualifies As an Evangelical, The Barna Group, Ltd.]</ref><ref>[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/5-barna-update/173-godless-hollywood-bible-belt-new-research-exploring-faith-in-americas-largest-markets-produces-surprises]</ref>  is more distinctive in that it holds to [[sola scriptura]], that the Bible is the final, but not the only, authority, wholly inspired by God and inerrant, although most hold that this refers to the original  manuscripts. Their scholars hold to the historical contextual and grammatical method, which understands Scripture in the light of its immediate and larger contexts, as well as linguistically aspects, and affirms its statements as accurate and true, within their respective literary  genres, in contrast to revisionist theories designed to negate its authority.<ref>[http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BrugHC.pdf  Why the Historical-Critical Method of Interpreting Scripture is Incompatible with Confessional Lutheranism. by John F. Brug]</ref> Such also hold to [[salvation]] by grace through faith in the crucified and risen Lord Jesus Christ and His sinless shed blood, by which the contrite and repentant soul is justified before God, not on the basis of merit gained by their own works.<ref>Ibid. Barna.org</ref>

==Positions on homosexuality by religious type==

==Positions on homosexuality by religious type==

===Evangelical Lutheran Church in America===

===Evangelical Lutheran Church in America===

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) officially holds to a liberal and subjective view regarding Scripture. It states that "God inspired the Bible’s many writers, editors and compilers", the mention of the latter entities indicating that it hold to the revisionary Documentary Source Hypothesis. It also seeks to "interpret Scripture by listening to the living Jesus in the context of the Church". As expressed, this holds that that the writer’s culture or personal experience or [[bias]] may have have resulted in "his missing what God was saying or doing, or that God now is saying or doing something new."<ref>What do Lutherans believe about the Bible?</ref>  

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) officially holds to a liberal and subjective view regarding Scripture. It states that "God inspired the Bible’s many writers, editors and compilers", the mention of the latter entities indicating that it hold to the revisionary Documentary Source Hypothesis. It also seeks to "interpret Scripture by listening to the living Jesus in the context of the Church". As expressed, this holds that that the writer’s culture or personal experience or [[bias]] may have resulted in "his missing what God was saying or doing, or that God now is saying or doing something new."<ref>What do Lutherans believe about the Bible?</ref>  

As regards homosexuality, the ELCA affirms "... that gay and lesbian people, as individuals created by God, are welcome to participate fully in the life of the congregations of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America." Nevertheless it stated, "The ELCA has no policy on the blessing of same-sex unions".  

As regards homosexuality, the ELCA affirms "... that gay and lesbian people, as individuals created by God, are welcome to participate fully in the life of the congregations of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America." Nevertheless, it stated, "The ELCA has no policy on the blessing of same-sex unions".  

Previously, it was the policy of the ELCA that "all single rostered people, including those who are homosexual in their self-understanding," were "expected to abstain from sexual relationships."  <ref>http://www.elca.org/What-We-Believe/New-or-Returning-to-Church/Dig-Deeper/Homosexuality-and-the-ELCA.aspx</ref> However, on August 21, 2009, the ELCA voted 559 to 451 at its convention in Minneapolis, Minn., to allow sexually active gays in a "committed relationship" to be ordained.<ref>Sara Shookman ''Lutherans to allow gay clergy'', Gray Television, Inc (Aug 23, 2009)</ref> In 2010, several dozen ELCA congregations opposed to the church's stance on homosexuality issues began the process of forming a rival church body, the North American Lutheran Church.  

Previously, it was the policy of the ELCA that "all single rostered people, including those who are homosexual in their self-understanding," were "expected to abstain from sexual relationships."  <ref>http://www.elca.org/What-We-Believe/New-or-Returning-to-Church/Dig-Deeper/Homosexuality-and-the-ELCA.aspx</ref> However, on August 21, 2009, the ELCA voted 559 to 451 at its convention in Minneapolis, Minn., to allow sexually active gays in a "committed relationship" to be ordained.<ref>Sara Shookman ''Lutherans to allow gay clergy'', Gray Television, Inc (Aug 23, 2009)</ref> In 2010, several dozen ELCA congregations opposed to the church's stance on homosexuality issues began the process of forming a rival church body, the North American Lutheran Church.  

...homosexual practice is a distortion of the image of God as it is still reflected in fallen man, and a perversion of the sexual relationship as God intended it to be.  

...homosexual practice is a distortion of the image of God as it is still reflected in fallen man, and a perversion of the sexual relationship as God intended it to be.  

We believe the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the infallible Word of God, the final authority on all issues to which it speaks. Therefore sexual attitudes and behaviors are to be judged in the light of the Bible, rather than the Bible being reinterpreted, modified or overturned by current cultural trends in thought and behavior.  

We believe the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the infallible Word of God, the final authority on all issues to which it speaks. Therefore, sexual attitudes and behaviors are to be judged in the light of the Bible, rather than the Bible being reinterpreted, modified or overturned by current cultural trends in thought and behavior.  

Even some Christian churches and their leaders are granting moral legitimacy to homosexuality. The prevailing ethic in the minds of many has become a “genetically-based morality.”...The EPC finds such moral logic to be significantly flawed....The EPC asserts that God’s law alone as revealed in the holy Scriptures is to be our basis for morality. We reject attempts to base morality on scientific study. The Bible teaches that since the fall of man, mankind has been born with a sinful nature. The Bible teaches that greed, lust, envy strife, etc., are characteristic of fallen man, and in that sense are our orientation from birth. But while they may be our natural orientation, they are still sin. Simply put, the Old and New Testaments consistently condemn homosexual practice and repeatedly affirm that God forgives the repentant sinner.<ref>[http://www.epc.org/about-the-epc/position-papers/homosexuality/ Position Paper on Homosexuality]</ref>

Even some Christian churches and their leaders are granting moral legitimacy to homosexuality. The prevailing ethic in the minds of many has become a “genetically-based morality.”...The EPC finds such moral logic to be significantly flawed....The EPC asserts that God’s law alone as revealed in the holy Scriptures is to be our basis for morality. We reject attempts to base morality on scientific study. The Bible teaches that since the fall of man, mankind has been born with a sinful nature. The Bible teaches that greed, lust, envy strife, etc., are characteristic of fallen man, and in that sense are our orientation from birth. But while they may be our natural orientation, they are still sin. Simply put, the Old and New Testaments consistently condemn homosexual practice and repeatedly affirm that God forgives the repentant sinner.<ref>[http://www.epc.org/about-the-epc/position-papers/homosexuality/ Position Paper on Homosexuality]</ref>