![]() ![]() First, he wishes to prove that homosexuality was generally accepted and approved of until about the 12th century and, secondly, he wishes to “rebut the common idea that religious belief - Christian or other - has been the *cause* of intolerance in regard to gay people."īoswell is considerably more convincing when arguing for the second point than when arguing for the first. This is revisionism of the most agenda-driven variety. The book has a scholarly appearance and copious footnotes, but the author engages in a great deal of interpretative gymnastics with regard to Scripture, Christian tradition, and especially history. But I find the claim that one is merely being scientific (and if the science happens to agree with my personal agenda, what a coincidence!) to be disingenuous. ![]() I very much enjoy reading persuasive writing. Now, I have absolutely no problem with books with agendas. I say it is odd because the massive volume is clearly aimed at convincing the reader that Christianity is, if you really dig into history and read the Scriptures just right, supportive of homosexual love and the sex that is an expression of that love. The author of “Christianity, Homosexuality, and Social Tolerance” begins his book with the odd claim that he is not supporting any particular moral position with regard to homosexuality. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |