| | | | |  | | | |
Average Rating : 
Rating :  - Highly recommended, but...
This is one of the early books dealing with the bible and homosexuality written in 1983 just after John Boswell's book (Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, 1980.
In his commentary on 1 Corinthians Gordon D Fee says that this book "is a model of fairness to all sides". The book is very clearly written and his quotation of the various Greco-roman sources is especially useful as it gives us valuable historical information about society and homosexuality at that time, for this alone it is worth getting. His main thesis is that pederasty was the main form of homosexual activity in higher levels of society in the Greco-roman world. And that the NT bible is against this exploitative sexual activity. Now if Paul had only written 1 Cor 6:9 condemning the malakoi and arsenokoitai, he would have a very good point. However, this argument falls rather flat when one considers Paul's reference to male and female homosexual activity in Romans 1. The fact that Paul says that the men were "consumed with passion for one another" means that he is hardly referring to just exploitative sex. As far as we know female homosexual relationships were very rare in society in those days. Paul's argument in Rom 1 is based on the created intent of the Creator, therefore he indicts both males and females who practise this sin. It is easy to understand that men indulge in this sin, but even the females indulge in this sin, that is Paul's point.
In his discussion of the origin of the word "arsenokoites" used in 1 Cor 6:9 he establishes that this is based on the Greek translation of Leviticus 18 and 20 in the Septuagint the LXX (p86). He fails to point out that Paul's use of the word arsenokoites, which he gets from his Greek OT, means that Paul also thought that the Levitical prohibitions against male-male intercourse also applied in his day. But on p107 he seems to back track by saying that arsenokoites has no recoverable history prior to Paul's use if it, but this is hardly the point, Paul's use of the word arsenokoite is derived from the LXX, meaning that Paul approved of the Levitical prohibitions. He then goes on to argue, and it is quite subtle, that when malakos and arsenokoites are used together, then malakos points to the effeminate call-boy, then arsenokoites in this context must be the active partner who keeps the malakos as a "mistress" or who hires him on occasion to satisfy his sexual desires. If this argument is correct then Paul is only condemning exploitative sex and prostitution, which Paul also clearly condemns in 1 Cor 6. Again we need to look at Rom 1 to see more on Paul's thoughts in order to clarify the issue.
In his discussion of Rom 1:26-27 on p 109 Scroggs clearly looses the plot. He does not seem to realise that Paul refutes his expoitative argument when Paul mentions "dishonoring of their bodies among themselves", men being "consumed with passion for one another", and "and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error".
I highly recommend this book for all who are interested in the biblical issues that surround this debate, especially for the Greco-roman history. Also recommended is Robert Gagnon's book "The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics".
Customer Review : | |
