Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Here's the views of another biblical scholar:
A biblical scholar? Nope. Paul defines marriage as a man and a woman, otherwise Christians are to remain celebate. That wouldn't make sense if homosexuality was seen as a legitimate alternative. Apart from the fact that it defies why God created the genders in the first place. One can accept the Bible or not but twisting it to fit your beliefs isn't scholarly.Here's the views of another biblical scholar:
Those are texts from the Old Testament, and who cares what a bunch of OT dudes said?
Tell us what Jesus says, Lonestar_logic, even though you despise Him in your life and beliefs.
Jesus did not speak on every subject. Paul, his inspired spokesman, said that homosexuality is wrong.
You don't believe in Paul's writings at all. Or you would consider his correction of Peter's false teachings. Or you could read the interaction with Phillip and the Eunuch or Ethiopia. When you are ready to repent and return to God, go to your local AME minister.
You understand nothing about the gospel as it applies to foreigners, non believers, race, or ethnicity.
Christ validated every word of the Hebrew text (that He referred to often, precisely, and without the originals), saying that every word of it came from God. He also contended that His words will never disappear. The only place to find them is the New Testament. If there have been changes made, they are too insignificant to change the intent.Galatians 2:9
James, Cephas< (Peter) and John, those esteemed as pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcised.
This is quite hilarious if you know the history of the KJV and what it is actually based on. I know your devotion to it would never let you study that, but it would be eye-opening for you.
More...
There are a handful of Scriptures (five or eight depending upon how one counts) that specifically speak of same-sex intimacy as unacceptable to God. Conservatives or traditionalists see these as reflecting Gods timeless will for human relationships. Progressives look at these same scriptures in much the same way that progressives in the nineteenth century looked at the Bibles teaching on slavery. They believe that these verses capture the cultural understandings and practices of sexuality in biblical times, but do not reflect Gods will for gay and lesbian people.
In my own life, it was both reading the Bibles passages on same-sex intimacy in the same light as passages on slavery (and violence and the place of women) and coming to know gay and lesbian people that led me to see this issue differently, particularly children who grew up in my church who loved God and sought to serve Christ. As I listened to their stories I saw that they did not fit the stereotypes I had been taught about gay and lesbian people. The love they shared with others looked very much like the love I share with my wife a deep friendship and companionship. And their faith was as authentic as that of anyone else in my congregation.
For many Christians today, particularly young adults, the handful of Bible verses related to same sex intimacy seem more like the 100 plus verses on slavery than they do the teachings of Jesus and his great commandments to love God and neighbor. Their gay and lesbian friends are people, just like them, in need of love and community. I believe that in the years ahead an increasing number of Christians, not only progressives, but also conservatives, will read the Bibles passages regarding homosexuality as all Christians today read the Bibles passages on slavery. And the sermons preached from Americas pulpits decrying the rights of homosexuals today will sound to future generations much like the pro-slavery sermons sound to us today.
The accusation that King James I, who authorized the King James Bible, was a homosexual has often been made, but we need to be cautious about accepting it.
Actually, since he fathered eight children, he couldn’t have been much of a homosexual! He wrote love letters to his wife and obviously enjoyed her most intimate company. He referred to her as “our dearest bedfellow” (Gustavus Paine, The Men Behind the King James Version, p. 4). When John Rainolds questioned the phrase in the Anglican marriage service, “with my body I thee worship,” King James replied: “... if you had a good wife yourself, you would think that all the honor and worship you could do to her would be well bestowed” (Ibid.).
In a book that the king wrote for his son Henry (entitled Basilikon Doron, or A King’s Gift), he made the following statements about the importance of sexual purity:
“But the principal blessing [is] in your marrying of a godly and virtuous wife … being flesh of your flesh and bone of your bone. … Marriage is the greatest earthly felicity” (p. 43).
“Keep your body clean and unpolluted while you give it to your wife whom to only it belongs for how can you justly crave to be joined with a Virgin if your body be polluted?” (p. 44).
“When you are married, keep inviolably your promise made to God in your marriage” (p. 45).
“Abstain from the filthy vice of adultery; remember only what solemn promise ye made to God at your marriage” (p. 54).
The king wrote plainly against the sin of homosexuality.
“Especially eschew to be effeminate” (Basilikon Doron, p. 46).
“There are some horrible crimes that ye are bound in conscience never to forgive: such as witchcraft, willful murder, incest, and sodomy” (p. 48).
The charge of homosexuality was made by the king’s enemies and only after his death. Stephen Coston’s book King James the VI of Scotland and the I of England Unjustly Accused?
here's the views of another biblical scholar:
howie?....do you remember when i provided you with a link to look at what the ot says about homosexual acts in the original hebrew and you said you weren't going to look because it might interfere with what some gay "biblical scholar" told you it said?.........
Apparently there is no proof one way or the other that King James was gay. What we do know is that he had no less than 7 children and that he advanced laws against sodomy.
https://www.chick.com/reading/books/158/158_03.asp?FROM=biblecenter
Apparently there is no proof one way or the other that King James was gay. What we do know is that he had no less than 7 children and that he advanced laws against sodomy.
https://www.chick.com/reading/books/158/158_03.asp?FROM=biblecenter
Lady, I hate to point this out but
1)There are married gay men with kids. King James could be one of them.
2)The fact he passed anti-sodomy laws may have more to do with politics and image of the throne than his own wishes. Machiavalli "The Prince" is much better able to explain the philosophy of politics during this era than I am.
Even so, it is possible that stories of King James Homosexual tendencies may be due to his political enemies. Hey, its tough being King. Tougher if you really want to be queen!
Not even close.
You'll crap all over the Bible as being unsubstantiated, but a secret text somewhere with Mark on it that was seen once by someone who remembered it and gave his rendition of it to some one who wrote some of it down, and you jump all over it? And declare Christ gay because of it?
If Mark wrote it, it will exhibit the same standards that the actual Gospel of Mark does. All 75 conditions regarding the placement of, and amounts of nouns, consonants, vowels, and so forth, that are apparent in one should be apparent in the other. If not, disregard it as non-God inspired, and stick with the one that is.
If they don't meet the standards God laid out then dismiss them. They could have come from anyone. The writing of Mark that we do know was God breathed is the one in the Bible. I listed some of the guidelines that God required somewhere on this board. I'll find them for you when I get some time. They make writing a sentence excruciating, let alone chapters.
If they don't meet the standards God laid out then dismiss them. They could have come from anyone. The writing of Mark that we do know was God breathed is the one in the Bible. I listed some of the guidelines that God required somewhere on this board. I'll find them for you when I get some time. They make writing a sentence excruciating, let alone chapters.
But the manuscripts we have of the Gospel of Mark exhibit inconsistencies with each other. They don't meet a standard as high as you describe. Many of these are insignificant, to be sure, but scribal errors are thoroughly documented.
The verse that calls all scripture God-breathed refers solely to the OT, as the NT didn't yet exist.
I don't accept that any of it is God-breathed however, but just the documentation of how a given people at a given time wrestled with the idea of a god.
here's the views of another biblical scholar:
howie?....do you remember when i provided you with a link to look at what the ot says about homosexual acts in the original hebrew and you said you weren't going to look because it might interfere with what some gay "biblical scholar" told you it said?.........
no
If they don't meet the standards God laid out then dismiss them. They could have come from anyone. The writing of Mark that we do know was God breathed is the one in the Bible. I listed some of the guidelines that God required somewhere on this board. I'll find them for you when I get some time. They make writing a sentence excruciating, let alone chapters.
But the manuscripts we have of the Gospel of Mark exhibit inconsistencies with each other. They don't meet a standard as high as you describe. Many of these are insignificant, to be sure, but scribal errors are thoroughly documented.
The verse that calls all scripture God-breathed refers solely to the OT, as the NT didn't yet exist.
I don't accept that any of it is God-breathed however, but just the documentation of how a given people at a given time wrestled with the idea of a god.
Correlation does not prove causation. Not everyone could afford schooling so if there are spelling errors in some of the copies you don't make my logic leap from spelling errors to "they changed the text".
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmXqL8-9dqk]JOHN TRAVOLTA SAYS IDINA MENZEL @ THE OSCARS 2014! - YouTube[/ame]
Anybody can make mistakes and the fact that Vaticanus sat on the shelf for a thousand years and is in such good condition is because no one used it because everyone knew that the scribe made a mistake.
