[RichInOC]

Mmmno. Sorry.

[narses]

+

If you want on (or off) this Catholic and Pro-Life ping list,

[samadams2000]

***FACT BASTARDIZATION ALERT***

[Reaganesque]

"...nobody bothers to mention that the Greek word used to describe the sick man is the word used in the ancient world to describe your same-sex partner."

And Mr. Miner doesn't seem to see the irony in his statement.

[longtermmemmory]

so now we know the democrat plan for the next two years.

Demonize religion as being anti-elightened. The left is going to push acceptance of homosexual behavior as "enlightened".

Paving the way for Hitlary?

[windsorknot]

Rev. Miner defers to the Queen James Version of the English Bible.

[domenad]

Wow, how interesting....the pastor is gay....and he believes the Bible endorses being gay. Isn't that a neat coincidence?

[ikka]

Why don't they try "Reading the Bible the Christ-Centered Way" for a change. Otherwise they are just setting up their sin as an idol to be worshipped.

[txroadkill]

Note to people going any where near that church...

If you are walking away from it and hear what sounds like Hell Fire and Brimstone crashing into it, DON'T LOOK BACK unless you REALLY like salt!!!!

[zarf]

A bunch of gays reading what they want to read in the texts or a medevil papl council cramming their own political agendas/doctrines down everyone's throats....what's the difference.

Read the Tao and get the same message without the collection plate and agendas.

[DouglasKC]

In the Old Testament, claim the authors, Ruth's covenant with Naomi, which includes the memorable phrase, "Wherever you go, I will go; wherever you live, I will live," actually refers to a committed same-sex relationship.

Please. This is what happens when the bible is taught without actually being read. If they actually read the story, they would see that Naomi counseled Ruth on how to snag a husband, Boaz. Boaz married Ruth, and they a child:

Rth 4:13 So Boaz took Ruth, and she was his wife: and when he went in unto her, the LORD gave her conception, and she bore a son.

There's no way you can read a lesbian relationship into this. It's sick to even attempt it. It's a beautiful story about the love of a mother-in-law and daughter-in-law...really more of a mother daughter relationship.

[Graybeard58]

Pendleton was careful to make a distinction between homosexual orientation and the practice itself. "When you look at what the Bible teaches, the Bible doesn't talk about orientation; the Bible talks about behavior."

[Waryone]

"In the Old Testament, claim the authors, Ruth's covenant with Naomi, which includes the memorable phrase, 'Wherever you go, I will go; wherever you live, I will live,' actually refers to a committed same-sex relationship."

HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

I've heard of bending the truth a little, but they completely fabricated this one out of fairy dust [pun intended]. After all, why should they let a little thing like what the Bible actually says get in the way of what they want to believe.

[mkjessup]

The 'Reverend' (laugh-chuckle-spew) Miner shouldn't be interpreting Scripture with his mouth full.

[Jotmo]

Wow.

[Seeing More Clearly Now]

They protest too much, me thinks. Nothing more here than their obseesion to destroy the universal moral code they know they are breaking big time.

[Ancesthntr]

I guess that reading the Bible the "gay-friendly" way means skipping over lots of the "inconveeeeenient" parts, like Leviticus 18.

[MissouriConservative]

It's really simple.

Romans 1:21 - 32

[21] Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. [22] Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, [23] And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. [24] Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: [25] Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. [26] For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: [27] And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. [28] And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; [29] Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, [30] Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, [31] Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: [32] Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them

I'd love to see them interpret that one.

[L.N. Smithee]

In the Old Testament, claim the authors, Ruth's covenant with Naomi, which includes the memorable phrase, "Wherever you go, I will go; wherever you live, I will live," actually refers to a committed same-sex relationship.

Ruth and Naomi lesbian lovers? It would be hilarious if it weren't that there are some people who would swallow such crap. Do these guys understand that they are alleging that Ruth was messing around with the mother of her deceased husband? (Ruth 1:1-5)

Oh, by the way: Ruth does end up getting remarried, and is an ancestress of the David by her son Obed, and thus the Messiah. Neat trick for a "committed" lesbo.

They also offered a different interpretation of a story that appears in both Matthew and Luke, in which a centurion asks Jesus to heal a man who is typically identified -- misidentified, says Miner -- as the centurion's servant..."That story's often preached about in straight churches," said Miner, but "nobody bothers to mention that the Greek word used to describe the sick man is the word used in the ancient world to describe your same-sex partner."

OK...let's just, for the sake of argument, assume that this is correct, and said manservant was being buggered by the centurion. Jesus did cure the boy of the debilitating paralysis. He also spoke of the centurion's faith. But what did the centurion -- in both Matthew and Luke's gospel accounts -- say about himself? He said the following:

---

Matthew 8:6-8: "Lord," he said, "my servant lies at home paralyzed and in terrible suffering. Jesus said to him, "I will go and heal him." The centurion replied, "Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. But just say the word, and my servant will be healed.

Luke 7:6,7: So Jesus went with them. He was not far from the house when the centurion sent friends to say to him: "Lord, don't trouble yourself, for I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. That is why I did not even consider myself worthy to come to you. But say the word, and my servant will be healed..."

---

So obviously, the centurion, in addition to being sick about the sickness of his servant, was also sick about being a sicko himself.

The revisionists' implication seems to be that if Jesus was bothered by the depravity of the centurion, he would have done something like zapping the dirty dude with a lightning bolt and allowed the kid to die, and anything short of the Messiah's usual modus operandi of healing all who came to be healed amounts to tacit approval of their lifestyles, no matter how repulsive.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Jesus healed the ill and fed the hungry without requiring that they repent beforehand. There is nothing in the scriptures suggesting that all recipients of Christ's miracles became loyal, dedicated followers. Many were unappreciative; some rejected him despite being eyewitnesses to his miracles. In other words, Jesus hated the sin, but loved the sinners.

To guys like the gay revisionists, "Hate the sin, love the sinner" isn't enough; you've got to love the sin, too. For the Biblically challenged, I give you the words of Hall & Oates: "I can't go for that...no can do." For the rest of us: the apostle Paul, who is routinely dismissed as irrelevant by "gay-friendly" theologians, made it crystal clear how the original Christians looked at homosexuality.

[tang-soo]

I would have a really, really difficult time in walking up to a centurion and implying he was a "girly man".