Oh my! Gay Bible?

[Lpe04]

Not shocking, since the Genesis 3 curse on the woman is that the man was put over her. All it is is rebellion of authority -
just like the homosexuality is rebellion of God's creative order.

Nothing new under the sun.

The Genesis 3 curse was not that man was put over women in authority (that was already established), the curse was that she would "long" for man, that is woman without God in her life (the product of sin) would need a man to replace that in her life, I see it all the time.

God bless.

 

[Nadiine]

Still won't be able to explain away Romans 1:25-27. Good luck with that one.

they explain everything away bro. They demand the bible directly say things for clarity, then when it DOES spell it out, they find excuses to ignore and/or manipulate it into something else.

Rom. 1, they claim are only about "temple prostitutes" LOL
The problem with that is obvious, but I"m just saying, it doesn't matter what it says.

& the best refutation to homosexuality is actually Matt. 19 where Jesus gives the definition of marriage - the reason for marriage is based on GENDER at creation. male & female.

Even that they excuse away by saying
1) that was in their day & era - not applicable today (as if morals are different today (yet they can't show you where Jesus reversed the OT homosexual law; becuz it doesn't exist)

2) that becuz that definition is outside of the context of divorce, it doesn't apply.
LOL

Now try using that hermeneutic thru all scripture any statement or definition or comment that they consider out of context means NOTHING now & can be disregarded across the board.
That's how they use the bible.

it doesn't matter what they read & how clear it is.

 

[GreenMunchkin]

I don't understand the point of it... what's its actual purpose?

 

[Sketcher]

Rom. 1, they claim are only about "temple prostitutes" LOL
The problem with that is obvious, but I"m just saying, it doesn't matter what it says.

That's OK because they're sincere.

 

[Zecryphon]

I've met a demon of homosexuality, so to say that it is of God I would beg to differ.

Who said it was of God? I presented a translation of Roman 1:26, that would likely appear in a Bible such as the one we're discussing.

 

[Nadiine]

That's OK because they're sincere.

ya I forgot, you're right.

my bad

 

[Lpe04]

Who said it was of God? I presented a translation of Roman 1:26, that would likely appear in a Bible such as the one we're discussing.

Not you, the people writing this Bible.

God bless.

 

[Zecryphon]

Not you, the people writing this Bible.

God bless.

Oh, okay.

 

[sleepythesahm]

That's OK because they're sincere.

wow lol

 

[desmalia]

Still won't be able to explain away Romans 1:25-27. Good luck with that one.

Well the Message paraphrase has already done a pretty good job of that:

24-25 So God said, in effect, "If that's what you want, that's what you get." It wasn't long before they were living in a pigpen, smeared with filth, filthy inside and out. And all this because they traded the true God for a fake god, and worshiped the god they made instead of the God who made them—the God we bless, the God who blesses us. Oh, yes!

26-27 Worse followed. Refusing to know God, they soon didn't know how to be human either—women didn't know how to be women, men didn't know how to be men. Sexually confused, they abused and defiled one another, women with women, men with men—all lust, no love. And then they paid for it, oh, how they paid for it—emptied of God and love, godless and loveless wretches.

​

See from that we could just say that the homosexual behavior was fine, but the problem was really that it was just lust with no love. So that must mean that gay loving relationships are fine. And THAT is what many, many people actually use as their "Bible". If you ask me, that's way more dangerous than this "gay" bible, which is much more obvious about its heresies.

 

[Sketcher]

One of several reasons I don't like the Message.

 

[Lpe04]

Well the Message paraphrase has already done a pretty good job of that:

24-25 So God said, in effect, "If that's what you want, that's what you get." It wasn't long before they were living in a pigpen, smeared with filth, filthy inside and out. And all this because they traded the true God for a fake god, and worshiped the god they made instead of the God who made them—the God we bless, the God who blesses us. Oh, yes!

26-27 Worse followed. Refusing to know God, they soon didn't know how to be human either—women didn't know how to be women, men didn't know how to be men. Sexually confused, they abused and defiled one another, women with women, men with men—all lust, no love. And then they paid for it, oh, how they paid for it—emptied of God and love, godless and loveless wretches.
​

The Message, just another attempt to keep man from "hurting" anyone's "feelings" so that demons and unrighteousness is allowed to remain in man.

Can I say blasphemy?

 

[Nadiine]

wow lol

 

[sleepythesahm]

 

[Nadiine]

I just noticed your join date & wanted to say HI -
I hadn't noticed you were new yet.

welcome =0)

 

[sleepythesahm]

Yeah,hard to believe how quick I took to this lol. Im learning something new about foruming every time I log on
thank you for welcoming me. Its nice to "meet " you

 

[Flibbertigibbet]

Suddenly the LolCat Bible is looking better.

 

[Sketcher]

Suddenly the LolCat Bible is looking better.

It's not illustrated, though. There are lotsa stories in Judges that I would love to see illustrated in the LOLcat Bible.

 

[Flibbertigibbet]

It's not illustrated, though. There are lotsa stories in Judges that I would love to see illustrated in the LOLcat Bible.

Surely they PLAN to illustrate it?? Who wants to read lolspeak without pictures? (must add new request to prayer list - I think God probably laughs at the lolcats, too)

 

[desmalia]

The Message, just another attempt to keep man from "hurting" anyone's "feelings" so that demons and unrighteousness is allowed to remain in man.

Can I say blasphemy?