Christians wrong in condemning homosexuality?

[Jack]

For the last 2,000 years, Christians have been taught to believe that Apostle Paul condemned homosexuality. But a new discovery documents that he deliberately acknowledged that it does not prevent anyone from entering heaven. If accepted, this discovery by internationally acclaimed cryptographer Michael Wood could remove the final barrier to full societal acceptance of gays and lesbians.
"Michael Wood's discovery is remarkable because it solves a colossal paradox regarding Paul's Greek that has baffled scholars for 2,000 years," says Dr. William Berg, who taught Greek and Roman Classics at Stanford University.

Paul's only unequivocal reference to homosexuality is found within Romans 1:18-3:20, a Biblical passage that has mystified scholars for two millennia. "The interpretation of Romans 1:18-3:20 has been notoriously difficult for almost every commentator," Richard Longenecker, the Distinguished New Testament Scholar at Wheaton College, writes in his book Studies in Paul. "Earlier interpreters such as Origen, Jerome, Augustine, and Erasmus wrestled with this issue and it continues to plague commentators today."

Dr. Berg has spent many months examining the linguistic and historical basis of what he describes as Wood's "remarkable" discovery. "Michael Wood reveals to the public a well-kept secret, namely that the apostle Paul, like the rest of his contemporaries, divided the commands of the Jewish law into two groups demarcated by Leviticus 19:18 — 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the commandments based on loving your neighbor were 'Justices of the Torah.' Those not based on Leviticus 19:18 were 'Jobs of the Torah,'" Dr. Berg explained.

Wood's solution is definitive, elegant, and verifiable. Romans 2:13-26 teaches: Only the doers of the "Justices of the Torah" will be vindicated before God. Romans 3:20 says, "By the 'Jobs of the Torah' no one will be vindicated." Not only is there no contradiction, but the two teachings have always been simple restatements of each other; the "Great Paradox" is no paradox at all!This legal solution fully explains Paul's treatment of homosexuality. Paul's passage excludes idolatrous, homosexual orgy fests from things which he considered worthy of spiritual death, things such as "bad-mouthing others," "deceiving," and "inflicting pain." Those engaged in idolatrous, homosexual orgies weren't violating the Justices. (They weren't violating the precept "Love your neighbor as yourself.") Therefore, Paul was obliged to separate this from his list of things which did violate the Justices.The finding is significant because it documents that Paul purposefully separated the same-sex acts; it was a conscious, deliberate decision consistent with the rest of the passage. In fact, it was demanded by the rest of the passage. The resolution of the paradox empirically proves that Paul's view on homosexuality was very different from what Christians had thought for 2,000 years.

http://www.goddiscussion.com/85794/c...ees-with-him/?

No doubt Christians will continue to trot out Old Testament passages like Leviticus 18:22 in order to condemn homosexuals while at the same time claiming that the Old Testament doesn't apply to them when it comes to wearing clothing of mixed fabrics and such. But for those Christians who attempt to honestly stay within the guidelines of the New Testament and follow Paul's admonishments to the early church the above ought to cause them to rethink their absolute stance on the topic of homosexuality.

[Questatement]

No doubt Christians will continue to trot out Old Testament passages like Leviticus 18:22 in order to condemn homosexuals while at the same time claiming that the Old Testament doesn't apply to them when it comes to wearing clothing of mixed fabrics and such. But for those Christians who attempt to honestly stay within the guidelines of the New Testament and follow Paul's admonishments to the early church the above ought to cause them to rethink their absolute stance on the topic of homosexuality.

This is not really revolutionary as 'biblical' justifications for homosexuality have been around for a long time... add this one to the pile.

I think the behavior of the men of Sodom is just one glimpse of many in history which shows the detrimental associations that typically go along with societal acceptance of homosexual behavior. A more elaborate, and recent, portrayal can be found in the book "The Pink Swastika" if you really want to get to the bottom of this debate.

[Peter]

Survival requires evolution. Even a religion of supposed absolute truths must change those truths to survive.

I wonder why god allows the homosexual misunderstanding(and a thousand other religious disagreements) to go on for so long? Entertainment? It is quite a show but it seems any god would tire of it by now. I am.

[arX]

I think the behavior of the men of Sodom is just one glimpse of many in mythology

Corrected that for you.

[Night]

This is not really revolutionary as 'biblical' justifications for homosexuality have been around for a long time... add this one to the pile.

I think the behavior of the men of Sodom is just one glimpse of many in history which shows the detrimental associations that typically go along with societal acceptance of homosexual behavior. A more elaborate, and recent, portrayal can be found in the book "The Pink Swastika" if you really want to get to the bottom of this debate.

That book states that Hitler was a homosexual, and that is completely untrue and has no basis in reality. In fact, most of the book doesn't have any basis in fact. It is anti-gay propaganda.

It doesn't surprise me that you would cite such trash.

[Questatement]

That book states that Hitler was a homosexual, and that is completely untrue and has no basis in reality. In fact, most of the book doesn't have any basis in fact. It is anti-gay propaganda.

It doesn't surprise me that you would cite such trash.

Have you read it?

It basically consists of historical writings and commentaries on those same writings before the white-washing of the 'modern' version that most of us under the age of 60 were all raised on.

So if you want to call source material "untrue, propaganda, no basis in reality," etc., I must say that it makes you appear less than neutral in the matter.

[Night]

Have you read it?

It basically consists of historical writings and commentaries on those same writings before the white-washing of the 'modern' version that most of us under the age of 60 were all raised on.

So if you want to call source material "untrue, propaganda, no basis in reality," etc., I must say that it makes you appear less than neutral in the matter.

The Pink Swastika is hardly what I'd call "neutral"...it attempts to say that the third reich was very homosexual, without pointing out that ALL sides have homosexuals. There is NO evidence to say that the third reich had more homosexuals than the average population.

[dontconfuseme]

Yeah, seriously. The French were in that war.

[Chris the Chees]

That book states that Hitler was a homosexual, and that is completely untrue and has no basis in reality. In fact, most of the book doesn't have any basis in fact. It is anti-gay propaganda.

It doesn't surprise me that you would cite such trash.

Indeed, what next nonsense will we see here? A David Irving book?

Have you read it?

Cover to cover? No. However, I once examined it when setting reading material for first year undergraduate historians as an example of pseudo-history; along with the work of various genocide deniers such as David Irving.

before the white-washing of the 'modern' version that most of us under the age of 60 were all raised on.

So modern historians, in fact not just modern historians but educators too, are engaged in a vast malicious conspiracy theory to hide the pernicious nature of homosexuality and the role of homosexuals in the holocaust and Third Reich from being publically known?

You know, I don't think I can place into words just how contemptable and moronic that point of view is.

[Questatement]

The Pink Swastika is hardly what I'd call "neutral"...it attempts to say that the third reich was very homosexual, without pointing out that ALL sides have homosexuals. There is NO evidence to say that the third reich had more homosexuals than the average population.

There was never a question as to if any homosexuals exist in any large population but to the prevalence of it. For if the prevalence is high, the association to the overall acts of that group become intertwined.

The book is not free but maybe this will help you. *bold emphasis mine*

The Pink Swastika: Chapter 1

Why was it then, since we were completely non-party, that our purely scientific Institute was the first victim which fell to the new regime? The answer to this is simple...We knew too much. It would be against medical principles to provide a list of the Nazi leaders and their perversions [but]...not ten percent of the men who, in 1933, took the fate of Germany into their hands, were sexually normal...Our knowledge of such intimate secrets regarding members of the Nazi Party and other documentary material — we possessed about forty thousand confessions and biographical letters — was the cause of the complete and utter destruction of the Institute of Sexology. (Haberle:369).

So my question to you is, based on this source material, would you call a 90+% homosexual orientation within this population prevalent?

[Chris the Chees]

There was never a question as to if any homosexuals exist in any large population but to the prevalence of it. For if the prevalence is high, the association to the overall acts of that group become intertwined.

The book is not free but maybe this will help you. *bold emphasis mine*

The Pink Swastika: Chapter 1



So my question to you is, based on this source material, would you call a 90+% homosexual orientation within this population prevalent?

And what is your source material? The rantings of two homophobes whose books have been condemed as pernicious lies by every single serious academic historian who bothered to review it. Hardly a great source.

But more to the point, what as I regularly ask my undergraduate students, is their source? They say 40,000 letters and confessions? Where is their prosopographal survey? How does this survey align with the copious research into the election of the Nazi Party which have shown that middle class, small town evangelical protestants were the primary source of Nazi votes in the 1930s? Where can I read these letters and confessions? Who, specifically are the authors of these documents?

And they say they have read 40,000? I call bullshit. As a research student working on the Second World War I am very used to dealing with documents, and there is no way even two people can have seriously read 40,000 documents. It is a total lie and a blindingly obvious one at that. My entire thesis is based on around a thousand (a very generous estimate), and that is the product of three years worth of dedicated research. So based on that standard, it would have taken them 60 years worth of research time to seriously survey that number of documents.

But lets say that they are much quicker workers than I am. Lets say that they can get through 100 documents between them, each day. Which is a little over six documents an hour in an 8 hour working day, that they work five days a week, fifty weeks a year. In that time they could examine around 5,000 documents a year. So based on that average we are still talking about the reserach for that project alone taking 8 years. Not to mnention writing, preliminary research, examination of the copious secondary literature and all the other things they have presumably purported to have examined in the research of this 'history'.

In short, if they are claiming to have examined 40,000 documents they are liars.

[Questatement]

And they say they have read 40,000? I call bullshit.

Slow down and read the material Mr. Research.

This claim was made by "Ludwig L. Lenz, the "gay" Assistant Director at the Institute at the time of the raid, managed to escape with his life and later wrote of the incident... "

No one is claiming to still have those 40k documents/files in their possession. They were burned if you read the context.

A rush to judgment is rarely the wisest choice.