This whole gay/bible says so thing.

[Nikepallas]

Wait a minute don't jump on me here give me a second to explain. I heard Randi talking about the Bible has nothing in it that said anything about being gay or against Gods will exactly. Well, one of the last times I attended a Catholic class it was trying to explain how being "Gay" was wrong.

Okay it goes back to a brief passage when one of Noah's sons (after the flood when they finally came to land and were slowly moving around on it) went into his father's tent while he slept and did things to him. (the things were not named) BUT it was implied that it was sexual and that is the reason why it is wrong.


My thing was. What if it wasn't the act he performed on his father but what if the outrage originally was the fact that 1) it was done between father and son and 2) what if his father was forced like raped. What if this unspeakable act was that and it was then through translations and interpretation of the bible linked to being gay?

Any Historians on here that could shade more light on this?
Can anyone see where I am going with this or am I completely out in left field?

[theorist]

1. Whatever it is, it's too ambiguous to really apply to us.

It's a shame that the writers of the biblical texts used so many euphemisms. Did they expect that their language would never change? I also have a problem with the use of the Leviticus 20:13 as a way of showing that homosexuality is a sin. They tend to leave out the "and shall be put to death" part. I suppose they don't want to admit that they support eugenics. :sigh:

[kiki]

40. Actually...

...it doesn't strictly say "he shall be put to death". In the version I have at least, the precise wording is "he shall die - his blood shall be upon him". This is in direct contrast to other crimes where the punishment is specifically listed as "he shall be put to death", often with a method (usually stoning) and even a location (usually outside the city gate).

It seems to me that the vague "he shall die" wording (rather than the specific "he shall be put to death") could be interpreted to mean "don't kill him, God will do that", or as talking about eternal death (going to hell) as opposed to eternal life (heaven), or something else. Obviously, whatever the meaning, it's not intended to be very supportive of homosexuality, but the idea that the Bible defines homosexuality as a capital crime could be just plain wrong.

Not that the fundies are interested in any such specifics, but there ya go...

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rurallib]

10. I posted elsewhere

But I have come to agree with your position. Of course it is fiction, much like a good portion of American history. And I have always said that people can prove anything by pulling stuff out of the bible. Like for instance that group that is trying to push war in the middle east so the rapture will come. Their source is the bible.

[progressiveBadger]

19. You should read "Ishmael"

I'm always telling people that around here. Anyway, there is an interesting explanation of the writing of Genesis, and WHO actually wrote it. It very much puts into perspective that it is only a book, even if it is a very popular one.

[bush_is_wacko]

23. MY ABSOLUTE ALLTIME FAVORITE BOOK

I gave it to my Mom just a little while ago!

[progressiveBadger]

36. awesome!

It is an amazing book. So is the Story of B and My Ishmael.

[bush_is_wacko]

38. Read them too

Gave my daughter "My Ismael"

[donheld]

34. Do you mean

Ishmael: An Adventure of the Mind and Spirit
by Daniel Quinn?

[progressiveBadger]

35. yep n/t

[Behind the Aegis]

3. That is an unusual reference

The reference most people use is part of the Levitican Code. It says "man shall not lieth with mankind as with womankind, for it is an abomination..." However, if you look at Jewish law, it was thought that sperm actually contained small humans in it and thus any sexual act that could not produce offspring was considered sinful (homosexuality, masturbation). Some believe this also reflects the Jews wishes to be separate from Pagan rituals that involved prostitution and homosexuality.

The reference you are referring to is usually used to condemn incest. I don't know that I have ever heard it used against gays.

Does that help?

[rurallib]

7. I thought that reference meant

that a man should not treat another man as he would treat a woman. In those days women were considered very lowly and to treat a man as if a woman meant in today's terms, to dis him.

[Behind the Aegis]

16. that is also true

It is still true today. The idea of a "feminine" man is offensive. Much homophobia and heterosexism is based squarely in misogyny. But, during those days, it was common for men to have sex with one another as part of a fertility ritual; thus, the Jews saw homosexuality as a "pagan" trait.

[CarbonDate]

31. As opposed to masculine women....

...who, of course, are never called anything disparaging like "butch" or "dykes".

It cuts both ways; being identified with the opposing gender implies a lack of sexual desirability, since masculine and feminine characteristics are what attract us to one another (homosexuals aside). It's an insult to our genetic worthiness, nothing more.

[Bertha Venation]

4. First, I don't think the son did anything to him.

The son's crime was that he'd stumbled into his father's tent and happened to see him napping in his birthday suit.

Second: yes, there is stuff in the bible that clearly (?) says homosexuality is a sin. In leviticus it says man shall not lie with man as he lieth with women; it is an abomination and they shall surely be put to death.

Leviticus also instructs us to beat or kill children, murder adulterous wives, etc., etc., etc.

If anyone can explain to me what bearing a collection of some history and mostly fantasy has on life -- and especially in American government -- in the 21st century, I'll eat my hat.

[Maple]

5. Noah got drunk

and passed out on his bed, nude.

One of the brothers, Ham, saw him, and told the other two...so they went in and covered him with a blanket...walking backwards so they didn't see his nudity.

When Noah woke up, he realized one of the brothers, Ham, had seen him nude and gotten him covered up...so he cursed Ham's son, Caanan!

Don't ask me...I didn't write it.

[Kathryn7]

33. Story has nothing to do with homosexuality

One son sees his father nude and drunk and tells the others to go look; Other sons cover father and show respect. Has nothing to do with homosexuality. It is a story about how to behave and show respect to one's parents.

[genius]

It was a Paul thing. He was talking to a group about their situation

and his words have been used in a more general sense to discriminate. Jesus never said anything against being gay.

[RUDUing2]

6. try this link

http://www.lionking.org/~kovu/bible/section01.html

[atreides1]

8. Not Really

The way the story goes, is that after the flood, Noah planted a vineyard. Being unfamiliar with fermented grape juice he drank to much. His son found him lying naked in his tent, and went to his brothers and made fun of his father, his brothers did the right thing and covered their fathre's nakedness.

When Noah woke up and found out what had happened, he blessed the two sons who had shown proper reverence, and cursed the son of his other son.

[Atlas Mugged]

15. It only makes Noah look like a major asshole.

And a really rotten father. Talk about hypersensitive.

Isn't this incident the one that white supremacists use as a validation of their bigotry? Something about cursing Ham and his descendants to be slaves.

[mitchum]

28. You've got it!

Correct about both Noah's pissant character and the white supremacist reading of the passage.

[idiosyncratic]

9. True Christians believe Christ's death on the cross was the end

of the Law. True Christians should have "God's Law written on their hearts."

Anyone who picks and chooses passages from the old Testament to discriminate against anyone is not a Christian.

[MadAsHellNewYorker]

11. Go read the story of David and Jonathan,

its not an answer to your question, but its more background on being gay in the bible:

they were lovers man...

1 Samuel 18:1, 3 And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul . . . And Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul.

and g-d sure as hell loved David.

Also check out the story of Ruth and Naomi.

I'm done hearing about "Gay" being wrong cause its biblical. HERES A SHOCKER--THE BIBLE SAYS A FUCK LOAD OF THINGS ARE WRONG and everyone one does them EVERY DAY. INCLUDING the hypocritical fundamentalists and their leaders.

The bible also has a bunch of laws for marriage and we don't follow a SINGLE one of them. check out http://www.whitehouse.org/dof/marriage.asp

[Hippo_Tron]

12. The bible also says that it's okay to beat your wife

So are the Republicans going to propose a constitutional ammendment to legalize spousal abuse?

[MadAsHellNewYorker]

13. ah, delicious hypocrisy at its best! n/t

[On the Road]

14. That Noah Reference is Really a Stretch

I have no idea why anyone would use that as a text against homosexuality.

On the other hand, Leviticus 18 and the first chapter of Romans are pretty clear:

22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

I just don't see how homosexuality can be reconciled with the Bible. Personally, I'm an atheist and see those passages as a reflection of the culture. But given Jesus's adherence to the Law ("not a jot or a tittle shall be changed"), I can't see how on earth he would have condoned gay sex.

[karlrschneider]

29. Eating shrimp, oysters, octopus, squid, etc. is also an "abomination",

whatever the fuck an "abomination" is...as is trimming the beard, wearing clothes of more than one kind of fiber...to mention just a few
of the idiotic bullshit observations in Leviticus.

:grr:

[On the Road]

30. I'm Not Saying It's Not Idiotic

I'm just saying it's in the Bible.

Personally, I don't think Jesus declared all foods clean, either. It's difficult to reconcile that with his adherence to the law.

The reference in Paul is pretty unambiguous that it's more than just a matter of ritual cleanliness. Now, why anyone thinks Paul's opinions should carry any weight with followers of Jesus I can't understand. But in this case, I think Jesus would have agreed.

[bush_is_wacko]

17. No

there actually is a passage in the Bible that calls it an "abomination" However, like I think another poster might have said. The death of Jesus was a renewal. He died for our sins. And he taught FORGIVENESS! He also taught compassion, not conservative compassion, REAL compassion! I will try and find that passage if you want, but honestly, I IGNORE it! It is in the old testament and the old testament to me is just HISTORY to explain why we needed to be forgiven. I will not type the words, only the passage and the numbers! You have to read the entire section to get the TRUE meaning. It was about forced sodomy not consensual sodomy, at least thats how I read it!

BTW, do you think God punishes animals for doing this? Homosexual acts occur in EVERY species of mammal. I don't know about other forms of life, but maybe someone else can chime in w/ that one.

[bush_is_wacko]

21. Also..

In your experience, have you ever met a gay man or woman that you thought would choose to be the way they are? I have several gay friends and they have endured absolute hell because of their lifestyle. I have never had any of them tell me they enjoyed that hell! All of my Friends are good people. some are quite frankly, better people than I am. they never miss an opportunity to help others who are suffering. I can not say I ALWAYS stop to help. Some of my friends could, but they never will. I have both gay and straight friends that applies to.

[idiosyncratic]

26. My neighbor and one of my best friends is gay

and he is a great guy . . . but he hates the fact that he is gay.

He has endured hell from friends and family.

He used to work with developmental disabled people. That is something I could never do.

He is a better person than I am.

[ezee]

25. The passage

you refer to is in Hewbrews, chapter 8 I think. Having to do with the Old Law and Grace

[idiosyncratic]

27. IMHO, that is one of the most important passages in the N.T.

Hebrews Chapeter 8 (quoting Jeremiah 31:31-34)

7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another.

8 But God found fault with the people and said: “The time is coming, declares the Lord,
when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.

9 It will not be like the covenant
I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful to my covenant,
and I turned away from them, declares the Lord.

10 This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds
and write them on their hearts. I will be their God,
and they will be my people.

11 No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.

12 For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more.”


I love the fact that it states that "God found fault with the people" and that he said, "No longer will a man teach his neighbor, . . . "


If these "Christians" were following the Bible, they would shut up and let each person find the Truth themselves.

[Nikepallas]

18. Thanks everyone for your opinions and knowledge. It proved once

again that while I was a catholic I was only given half the story. I will do more research on the matter.

thank you

[Behind the Aegis]

20. Study

You might want to explore the Gnostics. They were one of the three original branches of Christianity and deal with mysticism. Very interesting. They are also very aware of human differences and see them as a part of G-d's plan.

[Nikepallas]

22. Thank you I will be looking into that. I have been looking at the

Gnositic Gospel of Mary Magdalene. But I was not aware that their were others. I shall be studying this next year.

[OneBlueSky]

24. extreme right wing fundamentalist Christians are hypocrites . . .

picking and choosing the parts of the Bible they wish to adhere to based on their own fears and prejudices . . . . there are a whole lot of prohibitions in Leviticus other than homosexuality that most Christians choose to simply ignore . . . then they squawk about homosexuality being evil "because the Bible says so" . . . if you're going to take that tack, then you have to accept everything that the Bible prohibits, which virtually 100% of Christians, right or left, certainly do not . . . the famous letter to Dr. Laura (which I don't have handy) offers several good examples of the kinds of Biblical pronouncements that are routinely ignored . . .

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[donheld]

32. The bible can prove just about anything

The Bible has been used to justify slavery, abolition of the Native Americans and on and on. It's really appaulling what people have made the bible (i suppose the Koran is no different) into. It's more of a weapon than anything else now.

[bloom]

37. Some People will say it does

But with abortion, for instance, I think the Bible makes a brief reference to quickening.

And that is about it. The argument is a modern one, IMO.



People even twist the beatitudes to suit their purpose. There is no end to it.

[HamdenRice]

41. Jesus is the new Covenant so Leviticus is out the window ...

Here is the basic argument that there is no prohibition for Christians against homosexuality.

One of the most important points about the interpretation of the Bible that bush is wacko and idiosyncratic point out is that for many Christian denominations and biblical scholars, Christians are supposed to read the Old and New Testaments very differently. The prohibition on gay and lesbian behavior is in the same portion of the bible as prohibitions on non-kosher food, so it is supposed to be irrelevant to Christians.

The OT has several major parts -- the creation stories (Genesis), the Jewish law (Leviticus), history of the Jewish kingdoms (eg Samuel, Kings) the poetry (eg Psalms, Song of Solomon) and the prophets (eg Isaiah). For Jews, the Jewish law was very important and very precise, and required things like circumcision, avoidance of non-kosher foods, tribabl marriage rules, etc. The idea was that God entered a covenant or contract with the Jewish people to the effect that if they obeyed his law, he would be their God and protect them and make them prosperous. Also, he would send his messiah or king of the Jews to redeem the people.

For Christians, the main value of the OT is the prophecies which seem to predict the coming not just of the messiah, but of Jesus as messiah. Jesus life and crucifixion replaced the strict observance of complex Jewish law with observance of the simple principles faith, universal love, feeding the poor, and healing the sick as the main determinant of one's membership in the kingdom of God. At the moment that the Christians decided that gentiles (mostly Roman soldiers and the Roman underclass) could be Christians without being circumcised, the entirety of the Jewish law became irrelevant, and Jesus' teachings became most important. The only value of the OT to Christians is that the prophets accurately predicted Jesus life and death.

And Jesus never preached against homosexuality, or for that matter eating pork chops and oysters. That is all irrelevant OT stuff.

Excuse, me, I've got to get back to munching on my roast pork sandwich.

[ElaineinIN]

42. Thanks for helping clear that up!

It always kills me when my Mom, a Catholic right winger, tells me this. I was raised Catholic, now an Episcopalian. In the Episcopalian service at communion, the priest says, quoting from the last supper

This is the blood of the new covenant (sometimes testament), which is shed for you and for many, for the foregivenss of sins. Drink this in rememberance of me

Or something close.

You'd think that, for the most important sacrament of the religion, that being the Eucharist, they'd understand what they were doing... that being the recognition that the death of Christ solumnized and replaced the old covenant with the Jews with a new covenant between God and Christians.

Now I know lots of you out there think this a lot of hooey and mythology, and its your right to think that. But what gets me is those who profess to believe, but don't bother to actually figure what is that they say week to week.

Who cares, sheeple... just as long as fags can't marry. *sigh*
:crazy:

[Disturbed]

43. The Bible is the Word of God?

Old Testament


Slave Quotes

Psalm 123:2
As the eyes of slaves look to the hand of their master, as the eyes of a maid look to the hand of her mistress, so our eyes look to the LORD our God, till he shows us his mercy.

Ephesians 6:5
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.

Ephesians 6:9
And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.

Colossians 3:22
Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.

Colossians 4:1
Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because you know that you also have a Master in heaven.

1 Timothy 6:1
All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God's name and our teaching may not be slandered.

Titus 2:9
Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them,

1 Peter 2:18
Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.



Any religious person believes prayer should be balanced by action. So here, in support of the Prayer Team's admirable goals, is a proposed Constitutional Amendment to codify marriage, as they enjoin, on biblical principals:


A. Marriage in the United States shall consist of a union between one man and one
or more women. (Gen 29:17-28; II Sam 3:2-5)


B. Marriage shall not impede a man's right to take concubines, in addition to his
wife or wives. (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron 11:21)


C. A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a
virgin, she shall be executed. (Deut 22:13-21)

D. Marriage of a believer and a non-believer shall be forbidden. (Gen 24:3; Num

25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh 10:30)

E. Since marriage is for life, neither this constitution nor the constitution of any
State, nor any state or federal law, shall be construed to permit divorce. (Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9)

F. If a married man dies without children, his brother shall marry the widow. If he
refuses to marry his brother's widow or deliberately does not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one shoe. (Gen. 38:6- 10; Deut 25:5-10)


AS soon as you bring up all of the things that the Old Testament says are sinful (eating shellfish, touching a pig, wearing blended fabrics, etc.), and all the things that it says are not sinful (polygamy, slavery, etc.) they say that Jesus freed them from having to live by the Old Testament.

Thats when this passage comes in handy:

Matthew 5:17-18 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law (the Old Testament) or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law (the Old Testament) until everything is accomplished.”

[sweetheart]

44. I've never read the gay bible, but i like the idea

Perhaps you should publish one. Add in the gospel of thomas,
and clarify the unclear bits for the rainbow. :-)

With good marketing, copyright the name "Robertson bible", and
imply that pat robertson is still in the closet, but that this
bible is now released for the public.

Perhaps the "Moral Issues Bible"... ..hmmm. so much in a name... to
capture the right framing.

It would make great money!