The paper addresses an intra-evangelical debate that is going on right now. One side (Brian McLaren, et al.) argues that Christianity should revise its 2,000 year old teaching on sexual ethics. The other side argues that the Bible’s teaching is still relevant today even though it is definitely counter-cultural.

The title of the paper probably reads like an anti-gay tirade, but that’s not what it is. As I said, it’s addressed to other evangelicals. Moreover, even though Christians believe that the Bible teaches that homosexuality is a sin, we also still believe that the gospel is for sinners. As the apostle Paul has said, “Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners– of whom I am the worst” (1 Timothy 1:15).

One of the great texts on this topic is 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, “Do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals… shall inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God.”

The important line is “and such were some of you.” The apostle Paul wrote to those who had engaged in homosexual acts, and he adds that they have been washed, sanctified, and justified because of the death and resurrection of Jesus.

The truth is that homosexual sinners are no worse off than heterosexual ones. We’re all in the same boat. Thankfully, God has made a way for all sinners to be forgiven and cleansed and to inherit eternal life. That’s the good news (even if my title didn’t communicate that!).

Thanks again for writing. Great to hear from you.

Sincerely,
Denny

I would say the same about any authority figure, whether it be professor, doctor, psychologist, employer or anyone at all with authority over you. Consensual sex is really moot under conditions of authority.

http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/119/june06/note/inbred_obscurity.pdf

The truth is not quite so simple. With regard to polyamory, the Bible contains many instances (about 60 I believe) of Bible characters engaging in polygamy. Most of those committing the polygamy are “good guys” and none are condemned, save for Solomon (the world’s wisest man), whose crime was marrying foreign women and for going a bit overboard with his 700 wives and 300 concubines. Neither the Old or New Testament ever explicitly forbids polygamy. Augustine and Luther, among other church leaders, admitted that the Bible did not prohibit polygamy.

The matter of incest is a bit trickier. One critical issue is defining it. Virtually everyone agrees that a parent having sex with a minor child is incest and should be outlawed. But what about first cousins? Or second cousins? Some jurisdictions outlaw and some permit marriage between former in-laws or step-siblings. Some states and nations do not criminalize sex between consenting adults regardless of relationship. Even in the majority of states, where laws prohibit consensual adult sex between relatives, enforcement is almost nonexistent.

It seems to me that sex between consenting, mentally competent adults should not be a matter to be interfered with by the state. One additional and legitimate caveat would be to maintain prohibitions on sexual relations between a parent or parent figure and their child due to a probable imbalance of authority.

As to what various religious groups want to condone or condemn, that’s their business.

Wow, that’s almost exactly what John Owen said in On the Mortification of Sin in Believers (albeit in old school English).