[Mrs. Don-o]

"I'm decent at dismantling the arguments from the so-called Gay Christian movement... point-for-point, if you'd like."

Thank you! I mean it! There are hundreds of Gay Christian sites. One I was looking at awhile ago had its arguments in compact form focused on the 6 or 8 major "clobber passages" (as they called them), 4 in the OT and 4 in the NT. Can't find that particular article right now, but this one has similar arguments. Can you take 'em apart, or show me where somebody else has done so? You'd be doing a grand service for us all.

[Das Outsider]

Thank you! I mean it! There are hundreds of Gay Christian sites. One I was looking at awhile ago had its arguments in compact form focused on the 6 or 8 major "clobber passages" (as they called them), 4 in the OT and 4 in the NT.

The "clobber passages" aren't nearly as intimidating as one would think. Ever read the Skeptic's Annotated Bible?

Can you take 'em apart, or show me where somebody else has done so? You'd be doing a grand service for us all.

Perhaps with a little insight from my FRiends (if they're willing to take the challenge), to badly paraphrase Joe Cocker. Arguments from Masoretic Hebrew, Koine Greek, linguistics in general, philosophy, first-century Mediterranean culture, and ancient history shouldn't be too big of a problem. ;)

[Das Outsider]

Part I:

First of all, let's deal with your basic assessment of the arguments:

Their basic Scriptural claim is that all of the supposed condemnations of homosexuality in the Old and New Testaments referred to "straight" people engaging in same-sex relations for sinful lustful reasons, and not to "naturally-gay" people who are honorably in love-and-marriage type relationships.

I hate to bring attention to an act of equine abuse, but there is a dead horse that has been savagely beaten with regard to the NT. St. Paul says the following:

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

(Romans 1:24-28, NIV)

While it could be that St. Paul was referring to heterosexual men and women engaging in homosexual acts, there is not one single favorable mention with regard to homosexual acts in the Old Testament or in the Talmud. In other words, Hebrew scripture and tradition, when they did address the subject, did so in the negative. Provided that "abomination" does not mean "non-abomination", there is little left but an argument from silence. Argumentum ad silentio is a logical fallacy, regardless of who uses it...

[Das Outsider]

In addendum, Part I:

Is incest to be considered an equal non-abomination if Levite civil law is to be wholly disregarded? What does the Gay Christian movement have to say about this?

[Das Outsider]

In addendum, Part I, retread:

Is incest to be considered an equal non-abomination if Levite civil law is to be wholly disregarded? What does the Gay Christian movement have to say about this?

Just one last passing comment on the OT and homosexuality: Why is it that God made Adam and Eve, male and female, so that a man would cleave unto his wife and leave his family if he could just shack up with his "partner" in North Beach, SF? One could cite "loving relationships," but isn't the Torah loaded with examples of genuine loving--whether they be romantic or platonic--relationships? Do I need to list them?

According to the so-called Gay Christian movement, King David might have been queer.

[Das Outsider]

Part II—of what will probably become a 20-plus posting series—resumes tomorrow. Have a blessed evening.

[padre35]

That was simply pathetic on the malformed writer’s part Mrs. Don-o.

Malakis (Similar to Malkois)for example is still used in modern Greek and it means exactly what it meant “back then”. As well as the writer disqualifies themselves by saying “Well I’m no expert on the Greek Language...but”

Thirdly, the entire webpage is choc a bloc filled with false premises and errant “logic”, the writer would have one believe that the problem wasn’t engaging in such acts, but accepting money for engaging in such behavour...

For all of the issues with Sola, errors such as these do not pass the smell test. It is the work of those who wish to have Faith in Christ and still run ruin with a seared conscience, one that is branded shut..