But, Romans 1.26-27 isn’t about Creation or Homosexuality…

If Romans 1 is accepted as having a clear echo of the creation story, then on a very foundational level we need to recognise that God is imaged by both male and female…

via Anglicans, Rom 1:26-27, and Homosexuality.

The book looks great, but I wanted to comment on this one little bit.

Romans 1.26-27 MUST BE LEFT OUT of the debate on homosexuality from the perspective that it is Paul’s own words.

Paul actually condemns the statements made in this section of Romans.

You Might Also Like

6 Replies to “But, Romans 1.26-27 isn’t about Creation or Homosexuality…”

  1. It is very easy to use them that way because “scripture is plain”. But as you have pointed out before, this is a rhetorical device. Romans was never divided into chapters by Paul. This is from where a large part of the issues comes.

  2. //Paul actually condemns the statements made in this section of Romans.//

    Intrigued! Do you mind explaining how not that I disagree – I don’t as it happens – but would be interested in hearing your analysis of these passages.

Leave a Reply, Please!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.