Well, its time for a back to the basics lesson on Biblical sexuality.
Hip and Thigh does and excellent job debunking the warmed over gay theology of “up and coming gay christian apologist” Rick Bretlinger In my survey of Bretlinger’s gay christian 101 site, with all of the fancy arguments and religious philosophizing (probably not a word) the sum of his 101ism still amounts to a whopping zero. I saw nothing new, no revelation, no honest exegesis, no acknowledgement of irrefutable , uninterpreted truth. But that’s fairly common for gay christian adherents. Mathematically speaking, nothing from nothing leaves nothing.
Hip and Thigh writes:
Gay “Christian” apologists first attempt to argue that God’s silence in affirming consensual same-sex relationships in the creation narrative of Genesis 2 does not mean God is against same-sex marriages. “God doesn’t mention grandparents in Genesis 2,” proclaims Rick, “so God must be against grandparents,” and then he mentions several other illustrations of things God didn’t mention like wedding rings, wedding gifts, and adopting children, and says that to take the heterosexual interpretation of Genesis 2, we would have to conclude God is against those things, too. Dear reader, this is facile, childish reasoning that doesn’t even approach interaction with the text of Genesis and how sexuality and human relationships are discussed in the rest of the Bible.
Gay christian arguments are typically so absurd, one can easily disprove them biblically. Although its not about winning a theological argument, we must refute such attractive error so that others can have a choice not to believe it.
Hip and Thigh says he learned that in an email exchanges with Bretlinger and other gay christians:
A lot of Rick’s arguments – and I would imagine this can be said about a lot of gay “Christian” apologists as well – are based upon what he thinks is true to him, or what is reasonable to him. His authority, I hate to say, is not being defined by scripture properly interpreted, but by what he wants it to teach. He charges that heterosexual Christians like those mean-spirited Focus on the Family style evangelicals, read the Bible with heterosexual presuppositions. However, he fails to realize he reads the Bible with homosexual revisionist presuppositions. He wants the Bible to affirm his sinful desires and the rebellion lived out by many of his well-intentioned, and certainly, super nice gay friends. But, our presuppositions must be justified by the whole of scripture, not selected portions wrestled out of context and spun to yield an opposite conclusion than what they original say so as to please the whims of the person.
If you’d like to brush up on the biblical basics of sexuality, read the whole post.