Comments on: ‘Dull Knife’ Sharpens Focus’ Message By Rebranding ‘Ex-Gay’ As ‘Post-Gay’

By: Emily K

Emily K — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 20:53:53 +0000

Why can’t you just be “queer” then?

By: Alex

Alex — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 20:16:32 +0000

Doesn’t the prefix ‘post’ in it’s (post)modern applications usally impliy “transcend and include”?Clearly this is not what she means and should stop trying so hard to be hip. I consider myself postqueer, but that means something very different from repenting of my sexual orientation.

By: aj

aj — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 06:27:45 +0000

I have always read that to mean that we should be more “Christlike”, as much as possible and that God has a plan set out for each person from birth.
As far as translations go, I don’t believe for a second that Paul, Moses, Isaiah et.al wrote in Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic(sp?) AND ENGLISH. So there COULD (most likely) be some mis-translations in the English texts.

just my 2 cents

By: Emproph

Emproph — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:31:51 +0000

Real Truth says…
“since you discredit the entire Bible”

Are we to understand that you credit the entire Bible?

As in the idea that you think of it as having been written (interpreted VIA God) without error, translated and retranslated without error, and compiled and recompiled without error?

If this is what you believe, then say so. But if it is what you believe, then you have a lot of explaining to do.

By: Real Truth

Real Truth — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 06:31:08 +0000

I understand; those ARE difficult words. I don’t remember interpreting them for you. They’re found in most English dictionaries. If you’re referring to the word clone, I got that one from you.

By: Michael Airhart

Michael Airhart — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:56:28 +0000

RT, I don’t discredit the entire Bible; I reject your interpretation of “conform” and “likeness.”

By: Real Truth

Real Truth — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:35:24 +0000

You are correct, it does not declare that God or His Son be clones of anyone. It does declare that James Dobson, Melissa Fryrear, Alan Chambers, Wayne Besen, Michael Airhart, and I be clones of His Son. But, of course, since you discredit the entire Bible, there’s not point in bringing that up.

By: Michael Airhart

Michael Airhart — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 21:43:01 +0000

RT, the quotation from Romans 8 says nothing about God brainwashing his followers or turning them into automatons with no individuality or analytical thought.

Nor does Romans 8 declare God or his Son to be clones of James Dobson, Alan Chambers, or Melissa Fryrear. The latter persons exemplify greed, egocentrism, and worldliness. Fryrear, in particular, promotes a materialistic view of women, a view that defines femininity according to one’s makeup and one’s subservience to men. I find that view sadly lacking in self-respect.

Even if Romans did dictate that Christians become unthinking robots, it wouldn’t matter to me: Various passages of the Bible are historically or scientifically inaccurate. The various books that are now called the Bible were written by numerous flawed individuals, and they were edited, shortened, and creatively re-translated by many more flawed individuals whose knowledge of history and geology was limited and subjective.

Like any book or anthology, the Bible must be read with an open, informed and cautious mind. People who are familiar with early Christian philosophers and long-standing Christian tradition should already be well aware of this.

By: Real Truth

Real Truth — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:33:02 +0000

From Romans 8: “And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.” Apparently, according to your so-called article, God is into brainwashing.