When I talk about the current homosexual agenda most people dont think it is real. They think "well this is just a bunch of immoral lowlifes doing their own thing for fun". I beg to differ. This is a major move of the devil involving governments, so-called religious institutions, corporate organizations and what-have-you. It is very well orchestrated and has target goals and well-funded like all devilish institutions. They are in high levels of academia, just as am about to reveal.
I just read an article on Ghanaweb, the homepage of my country. It was entitled " Half of the New Testament Forged, Bible Scholar says". I read the article to the end. Immediatedly the Holy Ghost gave me a word of dicernment that: The author, North Carolina based professor was working for the homosexual agenda. His name is Dr Erhman. I immediately replied to the Ghanaweb article in these words: "These types of assertions are usually made by the current move of the homosexual agenda to portray the Bible as untrue so they can preach a different form of scripture called "Gay Theology". Erhman is a rotten homosexual, an apostate and a liar."
Soon After that I decided to launch an in-depth investigation into who this man is. I didnt have to look far. He lives here in North Carolina! One look at his picture and I knew that despite been married with kids, he was a closet homosexual_by discerment.So I decided to fine out if I was wrong or right. I didnt have to dig far to discover the entire reason for his writings:discredit the bible, pave a way for gay preaching. I want to quote this son of shit from his own writing taking from a book that you can access for yourselves on google entitled;Jesus, Interrupted: revealing the hidden contradictions in the Bible." There he says: " In thinking about which parts of the Bible have something to say in the modern context, it is important to recall the historical view that the biblical authors were all living in a different world from ours..... Their world, to pick in particular a cogent example, had no concept of homosexuality. To put it differently, homosexuality didnt exist in that world. (Now the learned professor is about to tell as why, my words). Why? Not because men didnt have sex with men(they did) not becuase women didnt have sex with women (they did) but because there was no sense of sexual orientation in that world....until the notion of sexual orientation was developed among Western thinkers in the 19th and 20th centuries" You see? What he is saying is that homosexuality is normal and has always existed and is right. The only reason we see it today as wrong is we believe in scripture that is forged. This idiotic professor wants you and I to believe that the opinion of western thinkers is more valuable than that of scripture because they were not modern. When my book comes out the truth will be laid bare. Thank you idiotic professor for making my day. I can smell a rotten poof one mile away. Just come out of the closet. Stop hiding behind your wife's apron. You are poof and you know it. Be a man and face up to it. Stop lying my friend, you will be uncovered.
The section of Jesus, Interrupted that you quote from is already being used to bolster gay rights arguments, but it is a later passage that is being used to make the case:
"As a result, the very assumptions that lie behind the Apostle Paul's denigration of same sex relations are very different from the assumptions that people in the modern world have about themselves as sexual beings.
You cannot very well take Paul's instructions on same sex relations, remove them from the assumptions, that Paul had about sex and gender, and transplant them onto a different set of assumptions."
Bart Ehrman's point here is not that "homosexuality is normal and has always existed and is right," but that the context of same-sex relationships in Paul's day were substantively different from the homosexual orientation we encounter today. (I might add, he didn't offer any proof that same-sex relationships in, say, 1st Century Rome were really different from today's same-sex relationships, but he's just rehashing a "cultural context" argument that was floating around twenty years ago--when I first encountered it.) From that proposition he then reasons that it is anachronistic to apply Paul's prohibitions against the same-sex relationships in his day to entirely different types of same-sex relationships that exist today.
As illustrated in this debate about homosexuality, the overall theme of Jesus, Interrupted is that the bible is inescapably constrained by the cultural context in which it was written, and cannot be "plopped down into our own context, as if we shared the worldviews and perspectives of the different authors" [page 270]. Ehrman is discounting the modern relevance of the whole bible (although he goes out of his way to insist he is not attacking Christian faith). The implications are so much broader than just helping the gay rights agenda. Ehrman is trying to spread the profound distrust of the bible on the part of liberal scholarship to a wider, lay audience.
My dearest Pastor,
While I can appreciate your passion and your verve concerning this matter, I can't help but to notice that many of your points are lacking the intellectual fortitude necesary to combat the scope and the level of this discussion. First, there is scriptual basis that would repudiate your statement that angels are "sexless" ( Genesis 6:2). Second, there is a great deal of ornithalogical data which certainly shows that same sex cohabitation does exist among the animal kingdom in general, and the birds, in particular. Further, the anus, while you so eloquently state is not a sex organ, the truth is that through the large intestine the prostate can receive stimulation, therefore allowing an orgasmic "episode". Please don't think that I subscribe to the tenets of homosexual behavior. Nothing could be further from the truth.Nor, should it be assumed that I am a proponent for your brand of randomly thrown diatribes which are neither scientifically supported, nor theologically plausible. I am a student of harmartiology (sin), and as all students, I have come to understand that enlightenment is progressive rather than regressive. You see, my beloved Pastor, as a child, I thought as a child, but when I became a man, I put away childish things. I say that to speak to the idea that I, as you currently, once held that sin was an animal. However, I must call in The Apostle, as he stated in I Corinthians 6, "Remembering, how ye once were." Sin, Brother Pastor, is not an animal, but that rather, sin is a "universal" condition. (Oh, I Would That I had Some Help With This Thing). That being said, we suffer from the same human imperfections as the so-called "Homosexuals". The same GOD, Through The Same Son, Via, The Same Holy Spirit, Which delivered both your and my souls, and who continues to keep us, can and will deliver, save, sanctify, and fill these "Lost Sheep". You know, we can't forget that we are still sheep. We are just "Lost-Found" Sheep, and as such, we can never think that our station has changed, just because our title has changed. We are still sinners, brother, however, as is always the case with free men, we adopt a posture of "selective amnesia...remembering what we want to remember and forgetting what we choose to forget. We can never forget that our jobs as Pastors, are not to condemn the flock, but to lead the Flock, because, regardless of how we feel about the "Brown" Sheep, they are nevertheless, still a part of the Holy Sheperd's Flock. The undersheperd is not afforded the privilege to decide which sheep He prefers to sheperd. I am both disappointed and appalled that this type of Neolithical and Incompetent behavior is still allowed in the pantheon of Christian leadership. This is the primary reason why the Church of The Living GOD can't save any more souls than we are saving, because the sheperds have decided what the criteria for Salvific Hermeneutic has become. Please understand as I close, there is a need for Prophetic Criticism, but this is neither the forum, nor the time for "Your" type of exclusion. The people are dying brother, and your job is to throw "Life-Lines", not gasoline on an already horrible situation.
But For His Grace,
Pastor Scott H. McDowell
Cedar Creek Missionary Baptist Church
There is so much venom in your writing. There is so much anger in your statements that I am wondering, exactly who is the intended brunt of such intensity. First, I couldn't understand why you referred to my position as that of a moron, when clearly, it is you who have a problem with individuals who do not subscribe to your "personal" perspective. The rash, judgmental and totally crass treatment that you attempt to extend to the men and women of this site is despicable. You say that you have "discernment", I beg to differ, the Holy Spirit does not move individuals to behave and speak the manner in which you are speaking. There is nothing wrong with being passonate about an issue. That is understandable, but when you elevate that passion into mindless, psycho-bable ramblings in which you misalign and perhaps engage in libelous banter about the sexual orientation of one of the worlds greatest Biblical scholars, that is something altogether different. Further, let me be clear, I resent the implication that I am an agent of The Devil, and I further can not understand who appointed you to speak for those individuals who lack a voice in such matters of theological intelligentsia. Your position, while it attempts to garner support for those countless mindless, uneducated and lazy "Negroes" who have simply relegated their duty of research and theological scholarship to idiots such as yourself, is not welcome in my circle and I have both contempt and empathy for people like you in general and those who tend to follow you in particular. This problem can not be addressed until we come to the understanding that there remain two approaches to Bible literature. Those being "Literalistic Approach", and the other being "Theological Redactionism". Either way, the Bible is not intended to be a scientific nor historical document...(Someone failed to listen up in Seminary). Therein lies the problem that I have with people like yourself, You read one excerpt from one paragraph, or more probable, you read an excerpt from Wilipedia, and then you wrap your intense, though ignorant ideas around the aforementioned. Next you insult anyone who uses an academically persuasive position to disagree with you. However, both you and I know that the true reason for this is so that the rest of your three followers will ignorantly substantiate your totally illogical and mean spirited position. Really, Andrew, I have neither the time, nor the patience with a person who stands as a retard champion of justice, while at the same instance remaining a constant antithesis of true, sound theological research. At any rate I have nothing further to add to this discussion, presently or in the future. Good luck with that rabbit hunt Drew, I hear that they tend to run in circles.
Wow you seriously have some issues. I am detecting some internal hate. Meaning you sound like you are dealing with your own sexuality issues.
People who know me will laugh at that stupid assertion that I have sexual issues. I can get all the pretty women I want why will I settle for another man's hairy stinking A...H? At my age I get women as young as 20 yrs who want to go out with me. There are young women right now all around the world who have expressed interest in marriage, because they know I am single. Why would I give them up to settle for a poop cabin? Where does poop come from? Do you know? No you dont. God has given you up to a reprobate mind, you are working for satan.
If you have no issues with your sexuality, you don't have to defend yourself.