Comments on: Introducing: The Gagnon Score

By: pmview

pmview — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:41:20 +0000

The Marin Foundation reached out to Gagnon multiple times without success. It was very disappointing as we kept discovering his ‘analysis’ as published attacks. This ranking system highlighted for us the way in which Gagnon treated others.

By: J Chervaux

J Chervaux — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 06:36:49 +0000

@PM View: Who are your talking to??

By: pmview

pmview — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 02:34:18 +0000

Thank you for sharing your analysis. This man consistently failed to
reach out or respond to multiple opportunities to actually discuss any
of these issues man to man between Marin and Gagnon. His so-called educated response was never
predicated on any real-time discussion on a face to face level. After we
made many repeated efforts to open up any sort of dialogue, Gagnon consistently refused to leave his ivory tower. This is not the Jesus I believe in as the gospels indicate a very involved leader who walked with the people to bring them good news, abundant life and hope for a better way.

By: J Chervaux

J Chervaux — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 17:06:09 +0000

Timothy,

Thank you for the follow-up post. I eagerly await your commentary.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 16:36:24 +0000

J Chervaux, I think that you will enjoy a commentary that I will be posting tomorrow or Monday

By: J Chervaux

J Chervaux — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 07:24:59 +0000

Time has come to conclude and leave aside the duty of impartiality which
it was oftentimes found difficult to adhere to in the face of the detailed evidence forour a uthor’s [Gagnon's] crass academic and scientific dishonesty in the making of his book, but which nonetheless had to observed.

The Bible and Homosexual Practice is a quite a slippery target to criticize, despite its documentary flaws and outrageous claims, for Gagnon never grants anything that does not square with his conservative methodology,
thus putting those who disagree with him in an uncomfortable position. If they multiply rebuttals over minutiae, they are bound to produce, in the average reader,the feeling that but for these blunders, the book basically stands, which could not be more wrong-headed ; and if these critics fault the author for indulging in ideology driven
special pleading at odds with the critical method in Bible studies that rightly dominates the more academically-minded studies of Scripture, all Gagnon will have to do is ignore this charge as stemming from a ‘liberal’ viewpoint.”

There exists no middle ground between bowing down to Gagnon and stepping up as the sneering,scholarly onlooker who deems himself capable of proving that, eleven years after,at a times when America looks torn between twin extremes of acceptation and outright
demonization, most provocatively advocated by Lady Gaga and Fred Phelps
(of the Westboro Baptist Church), The Bible and Homosexual Practice is moot. As Queer scholars or ‘liberal’ exegetes, we have a duty towards students and the GBLT community who needs guidance rooted in sound interpretation of the Scripture, not
to wallow in a pity party around such a detestable pile of junk.

Jean-Fabrice Nardelli
Universite de Provence

By: J Chervaux

J Chervaux — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 07:21:20 +0000

Once and for all, let it be said that Gagnon is an inaccurate and poor student of Biblical homosexuality : he is far too opinionated and self-indulging for someone who would have us believe in his impeccable judgement (whence my jibe at his status as an ayatollah), has no grasp whasoever of the major ancient Near Eastern languages apart from Masoretic Hebrew, never consults scholarly literature in other tongues (German and French Bible studies simply do not exist for him), and he is ridiculously parochial in his selection of primary and secondary sources (they are principally American, and wherever possible come from the Evangelical right).

Just consult any piece of his which appears on his website ; you will discover that he is all rhetoric and blistering, with virtually nothing in guise of scientific apparatus. I would have been loathe to expose him for what he is (see S. Ackerman, When Heroes Love. The Ambiguity of Eros in the Stories of Gilgamesh and David [2005], 16-17 ; J. E. Miller, ‘A Response to Robert Gagnon on “The Old Testament and Homosexuality”’, Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 119, 2007, 86-89) had he been decent enough not to charge his opponents with gross dishonesty. So let us not mince words any longer.

Jean-Fabrice Nardelli

By: Michael Bussee

Michael Bussee — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 04:56:16 +0000

Love Alan Chambers’ comment. Hey, we could make reading Gagnon an Olympic event…

By: Smith

Smith — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 04:36:05 +0000

I think a more useful service to BTB readers would be to explain why Gagnon’s responses are so voluminous. I really don’t want to wade through his writings to find out. Are they larded up with Bible quotes? Does he make the same point multiple times? Does he go off on irrelevant tangents? That’s really the issue, not the number of pages. If he writes 50 pages of compelling, relevant argument, then he shouldn’t be criticized.

By: Nathan F

Nathan F — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 23:08:45 +0000

Very interesting idea, but it seems counter-intuitive to me that a high Gagnon score is a good thing. Shouldn’t it be the other way around? As it stands, Gagnon himself would have the lowest possible Gagnon score. :)