Posted on 04/15/2014 4:22:46 PM PDT by Faith Presses On
I can't cut and paste from my phone, but the story from barbwire.com says that Christian publisher Multnomah will soon publish a pro-homosexual book, "God and the Gay Christian: The Biblical Case in Support of Same-sex Relationships," by Matthew Vines. This will be done under Multnomah's liberal subsidiary, Convergent. The report also says the publisher's employees have been told to keep quiet about it.
Barbwire also carries the story that Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth, I believe, was recently arrested In Canada for speaking out on what the Bible says about homosexuality.
Here’s your Biblical case on “same-sex marriage”.
And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, [NET Notes, TGC, TSK]
And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
— Words of Jesus in Matthew 19:4-5
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: Lev 18:22-23; [NET Notes, TSK]
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
— Romans 1:26-27
There’s a lot more. Just in the New Testament.
I’m sure the fairy that wrote the book has brutally tortured the Scripture to make some kind of case to excuse his coprophile perversion.
I’ll not have anything at all to do with his publisher.
More accurately, Waterbroook Multnomah and Convergent are both imprints of the Crown Publishing Group (which in turn is a subsidiary of Random House).
In other words, it's not Multnomah that is publishing Vines' book; it's a different division of the conglomerate. The relationship is not the one this barbwire.com site claims it is. Hence this is an accusation based on guilt by association.
I can't speak to this assertion that Multnomah employees are told to keep mum about publishing this book. All it took for me to find out the relationship between Multnomah and Convergent was five minutes on the Random House Web site.
What exactly is a “Christian publisher”?
This is so absurd. I have more respect for secularists/atheists who reject the Bible yet concede that it’s against homosexual sexual behavior than for these “Christians” who come up with theological positions no Biblical author ever would’ve thought of.
I’m sorry to take so long to get back to you, but I’ve been very busy. Actually, “barbwire” is a site run by the well-known and respected Matthew Barber, and I looked further and saw the Christian Post picked up his story. And it seems like there is something to it. According to Barber/CP:
“In an email sent to BarbWire.com, a source with unspecified ties to Multnomah wrote the following:
“’With a little help… I recently followed a few breadcrumbs – connected some dots – and the picture turned out to be pretty disturbing. I know for a fact that there are certain individuals (whistleblowers, if you will) who believe this information should become public, but there is immense pressure from within Multnomah Publishers to keep this under wraps, and not allow entities in the NRB Association/Evangelical orbit to learn about it.’
“WaterBrook Multnomah and the pro-”gay” Convergent are supposedly sister imprints with the same parent company, Random House.
“But are they really sister imprints?
“In truth, it appears that WaterBrook Multnomah and Convergent are effectively one and the same – same head, same staff, same offices, same printers and even the same ink.
“Only the name has been changed to protect the guilty...”
“The email to BarbWire provides more context:
“’An ‘imprint’ in the publishing world is like a mask – the name and logo of the entity may be unique, but the same staff, editors, executives, promoters, are behind the book as are behind those put out by other ‘imprints’ (i.e., directly from Multnomah, and wearing that brand/mask)...”
Yes, likewise! Thanks for taking the time, given that threads on FR have a pretty short shelf life, for the most part.
“In an email sent to BarbWire.com, a source with unspecified ties to Multnomah wrote the following:
And that is probably the biggest red flag that Barber could have raised. Who is this "unspecified source," and how significant are his "ties" to Multnomah? Apart from the research I've already done on the Random House conglomerate's various Web sites, how am I supposed to be able to evaluate the veracity of these allegations if I can't judge the credibility of the source?
There's a reason that anonymous authority is generally regarded as a logical fallacy. This is really no better than gossip-mongering.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.