Michael Kennedy wrote:

Rowland Croucher < wrote:

Now, I'm being being asked to nail my colors to the mast on the question of homosexual activity. I am hesitant to do so for lots of reasons:

1. 'Casting pearls before swine' reasons eg. whenever someone seems to be more judgmental about people's sexual activity than loving in regard to those persons. I was lecturing in a (Pentecostal) Bible College once, and asked the group: 'What did Jesus say to the woman caught in the act of adultery?' Their response, in unison: 'Go and sin no more!' My retort to the group: 'You pharisees!' (I haven't been invited back).

Weren't you being legalistic too there, Rowland ?

Perhaps I should have spelt out the wider context. 'Judgmental' yes. 'Legalistic' no. They missed, of course (as conservatives mostly do) the statement of Jesus which is most important: 'Neither do I condemn you...' But Jesus did condemn some people (eg. pharisees) but never those who felt marginalized. Hope that helps.

2. So what was Jesus' approach to questions like this? (And if this particular ethical question was of such paramount importance why is there no record of Jesus addressing it?). Take Zaccheus: Jesus didn't lecture him about thieving, just loved him (into repentance). With pharisees, repentance precedes acceptance, with Jesus it was the othe other way around. I want to be like Jesus.

Repentance still has to follow somewhere along the line, therefore this shouldn't affect your answer.

Oh, but it does/should. Read Matthew Fox, 'Original Sin'. I've no problem with the notion of repentance (it's the opposite of 'blaming') but it's the _order_ that's important. First: 'I do not condemn you' (acceptance) _then_ 'go and sin no more' (presuming repentance)...

3. Pedagogical reasons: it's better to teach people _how_ to think than _what_ to think by doing their thinking for them. I assume a maturity in adult (and most adolescent) learners which seems to encourage more mature convictions in the long run...

Fair enough, if were talking about man-made rules. But we are not, these are God's instructions on how we should lead our life, there not God's instructions for us - when were ready to obey them, or 'if' we agree with them.

My assumption would be that Jesus (and the prophets occasionally) used parables for the same pedagogical reasons...

My quick assessment - You have a pharisee fixation ( a new clinical term !)

I'm happy to admit to that. Jesus did too, I think, particularly as I read Matthew...

Michael.

Shalom! Rowland Croucher