Take a photo of a barcode or cover
agd1120's review against another edition
4.0
Haven’t quite finished this one yet, but I know it will take some time and I want to go ahead and get my thoughts down.
This is such a helpful book and I’m very thankful for it. If you’re looking for ways to interpret the Bible that are affirming of homosexuality then this will help!! There are sooo many ways to interpret the Bible and it’s so encouraging to see really legitimate explanations for some of those terrible anti-LGBT passages. I’ve been wanting to beef up my theology on this subject for quite some time and this was a helpful start. No need to read it straight through, it’s meant to be able to pick and choose the topics you’re interested in the most.
And if you’ve never questioned the Church’s traditional teaching on homosexuality….. then this book is ESPECIALLY for you!! Queer people are such an important part of the church and we’ve treated them so egregiously and unforgivably. Taking time to rethink this issue is so very worth your time.
This is such a helpful book and I’m very thankful for it. If you’re looking for ways to interpret the Bible that are affirming of homosexuality then this will help!! There are sooo many ways to interpret the Bible and it’s so encouraging to see really legitimate explanations for some of those terrible anti-LGBT passages. I’ve been wanting to beef up my theology on this subject for quite some time and this was a helpful start. No need to read it straight through, it’s meant to be able to pick and choose the topics you’re interested in the most.
And if you’ve never questioned the Church’s traditional teaching on homosexuality….. then this book is ESPECIALLY for you!! Queer people are such an important part of the church and we’ve treated them so egregiously and unforgivably. Taking time to rethink this issue is so very worth your time.
trywii's review against another edition
4.0
This book is probably the most thorough I’ve read so far on the discussion on Christian theology and LGBT inclusion/exclusion in the church.
The author walks through historical and cultural contexts for the verses mentioned, as well as including plenty of citations from other thinkers, authors, and leaders on the subject. I’m considering grabbing a physical copy to let others borrow.
I enjoyed this book, and the only thing keeping me from rating it 5 stars is that some of the flow of the text felt a little formulaic.
The author walks through historical and cultural contexts for the verses mentioned, as well as including plenty of citations from other thinkers, authors, and leaders on the subject. I’m considering grabbing a physical copy to let others borrow.
I enjoyed this book, and the only thing keeping me from rating it 5 stars is that some of the flow of the text felt a little formulaic.
chrisworthy's review against another edition
4.0
Worth reading even if you already understand this issue from a theological perspective and consider yourself an ally. Be sure to get the latest edition with the updated last chapter. It is worth the read for that alone.
debmylin's review against another edition
5.0
Essential reading for anyone engaged with the Christian church in any form, but especially those in churches that continue to deny full inclusion to LGBTQ people. This is a very careful, very thoughtful book that does an excellent job of avoiding incendiary language.
scottrushing's review against another edition
4.0
This book is part memoir, part biblical study to explain why Gushee changed his mind on the full inclusion of LGBT Christians into the Church. He writes in the form of short essays that are accessible to a general audience...no seminary background needed.
rebekahology's review against another edition
5.0
I read this a couple of years ago and went to look for it in my read books today and couldn't find it. I realized I never updated my status for it.
This is one of the most in-depth books on this topic I have read. The investigation of theology is thorough and the author's commitment to genuinely seeking answers is admirable. He is open-minded, if not skeptical, and commits himself to this process. I can't recommend this book enough.
This is one of the most in-depth books on this topic I have read. The investigation of theology is thorough and the author's commitment to genuinely seeking answers is admirable. He is open-minded, if not skeptical, and commits himself to this process. I can't recommend this book enough.
theavidread3r's review against another edition
2.0
Gushee does a great job of laying out the ethical and empathetic realities for many in the LGBT community. It is a work that is commendable, and needed in that regard.
Where the book falls apart, for me, is in the lack of cohesive narrative in his arguments. He often casts doubt, but doesn't state his own conclusion. The arguments are meant to 'beg the question' and evoke feelings in the reader, without stating their true intent. He makes sweeping Scriptural statements that fundamentally change how one would read the Bible, in short paragraphs, without adequately making the case.
Is it an important work? Absolutely. However, Gushee fails in his goal. In the end, it appears he is appealing to those who are already predisposed to the argument, and himself argues out of experience, rather than logic.
If you are looking for a more in-depth review, which adequately and fairly asks questions about Gushee's overall approach and argument, I'd suggest: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/reviews/changing-mind
Where the book falls apart, for me, is in the lack of cohesive narrative in his arguments. He often casts doubt, but doesn't state his own conclusion. The arguments are meant to 'beg the question' and evoke feelings in the reader, without stating their true intent. He makes sweeping Scriptural statements that fundamentally change how one would read the Bible, in short paragraphs, without adequately making the case.
Is it an important work? Absolutely. However, Gushee fails in his goal. In the end, it appears he is appealing to those who are already predisposed to the argument, and himself argues out of experience, rather than logic.
If you are looking for a more in-depth review, which adequately and fairly asks questions about Gushee's overall approach and argument, I'd suggest: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/reviews/changing-mind
res_curans's review against another edition
3.0
Takes a moderate-liberal view on the homosexuality issue, and takes a little longer to argue for it than it should. The first half of the book is spent proving that gay people exist, and that this poses a problem that the Church must grapple with, and then also provides some prefatory remarks for the form his argument will take. It isn’t until Chapter 10, more than 50 pages in, that he begins his argument proper.
The argument boils down to essentially four key points:
The condemnation of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19, and the incident recorded in Judges 19, seem to deal with homosexual rape an abomination more because of the social implications having to do with a sexist and classist society, rather than a condemnation of homosexual activity as such. (Also, in each case, it’s rape — not any sort of committed, monogamous, etc., relationship.)
Passages in Leviticus condemning homosexuality and imposing the death penalty for it may have been more or less intended to set Israel apart culturally from the surrounding societies, rather than intended to condemn homosexual activity as such. Since so much Old Testament law is no longer observed, it is at least an open question whether these particular laws should still apply.
A word that Paul uses in Corinthians and Timothy that is commonly translated “sodomites,” “homosexuals,” “pervert,” etc., is actually a neologism he made up that could be translated in a number of other ways that would still make sense in context — Gushee suggests “sexual predators” or “pimps.” The most straightforward condemnation of homosexuality in Romans 1:26-27 could be (and likely is) in reference to the really messed up things going on in the Roman Empire at the time. Considering that Paul was writing around the emperorships of Nero and Caligula, I think this is a fair point. Again, this is a far cry from any sort of committed, monogamous relationship.
Lastly, the complementarian vision of a man-woman marriage is rooted in Genesis 1-2, pre-fall creation. But the fact is that we live in a Genesis 3 world, post-fall, one in which divorce is allowed, etc. And here is where I finally have a problem with Gushee’s argument. Allowance does not imply endorsement. Just because we live in a fallen state does not mean that we endorse fallen behavior. He himself makes the distinction between descriptive and prescriptive ethics (28), so it’s shocking that he would try to make this move.
This book was a quick read, especially since I skipped over much of the early chapters, and I was glad to have read his explanations of some of the key Biblical verses. It raises very good questions, and takes a reasonably cautious/balanced view on the issues. But his discussions were quite brief — I plan on investigating some of his footnotes — and in its final move, the argument falls flat on its face.
Extra points though, for this quote:
“I was doing my devotional reading while on vacation last summer—I made sure to say both of those things so readers wondering about my salvation are at least aware that I still read the Bible devotionally, even on vacation…” (107)
The argument boils down to essentially four key points:
The condemnation of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19, and the incident recorded in Judges 19, seem to deal with homosexual rape an abomination more because of the social implications having to do with a sexist and classist society, rather than a condemnation of homosexual activity as such. (Also, in each case, it’s rape — not any sort of committed, monogamous, etc., relationship.)
Passages in Leviticus condemning homosexuality and imposing the death penalty for it may have been more or less intended to set Israel apart culturally from the surrounding societies, rather than intended to condemn homosexual activity as such. Since so much Old Testament law is no longer observed, it is at least an open question whether these particular laws should still apply.
A word that Paul uses in Corinthians and Timothy that is commonly translated “sodomites,” “homosexuals,” “pervert,” etc., is actually a neologism he made up that could be translated in a number of other ways that would still make sense in context — Gushee suggests “sexual predators” or “pimps.” The most straightforward condemnation of homosexuality in Romans 1:26-27 could be (and likely is) in reference to the really messed up things going on in the Roman Empire at the time. Considering that Paul was writing around the emperorships of Nero and Caligula, I think this is a fair point. Again, this is a far cry from any sort of committed, monogamous relationship.
Lastly, the complementarian vision of a man-woman marriage is rooted in Genesis 1-2, pre-fall creation. But the fact is that we live in a Genesis 3 world, post-fall, one in which divorce is allowed, etc. And here is where I finally have a problem with Gushee’s argument. Allowance does not imply endorsement. Just because we live in a fallen state does not mean that we endorse fallen behavior. He himself makes the distinction between descriptive and prescriptive ethics (28), so it’s shocking that he would try to make this move.
This book was a quick read, especially since I skipped over much of the early chapters, and I was glad to have read his explanations of some of the key Biblical verses. It raises very good questions, and takes a reasonably cautious/balanced view on the issues. But his discussions were quite brief — I plan on investigating some of his footnotes — and in its final move, the argument falls flat on its face.
Extra points though, for this quote:
“I was doing my devotional reading while on vacation last summer—I made sure to say both of those things so readers wondering about my salvation are at least aware that I still read the Bible devotionally, even on vacation…” (107)