The Conspiracy To Twist Bible Verses To Suit Their Antigay Agenda - Romans 1:26-27

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 09:10 PM
link   
I was having an interesting discussiong with someone in ATS chat room the other day. He wasn't against homosexuality but after I told him that the Bible never said that homosexuality was a sin, he showed me the verses Romans 1:26-27. I told him that it was in the context of ritual worship. He brought up a good point. Even if it was in the context of pagan temple worship, it still shows that homosexuality was unnatural as a consequence.

Granted, it may show that homosexuality was wrong in some cases, but the wordings show that it is universally wrong.

Is it as simple as that?

Actually, no. It was only until recent (this century) was the verses actually used against homosexuality. I will not mention the other verses in the Bible because they have been debunked throughoutly in other threads.

It appears that it was a recent conspiracy to sow discord and to turn people against homosexuals (among many, many others).

I will attempt to debunk that the verses of Romans 1:26-27 is against homosexuality in all cases.

Here's the verses:

Romans 1:26-27 (King James Version)

26 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:

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.

(Courtesy of BibleGateway.com

 


Romans 1 is about Romans and shrine prostitution





The ancient custom of shrine prostitution, prevalent in first century Rome, forms the historical motif of the first chapter of Romans. Ancient shrine prostitution is the most historically accurate explanation of Paul’s words in Romans chapter 1.

Non-gay Christians insist that Romans 1 must be interpreted apart from its first century historical context of shrine prostitution. This causes them to misinterpret Paul's words, specifically the words, "against nature" as a universal condemnation of homosexuality, something Paul never intended and never said.

www.gaychristian101.com...

You got to ask yourself this: why would Christians intentionally misinterpret Paul's words despite many scholars interpreting to the contrary? Is this a part of the conspiracy? Or just plain ignorance? Who is really responsible for this?





Cybele was an ancient fertility goddess, called "the Protectress of Rome," whose pagan temple loomed over first century Rome from atop the Palatine Hill. In Cybele’s temple, castrated Galli priests engaged in anal sex with men, in unholy worship of Cybele.

The religious situation Paul faced in first century Rome involved Romans and shrine prostitution.


It is getting clearer now. This is about pagan temple worship.

Jeremiah And the Psalmist On Romans And Shrine Prostitution





Paul’s argument about Romans and shrine prostitution contains clear inter-textual echoes from Psalm 106:20 and Jeremiah 2:11. These verses speak of Gentile idolatry which drew Israel away from God. The context of Psalm 106 is lust, v. 14, and God giving sinful Israel what they want, v. 15. Then comes the description to which Paul alludes in Romans 1.

“they changed their glory into the similitude of an ox... They forgat God their savior [did not like to retain God in their knowledge, Romans 1:28]

...were mingled with the heathen... they served their idols... they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils [Molech worship], And shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan [Molech worship, Leviticus 18:21]” Psalm 106:20-38.

“Hath a nation changed their gods, which are yet no gods? but my people have changed their glory [changed the glory, Romans 1:23], for that which doth not profit.” Jeremiah 2:11.


So now it's about forgetting their "true God" and worshipping the idols.



I know this picture is familiar to many of you.

This is a picture of idolators worshipping the image of Molech in a grove.



“...because they have made their groves, provoking the LORD to anger. And he shall give Israel up because of the sins of Jereboam, who did sin, and who made Israel to sin...

For they also built them high places, and images, and groves, on every high hill, and under every green tree. And there were also sodomites, [qadesh, shrine prostitutes], in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel.” I Kings 14:15-24.

“Then God turned, and gave them up to worship the host of heaven; as it is written in the book of the prophets, O ye house of Israel, have ye offered to me slain beasts and sacifices by the space of forty years in the wilderness? Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, figures which ye made to worship them...” Acts 7:42-43.


Getting clearer now?

One last point, but not the least, let's talk about the leading antigay apologist of our time.


The leading antigay apologist of our time, Dr. Robert Gagnon, cites Philo, 20 BC-AD 50, to support his assertion that male cult prostitutes (shrine prostitutes) were well known to first century Jews, although, in Gagnon’s opinion Paul did not primarily have shrine prostitution in mind in Romans 1.


Allright, let's recap:


The primary focus of Paul’s condemnation in Romans 1 is the illicit sexual practice of shrine prostitution, the same illicit sexual practice in worship of the fertility goddess, which is condemned throughout the Old Testament. Thus, Paul's argument in Romans 1, against shrine prostitution, is consistent with the Biblical witness.


Now to his assertion:



Remember that Dr. Gagnon is adamantly anti-gay, Yet, in a section of his book headed "Homosexual Cult Prostitution in Israel," Dr. Gagnon makes the following points about shrine prostitutes.

As you read keep in mind that this summary from The Bible And Homosexual Practice, represents the scholarly viewpoint of Dr. Robert Gagnon, the most anti-gay evangelical of the twenty first century.

Although it was not his intention, I believe Dr. Gagnon's list strongly supports our contention that shrine prostitution best fits the Biblical and historical context of Paul's argument in Romans 1.


Dr. Gagnon Affirms Shrine Prostitution As A Major Factor





1. There is good evidence that homosexual cult prostitution existed in Israel, Gagnon, p. 100.

2. The words qedesim and qades refer to men at pagan temples who engaged in male-male, religious prostitution, Gagnon, p. 101.

3. It was the function of the qedesim to offer their bodies to pagan male worshippers for sex, Gagnon, p. 102.

4. I Kings 14:24 links the abominations-toebah, of Israel and Judah, to the abominations of the nations God expelled from the land of Israel.

These abominations particularly single out male-male sex in worship of the ancient fertility gods, Gagnon, p. 103.

5. The existence of assinu, kugarru and kuluu, castrated male worshippers of the fertility goddess, is good evidence that male-male cult prostitution existed in the ancient near east, Gagnon, p. 104.

6. God’s use of the epithet “dog” in Deuteronomy 23:18, to describe cult prostitutes, reveals His revulsion for same sex religious prostitution, Gagnon, p. 104.

7. King Josiah’s forceful action to eradicate the qedesim must have been directly related to Moses’ law in Deuteronomy 23:18, concerning qedesim-dogs, Gagnon, p. 106.

8. The author of Job 36:14 viewed the qedesim as male cult, shrine, temple prostitutes, Gagnon, p. 108.

9. That cult prostitutes were religious in nature is implied by their name, which means holy or consecrated ones and by their connection to Asherah. The prostitution aspect is clear from Deuteronomy 23:18. They were paid for services they provided and they are identified as harlots, in other Biblical passages, Gagnon, p. 108.


I am very sorry for this LONG thread. I will add more and add my commentaries as we continue to discuss.

It should be clear by now that the chapter is about idolatry and pagan worship.

This is my first LONG thread
I need more practice.

I will discuss the meaning of the phrase "changed what was natural into that which is against nature" later.


[edit on 22-7-2009 by Deaf Alien]




posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


Seriously, I am not saying I have anything against homosexuals or their lifestyle, but how in the heck can you say the Bible isnt against Homosexuality. I dont care what people do in their own lives, but I do get offended when people try to twist the Bible around to make it fit their agenda. All I can say is that if I were gay the last thing club on Earth I would join is the Christian Church.

It clearly states that homesexual sex is a sin. Here are just a few verses from the Bible regarding the subject of homosexuality.

Leviticus 18:22:
22 “Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin.

2.Leviticus 20:13 (Whole Chapter)
“If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense.

1 Corinthians 6
9 Don’t you realize that those who do wrong will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don’t fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality, 10 or are thieves, or greedy people, or drunkards, or are abusive, or cheat people—none of these will inherit the Kingdom of God.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 


Like I said, those verses have pretty much been debunked in other threads. The focus is on Romans 1:26-27. If you want, we can discuss those verses you mentioned.

BTW, the verses in Leviticus is also about pagan worship. Read the whole context.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deaf Alien
reply to post by grapesofraft
 


Like I said, those verses have pretty much been debunked in other threads. The focus is on Romans 1:26-27. If you want, we can discuss those verses you mentioned.

BTW, the verses in Leviticus is also about pagan worship. Read the whole context.


Well the only way you can debunk them is to make up a bunch of BS and try to twist the meaning. They are as clear as day. There are no exceptions in those verses. I am sure if God wanted there to be exceptions he would have had them put in there.

You can believe what you want, but it isnt going to make it come true. The Bible clearly states OVER AND OVER AGAIN that Homosexuality in any form is a detestable sin. It never once mentions it in a positive light.

Please, dont get mad at me. I didnt write it. The issue is between homosexuals and God. I dont care what people do, but the Bible is pretty clear on this matter.

I would say the only way it would become right for a homosexual to become Christian is to stop engaging in the sexual behavior, but still love the person. The issues seems to be more with the sexual act than the love feelings.

[edit on 7/22/2009 by grapesofraft]



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 




Well the only way you can debunk them is to make up a bunch of BS and try to twist the meaning. They are as clear as day. There are no exceptions in those verses. I am sure if God wanted their to be exceptions he would have had them put in their.


Why place them in the context of pagan worship, and never outside? Why has Jesus never mentioned homosexuality as a sin, even when he listed the sins of Sodom? No BS here.



You can believe what you want, but it isnt going to make it come true.


It's not what I "believe", it's what many scholars before 1900 believed, and they knew more than us. They had closer access to manuscripts and history!



The Bible clearly states OVER AND OVER AGAIN that Homosexuality in any form is a detestable sin. It never once mentions it in a positive light.


Over and over again in the light of pagan worship or idolatry.



Please, dont get mad at me. I didnt write it.


LOL, why would I get mad at you? That's the purpose of this thread. To discuss and debate and to come to greater understanding. Perhaps to get people to understand that this is a conspiracy



The issues seems to be more with the sexual act than the love feelings.


Well, there you go. You unintentionally proved my point.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


Also, I did go back and read the Leviticus verses in context and both are in the middle of a list of other sexual sins. Nothing around it has to do with idol worship.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


Like I said, it doesnt matter to me other than it is twisting the Bible to try to make it say something it didnt.

I think if what you said in your last post about me proving your point by saying it is the sex act and not the love feelings than I think that is fine.

So what we are agreeing on is that the Bible isnt agains a man loving another man, but it is against a man having sex with another man?

If that is your point then I could see how you could interpret it that way, as the Bible is about loving one another, but it is also about actions that are considered sinful.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


Also, I did go back and read the Leviticus verses in context and both are in the middle of a list of other sexual sins. Nothing around it has to do with idol worship.


You did not read fully.


At this point, there is a break in topic being discussed. The chapter switches to a condemnation of false forms of worship in general, and the worship of the Pagan god Molech in particular. Like many other Pagan temples, those dedicated to Molech had temple prostitutes. His followers believed that engaging in sexual activity with these prostitutes would please Molech and "... increase the fertility of themselves, their spouses, their livestock and their fields."


www.religioustolerance.org...



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 




Why place them in the context of pagan worship, and never outside?


The verses in Leviticus are not placed in the context of pagan worship, they are placed in a list of sins which pagan worship happens to be one of them.

For instance this whole chapter is a list of sins one being pagan worship and another being homosexual sex. There are a bunch of others mixed in.
From the Bible.



Leviticus 20
1 The Lord said to Moses, 2 “Give the people of Israel these instructions, which apply both to native Israelites and to the foreigners living in Israel.

“If any of them offer their children as a sacrifice to Molech, they must be put to death. The people of the community must stone them to death. 3 I myself will turn against them and cut them off from the community, because they have defiled my sanctuary and brought shame on my holy name by offering their children to Molech. 4 And if the people of the community ignore those who offer their children to Molech and refuse to execute them, 5 I myself will turn against them and their families and will cut them off from the community. This will happen to all who commit spiritual prostitution by worshiping Molech.

6 “I will also turn against those who commit spiritual prostitution by putting their trust in mediums or in those who consult the spirits of the dead. I will cut them off from the community. 7 So set yourselves apart to be holy, for I am the Lord your God. 8 Keep all my decrees by putting them into practice, for I am the Lord who makes you holy.

9 “Anyone who dishonors[a] father or mother must be put to death. Such a person is guilty of a capital offense.

10 “If a man commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, both the man and the woman who have committed adultery must be put to death.

11 “If a man violates his father by having sex with one of his father’s wives, both the man and the woman must be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense.

12 “If a man has sex with his daughter-in-law, both must be put to death. They have committed a perverse act and are guilty of a capital offense.

13 “If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense.

14 “If a man marries both a woman and her mother, he has committed a wicked act. The man and both women must be burned to death to wipe out such wickedness from among you.

15 “If a man has sex with an animal, he must be put to death, and the animal must be killed.

16 “If a woman presents herself to a male animal to have intercourse with it, she and the animal must both be put to death. You must kill both, for they are guilty of a capital offense.

17 “If a man marries his sister, the daughter of either his father or his mother, and they have sexual relations, it is a shameful disgrace. They must be publicly cut off from the community. Since the man has violated his sister, he will be punished for his sin.

18 “If a man has sexual relations with a woman during her menstrual period, both of them must be cut off from the community, for together they have exposed the source of her blood flow.

19 “Do not have sexual relations with your aunt, whether your mother’s sister or your father’s sister. This would dishonor a close relative. Both parties are guilty and will be punished for their sin.

20 “If a man has sex with his uncle’s wife, he has violated his uncle. Both the man and woman will be punished for their sin, and they will die childless.

21 “If a man marries his brother’s wife, it is an act of impurity. He has violated his brother, and the guilty couple will remain childless.

22 “You must keep all my decrees and regulations by putting them into practice; otherwise the land to which I am bringing you as your new home will vomit you out. 23 Do not live according to the customs of the people I am driving out before you. It is because they do these shameful things that I detest them. 24 But I have promised you, ‘You will possess their land because I will give it to you as your possession—a land flowing with milk and honey.’ I am the Lord your God, who has set you apart from all other people.

25 “You must therefore make a distinction between ceremonially clean and unclean animals, and between clean and unclean birds. You must not defile yourselves by eating any unclean animal or bird or creature that scurries along the ground. I have identified them as being unclean for you. 26 You must be holy because I, the Lord, am holy. I have set you apart from all other people to be my very own.

27 “Men and women among you who act as mediums or who consult the spirits of the dead must be put to death by stoning. They are guilty of a capital offense.”


See how it is not in the context of pagan worship, they are both just sins in a laundry list of sins.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:12 PM
link   
From your quote:



If any of them offer their children as a sacrifice to Molech



The chapters before and after chapter 18 deal extensively with idolatry. We can therefore expect that much of chapter 18 will deal with the same topic.

www.gaychristian101.com...

Still idolatry and pagan worship.



Verse 22 is translated in the King James Version as: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

If the verse is considered in isolation -- as it is most often done -- then a logical interpretation is that the verse condemns all sexual activity between two males.

If Leviticus 18:22 is considered in the context of its surrounding chapters and previous verse, then one might expect that it refers to some forbidden idolatrous activity in a Pagan temple from which the ancient Israelites must separate themselves.


Those are not my words, but scholars' who know more than us.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   
Well if you're going to get all literal, it clearly states

“Give the people of Israel these instructions, which apply both to native Israelites and to the foreigners living in Israel."

So I guess that means that unless you are a practicing Jew, living in Israel, or both, it doesn't apply to you and you are free to be as gay as you like. Can't just pick and choose you know.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:26 PM
link   
reply to post by quackers
 


Oh, touche!

I've read that verse but I didn't pay attention to it but it was in the back of my mind.

Thank you for your post!



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:26 PM
link   
What the hell does a "Scholar" know more than you? That's the damned problem with religion is all the "experts". Your relationship with God is supposed to be very personal. It's what YOU feel. If you are wrong, then you will be judged at the end of your worldly existence.

Not to mention all this crap from the Old Testament NO LONGER APPLIES. Well at least not to Christians. Christ came to fulfill the prophecy. After that, only HIS rules apply.

Now, from that perspective, you are to be Christ like. That being the case, Christ WASN'T gay (so far as we know) so it would be up to you to hold yourself as Christ like and not be gay.

OR we could all just get over it, realize that it's all crap and straight people could leave their habits in the bedroom and gay people could too. Quit trying to make people believe that your behavior is OK and just do what you want. There shouldn't be any discussion on what you do in your private life.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by midnightbrigade
 




What the hell does a "Scholar" know more than you? That's the damned problem with religion is all the "experts".


Scholars from many centuries who have studied and had access to original or more contementary manuscripts and had knowledge of languages vs. "modern scholars"?

Riddle me this:

Many scholars since 100 AD or so stating that this chapter (among many others) is about pagan worship and never about homosexuality VS. "modern scholars" (only under 100 years) stating that this is about homosexuality in general. Which is correct?

This is clearly an agenda.



Your relationship with God is supposed to be very personal. It's what YOU feel.


Well, of course. This goes without saying.



Not to mention all this crap from the Old Testament NO LONGER APPLIES.


Well, it applies to antigay christians. They want to rule homosexuals' lives. If they had their way, there'd be imprisoning of homosexuals (if not stoning them to death or whatever else they would do). I can give you examples of their rhetorics.



Quit trying to make people believe that your behavior is OK and just do what you want. There shouldn't be any discussion on what you do in your private life.


Who is trying to make their behavior "OK"? It is modern Christians who make homosexual behavior not "OK".



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


LMAO, I am sure I could find 10 bible scholars that would say the scholar you are quoting is wrong. We all know there are scholars for both sides of the fence, so that doesnt help your case other then its better than having no scholars support your side.

It is clear that the whole chapter of Leviticus is a laundry list of sins. The ones regarding Molech being the first thing, because nothing pisses off God more than idol worship. Remember, he is a jealous God.

But you can keep trying to twist it to make it seem like it is accepted.

As far as Jesus not saying it was a sin, there are tons of sins he doesnt mention. He didnt need to. The law was clearly defined by then. He clearly states that the old laws still apply, but He is a path to forgiveness.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


So from your point of view, pagans were the only ones God was referring to then? I believe you had better do a little more research on the matter. I believe you could be wrong in what you are thinking. Then again, I may be wrong.


1Kings 14:24 And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel.


This issue has many teeth. They are all divisive. It worked so well in the past, which is why the same program is being applied. Why throw out a perfectly good weapon that is still loaded?



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:57 PM
link   
You are actually over thinking this, its really very simple in the bible. The bible defines what a marriage relationship is supposed to be, and the Ten Commandments state that any sexual activity outside the marriage relationship is sinful (whether it be adultery or fornication). That even includes heterosexual relationships out of wedlock. The marriage relationship is very clearly defined as it is used frequently as an allusion to Christ (husband) and his Church (Bride).



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackflap
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 



1Kings 14:24 And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel.



And what does "sodomities" mean to you?



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:58 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


A star for you. Excellent point. Good job keeping it simple.
Also, lets not forget that the Bible defines marriage as being between a man and a woman. There is not one example of a man-man or woman-woman marriage in the entire Bible.

[edit on 7/22/2009 by grapesofraft]



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


LMAO, I am sure I could find 10 bible scholars that would say the scholar you are quoting is wrong. We all know there are scholars for both sides of the fence, so that doesnt help your case other then its better than having no scholars support your side.


Like who? It's funny how modern scholars go against many scholars of many centuries. Ask yourself why would they go against them.



It is clear that the whole chapter of Leviticus is a laundry list of sins. The ones regarding Molech being the first thing, because nothing pisses off God more than idol worship. Remember, he is a jealous God.


Yep. You keep on proving my point over and over again.



But you can keep trying to twist it to make it seem like it is accepted.


Why do you keep on saying that I am trying to make it okay or more accepted? It is the antigay Christians who make it less accepted or less "OK".



As far as Jesus not saying it was a sin, there are tons of sins he doesnt mention. He didnt need to. The law was clearly defined by then. He clearly states that the old laws still apply, but He is a path to forgiveness.


If homosexuality is as bad as modern Christians make it out to be, you'd think that Jesus would at least mention it.





top topics
 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join



 
$('#skin').click(function(){ window.location.href = "http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1008463/pg1"; });