Comments on: Exodus’ dissenters latch onto Gagnon’s sad theology http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/08/02/47326 News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric Thu, 23 May 2013 02:03:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Priya Lynn http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/08/02/47326/comment-page-1#comment-135336 Priya Lynn Sat, 04 Aug 2012 15:37:31 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=47326#comment-135336 Eric, given all the other references to witchcraft and magic in the bible I don't think so. Think of the story of Pharoah and Moses, pharoah had magic that didn't come from the god character, magic was believed to be as real as their god was. Eric, given all the other references to witchcraft and magic in the bible I don’t think so. Think of the story of Pharoah and Moses, pharoah had magic that didn’t come from the god character, magic was believed to be as real as their god was.

]]> By: Eric in Oakland http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/08/02/47326/comment-page-1#comment-135279 Eric in Oakland Sat, 04 Aug 2012 04:50:35 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=47326#comment-135279 @MCB and Priya Lynn: Considering the context, wouldn't drug abuse be closer to the original intent for the term "witchcraft"? @MCB and Priya Lynn:

Considering the context, wouldn’t drug abuse be closer to the original intent for the term “witchcraft”?

]]> By: MCB http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/08/02/47326/comment-page-1#comment-135248 MCB Fri, 03 Aug 2012 23:09:32 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=47326#comment-135248 @Priya Lynn I'm maybe bending things a little to fit within a modern perspective. Though I might add two things: first, "dark magic" doesn't work for a religion (Hellenistic) that didn't actually believe in demons; the potions consulted gods, and there was was significant debate within early Christianity over whether the gods were just fakes or demons in disguise. Second, there was significant contempt among the upper classes for "pharmaceuticals" in favor of physicians who offered bone-setting, lifestyle changes, and bloodletting. Given that Paul's list of the "works of the flesh" are essentially a typical example of the usual list of vices presented in non-Christian moral texts of the time (hence why he says this should be "obvious"), there's a possibility it meant both "medical quackery of the lower classes" as well as "magical power from non-Christian gods." @Priya Lynn
I’m maybe bending things a little to fit within a modern perspective. Though I might add two things: first, “dark magic” doesn’t work for a religion (Hellenistic) that didn’t actually believe in demons; the potions consulted gods, and there was was significant debate within early Christianity over whether the gods were just fakes or demons in disguise. Second, there was significant contempt among the upper classes for “pharmaceuticals” in favor of physicians who offered bone-setting, lifestyle changes, and bloodletting. Given that Paul’s list of the “works of the flesh” are essentially a typical example of the usual list of vices presented in non-Christian moral texts of the time (hence why he says this should be “obvious”), there’s a possibility it meant both “medical quackery of the lower classes” as well as “magical power from non-Christian gods.”

]]> By: David Roberts http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/08/02/47326/comment-page-1#comment-135229 David Roberts Fri, 03 Aug 2012 18:18:10 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=47326#comment-135229 <blockquote> Gagnon isn’t just a horrible scholar, he doesn’t just interpret with blinders, but he’s so warped by his animus that if it’s not on the page, he just makes it up. </blockquote> I agree entirely.  My point is that he has a lot of company because scripture lends itself to such interpretation should the interpretor wish it.  This is why we have so many sects under the Christian banner.

Gagnon isn’t just a horrible scholar, he doesn’t just interpret with blinders, but he’s so warped by his animus that if it’s not on the page, he just makes it up.

I agree entirely.  My point is that he has a lot of company because scripture lends itself to such interpretation should the interpretor wish it.  This is why we have so many sects under the Christian banner.

]]> By: J Chervaux http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/08/02/47326/comment-page-1#comment-135226 J Chervaux Fri, 03 Aug 2012 18:03:22 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=47326#comment-135226 By way, my parents loved and adored me from the first day they knew me. My parent's only suffering was my mistreatment by other other humans. Dan Savage does good things. We need to be at war with those who narrowly define us: Gagnon!! By way, my parents loved and adored me from the first day they knew me.

My parent’s only suffering was my mistreatment by other other humans.

Dan Savage does good things. We need to be at war with those who narrowly define us: Gagnon!!

]]> By: J Chervaux http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/08/02/47326/comment-page-1#comment-135224 J Chervaux Fri, 03 Aug 2012 17:40:46 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=47326#comment-135224 The crux of all of Gagnon’s ranting boils down to one point of his poisoned mind and the minds of all religions who think the same: “take up your cross and suffer like Jesus did” (insert most religions here). Is this what is on his mind and on the minds of all people who celebrate Christianity and the like? I think so. There is NOTHING good about human suffering. Nothing!!! Why is Gagnon latched into this? Self hatred? I celebrate being gay every day of my life, bad things and good things. I love men! Click on this link to see how fantastic we are: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6PeJjcP-nQ The crux of all of Gagnon’s ranting boils down to one point of his poisoned mind and the minds of all religions who think the same: “take up your cross and suffer like Jesus did” (insert most religions here).

Is this what is on his mind and on the minds of all people who celebrate Christianity and the like? I think so.

There is NOTHING good about human suffering. Nothing!!! Why is Gagnon latched into this? Self hatred?

I celebrate being gay every day of my life, bad things and good things. I love men!

Click on this link to see how fantastic we are:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6PeJjcP-nQ

]]> By: Priya Lynn http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/08/02/47326/comment-page-1#comment-135221 Priya Lynn Fri, 03 Aug 2012 17:20:28 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=47326#comment-135221 Timothy said "If you live according to your own selfishness (the flesh), you will exhibit hatred, manipulation (“witchcraft”)...". MCB said "I know you said you don’t know Greek, so let me be nitpicky and throw out that the word for witchcraft is “pharmakeia,” or “the administration of drugs,” from which we get “pharmacy.” Back then, most medication was either magical potions or complete quackery (as opposed to the physicians who did sensible things like drain your blood; science marches on). So while some of the potions might have been love potions or the like intended to manipulate people, it might be better to interpret “witchcraft” not as “manipulation” but as medical quackery, promising false cures.". No, back in that time they didn't think such potions were quackery, people back then (and those who wrote the bible) actually believed such potions were effective, that magic was real so the term "wichcraft" was meant literally as in the practice of dark magic. Timothy said “If you live according to your own selfishness (the flesh), you will exhibit hatred, manipulation (“witchcraft”)…”.

MCB said “I know you said you don’t know Greek, so let me be nitpicky and throw out that the word for witchcraft is “pharmakeia,” or “the administration of drugs,” from which we get “pharmacy.” Back then, most medication was either magical potions or complete quackery (as opposed to the physicians who did sensible things like drain your blood; science marches on).

So while some of the potions might have been love potions or the like intended to manipulate people, it might be better to interpret “witchcraft” not as “manipulation” but as medical quackery, promising false cures.”.

No, back in that time they didn’t think such potions were quackery, people back then (and those who wrote the bible) actually believed such potions were effective, that magic was real so the term “wichcraft” was meant literally as in the practice of dark magic.

]]> By: Priya Lynn http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/08/02/47326/comment-page-1#comment-135216 Priya Lynn Fri, 03 Aug 2012 16:30:42 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=47326#comment-135216 Colin Smith said "If no harm is caused, then same-sex intercourse passes the no-harm test, based on Romans 13:9-10, and can be legitimately practiced by Christians. Details about the no-harm test are on http://www.gaysandslaves.com/noharm_test.html". Thank you very much Colin. Whenever I argue morality with people I always approach it from the perspective that anything which does not harm others is moral. This biblical reference to that idea will come in very handy as I sometimes have people claim to be astounded, or disbelieving that I would suggest morality is all about not harming others. Colin Smith said “If no harm is caused, then same-sex intercourse passes the no-harm test, based on Romans 13:9-10, and can be legitimately practiced by Christians. Details about the no-harm test are on http://www.gaysandslaves.com/noharm_test.html“.

Thank you very much Colin. Whenever I argue morality with people I always approach it from the perspective that anything which does not harm others is moral. This biblical reference to that idea will come in very handy as I sometimes have people claim to be astounded, or disbelieving that I would suggest morality is all about not harming others.

]]> By: TampaZeke http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/08/02/47326/comment-page-1#comment-135213 TampaZeke Fri, 03 Aug 2012 15:47:30 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=47326#comment-135213 The Buddha avoided so much of this controversy by being very, very clear in his teachings, leaving almost no wiggle room for interpretation. In Buddhism the third precept is to refrain from sexual misconduct. The BUDDHA defined sexual misconduct very clearly. If sexual conduct is non-violent, does not take what is not freely given, does not deceive, does not manipulate, does not act out of delusive and irresponsible mind state, is not obsessive to the point of distraction and does not break a vow it doesn't violate the third precept in any way. It is VERY clear that Buddhism has no restriction on homosexuality as long as the parties follow the third precept like everyone else. Of course Monks and Nuns have additional precepts that require that they refrain from ALL sex, heterosexual and homosexual. The Buddha avoided so much of this controversy by being very, very clear in his teachings, leaving almost no wiggle room for interpretation.

In Buddhism the third precept is to refrain from sexual misconduct. The BUDDHA defined sexual misconduct very clearly. If sexual conduct is non-violent, does not take what is not freely given, does not deceive, does not manipulate, does not act out of delusive and irresponsible mind state, is not obsessive to the point of distraction and does not break a vow it doesn’t violate the third precept in any way.

It is VERY clear that Buddhism has no restriction on homosexuality as long as the parties follow the third precept like everyone else.

Of course Monks and Nuns have additional precepts that require that they refrain from ALL sex, heterosexual and homosexual.

]]> By: Timothy Kincaid http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/08/02/47326/comment-page-1#comment-135201 Timothy Kincaid Fri, 03 Aug 2012 14:28:57 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=47326#comment-135201 David, Yes I do know how that game is played and I know John 14. But I also know that it is the lead in to John 15: <I> If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love. 11 I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete. 12 My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.</I> It is mirrored in Galatians. But arguing Scripture with gagnon is like arguing bone ownership with a dog. It's not worth the bother. The point of my essay isn't to debate Scriptural interpretation. Rather, it's to point out that Gagnon is so extreme that he feels no shame in claiming that obedience is a fruit of the Spirit in direct contradiction to the Apostle. Gagnon isn't just a horrible scholar, he doesn't just interpret with blinders, but he's so warped by his animus that if it's not on the page, he just makes it up. David,

Yes I do know how that game is played and I know John 14. But I also know that it is the lead in to John 15:


If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love. 11 I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete. 12 My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.

It is mirrored in Galatians.

But arguing Scripture with gagnon is like arguing bone ownership with a dog. It’s not worth the bother.

The point of my essay isn’t to debate Scriptural interpretation. Rather, it’s to point out that Gagnon is so extreme that he feels no shame in claiming that obedience is a fruit of the Spirit in direct contradiction to the Apostle.

Gagnon isn’t just a horrible scholar, he doesn’t just interpret with blinders, but he’s so warped by his animus that if it’s not on the page, he just makes it up.

]]>