Comments on: Homosexuality and the Clergy by N.T. Wright http://www.nathancolquhoun.com/2009/07/16/homosexuality-and-the-clergy-by-n-t-wrig the home of Nathan Colquhoun Sat, 13 Mar 2010 15:22:10 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Alan http://www.nathancolquhoun.com/2009/07/16/homosexuality-and-the-clergy-by-n-t-wrig#comment-2405 Alan Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-2405 Perhaps the biggest difference between Wright and Wink on this issue is that Wink believes Paul was a sort of pre-modern biologist and therefore understands Paul's use of words like "nature" to have primarily a biological referent, whereas Wright is going to see Paul as a theologian and understand the apostle's language in light of the Hebrew narrative. Perhaps the biggest difference between Wright and Wink on this issue is that Wink believes Paul was a sort of pre-modern biologist and therefore understands Paul’s use of words like “nature” to have primarily a biological referent, whereas Wright is going to see Paul as a theologian and understand the apostle’s language in light of the Hebrew narrative.

]]> By: Nathan Colquhoun http://www.nathancolquhoun.com/2009/07/16/homosexuality-and-the-clergy-by-n-t-wrig#comment-2406 Nathan Colquhoun Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-2406 Alan, thanks for the comment!<br /> <br /> I don't know if I full agree with that, Wink even says in his article that he realizes the scriptures don't approve of homosexuality. I think their biggest difference is where they see the role of scripture and the freedom of the church. Wink see the church as having freedom to reinterpret these things in the light of Christ and grace, Wright sees it more as trying to understand it and do what it says. Which actually surprised me a little bit, only because my first understanding of the church being an extension of the scriptures and not trying to become exactly what they were was by NT Wright in his analogy of it being like a play where the scriptures are the first 4 acts and the church today is the 5th act. So really, Wink and Wright just disagree on what the 5th act is supposed to look like, not necessarily what the bible says about it.<br /> Alan, thanks for the comment!

I don’t know if I full agree with that, Wink even says in his article that he realizes the scriptures don’t approve of homosexuality. I think their biggest difference is where they see the role of scripture and the freedom of the church. Wink see the church as having freedom to reinterpret these things in the light of Christ and grace, Wright sees it more as trying to understand it and do what it says. Which actually surprised me a little bit, only because my first understanding of the church being an extension of the scriptures and not trying to become exactly what they were was by NT Wright in his analogy of it being like a play where the scriptures are the first 4 acts and the church today is the 5th act. So really, Wink and Wright just disagree on what the 5th act is supposed to look like, not necessarily what the bible says about it.

]]>