tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post110285350697168029..comments2024-03-28T03:54:21.932-04:00Comments on Canadian Cynic: Marriage, war, the Bible and gays.CChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11406057201126015750noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1103758370745064002004-12-22T18:32:00.000-05:002004-12-22T18:32:00.000-05:00Dan needs to find a girlfriend or go out for some ...Dan needs to find a girlfriend or go out for some sport. One thing I've noticed is that Dan hates to be told that he's "obtuse", which is why I frequently remind him that he isAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16155439939388876411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1102937054808966082004-12-13T06:24:00.000-05:002004-12-13T06:24:00.000-05:00From CC:
Oh, dear. Here we go again. Apparently...From CC:<br /><br />Oh, dear. Here we go again. Apparently, Mr. Meyers' self-embarrassment knows no bounds. As most of you (unlike Mr. Meyers, apparently) can read, my primary point in this original post was that all of the Scriptural condemnation of homosexuality occurs exclusively in the Old Testament. <br /><br />Now, by way of admission, I'll admit that the above is not entirely true. It IS true that Jesus does not condemn homosexuality. That's left to Paul who, among other things, takes the concept of misogyny to a whole new level. But there's no doubt that Jesus himself is mum on the entire topic, which I think is a pretty significant observation.<br /><br />Having made that self-correction, I'm actually a bit baffled as to why Meyers chose to bolster his point with this particular translation of 1 Corinthians 6:9-10: "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor EFFEMINATE, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God."<br /><br />(I will refrain here from suggesting that, if you disqualify adulterers, thieves, the covetous, drunkards, revilers and extortioners, that pretty much wipes out the vast majority of the Republican party. But that's kind of belaboring the obvious.)<br /><br />But why would Meyers use a translation that contains the word "effeminate", which requires him to twist and contort the interpretation to make his point? I suspect it's because he got that translation from the King James Version, well recognized among serious Biblical scholars as a piece of total dreck.<br /><br />If Meyers had simply picked on, say, the New King James Version, or the New International Version, those editions actually condemn homosexuality specifically using that word, and his job would have been done. See? That's just the kind of guy I am, always willing to help out.<br /><br />Of course, none of the above makes a whit of difference to the contention that Jesus had nothing whatever to say about homosexuality. But, at least, if Meyers is going to use his argument on some other ignorant sap, he might as well use a version of the Bible that makes his point for him more directly without needing to butcher the translation.<br /><br />No, no, don't thank me, I'm just doing my job. Even for the clueless.CChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11406057201126015750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1102878600715440232004-12-12T14:10:00.000-05:002004-12-12T14:10:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.CChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11406057201126015750noreply@blogger.com