This is an amazing analysis of the history and context around those texts in the Bible that refer to homosexual practice. The verses that are so often quoted to support the view that 'the Bible condemns homosexuality'.

Nothing could be further from the truth. In nine chapters the author goes through the references, adds facts from other written sources of the time and provides enough data to clear up many misunderstandings. Personally, I found the last chapter to be the most illuminating. Tom Horner talks about Jesus and sexuality - and clarifies the point that Jesus was about spirituality and love. What he spoke up against was hypocrisy and lack of inclusiveness, not any particular kind of sexual orientation or behavior.

I recommend this book to anyone who wants to have some facts at their disposal when next encountering a bigoted argument against same sex relationships. Even though it was written in 1978, the facts haven't changed and are as valid today as they were back then. ( )

First off, I adore the cute 70s retro hardcover on this book. It's mustard colored, if you can believe that. If it were avocado, it would give off fond memories of my parents old refridgerator.

But in all seriousness, this is a classic contribution to the struggle for homosexual rights in Christianity. It's well researched, well organized and reasonable. It covers everything from the attitudes toward gays held by the Israelite's neighbors, to Paul's reasons for saying what *he* said, to the final chapters, which cover what,if anything, Jesus actually said about it all.

Not only is this a great book for defending homosexuality, it's great for the study of other Biblical issues such as polytheism.

It has a couple of flaws, of course. The book is largely concerned with gay men. There is one chapter on Ruth (where, in spite of some good arguments the author also falls into many classic male traps) and one brief discussion of lesbianism in Rome/Greece.

He is quite derisive of the idea that Mary Magdalene and Jesus could have been married, claiming that the Gnostic gospels are "not taken seriously". Well, they are *now* so that entire chapter might be considered dated by currrent progressive theologians. ( )