Not Against The Bible

[Guest ConfusionAtItsBest]

So basically I've been searching the bible and looking to see if I can find anything to support the old "Homosexuality is an abomination!" deal and my search has come up empty, I have noticed Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." however, that can have many translations, because don't all religious leaders classify the term "mankind" as the race of humans? They have used this many times to say that homosexuality is an abomination, but it's not, you can not help who you are. Example: If I was attracted to someone, I can not help that I find them attractive, someone else may not find them attractive, and they can't help that either, they didn't choose to not be attracted to them, just like I didn't choose to BE attracted to them (a little confusing I know). Another point that I would like to make would be this, if someone is gay, then they do not love them as if they love a woman, they love them as if they were a man. (in the male sense of homosexuality)

I know this is a little confusing lol it made sense in my mind lol. But the point I'm trying to make is that religious leaders are always trying to find some excuse to call something a sin just because it is a little out of the ordinary, and it doesn't look like the "norm" of society. This religious persecution against gay, lesbian, bi, and trans people has got to stop, there are no gains from it, did you know that Judas Iscariot kissed Jesus in the bible, when he pointed out who he was to the roman soldiers, he kissed him St. Mark 14:44-45 44:"And he that betrayed him had given them a token, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is He*; take him, and lead Him* away safely." 45:"And as soon as he was come, he goeth straightway to him, and saith, Master, master; and kissed him." Now I'm not saying that Jesus was gay, or bi. But he openly accepted the kiss from Judas, which must mean that he is accepting of all, whether they be straight, bi, gay, lesbian, or trans. So don't think you are going to hell because you are one of these, you are going to heaven as long as you love and accept Jesus into your heart.

Yours Truly,

CAIB (Confusion At Its Best)

[Guest Midoe]

Well Confusion At Its Best, I understand completely. I used to use the example of food. Why do you like certain foods? Because they taste good, why does it taste good, because your taste buds send signals to your brain of good feelings, does one have any control of this involuntary process of course not, It's just how one feels. When It comes to feelings we don't choose how to feel, we just feel. Unfortunately a lot (not all nut a lot) of very religious people, tend to be very close minded to anything that will throw their believes into question, and tend to immediately condemn them.

Just some thoughts to add

-Midoe

[Guest Elizabeth K]

Food? Ever read in the Bible about food? Those who are Christian Bible-is-literal, they probably never read those old Hebrew restrictions on preparaion and consumption of foods. It was intended originally as a set of Laws to follow, but seems based upon hygine and common practices of the Biblical times it was written. So today, ANY meat dish with a delicious cream sauce is Bible-literally an abomination.

My confusion about homosexuality related Biblical passages comes from the angels that visited Lot. What went on there apparently caused the Old Testament GOD to lose it - and Lot tried to calm Him down, unsucessfully as it turned out. So why when Lot and his family were allowed to flee, and Lot's wife wife wanted a little peek, she was turned into a pillar of salt? I just seem to think the translations were mishandled here. Just me I guess.

And a woman cutting her hair is an abomination.

And cloven hooved animals are an abomination.

And I really don't see us transgendered people mentioned, but some CALL us an abomination.

So what does abonination really mean and is GOD really so caught up with this corporal world he really keeps tabs? I know He knows of every sparrow that falls, but that invoves a little bird soul. I doubt he marks me as a candidate for hell every time I munch on a pork chop! This chop needs salt - oops, where does this salt originate?

Stupid ruminations over stupid Judician-Christian prejudices. Jesus comands us to LOVE not judge others! And wasn't Jesus Jewish? Are we missing the point here?

Lizzy

[Guest April63]

Remember that in the Old Testament there is the Law of Moses, which is the letter of the law. It was designed to be strict because the Israelites couldn't follow the simplest of commandments. Really, there are only two: Love God and love everyone else. So one day when Moses went away the Israelites did all sorts of bad things (I think the most famous was worshiping a golden cow). Thus came the Law of Moses.

Jesus fulfilled the law and made it unnecessary to continue to follow it. I take the Bible literally. There are a few parts which are parables. But I believe the Old Testament to be mostly history. But since that law has been fulfilled, I can eat pork

Judas kissing Jesus was a sign of respect. I'm pretty sure he didn't kiss his lips, but kissing back then was indeed a sign of respect. It wasn't uncommon for servants to kiss the feet of kings. That passage really has nothing to do with Jesus accepting gay people, sorry. Though Jesus does love each ands every one of us.

In Leviticus 18:22, mankind refers to only men and womankind refers to only women. One of the strange, unique times this happens.

One verse I have yet to see a good argument from is 1 Corinthians 6:9-10: "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God" and Romans 1:26-27: "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet". Okay, that was actually two. But you can't really say much to these two scriptures, so, well, I don't know.

April

[Guest Sarinah]

Just a point of clarification. In many european and in almost all middle eastern societies men kiss eachother on the cheek as a greeting, its saying your my brother and I love you as family.

April this article has relatively good arguments for the passage in 1 Corinthians and for a few others.

http://207.152.67.6/gog/pdf/p313_336.pdf

[Guest Eagledancer]

I am so led to respond with my own thoughts...and these are mine and not a condemnation of other's beliefs. As I was forced as a child to see this world through the eyes of what seemed to be narrow and hypocritical take on such an endless beauty we call life, my mind rebelled. I remember as a young child listening to the good Southern Baptist preachers using this same Bible as justification for segregation, discrimination, and even the justification for slavery. It wasn't until law suits and the such made it not so financial savvy that these scriptures became vague and the teachings were abolished. I remember watching homes destroyed in the name of the Christian God when a young girl would find herself with child and her family disowned her while the young man lied his way into "salvation" - the woman scorned and the man praised. Those "old laws" under the first covenant are still used when it comes to keeping wives subserviant, but they are called "old laws" when people need them to be for justification for their own actions. I remember some questions I had as a child, and these are some of them:

1.) Why did the Bible need translations? As a child in Texas, I knew that a simple translation of words, especially if these words were cultural, was difficult just from Spanish to English, and I had the origin of the word or words in front of me trying desperately to translate. Some things CANNOT be adequately translated and unfortunately suffers a new culture and mindset in the translation. The Bible doesn't say that each person translating the Bible is God sent. It only states the original to come from men of God.

2.) Why didn't God find men who at least knew Jesus? It would have been more believable if the books were actually limited to His 12 disciples.

3.) If Jesus so desperately needed to get His message out then why didn't He just write the Bible? Those long camel rides or walks through the desert surely provided time for something to be jotted down. It was always difficult for me to believe that someone could quote something or someone they never heard much less met. Go into your local Church or place of worship and try quoting someone you've never met and see how far you get.

4.) I was also stumped when I saw that the Bible was to taken as literal when it was convenient but parables when it is not. Also, the Bible is considered "living" or pliable to day-to-day life unless you are gay, lesbian, TG, etc...(Black, Hispanic, Japanese, etc were on the list when I was a kid)

5.) I couldn't understand how the Church could use grape juice to signify wine, but alcohol of any kind was a sin against the Temple of God (the body). Jesus could serve a whole party wine, but my childhood Church questioned that action!

6.) Adultery and divorce were about as sinful as homosexuality is considered now, but that all changed when the divorce rate started going up. The Churches couldn't keep condemning these because low numbers in the pulpits meant low tithes. People don't tend to volunteer to be barraged and cast into the pits of hell, so Churches will lean to what brings people in or at least the money.

If I sound harsh, I don't mean to. There is nothing keeping my Creator from getting messages directly to me, and it is my job to keep my mind and soul open to these messages. I can't understand or feel love if I only feel hate or disregard. I have struggled to find what is right for me. My own interpretation of the need for the second covenant was to remove the bigotry and control of a middle man. I respect the death of Jesus so much that I steer clear of well meaning Mockingbirds for God because I need to see my God as that unconditional, loving Father waiting for His prodigal son to come home. I do read the Bible because it helps to refocus certain aspects of my faith, but I also read writings from Oracles and study the Qabalah as well as other faith based literature. In my time on this earth through more than this life I feel that faith is a search of the soul and is not something that can be obtained with tithes or being spoon-fed from a pulpit. I believe it is important to first love self and then love comes forth from the core. Lastly, the looming question is...does the Bible say that homosexuality, TG, etc.. is an abomination? For every verse that can be used in favor of that argument, there are 100's that can be used against it. There is more talk of love, love , and (did I mention) love then any one sin. I would have to assume that even if one takes the Bible literally then love should dominate which would stop all bashing or condemnation because that can't be done out of true love. Remember, Ye without sin cast the first stone. In short, faith is individual and personal. I just wish that all could respect that. Love to all and Godspeed.

[Guest Pól_Eire]

So basically I've been searching the bible and looking to see if I can find anything to support the old "Homosexuality is an abomination!" deal and my search has come up empty, I have noticed Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

If you're looking for it, Leviticus 20:13 is pretty unequivocal: "The man who has intercourse with a man in the same way as with a woman: they have done a hateful thing together; they will be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

Not much grey area there. I don't like it, but there it is if you wanted to find it.

-Pól

[Guest androgynous]

I'm not religious, but studied it intensively. Jesus only spoke of two laws: honor God and respect your neighbor, because all other laws emanate from those two.

[Guest Joanna Phipps]

Food? Ever read in the Bible about food? Those who are Christian Bible-is-literal, they probably never read those old Hebrew restrictions on preparaion and consumption of foods. It was intended originally as a set of Laws to follow, but seems based upon hygine and common practices of the Biblical times it was written. So today, ANY meat dish with a delicious cream sauce is Bible-literally an abomination.

My confusion about homosexuality related Biblical passages comes from the angels that visited Lot. What went on there apparently caused the Old Testament GOD to lose it - and Lot tried to calm Him down, unsucessfully as it turned out. So why when Lot and his family were allowed to flee, and Lot's wife wife wanted a little peek, she was turned into a pillar of salt? I just seem to think the translations were mishandled here. Just me I guess.

And a woman cutting her hair is an abomination.

And cloven hooved animals are an abomination.

And I really don't see us transgendered people mentioned, but some CALL us an abomination.

So what does abonination really mean and is GOD really so caught up with this corporal world he really keeps tabs? I know He knows of every sparrow that falls, but that invoves a little bird soul. I doubt he marks me as a candidate for hell every time I munch on a pork chop! This chop needs salt - oops, where does this salt originate?

Stupid ruminations over stupid Judician-Christian prejudices. Jesus comands us to LOVE not judge others! And wasn't Jesus Jewish? Are we missing the point here?

Lizzy

We have but 10 commandments, the Hasidim (ultra orthodox Jews) have 600 and some of them to follow. All of which were supposed to have been given to Moses by God at the same time the ten that we know were. They cover nearly every aspect of life, love, living, food preparation, ritual clealiness, days when a woman is unclean, how to cleanse oneself after handling a corpse along with capital punishment for more offences than you thought imaginable.

The early Christians were a sect of Judaism, and would be so today if it wasnt for the split over offering scrifice to the Roman gods and the Emporer. This was something the Jews had far less of a problem with than the Christians and was the parting of ways for the two groups.

That which Christ began in peace, love and truth could not remain thus in the hands of man. Mankind seems incapable of offering the same love to his brother or sister which Christ showed to everyone. 

Render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's......

[Sally]

I have always been amazed at translations of the Bible because large parts of it were written in a language which really had no vowels and yet the article 'a' appears - How?

knowing this little tidbit it makes 'the' passage that all Christian Country Clubers (as I have labeled this group) the right, indeed the mandate to ban everyone else from heaven - Jesus said, "I am the way, who so ever believeth in me shall not perish but have everlasting life."

With no 'a' is it not possible that the wrong article was put into this account?

Substitute 'a' for 'the' and you have the meaning changed, now the kingdom of heaven is opened up to all who believe in God, believing in the son means you believe in the father.

Then look to, "not by acts, thoughts or deeds shall man enter the kingdom of heaven but by grace alone."

Oh no, we don't choose who goes to heaven, we have to leave that up to God, but his own son was surrounded by and worked with and saved so many undesirable people - that means heaven isn't a Country Club, we can't exclude anyone - then what is the point?

The point is in heaven everyone is equal and treated like we should have been treating each other all of this time.

Writing was very limited at the time of the teachings of Jesus and almost unheard of prior to that - as to the suggestion that Jesus should have jotted a few things down, where would a carpenter have gone to learn to write - it was a time of oral tradition for the poor - writing was reserved for the Romans and the Pharisees there was no public education you grew up learning a trade by becoming an apprentice, no manuals - nothing written and this continued until the Renaissance in reality but in the meantime the Niacin council gathered and decided which books went in and which didn't.

Even with the Apocrypha of the Catholic Bible added to the Torah - no one has seen the complete Bible since.

They are always finding new bits and pieces but what the council didn't see fit to include was lost to us.

There is an old joke that there were twenty commandments but being Jewish Moses got rid of the thou shalts in favor of the thou shalt nots - there is so much truth in comedy but the Niacin consul wasn't Jewish but they did have in mind how to control the masses.

The Bible can not be taken literally all of the contradictory passages make that impossible - it is a guide, it is a flawed history because all historical accounts are flawed and biased, that's just the way things are.

I hope that I haven't offended anyone with my views they are mine alone but they are based on a lifetime of observing humans - a self destructive lot who rewrite history as needed for the current winners to look good.

Love ya,

Sally

[Guest April63]

.

The Bible can not be taken literally all of the contradictory passages make that impossible - it is a guide, it is a flawed history because all historical accounts are flawed and biased, that's just the way things are.

It's not all contradictory. Contradictions form due to misinterpretations, but I do agree that somethings may have been lost with all of the translations.

You can take the Bible literally. A lot of people do. You just need to understand it's message... which is pretty big actually. But the short and sweet version is, we're here to experience life with a body and the experience our free will. If we follow the commandments of our Creator, we shall not only improve ourselves in this life, but in the life to come, and we shall experience everlasting happiness

[Guest Robin Winter]

I realize this is an old post, but I've always had an opinion, more towards the homosexuality aspect, and it ties in with what others are saying here. Like Lizzy mentioned, the animals as food laws were written based on practices specific to the time period, and were set for health reasons.

Yes, the bible condemns "men who lie with men" but I think that's because no child could be conceived from such a relationship, and people were also commanded to "go forth, be fruitful and become man". I don't know about the rest of you, but I'd say that's been accomplished. Like many of the laws that were period specific, I don't think that one really applies anymore.

[Guest viv]

So basically I've been searching the bible and looking to see if I can find anything to support the old "Homosexuality is an abomination!" deal and my search has come up empty, I have noticed Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." however, that can have many translations, because don't all religious leaders classify the term "mankind" as the race of humans? They have used this many times to say that homosexuality is an abomination, but it's not, you can not help who you are. Example: If I was attracted to someone, I can not help that I find them attractive, someone else may not find them attractive, and they can't help that either, they didn't choose to not be attracted to them, just like I didn't choose to BE attracted to them (a little confusing I know). Another point that I would like to make would be this, if someone is gay, then they do not love them as if they love a woman, they love them as if they were a man. (in the male sense of homosexuality)

I know this is a little confusing lol it made sense in my mind lol. But the point I'm trying to make is that religious leaders are always trying to find some excuse to call something a sin just because it is a little out of the ordinary, and it doesn't look like the "norm" of society. This religious persecution against gay, lesbian, bi, and trans people has got to stop, there are no gains from it, did you know that Judas Iscariot kissed Jesus in the bible, when he pointed out who he was to the roman soldiers, he kissed him St. Mark 14:44-45 44:"And he that betrayed him had given them a token, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is He*; take him, and lead Him* away safely." 45:"And as soon as he was come, he goeth straightway to him, and saith, Master, master; and kissed him." Now I'm not saying that Jesus was gay, or bi. But he openly accepted the kiss from Judas, which must mean that he is accepting of all, whether they be straight, bi, gay, lesbian, or trans. So don't think you are going to hell because you are one of these, you are going to heaven as long as you love and accept Jesus into your heart.

Yours Truly,

CAIB (Confusion At Its Best)

Hi CAIB,

Welcome to the Garden. Re being gay, bi, trans or lesbian. For me acceptance has

zoro to do with the Bible/Religion, no, it has everything to do with common decency ,it

has to do with the lack of Humanity in life today . Did we really evolve?? or was it just a

dream. Oh CAIB, I have a lot in my head re this stuff, just cant get same onto paper,

ya know ??? Please believe me , this woman is by your side. Luv, Viv.

[Guest viv]

I realize this is an old post, but I've always had an opinion, more towards the homosexuality aspect, and it ties in with what others are saying here. Like Lizzy mentioned, the animals as food laws were written based on practices specific to the time period, and were set for health reasons.

Yes, the bible condemns "men who lie with men" but I think that's because no child could be conceived from such a relationship, and people were also commanded to "go forth, be fruitful and become man". I don't know about the rest of you, but I'd say that's been accomplished. Like many of the laws that were period specific, I don't think that one really applies anymore.

Hiya Shilo,

realized a bit late myself , ( oh dear , not for the first time either) but this time I dont mind cos imho

a late opinion here is better than none, loved yours, viv.

[Guest Joanna Phipps]

If you're looking for it, Leviticus 20:13 is pretty unequivocal: "The man who has intercourse with a man in the same way as with a woman: they have done a hateful thing together; they will be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

Not much grey area there. I don't like it, but there it is if you wanted to find it.

-Pól

Not sure what translation you are using Pól but I recognize the original quote as being from the King James Authorized 1635 translation. I have seen that piece translated differently in many different versions of the bible. With all the different translations it is hard to get a handle on the original meaning and since most of us do not read ancient Greek or ancient Hebrew it is impossible for us to get the original verse in its original context and meaning.

Come to think of it one cannot have intercourse with a man the same way as a woman, just think of the anatomy. my feelings

[Guest ricka]

There is a great little book that really helped me: "The Children Are Free" published by Chi Ro Press. You can find it on-line. I keep buying copies and then giving them away and then buying more, LOL. This little paperback examines the "clobber scriptures" in light of what is known about good sound exegesis (interpretation of Scriptures). I had several years of seminary training including study of Hebrew myself so from what I know from my own training the ideas put forth in the book are sound. The book also examines the relationship between David and Jonathon which some of you might find rather amazing in terms of looking at all the Biblical evidence.

Long before I read this book I can remember thinking that the term "eunuch" as it was written in the orginal Hebrew and later in Aramaic meant something different than how we use the word in English to identified males who have had their genitals removed. Reading Matthew 19:12 gives us a clue. When I read of God's love and compassion and inclusion for eunuchs in the O.T. I knew that meant to me, as a male who from the womb was not like other men!

While I was just looking for the above scripture in Matthew I came across this: Matt 12:7 where Jesus is quoting Hosea 6:6--"But if you had known what this means, 'I desire compassion (or mercy), and not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the innocent." Matthew as a book was written specifically to the Jews of that day (during the years following Jesus' death) and IMO is just as relevant to the Church of Today.

Ricka

[Guest Anna_Banana]

You have to understand that many of these rules are written by society. Most of Jewish law (if any) was not directly mandated from God. It was established as an attempt to preserve Jewish culture and health. Pigs, for instance, appear to live unhealthily. It was thus common perception that these animals carry harmful diseases. That's why pigs were avoided. If you take a look at the list of animals that wouldn't meet the Jewish standard, you can see why they were avoided. A lot of the animals eat carrion.

You can also come to an easy understanding as to why homosexuality was outlawed. The Jews faced a lot of hardships, being conquered over and over for the majority of their existence, barely surviving as a culture as a result of some of these encounters. Falling under the assumption that homosexuality was a choice, if the majority of Jewish society had turned to homosexuality during these times, procreation would not occur. No procreation = the death of a society. Even if you take out the procreation factor, the Jews may have seen other factors for outlawing it. The physical act that two men would engage in would undoubtedly be seen as potentially harmful. It's no mystery to modern folk that diseases can be transmitted through gay sex. And since men have a long history of engaging with more than one partner, it would be relatively easy to pass on such diseases. Health aside, a lesbian relationship might be seen as a threat to the typically male-dominant Jewish hierarchy. Two women might become empowered and no longer be subservient to male masters.

But obviously the Jewish leaders couldn't just say "don't do this" without having a source of authority to stand behind. Maybe the lesbians like feeling empowered or maybe the guy who eats pigs doesn't seem to be sick. All it takes is a little bit of doubt--just one spark--to tear down the entire legal structure. So you say that God said it, and if you don't follow closely, you'll burn for it. The Jews knew suffering, its simply ingrained into their culture. Almost every incidence was blamed on the failings of Jewish society to do exactly what God demanded. Moses also had quite a bit of clout. He single-handedly held the title of delivering the Jews from captivity. If anyone knew God's will, it was Moses. So if he said God said such and such, that was that, hands down, no questions asked.

.Anna