# data[].attributes.body
"Christian ethicists or pastoral writers have often combined condemnation of pleasure with the reproductive imperative to construct a scale of sexual sins." pg 293

# data[].attributes.headline
Early church interpreter:  St. Augustine

# data[].attributes.subject
Early church interpreter:  St. Augustine

# data[].attributes.body
Romans 1:29-32

New International Version

29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

While this says nothing about sex explicitly, it's been used by the Church Fathers to talk about sexual depravity.

# data[].attributes.body
1 Corinthians 6:9

English Standard Version

9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous² will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: xneither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,³

Originally, this was about the power dynamic between male/female, dominant/submissive, not as much about the actual sex act itself. Over time, this scripture was used to condemn homosexuality as a whole.

# data[].attributes.body
Jordan is trying to teach us that scripture has been molded and manipulated to fit over the desired structure/view point of male dominance in the early church. This includes scripture that speaks directly to male/female relations and scripture that was vague enough that it could be interpreted as speaking to male/female relations. What does the Bible actually say versus what have we learned as the interpretation of it??

# data[].attributes.body
Jordan described the two types of interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2 about sexuality. He described the sexuality in the perspectives of reproduction at Genesis 1, while he described the sex in the perspectives of relationship at Genesis 2. He also mentioned that "The task of an ethics of sex would be to explain human interdependence and human community in relation to this oneness." (p.295)