Even though I whole heartedly agree with the conclusion Mastin Kipp reaches in his July 31st Huffington Post piece the manner in which he reaches it is ignorant, mistaken, and even belittling. It is interesting that he starts "Why Jesus Loves LGBT People and Gay Marriage Doesn't Exist" by noting some of the contradictions in the Old Testament. That's pretty much where his critical thinking ends. He doesn't seem to be aware that the New Testament is just as loaded with the same level of contradictory crap.
He states, "But as far as I can tell, there is nothing in the Red Letters of The Bible where Jesus preaches against homosexuality. It's just not there. If it is, please show me so that I can stand corrected," and technically he is correct. The New Testament never claims that Jesus talks about homosexuality at all. However, this is misleading and rather disingenuous since Kipp goes on about the New Testament trumping the Old. The New Testament does have Christ making a rather clear statement about that.
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5: 17-19)
Basically, the view that the New Testament is compatible with Gay rights since it trumps the Old Testament laws that condemn it is Bullshit. That is, assuming you see scripture as having any relevance to begin with.
Kipp goes on to site another passage from Matthew (22: 40) that refers to Jesus emphasis of two commandments. They are to love the lord and to love your neighbor. They are nice sentiments and I in no way dispute the second but as for this passage being the final word on religious arguments over the permissability of same sex marriage it falls short. He attempts an end run around Matt 5:17-19 by trying to make more out of Matt 22:40 than is actually there*. There are numerous passages where Jesus makes similar claims about other ideas or commandments being the most important. They all can't be the most important. That would pretty much dilute the meaning of each by making "most" a useless word.
No matter how a particular sect or religious individual chooses to interpret scripture it all amounts to basically the same thing, crap. What Kipp doesn't seem to notice about his own arguments is that it is pointless. Religion is not and should not be the basis of either morality or law. I find it highly unlikely that as humans we will ever agree on matters of faith. We have a better chance of working out what is in our best interests without such subjective and superficial garbage. Personally, I think he belittles the fight for equal rights because he seems to equate homosexual rights with a theological debate. Homosexual rights are civil/human rights. Period!
*Note they are both from the same book of the Bible and there are not that many verses in between. I also find it interesting that the passage reiterating the Old Testament laws is first. If you want to interpret, which you have to, I would say that makes the earlier passage more important and the latter more of an afterthought.
No comments:
Post a Comment