[Adora]

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

The mind games that liberal Christians play in order to tell us that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality is similar to the games that fundamentalists play in order to resolve the contradictions.

Except it's not "liberal Christianity" that explains these things, but non-Christian pro-Homosexual rights campaigners, feminists, and theologians who specialise in Christianity.

\That may seem simple-minded to you, but it is following the rule of Occam's Razor.

No, it's not. You're bastardising Occam's Razor as much as people claim the 'ie-God Exists' clause to everything is true to Occam's Razor.

Those who do not follow Occam's Razor will create a complex system of ad-hoc explanations just to hold one dubious idea to be true.

I'm not holding onto any "dubious ideal", and I simply don't see how understanding context is "ad hoc".

But if it is true that the Bible doesn't condemn homosexuality yet it condemns homosexual acts, then why should that make an important difference?

Because they weren't homosexual acts back then. They were acts of sodomy, rejected by the Judaic tribes because a) they were rather misogynistic when it came to sexual relations, and viewed "receiving" as a "dirty" act, and b) pansexuality was practiced by the tribes the Hewbrews were in competition with for resources, so they sought to distance themselves and create an illusion of difference (and more importantly- purity of bloodline). You can't have a "homosexual act" if there's no concept of "homosexual". You're projecting modern thinking and dogma onto a far different and ancient society. That is not Occam's Razor, that's just stupidity, and exactly what Christian Fundamentalists do when they bastardise any passage they feel like out of the old or new testament.