That's pretty deep for me. I'm not such an expert on 10th century B.C. royal succession in Canaan. But I'll take your word for it.
Little Fauss, On the one hand, I wondered if your initial comments on this were a bit too "in your face", but I must say that the above was one of the best analogies I have seen of the issue at hand. More excellent analogies on this, and a good, [relatively] concise explanation can be had in this particular Robert Gagnon article: http://tinyurl.com/8pvnr Dr. Gagnon, a Presbyterian who teaches at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, is the foremost thinker on the subject and has written The Bible and Homosexual Practice, pretty much the definitive text on the subject. On his site, he also has the program of the Gay Men's Group at the American Academy of Religion, making it clear that as antithetical to Chrsitian lifestyle as homosexual practice and "marriage" are, it's just the tip of the iceberg in terms of goals. Anyone so inclined can look that up on Gagnon's site. Finally, with regard to the manner in which the Scriptures are often misconstrued in the heat of debate, Thomas Oden has some interesting comments on the background of certain kinds of "liberal" interpretation of Scripture generally: edited/excerpted from an interview with Thomas Oden found at http://ivpress.gospelcom.net/accs/meet_tom_oden.php Interesting discussion -> Matt
Thanks very much, Matt. I think they've gotten used to my Scalia-esque style around here (if not the intellect, at least I have the acidity). At least they haven't banished me from the forum. Anyway, your support much appreciated. Now, someone want to rip me to shreds? I'm sure I've got a back door in my reasoning that one or more of you will gladly point out. Mike aka Little Fauss
Jeez I'm so tired of this juvenile line of reasoning. Once again, we compare gays to murderers, adulterers, psychotics, and the lot. I have a news flash for you...and I'm going out on a limb speaking for people that I am not, technically, a part of - but I'm fairly certain that gays give not a whit about your biblical interpretations that carefully classify them as misfits. You can analyze and justify and rationalize all you want about why your interpretation of the bible must be the word of god. Again, newsflash… the people you mean to condemn aren't listening. They don't care. You're preaching, but there's no one in the pews. Go home.
With two pages of posts, someone is "listening." Hi, Tom, where have you been? Good to see you post again.
What is it with the pro-gay lobby that wants to rewrite history by emhatically stating or implying or posing for discussion, that all same-sex intimate friendships were (are) gay?
Not that "popular opinion" matters much in the "search for truth", but at this juncture it miight be prudent to point out that the American Episcopal Church has roughly shrunk by half in the past couple of decades, due in no small measure to the radical stance taken on issues such as gay ordination. In contrast, not only have the various Evangelical churches in the US exploded in growth, but so have the Anglican Churches in parts of the world where a reasonably Biblical theology has been maintained (e.g., Africa, esp. in Nigeria with their heroic bishop Akinola). Somehow, I can't imagine the founders and/or key teachers of any of the Christian traditions which are now described as "mainline" in the US as being willing to countenance modern "queer theology". Matt
A poorly-chosen term, under these circumstances, don't you think? Yeah! What he said... only maybe a little nicer. Still... That isn't what I stated, implied or posed at all... and you know it (or at least I hope you do, otherwise it makes me wonder if you're capable of engaging in the world of hypothetical at all). I asked "what if." And I meant, "what if," and not one thing more. You understand what "what if" situations are, right? I mean, you've used spreadsheet software before, right? Damn! Now I really wish the pro-gay contingent within the ELCA had won the vote in Orlando. Maybe that would be the trigger trip that finally gets the WordAlone idiots to just spin off and stop threatening us with it all the time. Many WordAlone churches are already redirecting benevolence. Be gone with thee, already, I say. Be gone!
1. -> Gregg... this being a religious thread and all, oughtn't you have used an alternative, such as: A. Darn! B. Dern! C. Dang! D. All of the Above! (I've taken too many multiple choice exams in the recent past, I guess) -> 2. On a more serious note, though, would you really want schism? Demographically, at least, the departure of those who take their religion seriously has been deadly, as the Episcopal example demonstrates. Matt F
Yiddish forever! Uncle!! I laughed so hard that I sprayed coffee out my nose! Don't you DARE translate this! Let the heathens WONDER! Are you related, by any chance, to Mel Brooks? I kept thinking about "Blazing Saddles"! BTW: Buffalo, if properly slaughtered, would be kosher...
I'm not trying to condemn anyone, Tom. I have neither the right nor the wherewithal to do so--that job is up to G-d. And the line of reasoning regarding the Bible is appropriate because this whole thread was about whether a certain denomination that was founded on the principle "Sola Scriptura" should follow the scriptural pronouncements regarding the sanctification of gay marriages and the validity of homosexual practices in the church--not society as a whole. I'm only discussing the scriptural issues involved in an internal church matter, and stating that I believe homosexuality is a sin as defined by that denomination's holy book. I was not trying to speak to gays here, I was trying to speak to a non-gay regarding a doctrinal issue within a Scripture-following denomination. Tom, if you're going to leap into a thread in midstream and refer to someone's reasoning as "juvenile" and then misstate their arguments, prepare for a snappy little response such as you're receiving. I never compared gays with "psychotics" or "murderers", but I did compare them with adulterers (as well as the violent, the alcoholics, etc), and I'll not apologize for it. But for that matter, you might as well compare gays to murderers and to Hitler himself--as they are all those who sin according to the words of the Bible. And sin is sin, in that it separates you from G-d, and will surely damn you if you do not in humility seek out the One who forgives it all. But of course, by that definition, I might as well compare myself to Hitler--and that comparison is apt--because apart from pure undeserved grace, I would go to the same place that I'm almost sure he's going to inhabit for eternity. My arguments were from the Bible, if you wish to call it "juvenile", go right on, but I'll say you're just setting up a straw man and are rather ignorant of that to which you refer. And a good day to you, sir!
I'm trying, somehow, some way, to square this with Sola Scriptura. Why do you persist in calling yourself a Lutheran when you refer to one Martin Luther as an idiot? Spellbinding. Come on, away with this nonsense, Gregg, if the Ten Commandments and the rest of the Scriptures are just gentle suggestions from a doddering, confused Father in the Sky, then why make any pretenses? What's wrong with The Egalitarian Church of the New Millenium, it has sort of a ring, don't you think? Why continue this charade?
There, now I've gone and expended the last ounce of good will I'd built up on this forum. Well, it had to go sometime. You folks know what I believe, you know I state it like a ton of bricks sometimes. Oh well; I still love you all.