Oxford’s New Pro-Homosexual Bible a Hit with ‘Gay’ Activists

A new edition of the popular New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) commentary, The New Oxford Annotated Bible, reinterprets key sections of the Bible to negate or water down orthodox Christian beliefs about homosexuality, Jesus Christ’s sovereignty, and the sanctity of life.

The new Annotated Bible — edited in part by pro-"gay" and feminist scholars — adopts "gay" revisionist interpretations of Holy Scripture such as that God allegedly destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for the sin of inhospitality — not homosexual sin.

The nation’s leading church for homosexuals swiftly hailed the new politically correct Bible commentary. Rev. Troy D. Perry, founder of the homosexual Metropolitan Community Churches (MCC), wrote on the church’s Web site:

I’m excited to share with you today one of the most important theological breakthroughs in the 33-year history of Metropolitan Community Churches .. the world renowned biblical scholars who prepared The New Oxford Annotated Bible have adopted a great deal of MCC’s own scholarship and theology: There is no biblical condemnation of homosexuality — only prohibitions against its misuse, just as there is no biblical blanket condemnation of heterosexuality, only prohibitions against misuse of that gift.

I am pleased to commend this new study version of the Holy Scriptures. I believe it will be an important addition to the library of every MCC leader — and will be used by God to further open the doors of all faith communities to love, embrace and affirm God’s GLBT children.

Over the last several decades, the New Oxford Annotated Bible has gained wide acceptance in the large denominational churches as a valuable resource in Biblical interpretation. The Third Edition is a replacement for the Second Edition, which was published in 1991.

A comparison of selected commentaries between the two editions readily explains why homosexuals and their liberal allies are overjoyed.

SODOM SIN NOW ‘INHOSPITALITY’ For the last 3,500 years, the sin of Sodom was thought to be the widespread practice of homosexuality by the men of the city. The new Third Edition says differently:

Genesis 19:5-8: "…and they called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, so that we may know them." Lot went out of the door to the men, shut the door after him, and said, "I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly."

Second Edition: The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah impressed itself deeply upon later generations as an example of God’s total judgment upon appalling wickedness … the episode is told to illustrate the sexual excesses of Canaanites. 5. Know refers to sexual relations, here homosexual ("sodomy"). 8: Once guests had eaten in his house, Lot felt he had to obey the law of oriental hospitality, which guaranteed protection. Thus his proposal to hand over his daughters showed his determination to put first his obligation as a host.

Third Edition: The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was a prominent example in Israelite tradition of God’s total judgment. As in the case of 18:1-8, the main issue here is hospitality to secretly divine visitors. Here, however, the sanctity of hospitality is threatened by the men of the city who wish to rape (know) the guests. Though disapproval of male homosexuality is assumed here, the primary point of this text is how this threat by the townspeople violates the value of hospitality…As a result of his protection of his guests, he (Lot), like Noah, "finds favor" with God and he and his household are rescued out of destruction.

The new Oxford commentary ignores the fact that God had already decided to destroy the city because of the outcry over their grievous sins (see Genesis 18:20 and 19:13). The mission of the two angels who came to Lot’s door was to carry out God’s judgement.

Romans 1:26-28: "For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind and to things that should not be done."

Second Edition: God gave them up, because in turning from God they violated their true nature, becoming involved in terrible and destructive perversions; God let the process of death work itself out.

Third Edition: While Torah forbids a male "lying with a male as with a woman," Paul’s Jewish contemporaries criticized a range of sexual behaviors common in the pagan world. Although widely read today as a reference to homosexuality, the language of unnatural intercourse was more often used in Paul’s day to denote not the orientation of sexual desire, but its immoderate indulgence, which was believed to weaken the body.

I Corinthians 6:9-11: "Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers--none of these will inherit the kingdom of God. And this is what some of you used to be. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God."

Second Edition: Male prostitutes, young men or boys in a pederastic relationship; sodomites, the older homosexual.

Third Edition: The Greek term translated male prostitutes and sodomites do not refer to "homosexuals," as in inappropriate older translations; "masturbators" and male prostitutes might be a better translation.

THIRD EDITION AMBIGUOUS ON CHRIST’S SOVEREIGNTY, DIVINITY Most perniciously, the New Oxford Annotated Bible’s Third Edition commentary leaves questions regarding the sovereignty and divinity of Christ:

John 14:6 –7: "Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you know me, you will know my Father also. From now on you do know him and have seen him.’

Note that the Third Edition removed the explicit declaration that Jesus is the only way to God.

Philippians 2:5-7: "Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness."

Second Edition: In the form of God, that is, pre-existent and divine. Something to be exploited and never relinquished. But emptied himself, the extreme limit of self-denial.

Third Edition: In the form of God, equality with God, may refer to divine status, or simply preexistence as a heavenly being, or Adam’s original immortality, which Christ renounced by becoming subject to death. But emptied himself, the extreme limit of self-denial.

The Third Edition commentary removes the declarative statement of Jesus’ divinity and introduces several other interpretations that leave his deity an open question.

SANCTITY OF LIFE PASSAGE DISREGARDED Psalm 139:13-16: "For it was you who formed my inward parts; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; that I know very well. My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. Your eyes beheld my unformed substance. In your book were written all the days that were formed for me, when none of them as yet existed."

Second Edition: God formed the embryo in the womb (poetically called the depths of the earth) and knew the psalmist’s character from the moment of conception.

The drastic changes in the Third Edition commentaries may have been influenced by new editors. The Second Edition was edited by Bruce Metzger and Roland Murphy. The Third Edition replaced Mr. Murphy with editors Michael D. Coogan, Marc Z. Brettler, and Carol A. Newsom. Dr. Newsom, in particular, is a feminist theologian who partnered with Dr. Sharon H. Ringe to produce The Womens’ Bible Commentary—a feminist perspective of scripture. Dr. Ringe serves as a Biblical consultant to the Reconciling Congregation Program of the United Methodist Church — an outreach to gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, and transgender Methodists.

The reason he is a just man is that he was willing to hand his daughters over to a crowd of rapists. And this is why he found favor in God's sight. Yes?

Even if you take Lot literally, the law of hospitality of the times was so strict that, yes, you'd allow it to happen to your own family before you'd allow it to happen to a guest.

However, I think it highly unlikely that Lot was serious -- I think he was MOCKING THEIR HOMOSEXUALITY by offering his daughters (which he knew they would not want.) And note their angry response to his offer: "Who are you to judge us?"... Gays never change, not even in 4000 years.

Whether Sodom And Gommorah were destroyed because of 'inhospitality' or 'homosexuality' is an interesting debate. But that God considers same gender sex is a sin isn't really up for debate. The scriptures are clear that He does, indeed, consider it a sin.

So how exactly did they translate Leviticus 18:22 which says, "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable?"

Or, for that matter, the part of Genesis dealing with the flood? You know, that part dealing the great symbol of diversity, the rainbow? I suppose it was flashed in the sky as a signal that the big plumbing problem at bath house had been fixed.

"Gay" means cheerful, carefree and happy. There is no connection between the real meaning of that word and the disease-ridden, mentally tortured, moral travesties rotting away from horrific diseases all over the country as a consequnce of their practising the employment of a biological organ in a place and function other than that for which it was intended, i.e. Sodomites.

Good Christians are not mean-spirited or self righteous or hypocrites.

Self-righteous describes sodomites who want to infect young children in school with homosexual lifestyles, who flaunt their perversions in the public eye and demand public acceptance of an indecent and unnatural act.

Mean-spirited describes Sodomites who are not content with people not inquiring into their personal perversions, but who flaunt them and demand public acceptance of unnatural relationships.

Hypocritical describes Sodomites who are for the most part, intelligent enough to know their practises are abnormal and unnatural, yet seek to acquire approbation from the society and equality with those individuals who do not misue their bodies or those of anyone else.

Words change gradually through popular usage, which is a natural evolution of the language. These changes usual start with some subtle alteration of the original sense of the word involved.

The employemnt of the term "gay" to describe a Sodomite is twisting and torturing that adjective in a manner which is totally beyond any sense of the meaning it originally had.

If you don't know any Christians who are not mean-spirited you are travelling in the wrong circles, living in a cave, or biased against Christians.

Homosexuality is against all Christian and Jewush principles. It ius also an unnatural and perverted practise. Homosexuality does nothing to propagate the species which is the chief purpose of intercourse, a fact our hedonistic society has apparently forgotten.

As for your asssertion that "gay" was used to describe homosexual for the past century, I can't accept that. Being more than half a century old, I cqan't recall that term being hijacked by the lavender mafia until relatively recently.

Personally, I care what the Sodomites do in the privacy of their own homes, as long as they stop trying to sell their filthy, perverted life style to society as a legitimate alternative life style and stop tryin to sell acceptablility for such a practise to young children.

Gee. Blasphemy of the worst sort from "pro-Gay and feminist 'scholars'". Golly. Knock me over with a feather.

[.........would love to be a little bird in the corner when they have to stand before The Almighty and explain this one...........]

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.