• Alex Pittaway

    Your article is in accurate when it says the GCN Conference in Chicago was the largest gathering of LGBT Christians. MCC General Conference had well in excess of 1500-2000 people attending making it the largest gathering of LGBT Christians.

  • Great post, Eliel. Seeing these defining moments laid out serves as a reminder of how far we’ve come. While the battle to win hearts and minds continues, 2014 has been a pivotal year and I look forward to furthering the conversation in 2015.
    Bryan Christopher
    Author: “Hiding from Myself: A Memoir”

  • Pingback: 11 defining moments in 2014 for the Christian L...()

  • jmurman

    I find it amazing how far our nation has sunk. Treating an abomination (Gods choice of words) as it was just another thing.

    I’m sorry but you can line up people to wow and flutter over this from San Francisco to Sodom and it’s still sin.

  • ben in oakland

    How can someone get in so many inaccuracies in such a short time?

    “Abomination” applies to the eating of shrimp.

    Abomination was not “god’s word.” It was the direct translation of the words “ab ominare”, referring to bad weather omens, which the King james scholars found in the 12th century latin and greek translations of the old testament, which they used as the basis for the KJV.

    And our nation has not sunk to anything. Rather, it has finally risen to the recognition than an ancient, vicious, and durable prejudice has been given the thinnest sheen of respectability by calling it “sincere religious belief”, as if that were any kind of an excuse.

    It’s a sin not to believe that Jesus died for your sins, but well over 200 years ago, our nation was founded on the idea that religious freedom ought to be paramount. I’m sure you’re going to call religious freedom an example of “how far our nation has sunk”, right?

    It’s funny, the happiest, healthiest, wealthiest nations in the world are the ones that reject homohatred. The hellholes– Nigeria, Iran, Russia, Uganda, to name a few– are the most virulently antigay. Coincidence? I don’t think so.

  • CJ


  • Jon

    Well said, Ben!

  • Jake

    What about Presbyterian Church USA becoming one of the newest and largest denominations to actively affirm gay marriage!? It’s not all done yet, but the major hurdle has been passed… I think this deserves to be on the list, too.


  • Patrick Flynn

    In South Africa where gay marriage was already legalized back in 2006 it is with great delight that we watch the LGBTI community moving forward into their destiny in Christ – regardless of your sexual orientation what matters is that you live to honour our Lord & King Jesus Christ and that we walk in the fullness and wholeness He has called us to as believers. Look what God is doing this is awesome and we rejoice and look forward to more people being set free to be all that God has called them to be

  • Doc Anthony

    In the Bible, the Hebrew word “to’evah” = English word “abomination.”

    “To’evah” is NOT “bad weather omens”, oh no no. “To’evah” means an INTRINSIC, abhorent wrong, a “no-excuses” wickedness before God that is wrong at all places and at all times. Here’s an example from Ezekiel 16:

    49 Look, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: She and her daughter had pride, fullness of food, and abundance of idleness; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.

    50 And they were haughty and committed ***abomination*** before Me; therefore I took them away as I saw fit.

    In Hebrew, the word “to’evah” occurs right where you see that English word “abomination.” Sodom had more than one sin on her resume, but the final straw, the tipping point, was that homosexual gig. “To’evah.” That’s why God “took them away.”

    Lev. 18:22 simply says, “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.” What’s the Hebrew word that appears where the English word “abomination” appears? “To’evah.”

    So I’m just saying, let’s not try to deny or whitewash what Jmurman said. Let’s not try to escape it by trying to appeal to “12th century latin and greek translations.”

    For the Hebrew “to’evah” has ALWAYS been there, long before the 12th century. And it’s always been there right at the point where homosexual behavior is being discussed. Homosexual behavior – including gay marriage – is to’evah. It’s that simple.

    Court decisions come and go, but God hasn’t repealed that word “to’evah”, and neither can today’s courts or politicians.

  • It is very sad to see that Religion News Service decided to exclude transgender people from this list. Why in the world would you call it “LGBT” if you’re going to exclude trans folk?

  • Pingback: Wednesday Link List | Thinking Out Loud()

  • In context of the levitical references to abomination and homosexual acts, abomination referred to idolatry itself, or things associated with idolatry. The children of Israel lived among people that worshipped idols. Homosexuality was a part of idolatrous worship, as Paul also references in Romans chapter one, where he mentions idol worship and the things he knew took place in idolatrous contexts of ritualistic worship.

    Paul, unlike many today, was aware of how the Jews divided the law of Moses. It wasn’t divided into moral, ritual, or ceremonial groups. Instead, the law of Moses was divided into two groups: Jobs and Justices. Also known as Works and Ethics. Jobs (or Works) were all of the commandments found in the law of Moses that were between man and God. Justices (or Ethics) were all of the commandments found in the law of Moses that were between man and his neighbor. A reference to Works can be found in Romans 3:20. In that verse, Paul is saying, no one will be saved by keeping the commandments found in the law of Moses that are between man and God, because only the Ethics (or commandments between man and neighbor) are the whole Law. A reference to the Ethics can be found in Romans 2:26. In that verse, Paul is saying, if an uncircumcised man (who is breaking the law of Moses by being uncircumcised) keeps the Ethics, he will be counted as a true Jew and member of the Faith. Earlier on, in verse 13, Paul says, only the doers of the Law will be justifed before God. That Law is the Law of brotherly love, which are all of the commandments based on loving thy neighbor as thyself.

    Jesus’ Faith is based on the Ethics, which are commands based on loving thy neighbor as thyself. This relates to homosexuality because homosexual acts were condemned in the law of Moses for religious purity issue related reasons. Works are things that people did (and still do) out of religious devotion to God, a god, or a goddess. They are things people do that they don’t have to do, but they do them anyway as part of their religious ritual and devotion to God, a god, or a goddess. These are things that do not save a person. This is, originally, what the bible means when it references Works. It doesn’t mean what we modern Christians have been taught, which is kind of a Webster’s dictionary type of definition of the ancient term as understood in English terms. As you know, the bible was not written in English.

    Homosexuality was categorized as a Work of the law of Moses. It was something that was done for religious reasons by those showing devotion to a false god/idol. Since Jesus taught only the Ethics are the whole Law (and nothing else), Paul taught the same thing. It’s one of the points he was reiterating to his audience in Romans. He didn’t bring up ritualistic homosexual worship because he wanted to say those people are worthy of death. Instead, he brought it up as an example of a Work of the law of Moses, which was no longer applicable and also not worthy of death (Romans 1:27). He does this because he knows the Jews condemned homosexuality, per the law of Moses, but the law of Moses and it Works based commands were not the law anymore. Only the commands based on brotherly love were the Law. Paul compared an example of Works (ie. homosexual idol worship), which does not merit death with those things that do merit death (Romans 1:28-32). His intent, I believe, was to show that mistreating your fellowman is a violation of the Law of brotherly love (verses 29-31) and is worth of death. Homosexual rituals are not worth of death because they do not break the only Law that matters. In fact, Paul states in verse 27 that the penalty those engaged in the idolatrous practices get is a bodily penatly, which I believe is a reference to what Paul knew they did to themselves out of devotion to their deity. Self castration and the like were done as a part of their rituals.

    More can found at the books via the link below. Once the Jobs and Justices are known and understood, everything Paul says makes perfect sense. His ‘all things are lawful, but all things are not expedient’ statement is Paul letting his audience know that you can do what you want within the guidelines of the Law of brotherly love, but just because you can does not mean all things are beneficial to do. His other point was that, if you break the Law of brotherly love, you will suffer the punishment of the age, because that’s what happens to anyone who is in violation of the Law of loving thy neighbor as thyself.

    Homosexuals do not break the Law of brotherly love. A murderer does. An adulterer does. A thief does and so on. A homosexual does not anymore than a heterosexual does. What matters is whether or not the homosexual (or heterosexual) is meeting the requirements of the Law, like the uncircumcised man in Romans 2:26. The requirement is not to be heterosexual. The Law only requires a person to do what the Law says to do. Surely, a Jew would think the uncircumcised man would be unjust before God, based on the Jew’s understanding and upbringing. However, Paul says differently. The same can be said for a homosexual and anyone who thinks the homosexual would be unjustified before God. Maybe, according to the old testament law of Moses, but the old testament law of Moses has been replace by the Law of Christ, the royal Law (James 2:8), the Law of brotherly love, which is based on loving thy neighbor as thyself (Matthew 19:16-19). Happy new year, everyone! A new year of learning and understanding is coming your way.


  • ben in oakland

    It always amazes me, doc, how far the antigay will go in twisting and perverting what they claim is the word of god in pursuit of their prejudices. And as usual, you deftly manage to change the subject while appearing not to.

    “To’evah” is NOT “bad weather omens”, oh no no. “To’evah” means an INTRINSIC, abhorent wrong, a “no-excuses” wickedness before God that is wrong at all places and at all times.” Of course to’evah does not mena bad weather omens, and I didn’t say that they did. What I said was that the creators of the KJV, who used greek and latin translations– most emphatically not HEBREW texts– of the OT to make their “translation”– took the TRANSLATION of the word “to’evah”, which was “ab ominare”– and “cognate it into the English word “abomination”.

    The word abomination does not mean to us what it mean to the compilers of the KJV, and didn’t mean to them what the word “to’evah” meant to the OT and NT compilers. A simple google search of “to’evah in the old testament” yields a wealth of information that contradicts your highly selective opinion.

    Here is a quote form just ONE of those articles.

    “Clearly, if you look up the word “abomination” in an English dictionary, you will find that the word means “vile”, “wicked”, “wrong” and “hateful”. It is equally clear that the Bible was not written in English (but in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic). The 17th century translation of the Bible known as the King James Version (KJV) translates the Hebrew text of Leviticus 18:22 in this way: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” The term translated as “abomination” is the Hebrew expression תֹּועֵבָה (tō’ē’bā, a noun which may be pronounced “toevah”).

    There is widespread agreement among Hebrew scholars that the word “toevah” as used in Leviticus is not, in fact, a moral term; instead, it is a cultic term which indicates “ritual uncleanness”. Any action that is said to be “toevah” is an action which requires a person to engage in ritual purification before they may come to worship. Sometimes, the term “toevah” can be used in the Bible to refer simply to sinful behaviour in general, but in the case of the text in question, scholars agree that ritual uncleanness is implied.

    Thus, according to the same book of the Bible, eating pork is also said to be “toevah” (unclean). According to Leviticus 11:10, as rendered in the KJV, “And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you.” This means that eating squid, prawns, lobsters and other shellfish is “toevah”. Similarly, according to this ancient text, any man who has sex with a menstruating woman has has committed toevah (see Leviticus 20:18) . And any person who commits toevah within ancient Israel could not join the community in its acts of worship until they had been ritually purified.

    Few today would regard shellfood restaurants as abominations; not would most regard eating pork as an unclean act; and I don’t know anyone who believes a man has corrupted himself in any way by having sex with his wife during her menstrual cycle. Some may say that homosexuality is different, since the book of Leviticus also calls for the execution of those men who are found to have had sex with other men. But the Old Testament texts in question sanction the death penalty in all kinds of cases. The text tells us that a child (no age specified) who repeatedly disobeys his or her parents may be executed. The act of picking up sticks on the Sabbath was punishable by death. And even having sex with a menstruating woman is worthy of death, according to this ancient body of literature (see Leviticus 20:18; Ezekiel 18:13, and many other texts to that effect). Who today regards any of these acts as unclean or meriting execution?”


    Who indeed? Not even biblical fundamentalists would do so.

    “For the Hebrew “to’evah” has ALWAYS been there, long before the 12th century. And it’s always been there right at the point where homosexual behavior is being discussed. Homosexual behavior – including gay marriage – is to’evah. It’s that simple. Court decisions come and go, but God hasn’t repealed that word “to’evah”, and neither can today’s courts or politicians.”

    In short, you don’t believe this yourself, except where gay people are involved. I would give worlds to know exactly what motivates an otherwise intelligent man to be so anti-gay.

    Perhaps someday, you’ll tell us, instead of hiding behind childish evasions and maneuvers.

  • Pingback: Together At The Table: a time for feasting - Faithfully LGBT()

  • Pingback: Gay Christian Network gathering models what the church could be | GLBT411()

  • Well it was a very wonderful article.Thanks for writing such an tips here.I really hope you will continue enlightening folks in future as well,by way of this sort of valuable information.Carry on the excellent work.