English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Phyllis Bird’s important article on the Old  Testament’s contributions to Christian ethical discussion of homosexuality  argues that anti-homosex OT texts are based on an unacceptable worldview, given  their disinterest in affective bonds and attention to male honor. This essay  points to major problems with Bird’s article. First, Bird fails to distinguish  between affective bonds, in which the OT shows a limited interest, and  structural prerequisites for sexual activity. Second, Bird misconstrues the  story of Sodom as indicting only coercive male-male intercourse by neglecting  Gen 9,20–27 and Ez 16,49–50, failing to connect Jdc 19,22–25 and the   q e desîm  texts, and misreading the effect of introducing such  variables as consent and equality. Third, Bird’s attempt at dismissing the  Levitical prohibitions as nonrational and preethical falters because she  miscasts Lev 18 and 20 as ritual purity legislation, errs in assuming punishment  of coerced participants, and fails to recognize that Lev 18 and 20 give greater  weight to structuralist arguments from nature than to unbridled male dominance.  Fourth, Bird inaccurately portrays Gen 1,27 and 2,21–24 as void of proscriptive  implications for same-sex intercourse. Fifth, Bird’s appropriation of the wisdom  tradition overlooks the many ways in which such tradition speaks against her  position. Sixth, despite Bird’s claim to the contrary, her approach does not  attribute meaningful authority to Scripture as Scripture.

The Old Testament and Homosexuality: A Critical Review of the Case Made by Phyllis Bird