Latest on @HuffPostRelig – Romans 1.26-7

The Gutenberg Bible displayed by the United St...

The Gutenberg Bible displayed by the United States Library of Congress, demonstrating printed pages as a storage medium. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

So, this is not everyone’s cup o’tea and some may disagree. That’s fine. Let’s talk.

The Bible ‘Says’ Homosexuality Is a Sin? | Joel L. Watts.

I referred to a previous post that I *think is supported by a recent post by Dagesh.

Paul is not speaking about homosexuality, but about judging others as unsavable. The detractor (created) was arguing against the salvation of Gentiles, not sinners in general, but Gentiles.

Anyway, there you go.

For those who do not get the point of a HuffPost op-ed, it is not a full-blown academic article, but a short (no more than 1000 words) piece. So, it has to be short, sweet, and to the point, Beau. 

Related Articles:

Enhanced by Zemanta

Post By Joel Watts (10,113 Posts)

Joel L. Watts holds a Masters of Arts from United Theological Seminary with a focus in literary and rhetorical criticism of the New Testament. He is currently a Ph.D. student at the University of the Free State, analyzing Paul’s model of atonement in Galatians. He is the author of Mimetic Criticism of the Gospel of Mark: Introduction and Commentary (Wipf and Stock, 2013), a co-editor and contributor to From Fear to Faith: Stories of Hitting Spiritual Walls (Energion, 2013), and Praying in God's Theater, Meditations on the Book of Revelation (Wipf and Stock, 2014).

Website: → Unsettled Christianity

Connect

11 thoughts on “Latest on @HuffPostRelig – Romans 1.26-7

  1. First, I agree, we Christians should not judge, as we are all fall short (sin) of His righteousness. Just as my thoughts of hatred of someone are equal to murder according to Jesus.

    We tend to rank our short fallen nature in degrees of naughtiness. Part of this is our english language framework in which the word sin has been used throughout the world. Sin, by definition, is falling short or missing the mark.

    Within the New Testament, the use of γαρ is used to further explain (strengthens) the writer’s antecedent statement or phrase. It is not just a simply translation of “for”. There is a purpose behind using γαρ in that it expounds upon the previously made statement.

    Succinctly, between the Romans chapter 1 and 2, the missing component that very few grasp is that God had left those (turned them over) that did not acknowledge Him as their sovereign in their lives. The qualities exhibited in Romans 1:26-32 are a result of God leaving those that are ungodly and refuse His righteousness. Once again, God left them because they refused to acknowledge God as the sovereign, which starts at 1:18. These people idolized everything, except God, the Creator.

    Now, for judging those that exhibit the aforementioned shortcomings, at the start of 2:1, Paul starts talking to us, Christians. We are without excuse for judging, as we only serve to condemn ourselves. There is ONLY one allowed to judge and that is one who paid for our sins with His blood, Jesus.

    In addition, we do not judge because God might have already judged certain people to condemnation anyway. So just leave it alone, we just do not know what God has decided to do with anyone. Our charge is to exhibit faith in His Word, not to judge those that do not fit into our own framework of righteousness.

    • You are making a generalization of “Gar’s” use In The NT without basis. As I and others have pointed out, it is used in the antecedent to the NT and in well known works to indicate another dialogue partner

      • Interesting, respectfully, I was taking the position that you were making the generalization.

        I have re-read your position within the article, I just disagree with the justification coming from the Septuagint’s use of γαρ, as a change of speaker. It is clear in most contexts, in which you highlight, that γαρ is clearly being used to further explain that which was immediately preceded. The way in which you reference the Septuagint, along with the translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, makes it sound like there was a translation of the New Testament from another language. As you know, the New Testament is Koine greek, which is going to be slightly different than the Old Testament translated greek. The New Testament codices were written in Koine greek because of the Hellenization of the area at the time.

        I do not want argue back and forth about who is right or wrong. That was not my intention at all. There is an interpretation issue.

        You are also coming from an exegetical theological vantage point, and I am taking the pragmatic road. All in all, I like your analysis. However, my reaction was because I am really sensitive to the Christianity being espoused these days in the name of Jesus. Its focus is on fleshly matters of immediate satisfaction, as opposed to the achievements of spirituality through faith: it is sickening to me.

        Stated again, I enjoyed the conclusion of the write-up, but I slightly disagree with the path in which you arrived at your conclusion.

        Lastly, in the 6th paragraph, “… because they are idol worships and do …” “worships” should probably be “worshippers” or “worshipers”.

        • I’m not sure how, when I focused on one author in one of his works, I was making the generalization as opposed to you who issues a blanket statement about the Greek in the NT corpus.

          At no point do I even hint at anything other than a Greek New Testament.

  2. I just wanted to say thanks for the Huff Post article. I found it enlightening and while it may hace been short, that has only encouraged me to persue more on the subject. You have, if you will pardon the expession, redeemed Paul for me. Thanks again.

  3. The comments section where readers can respond to the article at HuffPost is being so heavily moderated and censored that a great many comments that do not agree with Mr. Watts’ point of view do not show up at all. I have plenty of experience posting to HuffPost the comments for it are the most censored I have ever run across< I have probably had 4 comments of 20 posted, and that is not due to breaking rules related to posting there,.So it goes for those who want to engage in discussion of the flaws of Mr. Watts supposed scholarship in regards to this passage. Yes, Mr. Watts, Genesis, Leviticus, Judges, Romans, Corinthians, 1 Timothy, Peter, Jude and Revelation all speak to homosexuality being sin. Jump through all the hoops you care to in an attempt to negate it, however the word of the Lord is eternal and stands forever, so you will fail

    • Well, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but the facts do not hold up.

      If you cared about Scripture whatsoever, you’d care about what it means. But, alas, you do not.

Leave a Reply, Please!