MSNBC wonders: Christian love for Jesus is kind of homoerotic, huh?

posted at 10:01 am on December 26, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

The Phil Robertson/A&E flap has produced some silly commentary, but perhaps none quite so silly as this exchange on MSNBC earlier this week. Joy Reid filled in for Ed Schultz on his show last Monday and invited Michael Eric Dyson to discuss the contretemps over Robertson’s comments on homosexuality and religion.  Dyson argues at the end of this clip that Robertson attempted to “us[e] Jesus in making Jesus co-sign all of this bigotry here,” and then almost in the same breath accused Christian men who profess love of Jesus as being, er … you know (via The Right Scoop and Truth Revolt):

MICHAEL ERIC DYSON: Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity and the rest of those folks ought to be ashamed of themselves. And gay, lesbian, transgender, and bisexual people ought to speak up and link their own fate to African-American people because ultimately we’re in the thing together.

JOY REID, SUBSTITUTE HOST: But what do you think of this attempt to recruit essentially Rosa Parks?

DYSON: Oh my God.

REID: Because this is something that has been done before on the Right.

DYSON: Right. Right.

REID: Like in anytime that something they say is taking as offensive by African-Americans or taken as offensive by the LGBT community…

DYSON: Right.

REID: …you get, “Well, Martin Luther King, Jr. would’ve been on our side…

DYSON: Right.

REID: . …or Rosa Parks or, you know, Phil Robertson is the next Rosa Parks.” What do you think of that as a tactic?

DYSON: I mean it’s — well, first of all, it’s scurrilous, but it’s the same as using Jesus in making Jesus co-sign all of this bigotry here. Jesus was a Jew who, around whom a religion was made. So the anti-Semitism of many of the Christians is ironic to begin with.
And then secondly, the gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual stuff – look through the Bible. There’s a lot of interesting things. The same men who will stand up in the church of all men. “I put my God, Jesus, overall women. I love him more than I love her.”

Hmmm. Do you really? That sounds interestingly homoerotic to people who are outside your religious traditions. I’m not suggesting it is but I’m suggesting that there are some very interesting, subtle, narrative tensions within the Bible itself and within Christianity beyond that.

I tried to get offended by this argument, and ended up laughing every time I tried. I mean, it takes a lot of effort to take this kind of trolling seriously, doesn’t it? According to Dyson’s CV, he’s a professor of sociology at Georgetown University, a Catholic university, but he must be the first professor at Georgetown to have never studied the difference between agape, philos, and eros.  Not all love is sexual, as even most people “outside your religious traditions” understand. Most normal people would scoff at the idea that a son’s love for his father would “sound interestingly homoerotic,” let alone that of sons for The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

This is the kind of commentary that only occurs in profoundly unserious circles, with MSNBC among the leading examples. I doubt that Dyson buys this schtick, which is just intended to tweak Christians who believe that Corinthians is scripture by using the “you guys are so gay!” insult, but it’s more an insult to his own audience. It’s the kind of ivory-tower sneering at those hoi polloi in the sticks that reveals more ignorance of the speaker than of anyone else. Exactly who does Dyson think would believe that professing a love of Jesus Christ equates to a homoerotic experience? Christians laugh at this, but perhaps it’s people “outside [our] religious tradition” who should be more insulted at Dyson’s assessment of their intelligence and common sense.

This displays a surprising amount of bigotry in and of itself, but it leads to a better and more subtle point, and one that Dyson should have explored rather than just using the tired “you guys are so gay!” attack. Dyson argued that people are using Jesus to “cosign” bigotry by focusing on homosexuality as the be-all of sins in 1 Corinthians 6:9, and there may be at least a little bit of truth in that. It is important to understand Corinthians and its place in Scripture, especially with Jesus’ teaching on consecrated marriage, and the context of the nature of sin.

After all, 1 Corinthians doesn’t come in a vacuum. Paul wrote the letter because the church in Corinth had fragmented and lost its way, especially on moral issues. Corinth was the Las Vegas of that era, where the leading culture promoted sexual excess and other activities that conflicted with the doctrine of Christianity. In one section of this letter, Paul delivers an acid scolding to the Corinthian church for turning a blind eye to an incestuous relationship involving one of its members, calling for what would be termed now an excommunication for its unrepentant member rather than “tolerance.” He was not at all interested in dumbing down the doctrine in order to expand membership, but urged the Corinthians to live and preach the truth to save souls.

For this reason, Paul spells out the dangers facing Corinthians and all of us in sin — leading off with “the immoral,” which in the original was “fornicators,” and processing through a number of other sinful activities:

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral,[b] nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals,[c][d]10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.

“Fornicators” refers to any sexual activity outside of consecrated marriage. And Jesus himself was clear on the definition of consecrated marriage in Matthew 19:4-6, referring back to Genesis and the Creation. Therefore, “fornication” applies equally to heterosexual and homosexual activity outside of that defined structure of marriage, which is intended to serve the purpose of Creation first on the model of the self-sacrificial love of the Trinity. (Paul later gives a definition of the roles of husbands and wives which emphasizes this.) It’s all sinful, because God created sexuality to be expressed within consecrated marriage, as Jesus and Paul teach in the Scriptures.

But that’s not the end-all, be-all of sin either, as the rest of Corinthians makes clear. In 1 Cor 6:10, we get a longer list that have nothing to do with sexual activities, and even in 1 Cor 6:9 we see “idolaters.” Even for the sexual sins, Paul doesn’t make any further distinction. In the passage that immediately follows (1 Cor 6:12-20), Paul asks the Corinthians to consider the fact that they are joined to the Body of Christ when they act immorally against their own bodies, but doesn’t bother to distinguish one form of sexual sin from another. “Every other sin which a man commits is outside the body; but the immoral man sins against his own body,” Paul writes, with the “immoral” again translated from “fornicators” of every kind.

Distinguishing one form of deadly sin over all the others is a fool’s errand. It’s akin to arguing whether the Houston Texans or the Washington Redskins are a better football team this year; what’s the point? They’re both terrible. A better analogy would be to think of salvation as a 100-foot leap between cliffs, with deathly rocks hundreds of feet below. Salvation is only possible, in the Christian faith, by the intercession of Jesus Christ as payment of our sins. If two people remain in mortal sin and one leaps 25 feet and the other 50, it’s pointless for the latter to claim primacy over the former all the way down.

Sin is sin, and we all fall short of the glory of God. That should make us humble rather than narrow, Pharisaical readers of 1 Corinthians, and produce love of our fellow sinners in such a way as to preach and live the truth as best we can. (For Dyson’s benefit, that’s philos.) Categorizing sin in order to cast judgment is merely counting beans on the plummet downward. All of us have an inclination to sin, which is why we have Christmas — the gift from God of our salvation through the Easter sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ.

With that in mind, Merry Christmas. I certainly need it, enough to know that we all do, and hope that as many can be saved as possible while still proclaiming the truth of the Scriptures. We are called, in this season especially, to lift up in truth more than condemning, let alone in categorical scale. Let us love our God and Jesus Christ with that agape love showered down upon us by the Creator, and help others to see it as well.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 11

Ed, Ed, Ed,
Never underestimate the propensity for evil thoughts to try to justify themselves or the depth of madness they will go.

Hope you had a blessed Christmas, by the way.

22044 on December 26, 2013 at 10:05 AM

This is a generation of children who cannot understand any definition of love that does not have sexual expression. For them, “love” always means or implies, “sexual activity.” And the consider themselves to be intellectuals. They are giggling 12-year olds at heart and in mind.

dkmonroe on December 26, 2013 at 10:09 AM

So the anti-Semitism of many of the Christians is ironic to begin with.

And largely contrived by Christian detractors to marginalize their faith, to follow up with. Much like how opposing Obama policies is raaaaacist.

That sounds interestingly homoerotic to people who are outside your religious traditions.

Don’t you need “erotic” in order for something to be “homoerotic”?

I love my dad more than I love Joy Reid, I guess that makes me a closet gay, right?

And of course, the irony of defending gay rights and in the same breath using gayness as a slander against your political opponents is not lost on me.

The Schaef on December 26, 2013 at 10:11 AM

I tried to get offended by this argument, and ended up laughing every time I tried. I mean, it takes a lot of effort to take this kind of trolling seriously, doesn’t it? According to Dyson’s CV, he’s a professor of sociology at Georgetown University, a Catholic university, but he must be the first professor at Georgetown to have never studied the difference between agape, philos, anderos

I admit that I tried to get offended too but ended up laughing similarly.and ed is right, Dyson doesn’t understand the difference in types of love. alas, he’s a professor……/

ted c on December 26, 2013 at 10:13 AM

Categorizing sin in order to cast judgment is merely counting beans on the plummet downward. 

that’s an excellent statement Ed. Very well said!

ted c on December 26, 2013 at 10:16 AM

So following his reasoning, someone who says, “I love baby back ribs” is revealing tendencies to beastiality?

talkingpoints on December 26, 2013 at 10:16 AM

In a study of Catholic colleges and universities by “First Things,” Georgetown was ranked among the ten least Catholic colleges and universities. DePaul was ranked #1 and my alma mater, University of Detroit-Mercy, had the dubious distinction of being #2.

I sent my kids to Catholic high schools, but Catholic colleges weren’t even a consideration because very few Catholic colleges are truly Catholic.

bw222 on December 26, 2013 at 10:17 AM

MSNBC is overflowing with despicable pond scum.

rplat on December 26, 2013 at 10:17 AM

and they will talk about Mohammed’s sexual preferences when?

Little Boomer on December 26, 2013 at 10:17 AM

Isn’t that libfree the whacked out professor of gheyness?

HotAirian on December 26, 2013 at 10:18 AM

Okie dokie

gophergirl on December 26, 2013 at 10:18 AM

Unfortunately, Christians, especially Evangelicals and more conservative Catholics, tend to focus solely on the sexual sins and don’t focus on the other sins mentioned in the Gospels. Jesus spent lots of time talking about poor people and the weak and helpless. The most egregious sinners in His parables tend to be the rich who are indifferent to the needs of the poor. The balance has gotten off kilter in the modern world as well with people spending more time obsessing over what happens in others’ bedrooms and less time with how people treat the poor and weak.

Illinidiva on December 26, 2013 at 10:18 AM

You know that these folks have hardened hearts and scales on their eyes. Jesus used the wheat and the weeds and the fish in the fishermans net to describe what will become of these slanderers on Judgment Day. They can yuk it up now but when they come face to face with their Maker, there won’ be many laughs, just that whole gnashing of teeth thing.

crosshugger on December 26, 2013 at 10:20 AM

Interesting, the go to insult for the libs is to accuse/imply someone of being gay.

HumpBot Salvation on December 26, 2013 at 10:20 AM

I wasn’t going to bother watching the video but curiosity got the better of me and I feel less intelligent as a result.

That is how dumb it is.

Mord on December 26, 2013 at 10:21 AM

MSNBC is overflowing with despicable pond scum.

rplat on December 26, 2013 at 10:17 AM

So are most Catholic colleges and universities.

The faculty at Santa Clara, another Jesuit institution, overwhelmingly voted for abortion funding:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/366895/president-catholic-university-eliminates-abortion-coverage-faculty-overrules-alec

bw222 on December 26, 2013 at 10:24 AM

There is a very real ignorance about Christianity amongst non-Christians. Which is not a bad thing. I am ignorant on many topics I know nothing about. But I don’t pretend to know and then comment on things such as being an astronaut for example.

Here it is: As a Christian, one professes to follow the Bible.
The Bible has some very choice things to say about homosexuality.

Therefore, if you believe in eternity and heaven and hell, is it more loving to not say anything and watch someone never repent of their sin and end up in hell, but you were so nice to allow them to live their lifestyle here on earth, or is it more loving to point it out, explain the consequence, and wish all to have the salvation given through Christ?

Could Phil Robertson have spoken more eloquently? Yes. Does it change the message at all? No.

jjjdad on December 26, 2013 at 10:24 AM

Isn’t that libfree the whacked out professor of gheyness?

HotAirian on December 26, 2013 at 10:18 AM

Heh. We should call him Michael Eric when he shows up.

22044 on December 26, 2013 at 10:25 AM

The balance has gotten off kilter in the modern world as well with people spending more time obsessing over what happens in others’ bedrooms and less time with how people treat the poor and weak.

Illinidiva on December 26, 2013 at 10:18 AM

Yet, those Christian and Evangelicals do more to help the poor and weak than the liberals. And they do it without fanfare.

The sexual sins get more attention because that is what the culture pushes on everyone. There would have been zero outrage if the DD dude was quoting scripture from Matthew 19 16-30.

HumpBot Salvation on December 26, 2013 at 10:27 AM

So, what about the leftist/commie/muzzie MSM love for a faux savior/messiah, Obama, what is it if not “homoerotic?” I’d rather have love for a true savior than some two-bit Hitler wannabe.

RoyalFlush on December 26, 2013 at 10:28 AM

Homosexual behavioral acceptance is destructive to normal friendship between men.

It’s so sad when men have to qualify friendship by claiming they’re not gay. It’s also sad when they use male friendship to only talk about gayness. I had a friend like this – he wrote a research paper on how all male friendships were homosexual at their root.

My son is homeschooled. When he greets his young friend, they are so overjoyed that they give each other a hug. And none of the other homeschooled kids think it’s weird or say anything about it, because we don’t teach them about homosexuals until they’re much older. So there. If you have a problem with that, talk to the hand.

LibertyJane on December 26, 2013 at 10:28 AM

Obviously these lads only know Greek when it involves somebody’s rectum. The Greek language has different words for the different types of love that people experience. For the duo involved in this exchange on MSNBC, “love” is only “erotic love” which says loads more about them than it does about Phil Robertson.
.
Everybody gets that I said “loads” for a reason, right?

ExpressoBold on December 26, 2013 at 10:28 AM

I tried to get offended by this argument, and ended up laughing every time I tried.

Good – GOOOOD, Ed…..you’re JUST the kind of Useful Idiot TOOL that they HOPE ALL of The Conservative Media will be……

Because – JUST LIKE a GOOD Collaborator – when Nazi’s stir up REAL OUTRAGE about how “The Jews” are screwing Germany…..and you JOIN THEM……and when Jews try to Stir Up Outrage over Nazi’s advocating “cooking Jews in ovens” and YOU Join in With The Nazi’s Laughter about How SILLY Their Words are….well – You’re JUST what The NAZI DOCTOR ORDERED!!

williamg on December 26, 2013 at 10:30 AM

The whole idea behind punditry, as it was designed first in print and now on TV, was to make your case to the other side of the argument. MSNBC doesn’t even try to do that anymore, and hasn’t since the middle of the last decade. It’s just a place where talking heads release the demons of whatever the worst thing that they can dream up to make their viewers feel good about their own ideology.

Dyson knows the nutter his allegations are the more face time he’ll get on MSNBC and speaks accordingly, in hopes no doubt of eventually getting his own show somewhere down the line.

jon1979 on December 26, 2013 at 10:31 AM

They WANT you to Laugh at Their Calumny, ED – GOOD BOY!!

williamg on December 26, 2013 at 10:32 AM

Is it really important that we know what the fools and bigots are doing at MSNBC?

sleepyhead on December 26, 2013 at 10:33 AM

williamg on December 26, 2013 at 10:30 AM

Take your meds!

Blake on December 26, 2013 at 10:34 AM

Unfortunately, Christians, especially Evangelicals and more conservative Catholics, tend to focus solely on the sexual sins and don’t focus on the other sins mentioned in the Gospels. Jesus spent lots of time talking about poor people and the weak and helpless. The most egregious sinners in His parables tend to be the rich who are indifferent to the needs of the poor. The balance has gotten off kilter in the modern world as well with people spending more time obsessing over what happens in others’ bedrooms and less time with how people treat the poor and weak.

Illinidiva on December 26, 2013 at 10:18 AM

In one sense you’re right, but context is everything. We live in a society that spends much of its time bashing the rich, pointing out their sins, making it less necessary for Christians to do so. But we also live in a society where there is a concerted, well-financed, and fanatical effort to try to redefine sexual sins as morally neutral, or acceptable, or even wonderful. Christians have to spend a lot of time and energy combatting those efforts. If we seem overbalanced in our focus, it’s because of the society that we live in.

Athanasius on December 26, 2013 at 10:34 AM

Dare the guy to go on al Jazera TV and say the same thing about the Muslim love for Mohammad.
The guy would not make it out to the parking lot…

albill on December 26, 2013 at 10:35 AM

Please stop featuring stories about MSNBC. It only boosts their ratings and gives them gravitas. Kill this beast by starvation. No one except the very fringe kooky far left loons watch this garbage channel. Rush Limbaugh doesn’t reference them anymore for this reason. I’ve never heard of this garbage piece of excrement Dyson and am content to live a life without knowing about him. Fluck him and MSNBC. They are useless.

neyney on December 26, 2013 at 10:35 AM

williamg on December 26, 2013 at 10:32 AM

You’re right — I completely forgot to add 10 paragraphs of criticism and argument to demolish his argument!

Oh, wait, no I didn’t — you just forgot to read it. Or are incapable of comprehending it.

GOOD BOY!

Ed Morrissey on December 26, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Unfortunately, Christians, especially Evangelicals and more conservative Catholics, tend to focus solely on the sexual sins and don’t focus on the other sins mentioned in the Gospels.

I don’t believe that’s true at all. Since modern culture has chosen to try an normalize sexual sin then Christian push back gets all the attention.

The most egregious sinners in His parables tend to be the rich who are indifferent to the needs of the poor.

Again that’s not true at all. The most egregious sinners in his parables are those who reject God and his prophets.

The balance has gotten off kilter in the modern world as well with people spending more time obsessing over what happens in others’ bedrooms and less time with how people treat the poor and weak.

Illinidiva on December 26, 2013 at 10:18 AM

Given that conservatives and Christians give a larger portion of their own resources and incomes to charity than any other demographic they are the most concerned with the poor and the weak. Giving away other peoples money is not altruism – you can’t outsource your Christian obligations.

tommyboy on December 26, 2013 at 10:38 AM

The clip makes me doubly glad that I didn’t go to Georgetown, although I don’t think it was this bad in my college days. I would have felt cheated both at this level of intellectual dishonesty and that a professor in a Catholic institution didn’t know anything about Christianity–and in fact was hostile to it.

Kevin K. on December 26, 2013 at 10:38 AM

DYSON: I mean it’s — well, first of all, it’s scurrilous, but it’s the same as using Jesus in making Jesus co-sign all of this bigotry here. Jesus was a Jew who, around whom a religion was made. So the anti-Semitism of many of the Christians is ironic to begin with.

I think he’s confusing the inhabitants of the faculty lounges and newsrooms he hangs out in with actual Christians. News flash; the “enlightened ones” don’t like Jews or Christians, either one, for the most part.

And then secondly, the gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual stuff – look through the Bible. There’s a lot of interesting things. The same men who will stand up in the church of all men. “I put my God, Jesus, overall women. I love him more than I love her.”

Hmmm. Do you really? That sounds interestingly homoerotic to people who are outside your religious traditions. I’m not suggesting it is but I’m suggesting that there are some very interesting, subtle, narrative tensions within the Bible itself and within Christianity beyond that.

Umm, my understanding of Scripture from a historical perspective is that it was Jewish doctrine to love God above any and all earthly things, including one’s own life. Early Christian doctrine was taken more-or-less directly from the Talmud, in that respect. So “loving” Jesus, as the Son of God, would be about as “homoerotic” as saying you love God himself. Which of course you are supposed to.

“Strong with this one, the stupid is”, as Master Yoda might say.

clear ether

eon

eon on December 26, 2013 at 10:38 AM

Interesting, the go to insult for the libs is to accuse/imply someone of being gay.

HumpBot Salvation on December 26, 2013 at 10:20 AM

“That is an outrageous and baseless accusation!”
Alec Baldwin

CaptFlood on December 26, 2013 at 10:41 AM

The profoundly ignorant confess freely.

Murphy9 on December 26, 2013 at 10:42 AM

These are the same people who are calling everyone who stand with Phil Robertson “haters”.

Hypocrites.

kingsjester on December 26, 2013 at 10:43 AM

A few tweaks and the quote could be about MSNBC and their followers.

And then secondly, the gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual stuff – look at the hosts at MSNBC . There’s a lot of interesting things. The same men who will stand up in the studio of all men. “I put my God, obama, overall women. I love him more than I love her.””he giveth me tingles up my leg”

Hmmm. Do you really? That sounds interestingly homoerotic to people who are outside your liberal culture. I’m not suggesting it is but I’m suggesting that there are some very interesting, subtle, narrative tensions within MSNBC itself and within liberalism beyond that.

HumpBot Salvation on December 26, 2013 at 10:43 AM

The profoundly ignorant confess freely.

Murphy9 on December 26, 2013 at 10:42 AM

I’m going to write that one down. Well put.

Ed Morrissey on December 26, 2013 at 10:44 AM

Outstanding commentary Ed!!

One of your best by far! I will be saving this one.

Talon on December 26, 2013 at 10:46 AM

MSNBC has gotten to be nothing more than one, continuous episode of a reality show called Village Idiots.

Dusty on December 26, 2013 at 10:46 AM

Giving away other peoples money is not altruism – you can’t outsource your Christian obligations.

tommyboy on December 26, 2013 at 10:38 AM

BAM!!

Talon on December 26, 2013 at 10:48 AM

Yeah, I laughed and then I puzzled at their logic and then I laughed again.

MSNBC appears, at first glance, to be the cable version of The Onion.

Fallon on December 26, 2013 at 10:48 AM

Well said, Ed. I’m doubtful that Phil Robertson would disagree with you, but I’ll let him speak for himself.

For a satirical take on the left’s assault on standard Christian doctrine, that makes some of the same points, check out this blog post.

Ordinary American on December 26, 2013 at 10:48 AM

I doubt that Dyson buys this schtick

really?
at what point do you finally realize they DO believe this crap?
what does it take to wake people up?
I swear I often wonder how many people in the gop suffer from stockholm syndrome.
if you only learn one thing today please let it be this; THEY BELIEVE THIS CRAP.

dmacleo on December 26, 2013 at 10:48 AM

I tried to get offended by this argument, and ended up laughing every time I tried.

It’s probably the appropriate response.

“The best way to drive out the devil, if he will not yield to texts of Scripture, is to jeer and flout him, for he cannot bear scorn.”
― Martin Luther

Sgt Steve on December 26, 2013 at 10:48 AM

Jesus was a Jew who, around whom a religion was made.

Yeah, well, I am aware of a gay president who liberals are building a religion around. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

DaveDief on December 26, 2013 at 10:49 AM

Murphy9 nails it

ted c on December 26, 2013 at 10:51 AM

williamg on December 26, 2013 at 10:32 AM

You’re right — I completely forgot to add 10 paragraphs of criticism and argument to demolish his argument!

Oh, wait, no I didn’t — you just forgot to read it. Or are incapable of comprehending it.

GOOD BOY!

Ed Morrissey on December 26, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Ed – the fact that you had to take 10 paragraphs to express your logic….that made the reader plow through a field of words to discern your point – is EXACTLY what They want…..it means that the Force of your point is Lost in Mix.

Outrage is Expressed in Bumper Stickers That Succinctly and Simply Scream: “THIS IS WRONG!

THIS Statement by you:

I tried to get offended by this argument, and ended up laughing every time I tried.

Which Mutes and Minimizes ANY Outrage against their ABJECT CONTEMPT and HATRED is EXACTLY what The Left is Looking for……it gives them The COVER to engage in Ad Hominem Attacks and “Hit Jobs” without EVER really being held Accountable or Called Out or ASSAILED the way that they should be……..

williamg on December 26, 2013 at 10:51 AM

Exactly what is this guy Dyson a professor of?

He always sounds like somebody randomly reading off Wikipedia.

Did he get his PhD in Hip Hop like Mark Lamont Hill?

tetriskid on December 26, 2013 at 10:51 AM

Unfruitful projection. Obviously Dyson is gay.

jake49 on December 26, 2013 at 10:53 AM

–snip–
Here it is: As a Christian, one professes to follow the Bible.
The Bible has some very choice things to say about homosexuality.

–snip–

jjjdad on December 26, 2013 at 10:24 AM

And in both the Old and New Testaments, so no one should be able to complain that the teachings no longer apply. (Since the focus is on the more direct Leviticus injunction.)

Kevin K. on December 26, 2013 at 10:53 AM

I would hope that there are some at Georgetown who cringe when they hear colleagues such as this guy conduct interviews.

ted c on December 26, 2013 at 10:53 AM

I doubt that Dyson buys this schtick

really?
at what point do you finally realize they DO believe this crap?
what does it take to wake people up?
I swear I often wonder how many people in the gop suffer from stockholm syndrome.
if you only learn one thing today please let it be this; THEY BELIEVE THIS CRAP.

dmacleo on December 26, 2013 at 10:48 AM

fwiw I say that with sadness and not disrespect.
its something I see from many and it bothers me.

dmacleo on December 26, 2013 at 10:54 AM

…All due respect intended, Ed…….

…Of course, reasonable minds can disagree…….I just believe it is time to start taking them down in a dramatic and public way for their behavior……we’re giving them the Cover they want by muting the reaction……

williamg on December 26, 2013 at 10:54 AM

And gay, lesbian, transgender, and bisexual people ought to speak up and link their own fate to African-American people because ultimately we’re in the thing together.

Do blacks realize that they’re in this thing with the sodomy brigade?

BuckeyeSam on December 26, 2013 at 10:59 AM

Would Dyson utter one word about Mohammed?

Of course not.

Why?

Because we all know how tolerant the followers of the religion of peace truly are.

Because there are too few Christians who are unwilling to stand up and shout from the rooftops “Enough!!!” And then use their economic power to put people such as Dyson out to pasture.

Ooo, but, coldwarrior, what about the First Amendment?

Well, the First Amendment stops at the front door of a home, a business, and free speech is not free, not at all. Say what you wish, when you wish, how you wish…but do NOT cry “Foul!!!” when the vox populi turns against you, costs you your job, or otherwise ostracizes you.

How many Christians were murdered in Baghdad over Christmas?

If the MSM finds DD’s Robertson “fair game” then Dyson is fair game as well.

Turning the other cheek does nothing, sometimes, oftentimes, but encourage these mental and moral cretins.

coldwarrior on December 26, 2013 at 11:01 AM

MSNBC has gotten to be nothing more than one, continuous episode of a reality show called Village Idiots.

Dusty on December 26, 2013 at 10:46 AM

…true dat!

KOOLAID2 on December 26, 2013 at 11:01 AM

Illinidiva on December 26, 2013 at 10:18 AM

I just don’t think that is the case. I attend mass weekly and my wife attends daily and there is absolutely no “focus” on sexual sin. I think you are getting confused with our defensive reaction to stuff that is put in our and our children’s faces. If there is a focus by Catholics on any certain sin it is the killing of human beings through abortion.

The “focus” is on the love of Jesus and redemption. Is there talk about sexual sins? Sometimes, but there is also talk about all types of sin. Jesus came for all sinners not just the homosexuals.

tommyboy on December 26, 2013 at 10:38 AM

Ah, you beat me to it. I take too long composing my thoughts….

TexAz on December 26, 2013 at 11:02 AM

williamg on December 26, 2013 at 10:54 AM

It’s cool. I think ridiculing them and pointing out their hypocrisy — and then explaining what Scripture actually means — can be done in a reasoned and informed manner rather than responding hotly and entirely out of emotion, but I can also understand the latter response, too. I prefer the the former over the latter, but I don’t think anything in my response is enabling, nor worthy of me being compared to a Nazi collaborator.

NOTE: I corrected this comment, which initially read “I prefer the latter over the former.”

Ed Morrissey on December 26, 2013 at 11:02 AM

Great analogy about jumping off the cliffs from different levels..either way, you’re gonna crash.

I’m going to use two eggs dropped from different heights in my next Sunday School class.

God bless and Merry Christmas!!

HarryStar on December 26, 2013 at 11:05 AM

Given that conservatives and Christians give a larger portion of their own resources and incomes to charity than any other demographic they are the most concerned with the poor and the weak. Giving away other peoples money is not altruism – you can’t outsource your Christian obligations.

tommyboy on December 26, 2013 at 10:38 AM

In my own experience, this isn’t the case. The Catholic parishes that I’ve attended things like the “giving tree” at Christmas are opportunities to be “show offs” and really try to upstage one’s neighbor. There are generally petty political fiefdoms and fights over music and coffee and donuts rather than true communities of Christian charity. I believe that Evangelical Christians are more welcoming (and their youth groups are about service opportunities rather than rosaries and the other ridiculousness that I got exposed to as a Catholic teen), but I don’t see how pastors like Joel Osteen are helping the poor with their lifestyle. (And yes, Catholic bishops are guilty of this as well. Apparently Cardinal Burke drops six figures on liturgical bling every year. Google Cardinal Burke and clothing if you want to see a man in his mid-60s (who happens to be incredibly homophobic) dressed like Liberace.)

n one sense you’re right, but context is everything. We live in a society that spends much of its time bashing the rich, pointing out their sins, making it less necessary for Christians to do so. But we also live in a society where there is a concerted, well-financed, and fanatical effort to try to redefine sexual sins as morally neutral, or acceptable, or even wonderful. Christians have to spend a lot of time and energy combatting those efforts. If we seem overbalanced in our focus, it’s because of the society that we live in.

Athanasius on December 26, 2013 at 10:34 AM

Actually, the society doesn’t bash the sins of the rich. The Democrats like demonizing the other guy’s rich people, but are fine with hanging with the cool rich people in Silicon Valley and Hollywood. As for sexual morality, Catholic teaching (as well as many conservative Evangelical sects) is highly patriarchal and focuses on the sexual morality of the “Other” more than anything else. There is lots of focus on the sexual sins of gays and women and straight males tend to get off free. Catholic female saints are valued for their virginity to the point where little pre-teen girls are celebrated as “martyrs” for attempting to fight off rapists. (I highly doubt that God was going to throw little Maria Goretti or the Blessed Albertina into Hell because their larger attackers had succeeded in brutally raping them.) Even within marriage, there is a huge imbalance between husband and wife because of the Catholic Church’s ridiculousness about birth control. And don’t even get me started about the Catholic Church’s historic indifference to abused wives up to the point where priests would counsel that they cook better and pray to St. Rita.

It seems to me when I read Catholic forums and blogs and I do so quite often to understand what people think that there is lots of angst over the private sex lives of others. I’ve never seen so much upset and lack of mercy toward remarried people or judgmental comments toward those who don’t have ten+ kids. I think that there is a sense that “we are better” than those sinners. (May they rot in Hell.) This is itself a grave sin. Perhaps rather than judging others private lives, everyone should focus on improving our own lives.

Illinidiva on December 26, 2013 at 11:05 AM

Let’s see if these MSNBC slime have the balls to speak of Muhammed in the same way.

Of course they wouldn’t. Because they’d have their heads removed from their necks by rabid Muslim extremists.

But us Christians don’t get too bothered. No, we just allow our Lord & Savior be defiled every day in the name of peace and tolerance.

portlandon on December 26, 2013 at 11:06 AM

Do blacks realize that they’re in this thing with the sodomy brigade?

BuckeyeSam on December 26, 2013 at 10:59 AM

The Preen Lantern, obozo, said it’s cool, for now, so they’re blindly following.

Flange on December 26, 2013 at 11:09 AM

I think he was just trying to point out that if you love Jesus, you are probably a homo and should attend the Fulton Street celebration of aberration. That’s what black sociologists get taught in school these days. He should have chosen rap to major in.

BL@KBIRD on December 26, 2013 at 11:10 AM

Jeebus….. put 2 rocks on the table and these two may approach a single digit IQ…..they make dumb and dumber look like Einstein.

roflmmfao

donabernathy on December 26, 2013 at 11:10 AM

That sounds interestingly homoerotic to people who are outside your religious traditions.

Revealing more about those outside “our religious traditions” than those within our tradition.

BTW, did he vomit the same about Islamists and their relationship with Mohammed? Yeaaaah, I thought not.

socalcon on December 26, 2013 at 11:10 AM

ROFL

The disturbing thing for me is knowing that douchebags such as Dyson are walking the same streets I do, where does MSDNC find these fools.

Bishop on December 26, 2013 at 11:11 AM

I am truly amazed that MSNBC remains on the air…

Khun Joe on December 26, 2013 at 11:12 AM

No, we just allow our Lord & Savior be defiled every day in the name of peace and tolerance.

portlandon on December 26, 2013 at 11:06 AM

If I may poorly paraphrase: If he slaps you on the right cheek, offer the left…if a soldier takes your cloak, offer him you shirt as well.

socalcon on December 26, 2013 at 11:14 AM

Why so many words to comment on garbage like this? Odd that leftists defend open homosexuality but also use it as an insult when it suits them. Typical mindlessness and hypocrisy.

arand on December 26, 2013 at 11:14 AM

We as Christians can laugh at this dimwitted “professor of (fill in blank minority studies) , but if you look a bit deeper, this is how atheists think. Everything in the end has humanistic and sexual connotations to them. Unlike Muslims who would be issuing numerous fatwas on Dyson’ s life, we can dust shrug off his foolish diatribe.

simkeith on December 26, 2013 at 11:15 AM

Sorry if someone else pointed this out, but American blacks vote 90 percent Democrat, and in the group you will find the strongest homophobic strain of any subset of Americans. Dyson, an educated black man, saying this is about as shocking as his being a regular on MSNBC. Homosexuality remains taboo to this group even with the knowledge that it exists among them – hence the term “the down low.” Do it, but don’t talk about, yup.

King B on December 26, 2013 at 11:16 AM

Ed, you are despicable. Getting involved in an intellectual discussion with an unarmed sociology professor and all. Maybe you should pick on someone your own size.

NOMOBO on December 26, 2013 at 11:17 AM

Illinidiva on December 26, 2013 at 11:05 AM

Your post reminded me of something I recently read. Had to go looking, here it is:

He hated all good works and virtuous deeds
And him no less, that any like did use
And who with gracious bread the hungry feeds
His alms for want of faith he doth accuse.
~ Edmund Spenser

Fallon on December 26, 2013 at 11:18 AM

Notice how Dyson didn’t apply this same argument to another less forgiving religion…

oldroy on December 26, 2013 at 11:18 AM

Well I sure am disappointed that these bullies went after Bob Newhart. Poor guy, he shouldn’t have to put up with this kind of garbage.

Cindy Munford on December 26, 2013 at 11:19 AM

oldroy on December 26, 2013 at 11:18 AM

Coward, he doesn’t want to really have to look over his shoulder every time he is in public.

Cindy Munford on December 26, 2013 at 11:20 AM

…Homosexuality remains taboo to this group even with the knowledge that it exists among them – hence the term “the down low.” Do it, but don’t talk about, yup.

King B on December 26, 2013 at 11:16 AM

That was before Obama came out… in favor of gay marriage.

Fallon on December 26, 2013 at 11:21 AM

I am truly amazed that MSNBC remains on the air…

Khun Joe on December 26, 2013 at 11:12 AM

Some kind of tax write off it the only thing I can figure.

Cindy Munford on December 26, 2013 at 11:21 AM

Everybody has a “crazy uncle” that says outlandish things and does outlandish pranks.

MSNBC is “The Home of the Crazy Uncle”

J_Crater on December 26, 2013 at 11:22 AM

The profoundly ignorant confess freely.

Murphy9 on December 26, 2013 at 10:42 AM

and public way for their behavior……we’re giving them the Cover they want by muting the reaction……

williamg on December 26, 2013 at 10:54 AM

Murphy9 has it exactly right. Somethings are simply so ridiculous you laugh at the entire premise. You are making the Emperors clothes argument for them. That is this is so stupid it can’t be a lie. Well it is just that stupid.

CW20 on December 26, 2013 at 11:22 AM

I just don’t think that is the case. I attend mass weekly and my wife attends daily and there is absolutely no “focus” on sexual sin. I think you are getting confused with our defensive reaction to stuff that is put in our and our children’s faces. If there is a focus by Catholics on any certain sin it is the killing of human beings through abortion.

The “focus” is on the love of Jesus and redemption. Is there talk about sexual sins? Sometimes, but there is also talk about all types of sin. Jesus came for all sinners not just the homosexuals.

In the case of Catholics, it tends to be the bishops who are obsessed with sexual sins. I’ve only heard one priest who enjoyed talking about sexual sins on a regular basis. He was the poster child for bad priest who also yelled in the Confessional, convinced more than one student they were headed for Hell, and said in one memorable sermon that American soldiers deserved to die in Iraq. (Needless to say, I didn’t attend Mass in college.) However, the USCCB has tended to obsess over sexual issues because it tends to be dominated by very conservative culture warrior types like Chaput and Burke. The bishop in Springfield actually did an exorcism because of the gay marriage bill. I know that the U.S. bishops have gotten so bad that the papal nuncio actually scolded them about it at their November meeting.

Illinidiva on December 26, 2013 at 11:22 AM

Interesting, the go to insult for the libs is to accuse/imply someone of being gay.

Indeed. One wonders what the point of this insult is — do they think that their insulted listener will… what? Realize they’re right, the listener is actually ghey, and get with the whole rainbow program in response?

Self-evidently, I am giving them too much credit in postulating they even HAVE a thought-out goal along these lines, ridiculous in its reasoning as it would have to be. The reality is, they are angry 12 year olds, throwing the insult they think would do the most damage. Even as they try to say they are the thoughtful and moral ones. Wow. It really IS to laugh…

Dirty Creature on December 26, 2013 at 11:22 AM

*wakes up, sips coffee, sees thread, then dumps coffee and goes back to bed*

BigGator5 on December 26, 2013 at 11:23 AM

coldwarrior on December 26, 2013 at 11:01 AM

Merry Christmas, I haven’t been around as much lately, so I wanted to ask how the homecoming was going?

Cindy Munford on December 26, 2013 at 11:23 AM

MSNBC tries their hand at reductio ad absurdem, and succeeds in making themselves look absurd.

There Goes the Neighborhood on December 26, 2013 at 11:24 AM

Say something truthful, but politically incorrect about 3% of the population and they try to ruin your life. Say something inflammatory and intentionally insulting about 70% of the population and you are lauded and feted upon because those in power hold the 70% in contempt.

njrob on December 26, 2013 at 11:24 AM

And gay, lesbian, transgender, and bisexual people ought to speak up and link their own fate to African-American people because ultimately we’re in the thing together.

The Preen Lantern, obozo, said it’s cool, for now, so they’re blindly following.

Flange on December 26, 2013 at 11:09 AM

You know, the more I look at that quotation, the more I find it of interest.

Who’s got more clout these days? Blacks or LGBTs? Notwithstanding the numbers, I’d say LGBTs? And who does Dyson suggest join whom? He’s not telling blacks to link up with the sodomy brigade. He says LGBTs should join blacks. Why? Because the strength of the race card is dropping, so he’s looking to add a perceived societal baby seal to “the cause” of blacks.

BuckeyeSam on December 26, 2013 at 11:25 AM

Summary: Leftist schwatze pokes Christians with a stick to get a rise out of them. Meets with very limited success.

I suppose one should expect a slow news day today :-)

MJBrutus on December 26, 2013 at 11:26 AM

Little brother: I love Ice cream!

Big brother: Then why don’t you marry it!

The depth of Dyson’s intellect.

Murphy9 on December 26, 2013 at 11:27 AM

I suppose one should expect a slow news day today :-)

MJBrutus on December 26, 2013 at 11:26 AM

Since this is boxing day, maybe Ed and Allah can allow a few guest posts? Then they could bash the premise and the writing of the posts and use words like “RINO” and “wordy” in their critiques?

oldroy on December 26, 2013 at 11:31 AM

After all, 1 Corinthians doesn’t come in a vacuum. Paul wrote the letter because the church in Corinth had fragmented and lost its way, especially on moral issues. Corinth was the Las Vegas of that era, where the leading culture promoted sexual excess and other activities that conflicted with the doctrine of Christianity.

If we’re looking at the context, let’s not lose sight of the fact that all of these things were approved by the culture of Corinth as being okay. So some in the church of Corinth were excusing what the Bible condemns because their culture saw no problem with it.

And that’s why the whole passage starts with that phrase, “Be not deceived.”

The relevance to today, where so many are trying to argue that Christianity does not condemn homosexuality, should be obvious.

No, you can’t argue that Christianity is not opposed to homosexuality simply because some who call themselves Christians would rather adopt the morals of the world around them.

There Goes the Neighborhood on December 26, 2013 at 11:31 AM

It’s cool. I think ridiculing them and pointing out their hypocrisy — and then explaining what Scripture actually means — can be done in a reasoned and informed manner rather than responding hotly and entirely out of emotion, but I can also understand the latter response, too. I prefer the the former over the latter, but I don’t think anything in my response is enabling, nor worthy of me being compared to a Nazi collaborator.

NOTE: I corrected this comment, which initially read “I prefer the latter over the former.”

Ed Morrissey on December 26, 2013 at 11:02 AM

Ha-ha – cool, Ed…..and, for the record – I don’t for a second compare You to a “Nazi Collaborator”….nor was I trying to……..I was trying to make a point about the unintended consequences of certain behavior…some of which may be “well-intended”……

I guess I’ll get out my Alice Cooper albums that listen to “No More Mr. Nice Guy” for the rest of the morning……

williamg on December 26, 2013 at 11:32 AM

Because the strength of the race card is dropping, so he’s looking to add a perceived societal baby seal to “the cause” of blacks.

BuckeyeSam on December 26, 2013 at 11:25 AM

Not just that but the dems nomination most likely won’t be black in ’16 so they need something to keep their coalition of hate alive. Just more of their “us” vs. “them” strategy.

Flange on December 26, 2013 at 11:34 AM

I guess I’ll get out my Alice Cooper albums that listen to “No More Mr. Nice Guy” for the rest of the morning……

williamg on December 26, 2013 at 11:32 AM

ENDORSED! :-)

Ed Morrissey on December 26, 2013 at 11:35 AM

I could be offended by this idiot or let God take care of him. I’ll go with the latter.

zoyclem on December 26, 2013 at 11:37 AM

Ed wrote:

I tried to get offended by this argument, and ended up laughing every time I tried. I mean, it takes a lot of effort to take this kind of trolling seriously, doesn’t it?

Ed, that’s what I love about you. In a non homo-erotic fashion, of course.

radjah shelduck on December 26, 2013 at 11:38 AM

It was done just to rib you guys. You provide easy targets and respond too often to foolishness that does not warrant a hint of response.

Rules for Radicals – There is no comeback to ridicule.

antisense on December 26, 2013 at 11:39 AM

Shallow fool with pretensions of intellect. Useless academic blathering about nothing to adoring audiences of fools.

pat on December 26, 2013 at 11:40 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 11