When behavioral practices originally condemned in the Old Testament are again condemned in the New Testament, they cannot be considered “savage” text. This is because the New Testament condemnation either comes directly from Jesus or comes from one of his recognized apostles.
Homosexuality is condemned in a number of places in the Old Testament. It is again condemned New Testament, most famously in Paul's Letter to the Romans (which lists it among a catalog of sinful Roman behaviors).
However it is again condemned in Jude (Jude 1: 5-11, KJV):
“5 But I want to remind you, though you once knew this, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.
6 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day;
7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
8 Likewise also these dreamers defile the flesh, reject authority, and speak evil of dignitaries.
9 Yet Michael the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!”
10 But these speak evil of whatever they do not know; and whatever they know naturally, like brute beasts, in these things they corrupt themselves.
11 Woe to them! For they have gone in the way of Cain, have run greedily in the error of Balaam for profit, and perished in the rebellion of Korah.”
Note the reference in verse 7 to Sodom and Gomorrah, their destruction, the reason for their destruction, and the fact that they are meant to be an example.
Consequently, you have homosexuality being condemned in both testaments, a direct linking of the New Testament condemnation to the Old, and the New Testament condemnation being done by apostles who either knew Jesus personally during his earthly ministry or, in Paul's case, were called directly by Jesus after his resurrection.
The only way the “savage text” argument works is if the author proves that the apostles (who collectively authored all of the text of the New Testament) were themselves ignorant of the “loving nature” of the Lord they served.
And if one portion of the text fails to reflect the "loving nature of Jesus," what other forbidden behaviors is the author next going to say are permitted? Pedophilia? Bestiality?
“Consequently, you have homosexuality being condemned in both testaments, a direct linking of the New Testament condemnation to the Old, and the New Testament condemnation being done by apostles who either knew Jesus personally during his earthly ministry or, in Paul’s case, were called directly by Jesus after his resurrection.”
Good point for continuity.
“The only way the “savage text” argument works is if the author proves that the apostles (who collectively authored all of the text of the New Testament) were themselves ignorant of the “loving nature” of the Lord they served.”
The writer of the book The Savage Text states that the passage “Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.” seems to be gay-friendly. He also states there are four references in the Gospel John (13:22-5, 19:26-7, 21:20-3) where Jesus has a particular love for a disciple that seems different than just a general love for all. He quotes another author, Theodore Jennings, who suggests that this might be “love characterized by erotic desire or sexual attraction.” There are other examples that the author uses that suggest the apostle writers knew that something was up with Jesus.
Yes, this opens the door to the slippery slope argument where other perversions raise their nasty heads in hopes to be “normalized” and accepted into the community.