A personal philosophy which has served very well is: before thinking about an answer/counterargument, think about the question/argument. Doing so often results in the realization that the question/argument is fallacious in the first place...
My new article considers why it is that a Gallup survey showed that U.S. adults estimate that 25% of Americans are homosexual.
This percentage represent one out of every four Americans which, as per the reported 2011 AD population in the USA, amounts to circa 77,897,979 personages:
In Conclusion Thus, having concluded our survey let us note that Rev. Dr. Mel White has presented us with a neo-hermeneutic which is none but a pseudo-hermeneutic. Rev. Dr. Mel White presents us with a false and faulty replacement for proper elucidation, a pseudo-hermeneutic. His eisegesis consists of approaching the text of the Bible with a presupposition that it can be made to not only give a pass to, but support and endorse homosexuality.
Could You Be Wrong? Rev. Dr. Mel White posed a very important question:
"We should be open to new truth from Scripture....What would you say if someone asked you, 'Could you be wrong about the way you've interpreted the Biblical texts used by some people to condemn homosexual orientation?' What does it say about you if you answer, 'No. I could NOT be wrong.' I am asking you to re-examine these texts carefully, prayerfully-lives hang in the balance."
Rev. Dr. Mel White writes, "Romans 2 begins with 'Therefore, [referring to Romans 1], you have no excuse, whoever you are, when you judge others; for in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself...' Paul warns us that judging others is God's business, not ours."
Simply reading the text reveals just how fallacious Rev. Dr. Mel White's application of the text is:
Rev. Dr. Mel White writes, "Jesus says nothing about same-sex behavior."
To state that Jesus did not address homosexuality is to begin with a faulty premise, which is that if Jesus did not address it then Christianity ought not have an opinion for nor against. But did He not address the issue at all? This issue requires discernment and logic. Let us read just one of Jesus' statements: