When A Homosexual Christian Leader ‘Comes O

[**Rowland Croucher**]

The Church has wrestled with a dozen major paradigm-shifts in its=20
history. The first had to do with accepting Gentiles. The Protestant=20
Reformation was built on the radical proposition that we are saved by=20
faith purely on the basis of God=92s grace, and that we can trust ordinar=
y=20
folks to read the Bible. Then there was slavery, charismatic renewal,=20
women in leadership... Conservative groups have recently wrestled with=20
issues like dancing, divorce, Sabbath/Sunday-behaviour, dress-codes, and=20
rock music.

And now the Big One: Homosexuality More...=20
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/20558.htm

(Review: Anthony Venn-Brown's 'A Life of Unlearning: a Journey to Find=20
the Truth', 2nd edition, New Holland Publishers, 2007.)

--=20
Shalom/Salaam/Pax! Rowland Croucher

http://jmm.aaa.net.au/ (20,000 articles 4000 humor)

Blogs - http://rowlandsblogs.blogspot.com/

Justice for Dawn Rowan - http://dawnrowansaga.blogspot.com/

Funny Jokes and Pics - http://funnyjokesnpics.blogspot.com/

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
The Church has wrestled with a dozen major paradigm-shifts in its
history.

No, the _Church_ has always stuck with one 'paradigm', the one
revealed by Christ. But judging from the filth taught as 'truth' in
your post and article, it seems you have never learned that one
paradigm yet. Or you once learned it, but have now thoroughly
supressed that memory.

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
The first had to do with accepting Gentiles.

That was not a "paradigm shift". This should have been clear from Acts
15. The real paradigm shift had already taken place with Mat 28:19.

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
The Protestant Reformation was built on the radical proposition that
we are saved by faith purely on the basis of God's grace, and that we
can trust ordinary folks to read the Bible.

And look what a disaster that has been! Now we have your so-called
"ordinary folks" reading the Bible and claiming that homosexuality is
OK, even though the Bible condemns it so sharply and clearly (e.g. 1
Cor 6:9).

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
Then there was slavery, charismatic renewal, women in
leadership... Conservative groups have recently wrestled with issues
like dancing, divorce, Sabbath/Sunday-behaviour, dress-codes, and
rock music.

These are not 'paradigm shifts', either. So why are you distracting
the reader with these irrelevant issues? Is it because you are slyly
preparing the reader for your false analogy between these "liberation
movements" and the modern support for depravity?

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
And now the Big One: Homosexuality More...
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/20558.htm

This "hit-and-run" style of posting, does not help your
credibility. Especially since you complain about others who "can't
cope with this sort of 'in your face' truthfulness", but can't take it
yourself. Otherwise you would not be hiding behind this "hit-and-run"
reference to a link.

[snip]

[shegeek72]

On Dec 5, 5:54 pm, the suspect Matthew Johnson

Post by Matthew Johnson
No, the _Church_ has always stuck with one 'paradigm', the one
revealed by Christ.

The 'one paradigm' may be Christ, but church doctrine has varied
widely over time. One obvious example: the church's opposition to
Galileo's radical, but correct, ideas.

Post by Matthew Johnson
But judging from the filth taught as 'truth' in
your post and article, it seems you have never learned that one
paradigm yet.

Ah yes, the newsgroup's insult dog. You are quick to lambast someone,
yet seldom provide documentation to back up your claims.

Post by Matthew Johnson
These are not 'paradigm shifts', either. So why are you distracting
the reader with these irrelevant issues? Is it because you are slyly
preparing the reader for your false analogy between these "liberation
movements" and the modern support for depravity?

The only 'depravity' is some Christian's ideas that homosexuality is a
'sin', based on misinterpretation of biblical passages that results in
untold rejection, harm, ostracizing, murder and suicide of their LGBT
brothers and sisters. I've found that the less one socializes with and
gets to know LGBT people the more negative ideas they tend to hold.
However, once one gets to know LGBT people and finds out they are like
everyone else, except for whom they choose to love or what gender they
want to be, their objections fall away and they come away with a more
humane and accepting attitude.

Post by Matthew Johnson
This "hit-and-run" style of posting, does not help your
credibility. Especially since you complain about others who "can't
cope with this sort of 'in your face' truthfulness", but can't take it
yourself. Otherwise you would not be hiding behind this "hit-and-run"
reference to a link.

Poor debating technique #34: Taking a person's statement, negatively
interpreting it and directing it back on the person. Often used when
one cannot come up with a valid rebuttal.
--
Tara's Transgender Resources
http://tarasresources.net

Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.mccchurch.org

[A Brown]

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
The Church has wrestled with a dozen major paradigm-shifts in its
history.

No, the _Church_ has always stuck with one 'paradigm',

There have been many variations on Church doctrine over the years....and
many interpretations of such.

Post by Matthew Johnson
the one
revealed by Christ.

Did Christ reveal that every Pope (until the current times) had to be
Italian?

Was that what what was revealed by Christ? Or was that an interpretation by
men?

Post by Matthew Johnson
But judging from the filth taught as 'truth' in
your post and article...

Do you have to try hard to be offensive in your posts....or does it come
naturally?

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
The Protestant Reformation was built on the radical proposition that
we are saved by faith purely on the basis of God's grace, and that we
can trust ordinary folks to read the Bible.

And look what a disaster that has been!

Which "disaster"? Where people are saved by Grace?

...or that ordinary people should be able to read the Bible?

Post by Matthew Johnson
Now we have your so-called
"ordinary folks" reading the Bible and claiming that homosexuality is
OK, even though the Bible condemns it so sharply and clearly (e.g. 1
Cor 6:9).

There are no words of Jesus to this affect.

The writer of the Epistle was writing to the people at the time...and their
understanding of what homosexuality was thought to be at the time.

They had no concept of homosexuality in the conext of a loving, committed,
responsible, mature relationship.

The understanding the people of Corinth probably had at the time was that
homosexuality meant diddling little boys....which appears to be what the
Church still se it as. (And they should know.)

Post by Matthew Johnson
This "hit-and-run" style of posting, does not help your
credibility.

Your credibility, dispite your all day postings, has not been held in high
regard either....

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by shegeek72
On Dec 5, 5:54 pm, the suspect Matthew Johnson

Post by Matthew Johnson
No, the _Church_ has always stuck with one 'paradigm', the one
revealed by Christ.

The 'one paradigm' may be Christ,

That is not what I said. Do you confuse the adjectives for color with
those for flavor, too?

Post by shegeek72
the church's opposition to Galileo's radical, but correct, ideas.

Why do you keep returning to the example of Galieo, as if it supported
you? It does not.

Post by shegeek72

Post by Matthew Johnson
But judging from the filth taught as 'truth' in your post and
article, it seems you have never learned that one paradigm yet.

Ah yes, the newsgroup's insult dog. You are quick to lambast someone,
yet seldom provide documentation to back up your claims.

This is not true. The only time I fail to provide the documentation is
when it is too painfully obvious. It is you who fails to provide
documentation, unless it is the 'documentation' of pseudo-scholars
such as John Boswell. As for "insult dog", you have surpassed me there
with your puerile methods of starting posts with 'Doris' or "the
suspect".

For unlike my alleged 'insults', these puerile openings contribute
nothing to the post other than insult. They are far from "constructive
criticism", even further away from the biblically sanctioned
'rebuke'. They are pure insult, and particularly childish insult at
that.

Post by shegeek72

Post by Matthew Johnson
These are not 'paradigm shifts', either. So why are you distracting
the reader with these irrelevant issues? Is it because you are
slyly preparing the reader for your false analogy between these
"liberation movements" and the modern support for depravity?

The only 'depravity' is some Christian's ideas that homosexuality is
a 'sin', based on misinterpretation of biblical passages that results
in untold rejection, harm, ostracizing, murder and suicide of their
LGBT brothers and sisters.

So you love to repeat. But in case you didn't notice, some of us find
your repetition unconvincing. Once more: it is NOT
'misinterpretation'. It is the only possible legitimate
interpretation. Yours is the misintepretation. You cannot face the
truth about what MALAKOS or ARSENOKOITHS means in 1 Cor 6:9, so you
have to hide under vain repetition instead.

Post by shegeek72
I've found that the less one socializes with and gets to know LGBT
people the more negative ideas they tend to hold.

Another of your favorite mantras. But all it proves is that the poet
was right when he said, "bad company ruins good morals (1 Cor
15:33). What _you_ are recommending here is that we give bad company a
free hand in corrupting good morals, and applaud them for it.

Post by shegeek72
However, once one gets to know LGBT people and finds out they are
like everyone else, except for whom they choose to love or what
gender they want to be, their objections fall away and they come away
with a more humane and accepting attitude.

It is your attitude that is inhumane. For you condemn your associates
to deepening themselves in the sins that will damn them -- as if you
were hungry for company in your own damnation.

Post by shegeek72

Post by Matthew Johnson
This "hit-and-run" style of posting, does not help your
credibility. Especially since you complain about others who "can't
cope with this sort of 'in your face' truthfulness", but can't take it
yourself. Otherwise you would not be hiding behind this "hit-and-run"
reference to a link.

Poor debating technique #34: Taking a person's statement, negatively
interpreting it and directing it back on the person. Often used when
one cannot come up with a valid rebuttal.

Well, we can certainly take your word for it, since you are the KING
of "poor debating techniques" in this NG;) Few others are as fond of
vain repetition of total nonsense. Yet you have done it yet again.

Knock it off with the vain repetition, come to terms with the facts
you have so long denied: the meaning of MALAKOS and ARSENOKOITHS in 1
Cor 6:9 is clear, it means people who engage in homosexual
activities. This truth _completely_ rules out your misinterpretation.

[A Brown]

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by shegeek72
Ah yes, the newsgroup's insult dog. You are quick to lambast someone,
yet seldom provide documentation to back up your claims.

This is not true. The only time I fail to provide the documentation is
when it is too painfully obvious.

Yet you don't shy away from the term "the newsgroups insulty dog"!!

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by shegeek72
The only 'depravity' is some Christian's ideas that homosexuality is
a 'sin', based on misinterpretation of biblical passages that results
in untold rejection, harm, ostracizing, murder and suicide of their
LGBT brothers and sisters.

So you love to repeat. But in case you didn't notice, some of us find
your repetition unconvincing.

And in case YOU haven't noticed. Many people find the repition of Rev
Phelps, Ted Haggard and Matthew Johnson unconvincing too.

Post by Matthew Johnson
Once more: it is NOT
'misinterpretation'. It is the only possible legitimate
interpretation.

Back to your old crutch. Matthew knows best, Matthews answer are the only
ones valid, etc., etc....

It's getting old.

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by A Brown

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by shegeek72
Ah yes, the newsgroup's insult dog. You are quick to lambast someone,
yet seldom provide documentation to back up your claims.

This is not true. The only time I fail to provide the documentation is
when it is too painfully obvious.

Yet you don't shy away from the term "the newsgroups insulty dog"!!

You can't even type the false accusation correctly!

[snip]

[A Brown]

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by A Brown

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by shegeek72
Ah yes, the newsgroup's insult dog. You are quick to lambast someone,
yet seldom provide documentation to back up your claims.

This is not true. The only time I fail to provide the documentation is
when it is too painfully obvious.

Yet you don't shy away from the term "the newsgroups insulty dog"!!

You can't even type the false accusation correctly!

I follow in Jesus' footsteps. He couldn't type well either. ;-)

[shegeek72]

On Dec 13, 7:27 pm, the suspect Matthew Johnson

Post by Matthew Johnson
This is not true. The only time I fail to provide the documentation is
when it is too painfully obvious. It is you who fails to provide
documentation, unless it is the 'documentation' of pseudo-scholars
such as John Boswell.

Uh, I've never used Boswell as documentation, but since you brought
him up here's what wikipedia says:

"Born in Boston in 1947 into a military family, Boswell earned his
undergraduate degree from the College of William and Mary, where he
converted to Roman Catholicism. His nickname, from his initials, was
"Jeb". A gifted medieval philologist who spoke (inter alia) fluent
Catalan, he received his doctorate from Harvard University in 1975,
whereupon he joined the Yale University history faculty as its rising
star; he was made full professor in 1982. In 1987, Boswell helped
organize and found the Lesbian and Gay Studies Center at Yale, which
is now the Research Fund for Lesbian and Gay Studies. He was named the
A. Whitney Griswold Professor of History in 1990, when he was also
appointed to a two-year term as chair of the Yale history department.
Boswell was a gifted and devoted teacher. His undergraduate lectures
in medieval history were renowned for their organization, erudition,
and wit, with the course often making the "top 10" for highest
enrollment. The multi-talented Boswell would pen his comments on
student papers in perfectly executed medieval calligraphy."

Sounds like an exemplary person.

Post by Matthew Johnson
As for "insult dog", you have surpassed me there
with your puerile methods of starting posts with 'Doris' or "the
suspect".

I've only used 'Doris' when you referred to me as 'he/she' or put my
nick in quotes. As for "the suspect", that came from alt.hacker from
another female poster (one of a handful among the men) who began all
her posts that way and it became a term of endearment that I've
applied to you. ;-)

Post by Matthew Johnson
For unlike my alleged 'insults', these puerile openings contribute
nothing to the post other than insult. They are far from "constructive
criticism", even further away from the biblically sanctioned
'rebuke'. They are pure insult, and particularly childish insult at
that.

Again reinforcing your 'insult dog' moniker, that appears to be taking
off in this ng.

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by shegeek72
The only 'depravity' is some Christian's ideas that homosexuality is
a 'sin', based on misinterpretation of biblical passages that results
in untold rejection, harm, ostracizing, murder and suicide of their
LGBT brothers and sisters.

So you love to repeat.

Because it's the truth and perhaps some Christians will reevaluate
their views on their GLBT brothers and sisters.

Post by Matthew Johnson
But in case you didn't notice, some of us find
your repetition unconvincing.
From recent postings, it appears more do.
Another of your favorite mantras. But all it proves is that the poet
was right when he said, "bad company ruins good morals (1 Cor
15:33). What _you_ are recommending here is that we give bad company a
free hand in corrupting good morals, and applaud them for it.

Nope, I'm recommending people who know few, or no, GLBT people to get
to know them.

Tell us Matthew, how many do you know? A question
you've_repeatedly_dodged.

Post by Matthew Johnson
It is your attitude that is inhumane. For you condemn your associates
to deepening themselves in the sins that will damn them -- as if you
were hungry for company in your own damnation.

Judge not, lest you be judged.

Post by Matthew Johnson
Knock it off with the vain repetition, come to terms with the facts
you have so long denied: the meaning of MALAKOS and ARSENOKOITHS in 1
Cor 6:9 is clear, it means people who engage in homosexual
activities. This truth _completely_ rules out your misinterpretation.

This will be addressed in a separate post; I know you're looking
forward to reading it. :)
--
Tara's Transgender Resources
http://tarasresources.net

Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.mccchurch.org