Here's a new twist on
"Orange Juice! It's not just for breakfast anymore" ...
"Imprisoning Gays! It's not just for Uganda anymore!"
"Orange Juice! It's not just for breakfast anymore" ...
"Imprisoning Gays! It's not just for Uganda anymore!"
From "Rightly Concerned" ... a blog maintained by the American Family Association -- this post by American Family Association radio host Bryan Fischer ... wherein he posts a copy of an email he wrote to a listener challenging him on his support for criminalizing homosexuality.Fasten your seat belts! (I've added the emphasis.)
Thanks for writing me about my comments on my program regarding homosexuality. It might be worth noting that what I actually suggested is that we impose the same sanctions on those who engage in homosexual behavior as we do on those who engage in intravenous drug abuse, since both pose the same kind of risk of contracting HIV/AIDS. I’d be curious to know what you think should be done with IV drug abusers, because whatever it is, I think the same response should be made to those who engage in homosexual behavior.
If you believe that what drug abusers need is to go into an effective detox program, then we should likewise put active homosexuals through an effective reparative therapy program. Secondly, I’m afraid you’re simply wrong about the Bible’s perspective on the law and homosexuality. Paul lists quite explicitly in 1 Timothy 1:8-11 the actions and behaviors that are the proper concern of the law:
“Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine…”The bottom line here is that, biblically, those “who practice homosexuality” should come under the purview of the law just as much as those who take people captive in order to sell them into slavery. You express a belief in the Scriptures, and I trust your confidence in Scripture is not selective.
If you believe all Scripture is inspired, then you are compelled to accept that legal sanctions may appropriately be applied to those who engage in homosexual behavior.
Thank you for contacting us, and I hope this response will help you think in a thorough and biblical way about this important social issue.
Bryan Fischer
Host, "Focal Point" radio program on AFR Talk, a division of the American Family Association
===
This is what "righteous indignation" was created for.
These are the folks sponsoring the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington this Thursday.
This is why we need to mobilize on Thursday and do whatever we can to support the American Prayer Hour .
What is the American Prayer Hour? The American Prayer Hour is an affirmation of inclusive values and a celebration of diversity that is the bedrock of our nation. It is also a protest of The National Prayer Breakfast, which is hosted by The Family. This group is a secretive fundamentalist organization directly tied to the draconian “Kill the Gays” bill in Uganda. We strongly urge those invited to the National Prayer Breakfast to reconsider attending the event. Instead, they can join us at our American Prayer Hour.
Visit the link above.
Support the American Prayer Hour service in your area if there is one.
Hold an American Prayer Hour service if there's not.
Get involved.
Speak up.
Make a difference.
Now.
Go do it!
=======
For more, visit Joe.My.God and Truth Wins Out ... blogs also covering this story.
20 comments:
I wonder which translation the speaker was using for that "homosexual" reference. It doesn't show up in NIV I'm reading today.
I had a copy of "The Message" out today for a homily on Ps 71, and found his 1 Timothy quote very interesting with their pop tranz:
(9) "It's obvious, isn't it, that the law code isn't primarily for people who live responsibly, but for the irresponsible, who defy all authority, riding roughshod over God, life."
Before I even considered this most generalized "...and anybody else we don't like..." verse, (when taken out of context,) I wondered about the "law against" IV drug users he mentions:
Did I miss a federal law there, and what _is_ the legislated treatment for same?
Before we get into a lack of actual legally-mandated "reparative therapy," let's first consider one of the bad-isms FIRST mentioned in his scripture quote: [heterosexual, of course] adulterers!!
Perhaps what folks of this ilk need is some good old-fashioned public stoning for adulterers and sexually-inappropriate heterosexuals! What?? No one running to the front to sling the first stone?
I thought not.
[/tongue-cheek application]
- Preach
I'm with CM..they really don't want to take it there...
If you don't want your"confidence in Scripture" to be condemned as "selective" then throw away the English Standard Version (a revision of the Revised Standard Version to satisfy certain conservative Protestants) (and the source of Fischer's quotations).
Then learn koine and find out what the Epistles really say.
Then start practicing Christianity instead of "fundamentalism".
I understand the outrage but these are not the people sponsoring the National Prayer Breakfast. Far from it. The Fellowship Foundation does that. The AFA is a far right group with no connection to the Fellowship Foundation. In fact, the Fellowship Foundation everywhere except Uganda opposes the bill.
The word in Greek that is used in 1 Timothy 1:10 is "arsenokoitais." The word is used twice in the New Testament. The first is in a letter that Paul undisputably wrote, at I Corinthians 6:9. There is no earlier known use of the word. The use here is later and most mainstream scholars seriously doubt that Paul actually wrote this epistle.
No one really knows what the word means. The word is a compound word combining "male" and "bed," with "bed' being euphemistically used as a term for "sex." "Homosexual" in its modern meaning is almost certainly not what it means. There's some thought that it means a male temple prostitute. Two lengthy studies of the word (admittedly not completely unbiased) can be found at http://www.gaychristian101.com/Arsenokoites.html and http://www.gaychristian101.com/Define-Arsenokoites.html .
It's also interesting that the word in the list here falls between "pornois" and "andrapodistais." The latter means essentially a person who sells slaves. The former is sometimes translated as "fornicators" but it also has the sense of someone who visits prostitutes. So there is some thought that "arsenokoitais" might have the meaning of a slave who has been sold for purposes of temple prostitution.
It is sad to see Christianity used in this way. The antidote? One of my -favorite traditional Anglo-Catholic feasts is that of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, which emphasizes Jesus' love for humanity. Jesus displayed a warm and loving heart, even as he suffered on the cross, not the judgmentalism of this man's totally misguided message. My first cousin is gay. Three out of the seven employees of my law firm are gay or lesbian. That these folks, regardless of their faith traditions, are held near and dear in the Sacred Heart of Jesus gives me great reassurance and comfort. I am so thankful for the love of Jesus every day!
Holy Lord save us from the devil in fundamentalist drag.
FWIW
jimB
The "translation" is the infamous 1948/1953 RSV. The first epoch making deliberate "though for thought", i.e. Dynamic Equivalence translation. 1 Modern to late Modern Concept is put in the plade of 2 pre Modern words: malakoì; soft (of textiles, c.f. Luke 7:24 and Matt 11:7) and arsenokoîtai; "bedfellow").
The most ancient ttanslation is the Old Latin. It gives "masculorum concubitores" for arsenokoîtes: bedfellows.
The order in 1 Cor 6:9-11 (and 1 Tim 1:10) is that of the 10 Commandments. But not all, only the 2nd, the 7th, the 10th). One Cultic, one Collective (the Household), one Social.
Sorry, should read: The 2nd, the 7th, the 8th, the 10th.
dr.primrose:
"Homosexual" in its modern meaning is almost certainly not what it means.
What do you mean by "'Homosexual' in its modern meaning"? What do you see as the modern meaning of 'homosexual' and what would be different from what it meant, say, when the cited Scripture was written?
Addressing your admission that your links are admittedly biased, here are a couple of discussions of what the term means from a different perspective; here and here. I cribbed the links from a Wiki article I found as a link when I searched Google using the Greek term.
“What do you mean by "'Homosexual' in its modern meaning"? What do you see as the modern meaning of 'homosexual' and what would be different from what it meant, say, when the cited Scripture was written?”
Ronf, asked and answered. A billion gazillion times. On this very blog. In countless links referenced by this blog. In countless books, journals, etc. For decades. You are clearly not interested in the answer.
NASA didn’t use the scientific information in the Bible to get to the moon and we, in the 21st century world, don’t use the Bible as the definitive source on human sexuality. Persons with a different sexual orientation than you are sinful or disordered only in your own mind. It’s really that simple. Perhaps a lesbian ran over your dog at some point in your past but you need to get over it.
As a general aside, religious conservatives who resent being labeled as bigoted and homophobic, yet continue to make bigoted and homophobic comments, need to take a look at a dictionary.
Susan, it's good that you posted this piece. I hope it gets wide circulation. I think it's a good idea for as many people as possible to see what filthy scum we're up against.
uffda51, I was not asking for your opinion. I was asking for the poster's opinion.
Of course, should all the queers be thrown into jail, who will pay for their imprisonment? Far be it for the populace to pay for their incarceration; that would make taxes go up, right? There's no attempt to think the whole scenario out logically. Oh, wait. I bet we'd have to pay for our own imprisonment. Ah, got it.
RonF posts a nonsense demand, gets a reasonable response, pull a "not-the-right-answer" response.
RonF is Mouneer Anis!
You were answered, Ronny boy. And, no, the writers of the Bible didn't have the intellectual, scientific or psychological equipment to understand homosexuality.
Stop being disingenuous. Then again, it's all you people are good at.
To fully understand the passage at issue, since I am not literate in Greek at all, I consulted the McReynolds interlinear translation. The word at issue has been translated as "male prostitutes, slavetraders or liars." I think there is a chasm of difference between a spouse (male or female) and a prostitute (male or female). I think progressive and conservative Christians are pretty much in agreement that prostitution, of whatever kind, is wrong.
And in point of fact, Ron, no, people in the first century wouldn't have comprehended the notion that some of us are hard-wired with sexual attraction toward others of the same gender possibly coupled with a lack of attraction toward anyone of the opposite gender. Come to think of it, they wouldn't have understood hard-wiring.
And, RonF, they wouldn't have understood antibiotics, manned flight, the roundness of the earth, or the solar system either.
Meanwhile, last night on Hardball, Peter Sprigg called for the criminalization of homosexuality and imprisonment of homosexuals. Intellectually, this is like calling for redheads, or lefties, to be imprisoned.
Let's be very clear what we are up against.
The words Paul used, the proper translations of those words, and his intended meaning of those words millennia ago, are still open to speculation. Some scholars have suggested that Paul himself may have been gay. What is not open to speculation is what Paul knew.
Paul (and the other writers of the Bible) knew nothing about an aspect of human sexuality which would not have a name until the 19th century. Same-sex attraction is not “sin” and epileptics are not possessed by demons.
Conservatives are constantly citing a translation, doctrine, a tradition, a footnote, a canon, a resolution, “deeply held beliefs,” Wikipedia, you name it, anything that will allow them to continue to discriminate while still claiming to “love the sinner.”
In a country in which millions of people do not believe in evolution, yet believe that our president was born in Kenya, Peter Sprigg actually appears to some cable TV viewers to be both authoritative and reasonable. Under oath at the Prop 8 trial, or testifying before congress, he would not.
(word verification = equel)
Post a Comment