Changes

Those who hold to the traditional position of unconditional prohibition of homoeroticism usually work from a strong adherence to the theological foundation of Biblical infallibility, in which God, as the author of [[Holy Scripture]], made His will for man evident and to be obeyed, especially as concerning basic doctrines and laws for attitude and behavior. This position holds that proper exegesis requires the consistent use of proven rules of interpretation ([[hermeneutics]]), and that such confirms the transcendent relevancy of the Bible, and that it's [[moral]] laws are immutable. Rather than every man doing that which is right according to his judgment, (Dt. 12:8; Jdg. 17:6) man is to be subject to the holy, just and good laws of God, (Rm. 7:12) which are to His benefit when obeyed, and to man's detriment when forsaken. (Dt. 28) In so seeking to live by every word of God, (Mt. 4:4) it becomes evident that a basic literalistic approach to Biblical exegesis is required, so that while interpretations are understood within the context of their respective literary genres, a wide range of metaphorical meanings of the historical narratives, in particular, are disallowed. By such exegesis, historically Christian theologians have overall seen the laws of God manifested as within different categories, basically those of immutable transcendent laws, out of which cultural applications are made, and ceremonial laws, which were typological of Christ and His working under the New Covenant. (Colossians 2:16,17; Hebrews 9:10)<ref>The Authority Of God's Law Today, Greg L. Bahnsen</ref>   

Those who hold to the traditional position of unconditional prohibition of homoeroticism usually work from a strong adherence to the theological foundation of Biblical infallibility, in which God, as the author of [[Holy Scripture]], made His will for man evident and to be obeyed, especially as concerning basic doctrines and laws for attitude and behavior. This position holds that proper exegesis requires the consistent use of proven rules of interpretation ([[hermeneutics]]), and that such confirms the transcendent relevancy of the Bible, and that it's [[moral]] laws are immutable. Rather than every man doing that which is right according to his judgment, (Dt. 12:8; Jdg. 17:6) man is to be subject to the holy, just and good laws of God, (Rm. 7:12) which are to His benefit when obeyed, and to man's detriment when forsaken. (Dt. 28) In so seeking to live by every word of God, (Mt. 4:4) it becomes evident that a basic literalistic approach to Biblical exegesis is required, so that while interpretations are understood within the context of their respective literary genres, a wide range of metaphorical meanings of the historical narratives, in particular, are disallowed. By such exegesis, historically Christian theologians have overall seen the laws of God manifested as within different categories, basically those of immutable transcendent laws, out of which cultural applications are made, and ceremonial laws, which were typological of Christ and His working under the New Covenant. (Colossians 2:16,17; Hebrews 9:10)<ref>The Authority Of God's Law Today, Greg L. Bahnsen</ref>   

This historical or traditional position, especially as substantiated by [[conservative Christians]], holds that the Bible establishes and consistently confirms that only the women was created from man and for man, as his uniquely compatible and complementary paracletal "helpmeet", which joining of two halves alone makes man (for those who so choose) sexually complete, and which no other physical creation could fulfill, (Gn. 2:18-24; Mt. 19:4-6; 1Cor. 11:9; Eph. 5:31), but which purposefully created complementary physical and positional distinctions (1Cor. 11:1-12) precludes fulfillment by same gender unions.  And that only the union of opposite genders is sanctified by marriage, and which explicit providence stands in contrast to the lack of any establishment of marriage between '''homosexuals'''. This conspicuous absence is not found to be constrained by cultural considerations, but rather is due to homosexual relations being foundationally contrary to the aforementioned foundational design and decrees of God.  

This historical or traditional position, especially as substantiated by [[conservative Christians]], holds that the Bible establishes and consistently confirms that only the women was created from man and for man, as his uniquely compatible and complementary paracletal "helpmeet", which joining of two halves alone makes man (for those who so choose) sexually complete, and which no other physical creation could fulfill, (Gn. 2:18-24; Mt. 19:4-6; 1Cor. 11:9; Eph. 5:31), but which purposefully created complementary physical and positional distinctions (1Cor. 11:1-12) precludes fulfillment by same gender unions.  And that only the union of opposite genders is sanctified by marriage, and which explicit providence stands in contrast to the lack of any establishment of marriage between '''homosexuals'''. This conspicuous absence is not found to be constrained by cultural considerations, but rather is due to homosexual relations being foundationally contrary to the aforementioned foundational design and decrees of God.<ref>[<ref>1)http://s3.amazonaws.com/tgc-documents/journal-issues/21.1_Taylor.pdf The Bible and Homosexuality by J. Glenn Taylor (Assoc. Prof. Of to at Wycliff College. U. of Toronto[</ref>

In addition, and consistent with the understanding that God made basic doctrines and laws for human behavior evident and to be obeyed, the laws and principals concerning human sexual partners are seen as universal and transcendent from the time of their institution, being directly applicable in all cultural contexts. In examining such, it is  evidenced that from the beginning all sexual relations outside marriage were and are consistently categorized as fornication. (1Cor. 7:2).  In contrast, in the places where homoerotic relations are most explicitly dealt with (Lv. 18:22; 20:13; Rm. 1:26,27) it is only condemned, with this condemnation being universal in scope, and not restricted to certain cultural, behavioral or motivational conditions.<ref>[http://www.ukapologetics.net/08/pannenberg1.htm Should We Support Gay Marriage? NO! Wolfhart Pannenberg]</ref><ref>[http://www.robgagnon.net/NewsweekMillerHomosexResp.htm Prof. Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon]</ref><ref>Straight or Narrow? Sexuality from the Beginning, Thomas E.Schmidt</ref>  As evangelical Bible scholar [[Greg Bahnsen]] stated, "God’s verdict on homosexuality is inescapably clear. His law is a precise interpretation of the sexual order of creation for fallen man, rendering again His intention and direction for sexual relations. When members of the same sex (homo-sexual) practice intercourse with each other...they violate God’s basic creation order in a vile and abominable fashion."<ref>Bahnsen, Homosexuality: A Biblical View (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1978), p. 36.</ref> Calvin Smith objectively concludes, "the  weak revisionist exegetical arguments, together with far more convincing traditionalist rebuttals,  have  led me  to  affirm  the  traditional  view more firmly than ever.<ref>CONCLUDING REMARKS, Homosexuality Revisited in Light of the Current Climate</ref>

In addition, and consistent with the understanding that God made basic doctrines and laws for human behavior evident and to be obeyed, the laws and principals concerning human sexual partners are seen as universal and transcendent from the time of their institution, being directly applicable in all cultural contexts. In examining such, it is  evidenced that from the beginning all sexual relations outside marriage were and are consistently categorized as fornication. (1Cor. 7:2).  In contrast, in the places where homoerotic relations are most explicitly dealt with (Lv. 18:22; 20:13; Rm. 1:26,27) it is only condemned, with this condemnation being universal in scope, and not restricted to certain cultural, behavioral or motivational conditions.<ref>[http://www.ukapologetics.net/08/pannenberg1.htm Should We Support Gay Marriage? NO! Wolfhart Pannenberg]</ref><ref>[http://www.robgagnon.net/NewsweekMillerHomosexResp.htm Prof. Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon]</ref><ref>Straight or Narrow? Sexuality from the Beginning, Thomas E.Schmidt</ref>  As evangelical Bible scholar [[Greg Bahnsen]] stated, "God’s verdict on homosexuality is inescapably clear. His law is a precise interpretation of the sexual order of creation for fallen man, rendering again His intention and direction for sexual relations. When members of the same sex (homo-sexual) practice intercourse with each other...they violate God’s basic creation order in a vile and abominable fashion."<ref>Bahnsen, Homosexuality: A Biblical View (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1978), p. 36.</ref> Calvin Smith objectively concludes, "the  weak revisionist exegetical arguments, together with far more convincing traditionalist rebuttals,  have  led me  to  affirm  the  traditional  view more firmly than ever.<ref>CONCLUDING REMARKS, Homosexuality Revisited in Light of the Current Climate</ref>