Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Forgotten Abominations Of The Bible.

page: 10
11
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 03:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by hildar
Exactly what here is left for beasts on the earth for us to eat??Not a gosh darn thing at all other then fish. If its unclean then we cant eat it. Fish is all we can eat but then we would all die soon enough, sorry but there isnt enough fish in the sea to feed all of man.

Hilda


Here is your answer:

Act 10:10 – 16: And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance, And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth: Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common. This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.




posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by hildar
 





You know if that list of food we cant eat is real which it isnt in the king james version. But since you are showing it that means we are all going to basiclly starve to death are we not.



See KJV,Leviticus chapter 11.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 





Homosexuality is a sin, its falls under fornication/adultery as having sex outside the bonds of marriage. The marriage contract is expressly mentioned in the Bible repeatedly as being between man and woman for the purpose of being “fruitful and multiplying”. If the relationship cannot create offspring, then it is not a marriage in the eyes of God. We have been through this same argument many times over and again on this site, I don’t know why it keeps coming up.



We have the same argument because of peoples lack of Bible knowledge and their stubborn refusal to even contemplate that they may have been given false information.
As i showed on the previous page,words have been lost in translation and many are suffering because of it.


You don't have to be married to produce children.


Jesus may have spouted verses that appear in the OT,but he also said,


34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage:35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by jakyll
As i showed on the previous page,words have been lost in translation and many are suffering because of it.

There is nothing lost in translation. You or anyone else can read Strong’s Concordance and see the translation of any word in the bible.

Originally posted by jakyll
You don't have to be married to produce children.

I never said that people who are unmarried cannot have children, I said that in order for a marriage contract to exist, according to God, it must be capable of producing offspring. In Christ’s time getting caught committing either Adultery or fornication was a death penalty offence, resulting in being stoned at the city gates. Needless to say if someone was pregnant out of wedlock, and was not betrothed to be married, then they were in a similar boat. This even was an issue for Mary and Joseph, God moved Joseph to marry Mary despite her pregnancy, which saved her from being put to death.

Originally posted by jakyll
Jesus may have spouted verses that appear in the OT,but he also said,

34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage:35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

When quoting from the Bible it is often helpful to quote within the context if you are wishing to convey the true meaning of what is being said. For example:

Luk 20:29 - 36: There were therefore seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and died without children. And the second took her to wife, and he died childless.
And the third took her; and in like manner the seven also: and they left no children, and died. Last of all the woman died also. Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them is she? for seven had her to wife. And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

Christ is not saying that only those who are not married receive salvation, as I think your trying to imply in your quote, but rather the question is about how marriage works after death. Christ is explaining that marriage does not apply after death, the marriage contract ceases to exist when a person dies. Sex, procreation, and marriage obviously don’t exist as they do in this world.



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 


That was from what the OP had put up there, thats why I said we by the looks would be stuck with just fish. The KJversion isnt that bad. I know it states we can not eat pig, but that was just about it other then animals with a cloven hoof. But the OP had it so we couldnt eat any of those posted. I eat chicken almost all the time and fruits and veggies, so I dont have much to worry about.

Hilda



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 





There is nothing lost in translation. You or anyone else can read Strong’s Concordance and see the translation of any word in the bible.


Are you serious?

Its a well known fact that words or phrases in one language can not always be translated into another.(it can even be difficult to translate old english into modern english!)

The Hebrew language have words that can mean several different things as can singular letters,there is also more than one form of Hebrew.
It should also be taken into account that most of the Bible deals with the Jewish people and their way of life,a thing that many Christians today still don't fully understand,so certain ceremonies,rituals etc get interpreted wrong or corrupted.Its easily done!



A changed word,even a misplaced punctuation mark,can alter the meaning of a verse/text.
That can be seen quite clearly in all the different versions of the Bible that exist in the world today.












posted on Feb, 29 2008 @ 08:05 PM
link   
Hello everyone! Im back here to share some more knowledge with you from my mentor and teacher..
Please watch this video if you wish to learn more on this topic..



All this talk about what is right and wrong.. And what is bad in the eyes of God.. Take a step back for a moment and take the time to watch this video..
IT will explain to you, and those who only wish to see this one way..
Many people can twist and turn the words of the bible to suit their agendas.
Would this video be any different?
I belive so.. Becasue it is spoken with the word of love. And that my friends is a God we can all understand.. Alteast I speak for myself.
And that is the only person I speak for..
And if you happen to agree, then my friend I will stand up for you until my last breath..

[edit on 29-2-2008 by zysin5]



posted on Mar, 1 2008 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.( Ezekiel 16: 49-50 )


The Iniquity

  1. Pride
  2. Fulness of Bread
  3. Idleness
  4. Uncompassionate toward the Poor and Needy


Result of Iniquity

  1. Haughtiness

    Result of Haughtiness

    1. Abomination

      The Abomination Committed

      1. Sodomy


      Result of Sodomy

      1. Taking them Away

        We can not be biased toward the fact, what may apply to the homosexual also applies to the heterosexual as well:
        The individual Sodomizing and the individual being sodomized are an Abomination, whether between male and female or, male and male.








        [edit on 1-3-2008 by jdposey]



posted on Mar, 1 2008 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Any God with the power to build a universe and populate it surely has the power to relay his will to the combined population of said universe through something more direct than ink and parchment. I tend to believe the creator of the universe and the one who claims to have created the universe in the bible are not one and the same. I believe those who follow the bible are following an impostor.



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by jakyll
HOMOSEXUALITY!!!

Yup,thats the only abomination the vast majority of Christians know about,and don't those fundamentalist types just lurrrrrvvvveeeee to tell you about it!


The Torah speaks of two different sins. Moral sins and ritual sins. The law of Leviticus 18:22 uses words which shows us it is a ritual sin, and it refers to the sin of same-sex religious prostitution in the pagan temples at the time.

The Hebrew word "to'ebah" means literally "ritually unclean". The Greek Septuagint (3rd century BC) translated "to'ebah " into Gr. "bdelygma," which meant ritual impurity. Had the acts written about in Leviticus 18:22 been a moral sin, "zimah" would have been used which translates into Abomination.

As for Paul when he speaks of homosexual acts, he is not talking about homosexuals, he is talking about married Christians who leaves their husband or wife to engage in sexual same sex acts.

The bible doesn't condemn gays.

It condemns ignorance.



[edit on 9/4/2008 by Neo Christian Mystic]



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic
 


Rom 1:27 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.


It does NOT mean adultery.
BlueletterBible



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Clearskies
Rom 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman,

...

It does NOT mean adultery.


Yes, the text clearly talks about married men who leaves their wives to commit adultary, even with the same sex.

The word for leaving here is Greek "Aphiemi". It means divorce or adulerous act of leaving ones spouse. How can you read a Greek book without knowing Greek?



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Is homosexuality a sin for New Testament Believers?

Just a couple of comments: Clearly it is admitted that same gender sex was condemned under Moses (being punishable by death), and that it was a practice of "Baal worship." And so it suggested that homosexuality was not inherently wrong, but rather it was wrong because it was practiced in the worship of Baal.

Apparently, had not the pagans used homosexuality in their worship of Baal, God would have allowed it. I think not.


Lev. 20:13:
"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."


THREE CATEGORIES OF PERVERTED SEX

"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators [Gk: paramours], nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate [Gk: catamites], nor abusers of themselves with mankind [Gk: sodomites] nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God" (I Cor. 6:9-10).

What are paramours, catamites, and sodomites?

paramours (King James, 'fornicators')-Strong's #4205 pornos "to sell, a male prostitute (as venal), a debauchee (libertine): fornicator, whoremonger."

prostitute: "one who solicits and accepts payment for sex" (American Heritage College Dictionary).

venal: "capable of betraying honor, duty, or scruples for a price, corruptible" (AHCD).

debauchee/debauchery: "to corrupt morally, to lead away from excellence or virtue, indulge in dissipation [lacking moral restraint, indulgence in sensual pleasure], orgies [unrestrained sexual activities],"

libertine: "one without moral restraint" (AHCD)

catamites (King James, 'effeminate')-Strong's #3120 malakos "soft, fine clothing, a catamite, effeminate."

catamite: "a boy who has a sexual relationship with a man" (AHCD).

effeminate: "having characteristics more often associated with women than a man" (AHCD).

sodomites (King James, 'abusers of themselves with mankind'-Strong's #733 arsenokoites "a sodomite, defile self with mankind."

The elements of the Greek word arsenokoites are "male-lier"-A male who lies with a male. "Male bed partners"--Wycliffe Bible Dictionary.



THESE PERVERSIONS ARE CONDEMNED IN SCRIPTURE

"I wrote unto you in an epistle not to keep company with fornicators [Gk: 'pornos'-paramour/male prostitutes] ...with such an one not to eat" (I Cor. 5:9-11).

"For this you know, that no whoremonger [Gk: pornos-paramour/male prostitute] ...has any inheritance in the Kingdom of Christ and of God" (Eph. 5:5).

"Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for ...whoremongers [Gk: pornos-paramour/male prostitute] ...and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine" (I Tim. 1:9-10).

"Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled, but whoremongers [Gk: pornos-paramour/male prostitute] and adulterers God will judge" (Heb. 13:4).

"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers [Gk: pornos-paramour/male prostitute], and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone which is the second death" (Rev. 21:8).

"Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. For without are dogs and sorcerers, and whoremongers [Gk: parnos-paramour/male prostitute], and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loves and makes [practices] a lie" (Rev. 22:14-15).

"Be not deceived, neither ...effeminate [Gk: malakos-catamite/boy with man sex] shall inherit the kingdom of God" (I Cor. 6:9-10).

"Be not deceived, neither ...abusers of themselves with mankind [Gk: arsenokoites-sodomites/male bed partners/male-liers] shall inherit the kingdom of God" (I Cor. 6:9-10).



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic
 

Rom 1:27 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.

Aphiemi;

1) to send away

a) to bid going away or depart

1) of a husband divorcing his wife

b) to send forth, yield up, to expire

c) to let go, let alone, let be

1) to disregard

2) to leave, not to discuss now, (a topic)

a) of teachers, writers and speakers

3) to omit, neglect

d) to let go, give up a debt, forgive, to remit

e) to give up, keep no longer

2) to permit, allow, not to hinder, to give up a thing to a person

3) to leave, go way from one

a) in order to go to another place

b) to depart from any one

c) to depart from one and leave him to himself so that all mutual claims are abandoned

d) to desert wrongfully

e) to go away leaving something behind

f) to leave one by not taking him as a companion

g) to leave on dying, leave behind one

h) to leave so that what is left may remain, leave remaining

i) abandon, leave destitute


Who says WHICH definition???
If it's C:3, then there is no contraversy, it means what it says. Leaves.

[edit on 9-4-2008 by Clearskies]



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 

I don't know fluent Greek.
If it IS divorce, then the man would divorce the natural use of the woman and have vile affections with a man?
That sounds the same to me.


[edit on 9-4-2008 by Clearskies]



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:37 AM
link   
I'm not here to teach you Hebrew and Greek. Your view is debunked by most scholars, I'm afraid. To know which translation to use relies on the context. Romans speak literally of Christian men leaving their female sexual partners to have sex with someone else. To a Christian one must be married to have sex in the first place, so if the Christians of the Church of Rome left their spouses, to have sex somewhere else they would commit adultary. Get real.

Leviticus speaks of pagan rituals connected to Ba'al worship as you cite, the word translated abomination in KJV is infact not abomination, but a word which speaks about a ritual sin, to parttake in a rite where anal sex is practiced as part of the ceremony or religion. You can see examples of this pagan practise in Genesis 19:5 and Judges 19:22.



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic
 





The bible doesn't condemn gays.



True.
It condemns the sexual act not the emotions,the person,the relationship etc.


Too many people though like to quote Leviticus in an argument against gays,and when you point out all the other laws within that book they claim that they are only for the Jews.

Logic dictates then that the law of sodomy must only be for Jews too.

You can't pick and choose....as many believe they can just because Paul mentions something similar later on in the Bible.



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 



According to this site a friend directed me to,



In secular Greek literature, aphiemi was a fundamental word used to indicate the sending away of an object or a person. Aphiemi was used to describe the voluntary release of a person or thing over which one has legal or actual control. The related noun aphesis meant described a setting free. .Later it came to include the release of someone from the obligation of marriage, or debt, or even a religious vow. In its final form it came to embrace the principle of release from punishment for some wrongdoing. .




In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul uses aphiemi in speaking of a Christian husband’s not sending away (that is, divorcing) his unbelieving wife. Divorce is total marital separation, complete abandonment of the relationship. And so this same Greek word is used here in Romans of forgiveness of sins. When we are forgiven, our sins are put away from us, separated from us, "divorced" from us. In Mt 15:14 the same term is used to speak of separating ourselves from false teachers.



www.preceptaustin.org...








[edit on 24-7-2008 by jakyll]



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by jakyll
 


Jakyll and others on this board,

I see these posts crop up from time to time with regularity. On both sides of this issue they teach and preach mostly nonsense...emtionally charged nonsense to justify thier positions.

Jakyll...you are correct when you imply that Christians are ignorant of many things...even about Christianity. I have found many of my Christian Bretheren to be so..with regularity. They know very little Christian Bible or history much less any other religions and history.

However..I will clue you and even many of the believers in on the subject of this thread and prohibitions.

The laws and prohibitions you quote are from the Olde Testament. The dietary laws in particular do not apply under the New Testament. Ironically many Christian Believers are so often and needlessly befuddled when presented with these texts. I am not under the Olde Testament Bondage. I am not under Ishmael..but under Issac. All attempts such as yours are to bring us under Olde Testament Bondage...not under New Testament Grace.
And this on an attempt to justify your real beliefs by bringing into contrast these other prohibitions which you claim Christians dont follow. They do not apply to them under Grace.

You and others can very easily neutralize unknowlegable Believers..still on milk and not strong meat with the tack you are trying to take here. It works quite well on these people.

One of the purposes of these laws and restrictions in the OLde Testament was to show that these people were not like the nations which surrounded them...the heathen and pagan nations. They were to dress differently..prepare their foods differently, sow and glean thier fields differently...worship differently...etc etc...
All of this to show that they were not like the nations which surrounded them.

About Homosexuality...You and others mislead many Believers here and also once again many Believers are easily mislead because they do not know much history or Bible. This is very easy to do with mans "Human" method or rationalizing.

The simple overview of the bible and history both, is that men ...Believers...both Olde and New Testament were never to define themselves by thier sexuality.or sexual orientation...ever.

Why is this???

Simple!!!

Because the nations surrounding Ancient Israel...were already doing this in their religious holidays and ceremonys ..carte blanche...across the board. By this I mean Homosexual and Heterosexual both. They were both committing abominations in this arena. This is easy to research if one is willing to do the historical digging on these other nations surrounding Ancient Israel. Most versions of history have been sanitized in this arena or truth about the customs and traditions of the nations surrounding Ancient Israel.

The simple fact of the matter ...is that No one ...under the Olde Testament or New Testament dicipline is instructed ...ever..to define themselves by thier sexuality or sexual orientation. For to do so is to be as were the Nations surrounding Ancient Israel. This dicipline stands unto this day.

No proper thinking individual...defines themselves by thier sexuality or sexual orientation....ever....for people are so much more than sex and sexuality.

I am not saying that people dont have sex or sexual relations...just that they do not define themselves by sexuality or sexual orientation..period.
One must be educated in the wisdom of this world to be that naturally stupid that they dont recognize this to be true.

Yet this group...Homosexuals...use this single identifiable fingerprint to declare thier greatness to the world. Only education in the wisdom religions or the wisdom of this world can dumb a people down so far that they do not recognize this fingerprint.

At the same time ..there are many heterosexuals which use this same fingerprint to declare thier excellence. Sexuality and sexual orientation. This too is ignorance and institutinalized stupidity. THey too do not seem to know the difference. It too is abomination.

Oh..by the way...the Wisdom Religions...the wisdom of this world ..is preciesly what the Nations surrounding Ancient Israel were doing and engaging in...and for which the Ancient Israelis were told not to do or observe. Runaway rampant sexuality was practiced by many of these nations. Particularly this was true around their pagan holidays and festivals.

But to set the record straight....this is exactly the disobedience for which the Ancient Israelis..did in fact do and we have the record of this throughout the Olde Testament and into the New Testament. That they were in fact disobedient in this. This is precisesly why they lost the land by 70 AD....disobedience.

And to clear this up...many of the New Testament Churchs are in fact following this same fingerprint in disobedience. Identifying themselves by sexuality..and mixing new wine with olde...leven with unleven....among other abominations they are practicing...even in ignorance.

No thinking individual defines themselves by their sexuality or sexual orientation...ever!! You have to be educated in the wisdom religions without knowing the differernce to get this naturally stupid.
People are so much more than mere sexuality..homo and hetero. Why limit ourselves by this fingerprint and then be ignorant enought to declare this nonsensse to be greatness when it is obviously not??

Notice...that this line of thought is not brought up by the so callled "experts" on this topic today. It is totally avoided. This is not accidental..but deliberate.

It is designed to keep us all in ignorance..homo and hetero on this issue.

For the record...proper thinking humans ...define who and what they are by thier lineage, their occupations, or some great work they have done and left to posterity...never their sexuality or sexual orientation. This applies homosexual as well as heterosexual

For to do this ..declare our greatness by sexuality or sexual orientation ..is just plain institutionalized stupidity. People are so much more than sexuality and sexual orientation.

Thanks to all for thier posts
Orangetom



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 





The laws and prohibitions you quote are from the Olde Testament. The dietary laws in particular do not apply under the New Testament. Ironically many Christian Believers are so often and needlessly befuddled when presented with these texts. I am not under the Olde Testament Bondage. I am not under Ishmael..but under Issac. All attempts such as yours are to bring us under Olde Testament Bondage...not under New Testament Grace.




Which is why i said that the law of sodomy doesn't apply either.All laws in the book of Leviticus come under OT covenants,not the NT covenants Jesus brought in.Yet its a book with verses in that are frequently used against homosexuality.So if Christians today want to stand by that law then they must stand by all the others too.





new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join