First, I bumped into this nasty comment at Instapundit
Luckily, he was Muslim, not Baptist, so it won’t be a big national scandal.
What’s he talking about? His comment comes concerning an article about a Muslim speaker at Vanderbilt who said he “would go with what Islam teaches” concerning capital punishment for homosexuals. Of course, except for the Westboro Lunatics, Baptists don’t call for the execution of homosexuals, and we all know it. Come on Glenn, you’re better than that. Cheap shots for the laugh? Leave it to Letterman. You’re just wrong.
Then I see this article, “First Openly Gay Episcopal Bishop Says St. Paul Was Condemning Homosexual Acts by Heterosexuals“
(CNSNews.com) – In a section of his New Testament letter to the Romans (1:22-27) dealing with God’s admonitions against same-sex relations, St. Paul was actually writing about heterosexuals who engage in same-sex acts and not homosexuals, said the Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson, the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal church.
Really? That’s a new one. What makes you think that?
“We have to understand that the notion of a homosexual sexual orientation is a notion that’s only about 125 years old,” Bishop Robinson told CNSNews.com. ”That is to say, St. Paul was talking about people that he understood to be heterosexual engaging in same-sex acts. It never occurred to anyone in ancient times that a certain minority of us would be born being affectionally oriented to people of the same sex.”
Oh, I see, the ancients were ignorant morons who weren’t as intelligent as we moderns are now. So they didn’t know anything about “orientation” or stuff like that. If you’re “oriented” that way, then it’s OK, but if you’re hetero and just looking for a little taboo thrill it’s a sin, is that it? I wonder if the good bishop would make the same distinction for thieves? It’s OK for them to steal because they’re “oriented” that way. It’s their job. But for someone who isn’t a thief, it’s a sin to take something from someone else. And it might be OK for Tiger Woods to cheat on his wife because apparently he’s “oriented” that way, but it would be a sin for me because I’m not. Alright then. I wonder if that’s why politicians (no names please, they can’t help it) are given a pass for lying? So everything Ol’ Paul wrote you can pretty much ignore because he was just a guy who didn’t know anything? Bishop, you’re just wrong.
That’s the silliest thing I’ve read all week (except for the comments threads over at the local fishwrap). I wonder what Bishop Robinson does with this from Paul, which he wrote to a young minister named Timothy?
For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.
I almost feel sorry for a man who has spent his whole life ministering to people and supposedly learning what God has to say about life, about human beings, and about Himself, who then goes so far into the weeds in order to justify something in himself that doesn’t fit with all that he has learned. I say almost because were it just between him and God it would be one thing, but when you get into the pulpit, or worse, a governing office in the church and lead the flock away… well, there just isn’t a “sorry” left.
Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.
Entries (RSS)