Dentonz said:
So you don't think homosexuality was socially acceptable to the Romans when Paul wrote his letter to them? From what I've read, it was pretty much common place and accepted by just about everyone in Rome. Yet God sought it proper to guide Paul's hand when he wrote "though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them. "(Rom. 1:32 ESV) That is exactly why Jesus never mentioned it. Because he only taught the Jews which knew the law. Therefore, when God sent his message to the gentiles who saw sin as common, they had to be told what was acceptable to God and what wasn't. It might not have been culturally acceptable when Leviticus was written, but it definately was at the time of Romans and 1 Cor 6:9 and 1 Tim 1:10.
Actually, it wasn't acceptable in that culture then, and it's still largely not today. Inthe Middle East there are still remnants of the socio-sexual roles of honor/shame.
Paul wrote out of
his own sense of culture. Paul was a Jew and a Pharisee. Because Paul was a Pharisee, religious law and cultural mores were all wrapped up in the same package. Paul, by virtue of who he was, could not segregate the two. Israel was a religious state. The Sanhedrin were religious leaders, as well as civic leaders.
Possibly the gospelers don't have Jesus mention homosexuality because Mark and Q were written to largely Jewish communities, where homosexuality was not prevalent. Paul mentions it because he is a Jew living in cultures where homosexuality is practiced. Being unable to segregate social more from religious righteousness, Paul was compelled to address what
he regarded as sin...as sin. so we see how God's truth becomes filtered through the lens of human expectation and experience.
