Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views

by Robert A. J. Gagnon, Robert A.J. Gagnon

Few recent issues have sparked such debate in the churches as homosexuality, same-sex unions, and ordination of gays and lesbians. A key point of contention is the meaning and authority of the biblical witness. In this brief book, two New Testament scholars discuss the relevant biblical texts on the subject of homosexual behavior and orientation. Discussing both Old Testament and New Testament texts, each author also raises important interpretive and moral questions and then offers a response to the other's main assertions. Chief questions examined by each include what the Bible has to say about homosexuality and homosexual behavior, the meaning of those texts in their cultural contexts, and the larger hermeneutical dilemma of what kind of authority the Bible's teaching, if recoverable, has for Christians today. A thoughtful and irenic dialogue, this volume can facilitate reflection and discussion among church members on a vital and contentious issue in American church life.

Genres: Theology, Religion, Christian, Sexuality, Sociology, Church, Biblical Studies

125 pages, Paperback

First published September 1, 2003

Reviews

[Tim · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is a demonstration of two differing hermeneutical and epistemological approaches, mirroring roughly what you would stereotypically expect from "evangelical" and "liberal" viewpoints. Hopefully, if nothing else, this book shows that the people who oppose your viewpoint are not all bigoted, minimally-educated Philistines nor relativistic Gospel-denying abomination-lovers. While both authors lay out their positions reasonably well, as a dialogue between the two views the book could be better. What I would have liked:

a) better argument construction by Via. This book reads lopsidedly towards Gagnon, and I don't think this represents the legitimacy of their respective positions so much as the relative complexity of the two arguments and the way this complexity is dealt with. This pops up a lot in Constitutional law discussions; prima facie, arguments for things like originalism are often much more compelling than the alternatives, not because they are necessarily stronger positions, but just because they are easier to articulate than the alternatives. Gagnon takes an extremely straightforward textualist approach which makes a handful of expected points then piles textual support on top, while Via takes a nuanced approach which necessarily asks larger questions about the interplay (in typical Anglican fashion) of Scripture, tradition, and reason. Considering that Via is trying to make a much more complex argument, he does somewhat of a poor job laying out his premises, and as such the inferences are not always obvious. His sentences require significant unpacking. This isn’t surprising given what he is discussing, but it’s not ideal, especially since this book is ostensibly geared towards a wide audience.

b) more empathy from Gagnon. This book was written over a decade ago (before quite a bit of social change), which probably influences the tone, but Gagnon can come across as harsh and uncaring, despite claims to the contrary. Calling for empathy here doesn’t entail changing his position- his position can remain identical, but framing it with a less derogatory tone would be an improvement.

c) more engagement with the other side by both authors. The given responses after the main essays were fine, but their arguments really weren't tailored to oppose one another. They do well to illustrate that there are numerous ways to approach the issue, but even so the responses only seemed to half-heartedly engage with one another. Rather than arguing why your opponent’s response doesn’t match up well with your argumentative framework, it would have been nice for each author to argue from the other's presumptions and try to lay out what that would entail. It's hard to meet in the middle for a meaningful discussion without engaging with the alternative, and here the engagement is decidedly lackluster.

[Justin Deal · Rating 5 out of 5]

Professor Via and Professor Gagnon come together to debate a very "touchy" subject in the church today. Via argues that homosexuality is not entirely immoral. In other words, he argues that some people can be born with a destiny to find love in a homosexual relationship and tries to use scriptural exegesis and other sources to justify his claims. On the other hand, Gagnon argues that homosexuality is absolutely and all inclusively immoral using his knowledge of scripture and historical context of scripture to back up his position. I recommend this product to those seeking to gain a greater understanding of this hot topic of the day and how each side defends their viewpoints.Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views Dan O. ViaRobert A.J. Gagnon

[Mike · Rating 2 out of 5]

I bought this book in the hopes that it would help figure out what think about this controversy facing the church today, I was pretty disappointed in Via's arguments and Gagnon seemed to win the day by default. Ultimately I think that the historical background of homosexuality presented to the extent that I would have like to had seen.

[V · Rating 2 out of 5]

i liked the concept of this book, but i have to say that both authors really rubbed me the wrong way. they both tried to prove their (extreme) opinion was absolutely correct, mostly involving putting the burden of proof elsewhere. glad i read it, but i didn't find either of them convincing, or even especially helpful.

[Bob Schilling · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very worthwhile book to read, and I would especially recommend it to those wondering if they should purchase the larger (and more expensive) work by Robert Gagnon, "The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics" (Abingdon, 2001). Yes - get this book rather than the larger, foundational work (but buy the other if you get an opportunity). This book was published a couple of years later (2003). It distills the material from the larger work and adds nuances that he has hammered out after a couple of years in group presentations and talks. In fact he writes, "This essay, then, should be viewed as a revised synthesis of 'The Bible and Homosexual Practice'." Additionally, material that he wanted to add to this volume, but couldn't because of space restraints are available online here: http://www.robgagnon.net/TwoViews.htm

Check out his website for lots of free material.

Robert A.J. Gagnon is a man who has thought seriously and read broadly to engage this preeminent matter of the hour. I say "preeminent" because it really is a watershed practical issue that is going to radically redefine modern culture and create a stark dividing line between genuine Christians ruled by the inerrent, sole-ultimate authority of Scripture, and those who are not, whether or not they take the name of 'Christian.'

Homosexuality is a "gospel" issue, a matter of eternal life or hell. That is, like any sin persisted in unrepentantly, you cannot be, in Robert Gagnon's words, "a practicing homosexual" and an authentic Christian. Among many texts that make this point is 1 Cor. 6:9-11 (dealt with explicitly by Gagnon on pages 81-86).

Gagnon's material is good and very helpful - but not as solid as Kevin DeYoung's treatment in "What Does the Bible Really Teach about Homosexuality?" He is committed to the authority of Scripture, but some aspects of his affinity to higher criticism bleed through here and there and mar an otherwise great resource.

It becomes patently clear as you read more and more on this subject that one's view of Scripture is determinative of and critical to their understanding of the morality of homosexuality. Dan Via, a heterosexually married Episcopalian, begins his essay by openly declaring his rejection of the "perfection or inerrancy or complete consistency" (His words, verbatim) of the Scriptures. He holds to an "existential view" of biblical authority: "The Bible is authoritative only in those parts that are [experientially] existentially engaging and compelling" - with Christian tradition and community aiding ones existential understanding of the Scriptures (see page 2). The Old Testament writers especially were limited by "prerational sensibilities" (pg. 8). "Conscientious Christians," writes Dan Via, "simply have to decide which side they will give priority" in the ethical and theological contradictions in Scripture.

- "I choose Paul and the Gospels over Leviticus as having the more profound understanding of the human situation" (pg. 10).
- "If, for the Christian, Mark and Paul trump Leviticus..." (pg. 10).
- "But we must still pursue the question of whether Paul's ethical rule against homosexuality is finally justifiable in light of the larger canonical message of redemption" (pg. 11).
- "...It should be noted that at points the canon gives us permission to question other canonical interpretations of God's design for the world and the moral governance of it. In the book of Job the hero is pictured as right in questioning the moral order of the human world" (pg. 23).
- Ecclesiastes begins on the note that all is vanity, questions whether we live in a moral universe, and doubts that we can discern God's design for the world and history" (pg. 23)
- "Paul's interpretation of God's creative design is subject to critical reinterpretation" (pg. 23).
- Referring to Romans 1, he writes, "But that is an assumption that needs to be tested by the experience and knowledge of our time. If it cannot be demonstrated that homosexual practice is harmful in itself - in mutual, consensual, committed relationships - then it cannot be shown, in Pauline terms, that it is sinful" (pg. 25).
- "As I am trying to show, more than one position can be derived from Scripture" (pg. 28).
- "How might Scripture, reason, and experience lead the church to a new, nontraditional understanding of the moral justifiability of homosexual practice?" (pg. 29)
- "What does the creative and redemptive purpose of God and the ethic of love tell the church its posture should be toward homosexual practice - assuming that the relationship is loving, consensual, nonmanipulative, and faithful?" (pg. 29)
- "Since the homosexual is for Christian faith as much a part of God's creation as the heterosexual, how can the homosexual destiny, which is as inalienable as the heterosexual destiny, not be regarded as part of God's creative intent, just as the heterosexual destiny is so regarded?" (pg. 33)
- "Human life is bodily and sexual, and God wants all of God's human creations to have life in abundance" (pg. 34).
- "Should, then, the prohibitions against violating the complementarity of male and female sex organs always and without exception take precedence over the intention of God that every human creature should be able to express in the fullest way the only life to whcih he or she has been destined?" (pg. 35)
- "Here I think we need to listen to the voice of experience. There are people today who understand themselves as Christians and who are practicing homosexuals who see no incompatibility and feel no tension between those two aspects of their lives" (pg. 36-37).
- "...When the Spirit comes, he will lead the disciples into all the truth..." (pg. 39).

-----

Here's part of his argument, which classically displays the turning of truth on its head (like his appeals to homosexual's being granted by Jesus, "abundant life" - whatever that looks like for them). He writes:

"Paul seems to have agreed with the generally held belief of the ancient world that there is only one sexual nature, what we would call a heterosexual nature. Therefore, what he is condemning as contrary to nature is homosexual acts by people with a heterosexual nature. His implied underlying principle is that if people choose to actualize their sexuality, their acts should be in accord with their nature or orientation. If Paul then could be confronted with the reality of homosexual orientation, consistency would require him to acknowledge the naturalness of homosexual acts for people with a homosexual orientation" (pg. 15).

It is very worthwhile to read defenders of error that you might be more convinced of the truth. What is very interesting in Mr. Via's presentation is his open agreement that the texts of Scripture plainly condemn homosexual practice. ""Professor Gagnon and I are in substantial agreement that the biblical texts that deal specifically with homosexual practice condemn it unconditionally. However, on the question of what the church might or should make of this we diverge sharply" (pg. 93)

He argues that "homosexual practice among homosexually oriented, committed couples should not be regarded as sin" (pg. 94). He even admits that "the fit of male and female sexual organs is clearly self-evident for us" (pg. 96), but he would defend that the Bible points us to imagination and creativity which embraces mystery. "...In the New Testament there are dimensions of human life that are too complex, subtle, puzzling, unexpected, and ironic to be accounted for solely on the basis of what is self-evidently obvious" (96).

I'll just add that Robert Gagnon roots his argumentation in a commitment to the authoritative Scriptures (pgs. 40-42, 99, 104-105). His entire essay is built around explaining the Scriptural perspective. It is very good. He walks through all the primary texts, deals with many objections and explains the biblical case plainly. He gives a good rebuttal to the smokescreen analogies used by liberal scholars, Slavery, Women in Ministry and Divorce (pgs. 44-47). And he rightly drives home the parallels with the very apt analogy of incest (pgs. 48-50).

One interesting tidbit from Dan Via. He summarizes the stages of secular thought regarding homosexuality over the last generation (pgs. 3-4):

- prior to the 1960's: Homosexuality was viewed as degenerate.
- in the 1960's: Homosexuality was viewed as diseased.
- in the 1970's: Homosexuality was viewed as disordered.
- today: Homosexuality was viewed as "differently-ordered."

Get the book, check out his website, read Kevin DeYoung, and may God give His people grace to stand firmly for the truth. The word of God is clear. Homosexual practice and homosexual lust is evil. May God have mercy on many.

[Jeff · Rating 1 out of 5]

Definitely not a book that I would recommend to anyone struggling with same sex attraction. Although Mr. Via supports the case for gay-Christians I feel that he gives weak arguments from scripture to back his support.
Mr. Gagnon is unapologetically against gay Christians. His dislike (hatred?) is hardly hidden. He dwells WAY TOO much on the act of sex itself. His usage of the word “homosex” comes off as demeaning and hateful. He does include a disclaimer to “love the sinner, hate the sin” but one clearly feels no love coming from the words of Mr. Gagnon.

[Jonathan Templeton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Who would I recommend to read this book? Counselor, Pastor

What book would I recommend before? Love Into Light: the Gospel, the Homosexual, and the Church

[Don Keninitz · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a short book, so I'll keep my review short (although I've read Gagnon's lengthy book on the subject).

I wasn't really impressed with the argument of either participant. While I'd suggest Via's heart is in the better place, he contradicts himself in ways that define reconciling. He states he maintains a "high view of Scripture", but then quickly demonstrates his actual perspective is incompatible with any orthodox definition of what that means.

The implicit bias Gagnon brings to his view (both here and in his much longer work on the topic) is glaring. He offers up a variety of proof texts accompanied by subtle special pleadings (that many won't recognize as such; clever of him).

I think Robin Scroggs' book on this subject is still the best work, even though some will regard it as showing its age. Scroggs has impeccable credentials as both a Bible scholar and as a conservative one.

In short, Scroggs' conclusion is that we cannot rely on any of the commonly quoted passages from Scripture in determining what the Bible really says on this subject. Via ardently professes to recognize and agree with them, but ultimately ignores them - no other explanation is possible given his result. Gagnon, on the other hand - despite his (in my opinion, disingenuous) efforts to appear thoughtful and objective - accepts them uncritically but disguises his lack of objectivity with what amounts to little more than one man's speculation based on attenuated interpretations of numerous other passages that will have many shaking their heads with doubt as to their relevance.

This short book is unlikely to sway many people from one side to the other, nor should it, as it's sorely lacking in coherence on either side.

[Phil Whittall · Rating 3 out of 5]

Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views is a debate between Dan Via and Robert Gagnon, both New Testament professors. Via takes the view that the church should affirm gay marriage, Gagnon affirms the traditional view of homosexual sex as sinful.

What was interesting and surprising to me was that Via affirmed that ‘the Biblical texts that deal specifically with homosexual practice condemn it unconditionally’ (p93). He believes that rules (Biblical injunctions in this case) can be overridden if you have enough good reasons (p21).

His view of Scripture is essentially that it is ‘authoritative only in those parts that are existentially engaging and compelling’ and should be re-interpreted in the light not only of new knowledge but ‘in the light of one’s own interpretation’ (p2).

Via’s main argument rested on the issue of orientation. He argues that Paul (Romans 1:24-27 and 1 Cor 6:9-10) and the Biblical witness against homosexuality applies only to those who are acting against their nature. So straight people acting gay. What it does not apply to are people who by nature are gay. For them it is natural to live gay, it’s not against their nature but with their nature. He argues that if Paul knew then what we knew now he would say the same. That denying gay marriage both encourages promiscuity within the gay community by not supporting faithful, monogamous relationships and is unjust by denying some of God’s creation the possibility of finding sexual fulfilment.

Gagnon by contrast deals comprehensively with every Biblical passage, examines context, makes good exegetical links and connections (and one or two weaker suggestions such as reference to Ham & Noah that is far from convincing). He agrees with Via that the Bible uniformly, unequivocally and consistently calls same-sex sex sin and sees no reason why the church should change its mind now.

He argues that instead, the Bible offers the ‘beautiful image of ‘one fleshness’ of marriage as a reunion of an original binary whole’ (p89). The joining of two constituent parts male and female, that together reflects the image of God in a way that one half on their own cannot. Anything contrary to that falls short of God’s creative intent.

Via sees orientation as unchangeable and refers to gay experience to support that (I assume not really giving weight to the experience of those who are post-gay and have left that lifestyle behind), while Gagnon believes God’s grace is more powerful than even the strongest of our desires.

In terms of use of the Bible I struggle with Via’s liberal approach but perhaps if the case is so weak then what options does he have? I see Scripture as more authoritative, and am unsure of where Via would reasonably draw the line, a point Gagnon makes well.

[Jenny · Rating 3 out of 5]

Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views tries to create a dialogue/debate about issues of homosexuality in the church and how one approaches scripture to justify their pro/con stance. Professor Via writes a pro-homosexuality essay, and Professor Gagnon writes a con-homosexuality essay. Both essays are followed by a response to each other's essay.

I was assigned this for my biblical ethics class in seminary but never finished it. With the issue coming up again recently locally and nationally, I was reminded of the book and wanted to read it. I do appreciate the concept of the book, hearing from two educated scholars with firm positions on the issue. However, I was disappointed with how unapproachable this book is. It is a very scholarly approach and so takes time to read and digest and is not terribly approachable from the lay person's perspective. This, I feel, is a shame because there doesn't seem to be much out there that I have encountered that presents both sides equally, fairly and with respect. One thing about this subject that bothers me is that the respective sides don't seem to acknowledge how complicated an issue it is and how each side is doing their best to approach the scriptures faithfully.

[Steve Watson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Dan Via has some interesting additions to the conversation but also makes some weak claims. Robert Gagnon has some incisive biblical commentary, but also overstates some claims, to my mind, and comes across as reactionary and mean.

This book does help clarify that in our praxis and biblical ethics regarding same-sex sexuality, we have other things as stake - our hermeneutics, how we grapple with science and culture, and how we interpret rules and laws and the leading of the Holy Spirit.

Gagnon's most helpful arguments are in looking at a second layer of biblical text, the biblical world view beyond the short list of explicit texts on homosexuality, a worldview that assumes prohibition of same-sex sexual expression.

Via, who actually agrees with Gagnon's take on the biblical worldview for the most part, is most helpful in asking questions about what experiences and reason and theology would help us reconsider a biblical rule, even one consistently upheld in that context.

[Ryan Linkous · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is good but not great. Both author's claim to be evangelicals and hold to the authority of the Bible. However, when Via starts his chapter, it is clear that he does not respect scripture that much as authoritative for Christian living now. His arguments are hollow. There must be someone who could present and defend his position better.

Gagnon, on the other hand, gives an very good defense of the Bible's position on homosexuality and defends it as sin.

It becomes clear that the starting point for each author determines where each one ends up. Via clearly has a weaker view of scripture's authority. Gagnon (though not an inerrantist) has a stronger view. I'm interested to read Gagnon's big book on the issue.

[Chad Ryan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Content aside, I found the format of the book helpful for entering into the discussion: two opposing views presented, plus a rebuttal from each author. So long as one reads this little book knowing that each side has behind it much longer & more substantive books, it serves as a helpful introduction. (I will say that Gagnon is a scholarly authority in the traditionalist camp, & that I don't know anything about Via. But I have a hunch that Via doesn't represent the best revisionist arguments.)

[Guillaume Bourin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Gagnon obviously won the debate, according to me. However I am not following him on several issues, such as the documentary hypothesis, or the freshly created Adam depicted as "a binary or sexually undifferentiated human"(61°.
This is a short book. Only the major issues are discussed.

[Nancy Graham · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great insights from two scholars who disagree. Helpful for the theological conversation.

[Jill]

Taking the topic out of my sights, what strikes me is the futility of Sola Scriptura. When each person becomes his own final arbiter of truth, this is what we end up with.

[Jeffrey · Rating 4 out of 5]

A debate on the teachings of the Christian bible with regards to the topic of homosexuality.

[Bryan · Rating 1 out of 5]

2/5/12

[Justin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Clearly shows the interpretation (hermenuetical) differences between those who would think that the Bible allows Same Sex relationships and those who think the Bible prohibits those relationships.