Homosexuality And "Delusions Of Grandeur"

In another thread, an anonymous writer comments:

"Last I checked, YOU don’t speak for all Christians. But I’m not surprised at your delusions of grandeur. Perhaps Bishop Robinson and Bishop Spong speak for ALL Christians on this matter?"

There are too many bad arguments and misleading claims in his post to respond to all of them, and he doesn't seem to have much interest in the truth. But some of the other readers might benefit from knowing more about the history of the Christian view of homosexuality.

Apparently, support of homosexuality among professing Christians, at least among more than the smallest percentage of the population, is of recent origin:

"it is only in recent times that some writers have argued that the quality of a relationship, be it homosexual or heterosexual, is what determines its moral value" (F.L. Cross and E.A. Livingstone, editors, The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church [New York: Oxford University Press, 1997], p. 786)

Condemnations of homosexual behavior are found in a variety of Jewish and Christian sources for thousands of years prior to the modern arguments from professing Christians supporting homosexuality:

"Homosexuality was largely unknown in Judaism, but Christianity inherited unqualified condemnations of male homosexual practices in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13….Postbiblical Judaism stressed the homosexual element in the Sodomites’ attempted rape of Lot’s male guests (Gen. 19:4-5; cf. Judg. 19:22), and Hellenistic Jewish writers denounced homosexuality as frequently as any sin….The Greek word arsenokoitai in 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10, denoting literally (males) 'who lie [sleep] with males,' was almost certainly formed under the influence of the Septuagint text of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. Although first attested in Paul, the term also occurs in Hellenistic Jewish texts (Sibyll. Or. 2.73, influenced by Pseudo-Phocylides’s Sentences). The church fathers universally condemned male homosexual behavior….They [the church fathers] clearly regarded it [homosexual behavior] as contrary to the created constitution and function of men and women, and not merely to the dispositions of particular individuals." (David Wright, in Everett Ferguson, editor, Encyclopedia of Early Christianity [New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1999], pp. 542-543)

Aristides, for example, a Christian writing in the early second century, criticizes homosexuality along with adultery and incest (Apology, 9). He refers to "lying with males", so it doesn’t seem that he was only criticizing sex outside of marriage. If he meant to criticize fornication without criticizing homosexuality, why specify that the sex is occurring with males? If the issue is the timing of the sex (before marriage), why refer to the gender of the sexual partner? The most natural way to read Aristides is to read him as criticizing homosexuality. Athenagoras, writing later in the second century, makes similar comments (A Plea for the Christians, 34). Many other patristic passages could be cited. Tertullian sums it up well with the comment:

"The Christian confines himself to the female sex." (Apology, 46)

And:

"I should suppose the coupling of two males to be a very shameful thing" (Against the Valentinians, 11)

Were all of these Christians misunderstanding what scripture, Jesus, and the apostles taught? The reason why men like Gene Robinson and John Spong are treated as if they're advocating implausible reinterpretations of scripture and church tradition is because they're advocating implausible reinterpretations of scripture and church tradition.