Connie Flipped Out On Shrooms

I went back and forth on whether I should put up these videos because the source is from an Atheist by the name of Peter Thurston who couldn't help himself with little digs in insulting me when I was nothing but nice to him for calling out the facts. But I can take it because I'm a big boy and Peter isn't going to stress God out with what he has to say. Below are arguments, from 3 anti-gay powerhouses, even an Atheist like that dolt can refute. It also shows the cunning of these men in how they try to figure out how to undermine arguments for equality. The second video is a refute of the New Atlantis mag touting a bogus anti-LGBTQ study (remember the debunked Regnerus study?).* These types of arguments are in the secular domain and not just within the Church, so they are free to be taken apart even by non-believers even though believers think they don't know "Christian Stuff."

My Take:

I think most Christians underestimate the unbelievers in the world. If they see what is bigotry, it will be bigotry in a real sense anyone can grasp and it's not coming from a place of not believing in a God or lack of morals, unlike what the 3 above would have you believe. It comes from seeing one group of people having a prejudice against another group of people just for being who they are. This looks hypocritical when this group with the display of prejudice is having premarital sex and coveting. Practice these or other sins and you have no place to quote Romans to a homosexual. Paul said IMAGE was everything to the unbelieving world:
"To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some. I do all things for the sake of the gospel... "

Yet this is completely lost on most Christians like the ones above who feel they need to have special round table discussions on homosexuality and THIS is hypocritical to the unbelieving World.

When you discriminate against the LGBTQ community because you think your faith gives you this entitlement, this is bigotry by its very definition YOU think is God-backed and what is "bigotry" everyone can understand? A bigoted belief is one that respects, enforces or socially/culturally maintains enforcement of oppression on a disenfranchised minority for no useful reason other than prejudice, belief, and tradition. But it also is a belief that perpetuates stigma, stereotypes, misinformation, or cruelty to disenfranchised minorities. Even if the person believes their argument is sound, if it hurts, defames, dehumanizes, disenfranchises, stigmatizes, or insults the being of a person, it is BIGOTED. 
Bigotry should not even be in the vocabulary of a Christian with another also created in the image of God.

The 3 tries to get around this by saying; "Well the Bible says..." But Paul shuts them down by asking; "What have we to do with the affairs of the world? Nothing." We are only called to live at peace with our neighbor, walk 2 miles when they ask us to walk 1, and love them like a favorite child.
Instead of TRYING to not sound bigoted and getting frustrated when you still come off like one, why not take a good look at yourself and see if the unbelieving world has reason to see you as a bigot? Paul says himself we are to examine ourselves and these men have missed the mark. The "World" isn't irrational and they can see when a wrong is being done to another no matter the reason you give.

I have nothing to say about these two old goats other than they should be put to bed with a big glass of warm milk.

*A few years back study researchers on homosexuality held a press conference demanding anti-gay Christian groups stop twisting their data. Did they listen? No. They just can't help themselves with what's outright bearing false witness with these studies that should be yanked out of their hands.

Less Summer, More Here

Backstory

..................................


Triple Double Backflip.

Tobias Haller did a great article on how "Porneia" can't be used about homosexuality.

 

And what I wrote about it (in the comments).

...................................


Remember Trey? Now what?

 

Speaking of Progressive Christianity...

People assume I'm one because of my stance on homosexuality when I'm as traditional as an old Pentecostal pastor with saying "The Bible says it and I believe it!" Pretty much the definition of a traditionalist. But I wonder, how did a seemingly more loving Christianity called "Progressive Christianity" turn into chipping away at Bible inerrancy to where few pieces are left over? I think the fear traditionalists have is that this is a slippery slope of; "If we interpreted wrong about homosexuality, what else was interpreted wrong?" Undermining the reliability of the Bible when this is ONLY ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY WITH SPECIFIC VERSES and not a "type" of Christianity, progressive or otherwise. The Church had no problem revising their Biblical view with African-Americans. Some will say "but sexuality is not race," But it doesn't matter because there was no distinction with both from what was then an understanding of specific verses with only one group (African-Americans) being revisited with the verses later and the Biblical view changed. When these same people are asked to revisit the verses with the other group (homosexuals), they scoff at the very thought of it. My argument is; "The Bible didn't change, our understanding of it did." But this will only come about by sound hermeneutics without bias and real love for our LGBTQ neighbor.

Translating Caelum Aetherum

Like I've said before, somewhere, I think, translators are imperfect men who never claimed to be inspired by the Holy Spirit. Because they have so poisoned me with what they have done with the Biblical verses on homosexuality, I don't see them (some didn't even bother to hide their (bias) as having the final say on anything. They should be tour guides of the Word, not like how they see themselves, expounders of it. We tend to look at the Bible translators as wise sages in a torch-lit cave writing with a quill pen, holy fire over their heads. The reality is they're just doing paperwork on ancient languages. If you look at the panel of interpreters of the RSV from old photos, you'll see they're just sitting in a circle with their desks in a class school room looking bored, bickering over what means what, and counting the minutes they can go home to have meatloaf while watching the Ed Sullivan Show.
We need to be in the mindset of not blindly accepting what any translator/theologian/teacher/preacher of the Word says to us. 

Paul's koine (everyday language) Greek is available in any bookstore (It's not hidden in some Vatican archive or you need a Mormon "Seer Stone" to read), so there shouldn't be a reason to not go and read the Greek of his words yourself along with buying some fancy bookmarks you'll end up losing. If you read Greek to the English word for literal word, it CAN be confusing to the average reader unless they've spent some time in these verses to get the hang of how to read them. Example: 

"Ἦσαν-They  δὲ-But  οἱ-The  φαγόντες-Devour  τετρακισχίλιοι-Four Thousand  καὶ-And  ἀπέλυσεν-Released  αὐτούς-them."

You'd never know this verse was from Mark 8:9 and not a Bible verse sounding like the undead devouring four thousand and then being released to do more devouring. This is the raw Gospel, choppy, repetitive, uses different Greek spellings for the same word, not at all easy to understand, but untainted by any Bible translation from the time Paul spoke those words.

When I went to Paul's Greek, a whole new world opened up to me and many times I found myself sometimes crying with the beauty I was reading that no Bible translation got words right or had words that were missing. The reading of 1 Corinthians 13:12 usually reads in your Bible as:

"For now we see through a glass darkly, but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known." 

When I went to the Greek myself, it had more depth with it really saying:

"We see this moment through a mirror (ἐσόπτρου, mirror, not glass. A mirror parallels our world), a riddle (the word Riddle (αἰνίγματι) is left out of translations), but we'll understand and know when we are face to face. We have a piece (now), but we'll know as I will be known." 

Reading Paul's real words can also clear things up. The mysterious thing called "faith" is just trusting God. That's it. 

The hard to understand; "For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, 'but the righteous man shall live by faith" in Romans 1:17 Is a translation put out there I still don't get when it really says; "Fulfillment of the Law of God is trusting. According to what is written, trusting will make you innocent and THAT will make you alive."

Oldest image (middle) of Paul known.

"1946" Movie In 7D

A doc is coming out called "1946." The filmmaker shows how Bruce Metzger, interpreter, and editor of the RSV and NRSV translations of the Bible, thought maybe putting the word "homosexual" in the translations might not have been such a great idea from a letter Metzger sent to a seminarian student Metzger thought would never see the light of day. The problem I have is the filmmaker makes it sound like it was an honest mistake. I know how Metzger felt about homosexuality along with several of the interpreters on his panel which shows it wasn't an honest mistake with those on his panel either going along with it or staying silent with their objections. They had the chance to change that mistake with the NRSV, but didn't even when they started to see the damage it was doing with Christians now being able to use the word "homosexual" for the first time. Further proof of this is that Metzger and his panel had over 70 years of chances to publicly say they were wrong and never did.

The anti-gay are already jumping all over this by saying; "So what? The descriptives of homosexuality in past translations finally gave the word "homosexual" its proper place in this one translation." 

My take:

In most cases in the earliest Bible translations that we have, the verse in a translation is carried over from prior translations. If a mistake was made with the meaning of the verse in that Bible's translation and is not caught and corrected by the translators, that mistake will be in the next translation and the one after with the only difference being the wording of that era the translation was written in. 

If we bypass the earliest translations of arsenokoite and go straight to Leviticus, where Paul got the word from, we can find out Paul's intent.

Leviticus narrows down male homosexuality to only an idolatrous Canaanite worship practice. The word is wrong in Metzger's translation because the descriptives in prior translations of the word are wrong. 

The 1940's-50s saw homosexuals as mentally sick child predators who were institutionalized and routinely lobotomized. THIS was the world Metzger saw homosexuals in in his time. That bias informed his own translations, that he would later question, with putting arsenokoite as "homosexual." A word stamp that would be used by future generations in the Church to condemn male and female homosexuals who just needed that one word to do it with.

I had a strong presence in YouTube comments. One thing I can say in all honesty out of the endless people I've engaged and debated, who've ranged from pastor, priest, and pew sitter, is that give it time, their debating with me always goes from the Bible to other issues, the real core of the problem they have with homosexuality.

They find homosexuality disgusting or at some level distasteful is what it really boils down to for most when they give up hiding behind Scripture. They love going to bogus science studies of disease and mortality rates as a reason to hate me. Me going to an early grave racked with disease is a reason to have a problem with me? If anything, that should be making you show me the love of Christ MORE, considering my short and miserable existence on Earth. Or how all humans would die out if we found ourselves on a mysterious island with no heterosexuals to procreate. Like we were somehow air-lifted there in our sleep by unknown entities or all procreation would just stop if all heterosexuals just evaporated off the face of the Earth one day. Statistically, a society can't be all straight or all gay in orientation. I guess bisexuals would also not exist.

You do know that gay men and women still have their working sexual organs, right? So we could still be able to re-populate the Earth if we wanted to, but we would do it by careful design. We would also be better at procreation than you would because each child will be WANTED and not by accident, making abortions nonexistent. Isn't that what you want? 

They only do this "It would end the human race" scenario with gays and not heterosexuals who might, for instance, be genetically sterile because of a nuclear winter or a mass genetic screw-up where only males are born (not a problem for all gay men). They also don't see the problem that being celibate for the Kingdom, what Paul wished we all did, that also would bring about our extinction. 

All this is very telling and backs what I've always believed. The Bible comes in second with why they have a homosexuality issue. The Bible is the backup they need to justify how strongly they feel against homosexuality, it's a reference, not the reason. They think the Bible is somehow saying to them; "I have your back with whatever else you have on these perverts." For those who say I'm driven by my homosexuality to read the Bible how I read it, aren't you reading the Bible through the lens of your own heterosexuality? Your bias would be stronger than mine because it was drilled into you starting at birth (blue is for boys and pink is for girls) and reaffirmed to you every day of your life.

All I care about is the Word of the eternal and living God to guide me on this subject and I don't need to go anywhere else. Too bad you people can't say the same.

Bad Blood

John Shore is a prolific Evangelical Christian writer and founder of "Unfundamentalist Christian." Now John is gay-affirming and with him it's; "There is no middle ground, that's what the Bible says, shut your mouth!" I love John. Now there is Andrew Marin, also a prolific Christian writer and founder of the "Marin Foundation" with their "I'm Sorry" campaign (get it? It's a campaign to say to gays; "I'm sorry for how the Church has treated you."), but you can't get out of Andrew if he's affirming of homosexuality with the Bible or not. He'll straddle the fence even if his pants split. He once gave his reason that is neither here nor there without giving a direct answer. I give him credit, not love because he outright won't just say how he believes.

Whether Andrew knows this or not, everyone pretty much knows he believes the Bible condemns homosexuality. The thing with Andrew is that he stretches the message of the love of Christ over bad Bible teaching like was a big Persian rug that he hopes hides what the Bible says on homosexuality, but makes people ask; "What's that big lump under this pretty rug?" I'm convinced Andrew will never come right out and state how he really feels no matter how much you try to pry it out of him. Now there is something to be said about the "FOCUS ON ONLY LOVE! FOCUS ON ONLY LOVE" Message that WILL bring many who felt ostracized by the Church to Christ, but this doesn't answer the big Bible question on homosexuality. Now you have TWO lumps under the rug people can't help but notice. One is what the Bible says on homosexuality and the other is what Andrew says on it.

It was only a matter of time when John and Andrew came to blows on social media, what was bound to happen with two Christian powerhouses having ministries reaching out to the homosexual community. 

I understood John's frustration with Andrew because bringing a gay kid into the faith saying; "God loves you and the Church was wrong to say bad things to you, but now look at the fine print of the Bible whenever you have the time" CAN be devastating to a child with finding out God's love was conditional after all. I'm sure Andrew's reasoning is; "Don't let the Bible get in the way of a good witness!... They'll learn their sexuality is wrong later." 

When the smoke cleared, Andrew left to fight other battles with gays who were suspicions about his motivation AND Christians who think Andrew is hiding the Bible condemns homosexuality message (they're right) with only talking about love. 

Shore said on his blog about the exchange with Andrew:

"I don’t expect to hear from him (Andrew) again. But I’m confident that if I do, he won’t say anything beyond how important it is to continue the dialogue, to keep building bridges, to “live in the tension,” to reach out in love, fuzzy, fuzzy, blah, blah, tastes great, less filling. Because selling that kind of sugar-powdered waffle is how Andrew makes his money."

Later, when John received criticism for what looked like a less-than-Christian response to Andrew, he went further stating:

"... folks have made the point that Andrew’s work is valuable because he is “building bridges”—because he is, as one reader put it, “creating stepping stones from one end of the spectrum to the other.” They appreciate Marin establishing a neutral, non-judgmental, values-free middle ground where parties on either side of the gay-Christian debate can meet to together discuss and explore the issue.

And I certainly understand how great that sounds.

But it’s not great. It doesn’t even make sense. Because when it comes to the issue of LGBT equality, there is no middle ground. There can’t be. The Christian/LGBT issue is a moral issue. And moral issues are by definition about right and wrong.

And this particular moral issue is one of no small consequence. There couldn’t be more at stake with it. The Christians on one side of this debate are claiming that, in the eyes of God, those on the other side are less than human."

Whoooosh! Goodbye middle ground.

John goes on...

"No matter how strenuously he or she might deny it, any Christian who fails to forthrightly and unambiguously assert that there is nothing whatsoever inherently immoral about same-sex relationships has chosen a side in this conflict. They’ve chosen to perpetuate the maligning, ostracizing, and degradation of gay people by Christians. If you don’t stop one person from abusing another, what good are you to the victim? To a starving man, the person who can’t decide whether or not they want to share their food is no better than the person who outright refuses to."

... well said, John.



I bring up this incident between John and Andrew because I'm seeing this being played out more and more now. Those like John and myself having to confront the Andrews of the world with hard Scripture (in our case, affirming) over their exuberance of love and acceptance that's hiding a bill of goods that says you have to be alone for the rest of your life or make an opposite-sex relationship work once your foot is in salvation's door.

another thing...

I'm seeing a misappropriation of terms by the anti-gay with the intent of confusing people. "Ex-Gays" are now calling themselves "Gay Christians" (you can be gay, just don't have gay sex) and anti-gay churches are now saying they are "Gay Affirming" (we affirm you as a child of God, just don't have gay sex). 

Freshly Sliced Sandia

My Summer has been a bust, I blame the anti-Christ. And to stick it to him I'm posting some news that happened while I was gone.

Remember Tony Perkins? I know you don't because I never posted about him. This elder statesman with the anti-gay set says natural disasters are from God for being pissed at the likes of gay marriage happening. Well, a flood of "Biblical Proportions" (his own words) gushed through his home with him and his family barely escaping in a canoe they happened to have had laying around.
Maybe God will get him next time.

This has been in the news because people are relishing in the delicious irony. But what isn't widely known is that the people who were giving donations for the flood victims in the area through a local church called "Greenwell Springs Baptist Church," were actually giving to Perkins (who's their "pastor by absence") to rebuild his own house (Greenwell is a front for Perkins' designated hate group the "Family Research Counsel"). On top of THAT, the FRC is one of the richest hate groups around with support from the wealthy and well hidden DeVos family who are also supporting racist school vouchers along with other unsavory endeavors.

When I first posted this in 2016, I had no idea Trump would bring these ghouls (Perkins and the DeVos kin) together.
...................................

Meanwhile, in Canada...

What about us lovey?

...................................

Orthodox Rabbi demands gay acceptance and demands kosher calamari.

...................................


I updated my arsenokoitai post.

And some on my favorite rascal.



Now back to my Summer. 

Connie Joins the ALF. Bombs Animal labs...

Landon Schott is another straight Christian (remember Preston Sprinkles and all that fake dancing to show tunes?) who thinks he can pen a book about homosexuality. I got into it with a production company that promoted Landon a while back:

Me: I have a radical idea. Why don't you interview a gay Christian about being gay in his walk of faith instead of interviewing a straight man on this topic? It's like you interviewing me about the black experience in the Church when I am neither black nor in the Church to speak on that experience.


Their response was they can do whatever they want. Without even looking, they accused me of having only opinions on my blog I wanted when I have more of what anti-gay apologists say on here with my tags below proving it, and that I should take myself to a dry lake bed and leave myself there.


What's creepy is Schott is a Pentecostal like myself and as Pentes are prone to do, they blame homosexuality on demons instead of having a sober and rational dialogue with understanding  homosexuality from an actual homosexual. At least Sprinkles has evolved his views, though still not affirming, with discussion he's had with homosexuals to learn better where they are coming from.


"Nothing this guy is saying is anything "new." He portrays his arguments as if they are revolutionary, and he even states that the church "isn't discussing homosexuality" so he has taken it upon himself to do so. I'm not sure where Mr. Schott has been, but evangelicals have been discussing homosexuality long before anyone asked them to. Then he actually starts talking and it's the same talking points that evangelicals have ALWAYS used. It's telling that Michael Brown wrote the foreword for his book; it appears to me that Michael Brown could very well have written the entire book, at least in that there's not a single thing that Schott addresses that wouldn't 100% agree with Brown's tired assertions that have lost play among non-evangelicals long ago.

Schott is basically just a younger, hipper, "shirt untucked" version of the same message promulgated by Brown and countless anti-gay evangelicals before him. Basically I look at this entire book as nothing more than a thinly-veiled attempt by Evangelicals to promote an anti-gay mindset to their children and grandchildren. Little Bobby and Billy don't give a damn what some old Pastor like Michael Brown has to say since they know so many gays and have no problem with them, but maybe, just maybe if those same bigoted and incorrect words come from the mouth of a 32 year old unshaven hipster these kids will get the message better. 

Wear as many rainbow shirts (Schott is fond of wearing rainbow t-shirts to show whatever odd point he's trying to make) as you want for some, tell people you wrote this book because you "love gays" all you want, that still won't change the fact that in that very same book you say that every single gay person you have met was either sexually molested or had a poor relationship with his parents. (pg. 173) I don't know many gays who would view that ridiculous assertion as kind or loving. I also doubt they would consider it loving for you to refer to gay-friendly churches as being akin to satanist temples. (pg. 116) And something makes me think they might take umbrage with the notion that "gay-affirming teachers... are influenced by demons" (pg. 112). But hey, none of that matters because you're wearing a rainbow shirt- CLEARLY you must love gay people."

- YouTube comment.

I'm going to be enjoying my Summer and take a hiatus from my blog.

"Consider the work of the Lord, for who is able to straighten what he has bent? For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope."

- Ecclesiastes 3:13, Jeremiah 29:11.