The Gay Awakening

The Gay Awakening

There are 475 comments on the The American Prospect story from Nov 18, 2013, titled The Gay Awakening. In it, The American Prospect reports that:

Supporters of same-sex marriage outside Camp Innnabah, the Methodist retreat center where Rev.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The American Prospect.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#311 Jan 12, 2014
Joe DeCaro wrote:
What reader in his right mind would purchase a deliberately mistranslated Bible?
In fact, the Amplified Bible is so popular that it has been copyrighted by Zondervan Press at least six times since 1954!
As you are living proof, not all Bible readers are necessarily in their right minds sometimes. According to the oldest known copies of the work, Paul makes no mention of homosexuals or homosexuality, he doesn't even write about anything those reading it would have confused with same sex sex acts. The idea he left folk with was used for centuries to warn people not to play by themselves, not to condemn same sex acts. Modern Bibles which include the concept of homosexuality or the practice thereof, deliberately false.
Juliet Echo

Las Vegas, NV

#312 Jan 12, 2014
"Gay awakening?"

Most gays awaken with a hangover and a sore azzwhole.

“... truth will out.”

Since: May 08

Stratford, Connecticut.

#313 Jan 12, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
According to the oldest known copies of the work, Paul makes no mention of homosexuals or homosexuality, he doesn't even write about anything those reading it would have confused with same sex sex acts ...
... then you have obviously never read Paul's Romans 1:26-7.

"Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another ..."

How could anyone not confuse the above with same-sex acts?
Christaliban

Philadelphia, PA

#314 Jan 12, 2014
Joe DeCaro wrote:
<quoted text>
How could anyone not confuse the above with same-sex acts?
How's the reparative therapy going, closet case?

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#315 Jan 12, 2014
Joe DeCaro wrote:
... then you have obviously never read Paul's Romans 1:26-7.
"Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another ..."
How could anyone not confuse the above with same-sex acts?
Joe dumpling, what does Paul actually using words which refer to same sex sexual acts in these verses condemning idolatry, have to do with the fact that he didn't use words to describe same sex sexual acts in his letters to Corinth and Timothy? Did you actually have a point?

“... truth will out.”

Since: May 08

Stratford, Connecticut.

#316 Jan 13, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>
Joe dumpling, what does Paul actually using words which refer to same sex sexual acts in these verses condemning idolatry ...
Ricky, Paul was not only condemning idolatry, but what it led to: a "gay" worship of self in lieu of God.

Or don't you recall a v-e-r-y lengthy discussion we had about Romans 1 a previous thread?
Jesus Latter Day Taint

Philadelphia, PA

#317 Jan 13, 2014
Joe DeCaro wrote:
<quoted text>
Or don't you recall a v-e-r-y lengthy discussion we had about Romans 1 a previous thread?
Size queen alert.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#318 Jan 13, 2014
Joe DeCaro wrote:
Ricky, Paul was not only condemning idolatry, but what it led to: a "gay" worship of self in lieu of God.
Or don't you recall a v-e-r-y lengthy discussion we had about Romans 1 a previous thread?
You really, really should work on your reading comprehension issues. The only sin Paul is directly addressing is that of idolatry. The direct result of worshiping of other Gods is to be given over to a reprobate mind by God. It is a slippery slope argument which starts with folks he is assuming to be heterosexual, engaging in same sex acts for those other Gods and it's all downhill from there.

2 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.

2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.

3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?

4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;

6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#319 Jan 13, 2014
Joe DeCaro wrote:
<quoted text>
Ricky, Paul was not only condemning idolatry, but what it led to: a "gay" worship of self in lieu of God.
Or don't you recall a v-e-r-y lengthy discussion we had about Romans 1 a previous thread?
The text appears to say that idolatry is the CAUSE.

“... truth will out.”

Since: May 08

Stratford, Connecticut.

#321 Jan 14, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
The only sin Paul is directly addressing is that of idolatry ...
But isn't lust still one of the" seven deadly sins"?

"Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another ..."

And snyper (!) is correct in that idolatry is a cause: a gateway sin that leads to others.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#322 Jan 14, 2014
Joe DeCaro wrote:
But isn't lust still one of the" seven deadly sins"?
"Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another ..."
And snyper (!) is correct in that idolatry is a cause: a gateway sin that leads to others.
Idolatry is the reason that God gives them over to Paul's unnatural lusts, presumed heterosexuals engaging in homosexual acts and the rest of the butcher's bill he made the Christians of Rome pay for their true sin. But you do realize that in the very next chapter, Paul goes on to teach that as a Christian, you aren't supposed to be judging folk who commit such acts, because you're part of that bill too. Judgement and condemnation are God's job, not yours.

“... truth will out.”

Since: May 08

Stratford, Connecticut.

#323 Jan 15, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Idolatry is the reason that God gives them over to Paul's unnatural lusts, presumed heterosexuals engaging in homosexual acts ...
That's not Paul's unnatural lusts, but Gene Robinson's gay rationale for Romans 1.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#324 Jan 15, 2014
Joe DeCaro wrote:
That's not Paul's unnatural lusts, but Gene Robinson's gay rationale for Romans 1.
Your reading comprehension issues, your problem. I'm just going by what the Bible says and it says that you really don't know what you are talking about.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#325 Jan 15, 2014
Joe DeCaro wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not Paul's unnatural lusts, but Gene Robinson's gay rationale for Romans 1.
Please. Early Koine texts may have been lousy when it came to word separations and punctuation, but it did use paragraphs.

“... truth will out.”

Since: May 08

Stratford, Connecticut.

#326 Jan 16, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Your reading comprehension issues, your problem. I'm just going by what the Bible says ...
LOL Ricky.

Both you and Gene have been paraphrasing that book to suit yourselves for some time now.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#327 Jan 16, 2014
Joe DeCaro wrote:
LOL Ricky.
Both you and Gene have been paraphrasing that book to suit yourselves for some time now.
Actually no, we haven't, we are the ones attempting to put your tortured eisegesis back into the context of what the Bible is ACTUALLY saying.

“... truth will out.”

Since: May 08

Stratford, Connecticut.

#328 Jan 17, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Actually no, we haven't, we are the ones attempting to put your tortured eisegesis back into the context of what the Bible is ACTUALLY saying.
The Bible never said anything in Romans or anywhere else about any heterosexual acting homosexual: that "tortured exegesis" -- and note the proper spelling -- was the "brainchild" of you and Gene Robinson, the first openly gay Episcopal bishop.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#329 Jan 17, 2014
Joe DeCaro wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bible never said anything in Romans or anywhere else about any heterosexual acting homosexual: that "tortured exegesis" -- and note the proper spelling -- was the "brainchild" of you and Gene Robinson, the first openly gay Episcopal bishop.
Joe,

I think that a "any heterosexual acting homosexual" is just another way of describing a "bisexual' person. Anyway, that certainly is a possibility.

Also, it appears to me that St. Paul was writing about people who become obsessed with sex. The obsession with self-satisfying physical gratification is an out-of-balance condition. There are all kinds of settings and inducements for sexually promiscuous people. The Hollywood and Internet-based XXX film and video culture/industry is today's example of the same basic licentiousness that Paul wrote about in the First Century, A.D.

The human physical body is neurally wired to express and experience a balanced consciousness. It is a balance of head, heart, gut, genitals and feet - although that description is obviously an oversimplification. The Eastern Esoteric studies have brought us the concept of seven major Chakras. These are the focal points in the spiritual body that have counterpart regions and nerve ganglia in the physical body. The Western Teachings, including the Christian Way are more focused upon a natural balance that centers in Light and Love, starting with the heart.

But, essentially, both "Ways" are investigations of the same gateways and pathways into the internal world of consciousness.

Jesus said, "Blessed is he who came into being before he came into being. If you become my disciples and listen to my words, these stones will minister to you. For there are five trees for you in Paradise which remain undisturbed summer and winter and whose leaves do not fall. Whoever becomes acquainted with them will not experience death."

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#330 Jan 17, 2014
Joe DeCaro wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bible never said anything in Romans or anywhere else about any heterosexual acting homosexual: that "tortured exegesis" -- and note the proper spelling -- was the "brainchild" of you and Gene Robinson, the first openly gay Episcopal bishop.
Your reading comprehension difficulties, still not my problem. He presumes his reading audience to be heterosexual in nature, same sex acts would be how one acts against it.


You haven't been engaging in exegesis and you are only kidding yourself if you imagine you have been. This has been a trip on the eisegesis (correct spelling) express with you.

Eisegesis is the process of interpreting a text or portion of text in such a way that it introduces one's own presuppositions, agendas, or biases into and onto the text. This is commonly referred to as reading into the text. The act is often used to "prove" a pre-held point of concern to the reader and to provide him or her with confirmation bias in accordance with his or her pre-held agenda. Eisegesis is best understood when contrasted with exegesis. While exegesis draws out the meaning from a text in accordance with the context and discover-able meaning of its author, eisegesis occurs when a reader imposes his or her interpretation into and onto the text. As a result, exegesis tends to be objective when employed effectively while eisegesis is regarded as highly subjective.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisegesis

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#331 Jan 18, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Your reading comprehension difficulties, still not my problem. He presumes his reading audience to be heterosexual in nature, same sex acts would be how one acts against it.
You haven't been engaging in exegesis and you are only kidding yourself if you imagine you have been. This has been a trip on the eisegesis (correct spelling) express with you.
Eisegesis is the process of interpreting a text or portion of text in such a way that it introduces one's own presuppositions, agendas, or biases into and onto the text. This is commonly referred to as reading into the text. The act is often used to "prove" a pre-held point of concern to the reader and to provide him or her with confirmation bias in accordance with his or her pre-held agenda. Eisegesis is best understood when contrasted with exegesis. While exegesis draws out the meaning from a text in accordance with the context and discover-able meaning of its author, eisegesis occurs when a reader imposes his or her interpretation into and onto the text. As a result, exegesis tends to be objective when employed effectively while eisegesis is regarded as highly subjective.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisegesis
Thank you, Rick.

This above is an helpful explanation. Eisegesis is both intuitive and interpretive and CAN be an inductive reasoning that has valid insight. But usually, the term refers to a derogatory description of an opinion-based explanation of scripture.

As you have explained, eisegesis depends upon the structure and content of personal belief. So, the eisegetical reading is at least "colored" by the interpretive act. At worst, it is an wholly unsubstantiated viewpoint.

Even so, EVERY biblical exegesis can be viewed as eisegetical, simply because we are forced to make our conclusions from a partially subjective standpoint. Though, that is an extreme view of the value of scholarship.

Rev. Ken

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Wedding Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Anti-gay married Republican quits after he is c... 17 min Retribution 5
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 3 hr Agents of Corruption 14,023
News In Kentucky town, gay-marriage opponent Davis s... 5 hr Andy 22
News Organization of Arab Student celebrates culture... 7 hr They cannot kill ... 3
News PM continues gay marriage victory blitz 15 hr Gremlin 1
News Supporters of the same-sex marriage "Yes" vote ... 15 hr Gremlin 5
News Bristol Palin: Breaking abstinence pledge again... (Jun '15) 16 hr anonz 18
More from around the web