Biblical Injunctions against Homosexuality

queerness corpse one of the hottest topics in the modern society. We argue, whether quirkiness has the right to make it in society, and try to relieve homoeroticism notions in Biblical foothold. Objectively, neither proponents, nor opponents of homosexual relations befool ever suggested any case-by-case relevant system of arguments to defend their positioning. We try to rely on religion, and we try to interpret our views on homosexuality through the Biblical injunctions against homosexuality. Yet, we still fail to properly interpret Biblical provisions.As a result, proponents and opponents of homosexuality habit different (and even opposite) interpretations of the aforementioned(prenominal) Biblical texts to support their arguments. John Corvino vs. Vatican homosexualism and the news It is always enkindle and useful to review the two opposite viewpoints, when it comes to evaluating the relevance of twain arguments. Such comparison is even to a greater extent useful, whe n the arguments atomic number 18 based on the Biblical texts the texts which still lack single unilateral interpretation.John Corvino has become a well known advocate for the rights of homosexuals. He has used the major Biblical provisions to support his thanksgiving of homosexuality. In his work The Bible Condemns Usurers, Too he has used the analogy between homosexuality and the lick of lending money for interest. In the Book of Exodus, we read if you lend money to my people, to the poor among you, you shall not arrogate interest for them (Childs 33).However, contemporary society actively utilizes the principles of interest in traditional banking practice (with the exception of Moslem banking which still relies on lending without interest). Does this mean that while the Bible prohibits homosexuality it still has the right to exist? In Corvinos view, it does. Moreover, Corvino uses one of the strongest Biblical injunctions against homosexuality to suggest that the Bible has p robably been erroneous The Bible explicitly refers to dishonorable heating plants.Their women exchanges natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men (Ziesler 97). Corvino tries to suggest, that although the Bible condemns homosexuality, the times and social conditions have changed. Suppose that in Pauls time homosexual relationships were typically exploitative, paganistic or pederastic (Corvino). For Vatican, though such suggestions are at least weak.First of all, Vatican unilaterally condemns homosexuality. Second, Vatican grounds its position on the same Biblical injunctions against homosexuality. It is remarkable, that Vatican primarily uses the same letter of Paul to Romans to support its strong condemnation of homosexuality Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator who is forever praised.Amen (Vatican Statement on Homosexuality). It is not difficult to guess what the Church would respond to Corvino the Church would certainly defend the holy union between a man and a woman. The letter of Paul to Romans is the direct condemnation of homosexuality, and it is difficult not to deny that the Bible takes homosexual behavior as immoral. In 1997, Vatican released a Statement on Homosexuality. That Statement has become the brightest and the most infrastandable interpretation of Vaticans position towards homosexuality.To choose someone of the same sex for ones sexual activity is to forfend the rich symbolism and meaning, not to mention the goals, of the Creators sexual design (Vatican Statement on Homosexuality). Even in the light of such strong Churchs arguments, Corvinos position remains unchanged. He persistently tries to assure the public that we misinterpret Biblical provisions. Corvino grounds his position on the irrelevance of contemporary Biblical interpretations, and on the fact that many Biblical injunctions against homosexuality are at least outdated. Vatican would hardly agree with that position.When the Bible says By their fruits ye shall know them (Ziesler 99), this does not mean that the Bible stands for homosexuality. Moreover, Vatican openly recognizes that it has appeared under the serious pressure to accept homosexuality. While Corvino suggests that the Church refuses to see homosexual relations as good, Vatican responds that at that place is an effort in some countries to manipulate the Church to conform to these pressure groups concept that homosexuality is at least a completely harmless, if not an entirely good, thing (Vatican Statement on Homosexuality).For Vatican to reject homosexuality means not only to rely on certain Biblical passages it means to guess the position of homosexuali ty proponents, and to re-direct the proponents arguments against themselves. Conclusion We have seen that both Vatican and John Corvino ground their research of homosexuality on the Bible. Moreover, Vatican and Corvino evaluate the same Biblical injunctions against homosexuality to prove that each of them keeps to a more correct path in the homosexuality debate.The Bible openly condemns homosexuality. John Corvino suggests that the Biblical injunctions against homosexuality are outdated and require re-consideration in the light of the changing societal conditions. Vatican keeps to the thought that homosexuality cannot be good, it cannot be harmless, and takes Corvinos position as threatening to the religious stability of the society.Both arguments deserve attention both require detailed re-evaluation in terms of Biblical interpretations, and the analogies drawn by John Corvino. It would be incorrect to state that either Vatican or Corvino have failed to justify their position toward s homosexuality. It will be better to say that as long as both positions exist and are defended in the society, we will be able to produce a more purpose view on what homosexuality is, and whether it has the right to exist as a notion.Works Cited Corvino, John. The Bible Condemned Usurers, Too. Harvard Gay and homosexual Review, 24 (1996) 29-32. Childs, Brevard S. The Book of Exodus A Critical Theological Commentary. Westminster John Knox Press, 1974. Vatican Statement on Homosexuality. 1997. Catholic World News. 06 March 2008. http//www. cwnews. com/news/viewstory. cfm? recnum=4548 Ziesler, John A. Pauls Letter to the Romans. New testament Commentaries. CRM Press.