Now you have me curious, since you've chosen to debate someone with a self affirmed Doctor of Theology degree. How accurate are these scriptural references?
From here
OK, so it was only a hundred foreskins. Must have been a pretty gruesome dowry, nonetheless. It appears from the verse above that the whole request was a ploy to get the Philistines to kill off the pesky suitor, David.
Yes, that one seems accurate. I wonder if the word 'love" was translated from "eros" or from "filius"? Surely, the professor can tell us. Much of the OT was translated, retranslated, and is therefore open to a lot of interpretations.
It really doesn't say much about homosexuality one way or the other, it seems to me, unless you do translate "love" as "sex."
Not sure what that means. Could "son of a perverse, rebellious woman" be interpreted and "you SOB!"? He chose the son of Jesse to do what? The whole thing sounds like a murderous rage to me.
OK, one more, as this is getting long:
Wow! When god sent people to war in those days, they did it right. Looks like you hit the nail on the head with that one.
When God told GWB to go avenge himself against the Iraqis, the instructions were quite different. I wonder how it might have turned out had he instructed him to wage war the way the ancient Israelites did it?
However you interpret the OT, it is mostly about war, killing, plotting, and passing on your DNA by force if necessary. It really doesn't say a lot about sexual orientation. Maybe you're right: God doesn't consider it any big deal. He did, of course, make some people, as well as some of the other higher animals, to be attracted to their own gender. Why that is remains a mystery.
