In Reply to: Re: Simplicity isn't easy posted by Farmer on April 29, 2010 at 02:57:45:
The main reason I didn't like the linked file too much...because he goes on and on about premises and premises...(I know many people don't know the Bible...so???...in the US...in Europe and elsewhere...in Europe they don't read the Bible...and many became pro gay...get it??)until he comes to what really interests me and it's a flop...a weak rendering of some relevant portions of the Bible
What you in contrast also should try: try to prove, where Jesus or Paul says: have same gender sexual contact...where is such positive statement?Instead the Bible talks explicitly about the normal husband wife relationship... to the adulteress in John 8 (some refute that portion of the gospel)He assures, that He's not condemning her...but also go and sin no more...there are certain sex-sins/offenses, which we can outline...mind you to prove the positive, that same sex is not among it?...it's easy to dismiss the portions where it got traditionally interpreted as homosexuality like in Romans 1...I have easily over 100 exegetical theological works/books of old times about the letter to the Romans ...I will now, since you challenged me...see, what old exegetical labour says about
Romans 1 and not just Mel W. with his tendentious
explanation...will take me time...the earliest are from 17 something...and I can see what the church fathers got to say about it.