Support the Café

Search our Site

Does Phil Robertson get the Bible wrong?

Does Phil Robertson get the Bible wrong?

Daniel Burke comments on the “Duck Dynasty” controversy at CNN Belief Blog. He writes that Phil Robertson misinterprets the verses quoted:

The Robertsons of “Duck Dynasty” fame have rallied around their family patriarch, saying his controversial comments on homosexuality are “grounded in the teachings of the Bible.” But Scripture is fiercely contested ground, and some experts say Phil Robertson misinterprets a key Bible verse.

“On the subject of homosexuality, the Bible doesn’t mean what Phil Robertson thinks it means,” said Jim Naughton, a Christian gay rights activist and communications consultant.

“The Bible may be divinely inspired, but its authors were human and saw, as St. Paul puts it, through a glass darkly,” said Naughton, the Christian gay rights activist.

Conservatives such as Robertson, on the other hand, argue that the Bible is the bedrock of their faith, unchanging and unalterable. “We want you to know that first and foremost we are a family rooted in our faith in God and our belief that the Bible is His word,” the Robertson family said Thursday.

Read more on how the Bible is interpreted here.


Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Geoffrey, as he makes clear by his vagina/anus comparison, he thinks homosexuality is unnatural. That is pretty much the CofC party line. And Im sure he’d say he’d be thrilled if we got married – to women.

Bill Dilworth

Geoffrey McLarney

If that’s so, Bill, why would he have gays and lesbians “exchange natural intercourse for unnatural” (to us) heterosexuality? And why is it not better for us “to marry than to be aflame with passion?”


Gregory, he’s a member of the Church of Christ, which historically hasn’t put too much emphasis on the Old Testament. I’m sure he looks to the Epistles of Paul rather than Leviticus for the justification of his views.

Bill Dilworth

Gregory Orloff

If only Phil Robertson and his ilk got as “turned on” and “on fire” about Luke 6:31 as they do about Leviticus 20:13.

The world would be a much different, and far better, place.


“Naughton, the Christian gay rights activist.”

Love ya, Jim, but “THE Christian gay rights activist”?!


JC Fisher

[Would this family of duck-call manufacturers have received a reality show in the first place, if not for the facial hair? Just curious.]

Support the Café
Past Posts

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café