I think I want to explore Walter Wink. I never heard of him before WonderCafe. Here he is quoted by Rev. James Murray to explore homosexuality in the New Testament. Often when Leviticus is quoted, it is easy to counter those quotes as many of the beliefs found in it are dismissable - stoning rebellious teenagers, preventing women from leaving their homes during their menstral cycle, etc. I find wrestling with the translations of Paul not as effective, but do like the story of the baptism of the Eunuch as helpful.
Rev. Murray wrote:
Walter Wink makes this point about how we all interpret the Bible's injunctions about sexuality.
"For example, virtually all modern readers would agree with the Bible in rejecting: incest, rape, adultery, and intercourse with animals. But we disagree with the Bible on most other sexual mores. The Bible condemned the following behaviors which we generally allow: intercourse during menstruation, celibacy, exogamy (marriage with non-Jews), naming sexual organs, nudity (under certain conditions), masturbation (some Christians still condemn this), birth control (some Christians still forbid this).
And the Bible regarded semen and menstrual blood as unclean, which most of us do not. Likewise, the Bible permitted behaviors that we today condemn: prostitution, polygamy, levirate marriage, sex with slaves, concubinage, treatment of women as property, and very early marriage (for the girl, age 11-13).
And while the Old Testament accepted divorce, Jesus forbade it. In short, of the sexual mores mentioned here, we only agree with the Bible on four of them, and disagree with it on sixteen!"
I could respect the opinion of someone who spoke against homosexuality if they abided by all of these Biblical standards. Homosexuality is no better or worse than any of these other sexual issues. By how we are abiding by the commandments on this list, we are all either A) condemned to hell or B) part of an ever-evolving process of learning how to live together in an ethical manner.