Thursday, April 9, 2009

Conversation With A Gay Apologist Part I

Below is a comment that was left on my blog in response to a post about the perversion of homosexuality. The commenter’s statements will be in italics while my reply will be in regular typeface. I will post the entire comment over the course of several days. We Christians have a rational, objective basis for our faith. We have truth revealed in the word of God.
Just a quick note, this comment was left in response to other comments on a post from a few days ago. You can read that post here.

Interesting that you go straight to the issue of the Torah's prescribed punishment for male homosexuality -- death by stoning. (Note: No mention of lesbianism in the OT.)

Actually you suggested that there was no difference between the eating of shellfish being an abomination and homosexuality being an abomination. Therefore, I directed you to look up the difference between the two different Hebrew words translated abomination that are used to describe those two acts.

The one used to describe eating shellfish as an abomination is shequets. The Hebrew word translated abomination when describing same sex perversions is the word to’ebah. The Hebrews used the second to describe the highest degree of abominations that are particularly disgusting because they are contrary to God’s holy nature. I then directed you to look at the different punishments for the two kinds of abominations. For a shequets style abomination, a person might be declared ritually unclean until evening, for example. However, a person guilty of a to’ebah type of abomination suffered the death penalty.

Further, I directed you to look in Acts chapter 10:9-16 and see what it said about eating unclean foods (a shequets type offense). God told Peter, basically, that the dietary laws were no longer in effect. However, in Romans 1 and other places in the New Testament, God clearly tells us through the apostle Paul and other writers that homosexuality is still a perversion.

The penalty which was physical death in the Old Testament becomes God giving the pervert over to their perversions in the New Testament. Further, Christians are no where commanded to kill anyone. For those who do not know Christ, we are called to proclaim the gospel and lovingly call men and women everywhere to repent of their sins and place their faith in Christ. For those who profess to know Christ but live lives contrary to that profession (i.e. a “christian” who is a practicing homosexual), we are directed to call them to repent of their sin. If they don’t, the church is directed to no longer consider them a brother or sister in Christ but rather to treat them as an unbeliever (Matt 18:15-17)—in other words, treat them as someone who needs to be called to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ.

I'll continue this discussion tomorrow.


Andrew said...

So what happened, Joe? Why did your bloodthirsty god of the OT suddenly lose his taste for the blood of the queers in the New? (As well as his love of the smell of burning bull flesh?)

P.S. It's a rather puny endorsement of Christianity, this "We're not commanded to kill people" business. Uh, good for you?

Joe Blackmon said...


Matthew 7:6.


Andrew said...

So much for an unchanging god, then, huh?

For thousands of years, it's a GREAT idea for "god's people" to stone their brothers and sons and friends and neighbors to death; then one day, whoops, it is not.

If something that huge can change, why can't you wrap your head around the change that is happening in our country ... a change that is leaving you and your ilk behind? Marriage is a good thing. An open door policy at churches, embracing of gays and lesbians who desire membership and leadership -- it's a good thing.

By the way: Your word game of drilling down on the Hebrew and adding a layer of interpretation that says, "Oh, this one old Hebrew word must have been dreamed up to slap on things 3,000 years ago that had expiration dates, while this other old Hebrew word must mean that this rule is binding on us today, except for maybe with a different punishment," does nothing really other than prove the point of those who look at Fundamentalists and see them picking and choosing what they want to vilify, and what they don't.

I do not see you moaning that we don't have sufficient laws against gossip in this country. Nor do I see you writing posts to start vendettas against churches who have arrogant leadership. You're only obsessed with the gays. Like most Fundamentalists. It's born of bigotry.

Joe Blackmon said...


John 10:27


Raycol said...

As well as to’ebah being used to comment on sex between men in verse 22, it is again used in verses 26, 29 and 30, where it refers to all the prohibited actions in chapter 18, including the incest prohibitions in verses 6 to 17. It would appear that all the prohibitions in the chapter are equally displeasing to God.

Joe Blackmon said...


You are correct. The entire chapter deals with various sexual perversions.

Anonymous said...

It never ceases to amaze me when liberals, who claim to be open-minded, use volume and length to shout down someone with an opposing view.

I like the way you answered him Joe.


Joe Blackmon said...


Here's the thing, libs are like Lt. Kaffe in A Few Good Men. They "can't handle the truth". When you listen to them or read things they've wrote, it's as clear as day that they literally can't see past the nose on the end of their face.

Thanks for stopping by.