<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">Yes Nick, Keely did the best anyone could do. </SPAN></div>
<div style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-SIZE: 16px; RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto"></SPAN> </div>
<div style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-SIZE: 16px; RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">I would have argued that <SPAN style="RIGHT: auto" id=misspell-0><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">pedophilia</SPAN></SPAN> is an incurable mental illness that puts children at high risk for serious harm. If Doug Wilson thinks marriage is about the welfare of children, why design, create and promote marriages that will <SPAN style="RIGHT: auto" id=misspell-1><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">intentionally</SPAN></SPAN> place children and a family at the highest risk possible for the worst possible mental and physical <SPAN style="RIGHT: auto" id=misspell-2><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">trauma</SPAN></SPAN> that could happen to a child? Doesn't giving a <SPAN id=misspell-0><SPAN>pedophile</SPAN></SPAN> access to children negate any
potential benefits they could reap from the marriage? </SPAN></div>
<div style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-SIZE: 16px; RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto"></SPAN> </div>
<div style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-SIZE: 16px; RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">Donovan J. Arnold</SPAN></div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto"></SPAN> </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><BR style="RIGHT: auto"></div>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 0; MARGIN: 5px 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; HEIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 0px; BORDER-TOP: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-TOP: 0px" class=hr contentEditable=false readonly="true"></DIV><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> Nicholas Gier <ngier006@gmail.com><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> vision2020 <vision2020@moscow.com> <BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Cc:</SPAN></B> kjajmix1@msn.com <BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Wednesday, September 19, 2012 2:04 PM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> [Vision2020] Keeley vs. Wilson (Was: "Who <SPAN id=misspell-1 class=mark>Dat</SPAN>?" mysteriously turn into Romney & Middle Class)<BR></FONT></DIV><BR>
<DIV id=yiv1765494667>Hi Keeley,
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>You did a great job against a dishonest and disgraceful pastor. Below is a rebuttal to Wilson's use of the Book of Jude. </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>My only quibble with the author (s) is that "sons of God" (<SPAN id=misspell-2 class=mark>bene</SPAN> <SPAN id=misspell-3 class=mark>elohim</SPAN> in Hebrew) are angels (a different word is used from them) but minor deities under the High God. See my essay "Hebrew <SPAN id=misspell-4 class=mark>Henotheism</SPAN>" at <A href="http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/henotheism.htm" rel=nofollow target=_blank>www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/henotheism.htm</A>. <SPAN id=misspell-5 class=mark>Henotheism</SPAN> is an advance form of polytheism that has a executive god who rules over minor deities. Read about the summary dismissal of the minor deities in Psalms 82.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Wish I could see more of your insights on the Vision.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Nick</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/biblical_evidence/sodom_and_gomorrah.html</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<div style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 21px; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 14px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">The second of the clobber passages is another reference to Sodom and Gomorrah. In the King James Version of the Bible it reads:</div>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="LINE-HEIGHT: 21px; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); PADDING-LEFT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 14px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<div style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 10px; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(229,239,245); MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 12px; WIDTH: 180px; PADDING-RIGHT: 12px; FLOAT: right; CLEAR: right; FONT-SIZE: 8pt; PADDING-TOP: 10px" class=yiv1765494667sidenote>Note 7. When quoting the clobber passages, we have chosen to use the King James Version, because this is the translation most often quoted by Christians who use these passages against gay, lesbian, and bisexual people.</div>
<div style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">“Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.” (Jude 7 (See note 7.))</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
<div style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 21px; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 14px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">When we read this verse in modern America, having been raised in a culture that despises gays and refers to them as “queer,” it is easy to assume Jude’s reference to “going after strange flesh” must mean homosexuality. For many heterosexual people, it seems unnatural or strange for a person to desire intimacy with someone of the same sex. However, well-informed theologians will tell you this is not what Jude was talking about.</div>
<div style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 21px; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 14px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">At the time the book of Jude was written, many believed some of the women of Sodom had engaged in intercourse with male angels. This belief was probably derived from Genesis 6:1, 2 and 4, where we are told the “Sons of God”(angels) took the daughters of humans as wives. This was the final act which brought God’s judgment on the earth in the form of a great flood. And it seems some Jewish writers believed this was also the sin which sealed Sodom’s fate.</div>
<div style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 10px; LINE-HEIGHT: 21px; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(229,239,245); MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 12px; WIDTH: 180px; PADDING-RIGHT: 12px; FLOAT: right; CLEAR: right; FONT-SIZE: 8pt; PADDING-TOP: 10px" class=yiv1765494667sidenote>Note 8. For an excellent discussion of this, see <SPAN id=misspell-6 class=mark>Nissinen</SPAN>, pages 91 to 93. In these pages, <SPAN id=misspell-7 class=mark>Nissinen</SPAN> discusses Jewish writings from 200 to 1 <SPAN id=misspell-8 class=mark>bc</SPAN> which associate the sin of the people of Sodom with that of people before the flood of Noah.<BR><BR>Note 9. For example, see <SPAN id=misspell-9 class=mark>JND</SPAN>. Kelly, <I>A commentary on the Epistles of Peter and of Jude</I> (Harper and Row, New York, 1969), pages 258-259; Fred <SPAN id=misspell-10 class=mark>Craddock</SPAN>, <I>First and Second Peter and Jude</I> (Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville, 1995), page
139; Richard <SPAN id=misspell-11 class=mark>Bauckham</SPAN>, <I>Jude, 2 Peter</I> (Word Books, Waco, 1983), page 54; Michael Green, <I>The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude</I> (Inter-Varsity Press, Leicester, 1987), page 180; <SPAN id=misspell-12 class=mark>CEB</SPAN>. <SPAN id=misspell-13 class=mark>Cranfield</SPAN>, <I>I and II Peter and Jude</I> (<SPAN id=misspell-14 class=mark>SCM</SPAN> Press, London, 1960), page 159; and Richard Hays,<I>The Moral Vision of the New Testament</I> (Harper, San Francisco, 1996), page 404.</div>
<div style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 21px; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 14px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">According to first century legend, some of the women of Sodom (and other wicked ancient cities) were thought to have had sex with beings who were made of different flesh — angelic flesh. (See note 8.) This is what Jude was referring to when he talked about “going after strange flesh.” He was referring to heterosexual sex between male angels and human women, not homosexual sex between humans. Many theologians, including many conservatives, interpret the passage this way. (See note 9.)</div>
<div style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 21px; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); MARGIN: 0px 0px 1em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 14px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">Again we ask, does this passage apply to the question we bring to Scripture? And we must answer that it has nothing to say about whether it is possible for two humans of the same sex to have an intimate, loving relationship with the blessing of God.</div>
<DIV style="LINE-HEIGHT: 21px; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); FONT-SIZE: 14px" id=yiv1765494667furtherstudycontainer>
<H1 style="LINE-HEIGHT: 19pt; MARGIN: 20px 0px; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(196,113,23); FONT-SIZE: 19pt; FONT-WEIGHT: normal"><BR></H1></DIV></DIV></DIV><BR>=======================================================<BR>List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>serving the communities of the <SPAN id=misspell-15 class=mark>Palouse</SPAN> since 1994.<BR> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net/</A><BR> <SPAN id=misspell-16 class=mark>mailto</SPAN>:<A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================<BR><BR></DIV></DIV><VAR id=yui-ie-cursor></VAR></div></body></html>