From: jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,rice.politics,rice.galor
Subject: Re: Homosexuality and the Bible: Refutations (Long)
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1992 06:54:56 GMT
 <Bu69np.F58@rice.edu>
Distribution: tx
Organization: is sometimes desirable

In article <Bu69np.F58@rice.edu>, Patrick L Humphrey writes:

> In article <RraDr*fX0@caleb.UUCP> jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:
> >In article <1685513A1C.JLOCK00@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU>, Joseph L. Lockett writes:
> >
> >several deliberate misinterpretations of the Bible and outright falsehoods.
> 
> Mighty nice of you to take them out and prevent folks from deciding for
> themselves...
> 
> >> I have read ALL of John 8.  I see the story of Jesus and the adulteress,
> >
> >You obviously didn't understand it.
> 
> In other words, he doesn't agree with your opinion, and by default, you're
> right...

In other words, YOU don't agree with my opinion, so you try to twist my words.

> >> prick.  Actually, I think a fair-sized group of Biblical scholars figure
> >> the man was gay himself, and repressed it in himself and others all his
> >> life.  No wonder he's so retentive it's amusing.
> >
> >The group of warped, so-called scholars who would agree with that statement is
> >both small and irrelevant.
> 
> How would you know, if you never bother with listening to them?  

I've heard that garbage before.  It all starts at the same place.  "Scholar" thinks
"I don't like that, it must be translated wrong."  Then he goes looking for a
manuscript (no matter how bad) that he can twist into the result he wants by
changing a syllable here or there...  Once the process is complete, he gleefully
proclaims to the world that there was a translation error in the KJV...

> 
> >> Elizabethan English of his beloved King James (who was himself gay, by
> >> the way, according to many interpretations):
> >
> >King James was absolutely abominable.  However, he did NOT do the translation,
> >it was simply named after him because the translation was commissioned during
> >his reign.
> 
> Well, I'd suspect James spoke pretty much the same English as the
> Elizabethans, seeing as he wasn't that far removed from them -- all of 30
> years.  I'd also suspect the translators would have some fairly strong
> incentives to *not* come up with translations with which the monarch
> disagreed.

As I posted before, if what you say is true, then the KJV would have endorsed
homosexuality and fornication.  It condemns both.  Therefore, you are obviously
wrong.

> >Since you are deliberately perverting the Scriptures, there is little point in
> >specifically rebutting each point of your ridiculous diatribe.
> 
> Well, since you seem to feel it necessary to protect us from all of those
> horrible things -- for our own good, doubtless -- by deliberately deleting
> them, thus making it impossible for the rest of us to form our own
> conclusions about what Joseph had to say --- I'd say you're doing a pretty
> good job of rebutting your own ridiculous diatribe.  

Cute, you call me a censor for not quoting the entire article.  Well, that has
already been posted.  There is no need for me to repost that stuff.

Try to remember something here.  He started this thread with his ridiculous
claim that the Bible doesn't condemn homosexuality.  Then, he admitted that it
did, but claimed that it was all because one word was translated wrong.  Then,
he claimed that Paul was a repressed homosexual who wanted to repress the other
homosexuals.  This ridiculous claim was solely based upon the fact that Paul wrote
adamantly against homosexuality.  By that logic, anyone who is against homosexuality,
must be gay (obviously untrue.)  All of this stuff about Paul is totally irrelevant
since Paul's epistles are almost universally accepted as part of the Bible.  He made
no claim to the contrary, he simply made unjustified accusations about Paul.  He
claimed that since he didn't like Paul's writings, that they didn't count.  From
what he wrote, he evidently doesn't like most of the Bible.  (He eliminated all
the Old Testament and half of the New Testament.)  I suspect that if we pinned him
down further, he wouldn't like much of what Jesus said either.


                                                Jim Pritchett


UUCP:  rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!jdp
 or    utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!jdp
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics