Almost forgot: here’s a final reply to soemthing Brock posted right before he scooted out the door.
I would ask [you, Mark,] … to find one [place] in the Bible [where Scripture says] homosexuality is [okay] … When you show me where it is okay … or even tolerated once, then, Mark, I will refute my beliefs of it being a sin.
The best way to answer this challenge is to tell a quick story:
Imagine one Sunday I burst into your church and shout, “Everyone in here with a tattoo is going to Hell! Everyone with a tattoo is a sinner, and is in transgression against the clear teaching of Leviticus 19:28!”
“But Mark,” you say. “Leviticus 19:28 is part of the old Levitical holiness code.”
“Spare me your little intellectual tricks!” I scream. “The Bible says what the Bible says! Now, strip for inspection! We’re gonna root out all the tattooed sinners and put ’em to death by stoning!”
“But Mark,” you say, “The Christ came to free us from the overbearing restrictions of the Old Law. With his blood, he established a new covenant with us, abolishing the tyranny of the Levitical code forever.”
“Okay, then, smarty pants,” I rave, waving my Bible in the air. “Show me one place, just one place in all of Scripture, where the Bible says tattoos are okay … and I’ll abandon my belief that tattoos are sinful!”
I’m so clever! Did you spot my little trick?
First, I made a claim and cited a Scrapture to back it up.
You, then, knocked my legs out from under me by pointing out (as you will, no doubt, be doing to fundamentalists everywhere, now that you’ve read this) that Christians are no longer obligated to live under the strict controls of the Levitical code.
So what did I do? I very conveniently ignored a little principle called “the burden of proof.”
The burden of proof states that, when someone makes a claim, the responsibility for proving and supporting that claim falls to the person who made it. If I say I can fly, it’s not your obligation to “disprove” that … it’s my obligation to buzz around the room.
Which brings us back to Brock, who wants to claim homosexuality is sinful … but who doesn’t want to be bothered with the homework necessary to prove his own point. He’s jazzed enough to go ’round calling The Gays sinful … but he’s too spiritually lazy to dig through the Word and see what the Scriptures actually teach. So he takes an easy way out by ignorning the burden of proof … and wriggling out from under obligations he, himself, created.
I won’t do your homework for you, Brock … and the “ball” — the obligation to prove your own original thesis (that “Homosexuality is sinful”) — remains very firmly in your court. Until you can back that claim up with Scripture … you’re resting on very shaky ground indeed.
Meantime: if anyone else has specific Scriptures or questions, feel free to drop ’em my way. I don’t have all the answers. I don’t even have all the questions. But perhaps, together, we can find a quiet place where we can co-exist?
Add comment