Queers and the Apostate Church
2 Peter 2:1 - But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
Last Saturday, I attended a discussion titled “Homosexuality and The Bible” hosted by a local Episcopalian “church”. Not surprisingly, the opinion of the main speaker, a Rev. Susan Miller was that there is nothing Biblically wrong with queers. Miller informed the audience (roughly 30+ people) that the Episcopalian “Church” ordained its first queer in the 1980’s.
I was probably the only person there who opposed homos. While they gave us name tags, I only used my first name. My opinions on faggotry had recently been published in a local paper and I didn’t want t a fight to start before the discussion began. I also saw that a woman (Who later identified herself as a “pagan”, i.e., a lite-satanist) whose letter to a local paper I responded to several years ago was there. Fortunately, I recognized her by name and we had never seen each other in person before.
Miller spoke of the differences of a literal and symbolic interpretation of the Bible, claiming that the symbolic interpretation is the “broader” view. In other words, the “broader” view is twisting what is plainly written until it conforms to whatever you want it to say.
One of the more important things I learned there was that the New Revised Standard version of the Bible was translated and/or endorsed by the World Council of Churches (WCC). The WCC is group of left-wing “churches” who often support Red causes. But, I’ll write more about that in a later post. I’m debating on whether I should burn my NRSV Bibles or simply throw them away.
We broke off into smaller discussion groups several times to discuss, or rather to pervert passages of Scripture that condemn queers.
The first small group discussion question was what was the sin of Sodom. Most would agree that the sins of Sodom were many, homosexuality being one of them. However, the conclusion reached by our group (Me excluded) was that Sodom’s sin was violence and inhospitality toward strangers. Miller used Luke 10:10, which spoke of how to deal with towns that wouldn’t accept Christian missionaries to claim Sodom’s sin was inhospitality, and Ezekiel 16:49 to claim its sin was in not providing for the poor. I’m no expert on ancient history, but I assume that was more than common among most societies in those days.
She, like others who try to legitimize homos, mention Leviticus and how most Fundamentalists reference its passages against faggots, but not the many other prohibitions. Perhaps it was a typographical error, but in one of her handouts, she claimed the Leviticus prohibited temple whores, male and female but did not prohibit “loving” “mutually supportive” relationships between homos.
In her handouts, she referenced Jude 1:7 where it was written that Sodom was punished for indulging in sexual immorality and unnatural lust. Most people would see that as including homos.
I should briefly go over what Episcopalians consider “marriage”. No, it doesn’t include actually being married. As Miller describes “marriage” it consists of two “committed” people, straight or queer.
When speaking on the New Testament passages against homos, Miller claimed that Paul opposed them because in “his” view of the world, heterosexuals are the natural order of God’s world. I would say that it isn’t just Paul’s view; a basic knowledge of anatomy reveals that to all thinking people.
When she spoke of chastity and marriage, Miller claimed that some “Christian” communities wanted their unmarried women to become pregnant before marriage to insure that they could become pregnant. (Presumably by the future husband. This begs the question on what happened if the man changed his mind after she was knocked-up) She also claimed that some “Christians” went to prostitutes. It was more than likely perversions like these that led Paul to write letters like the one’s he wrote to the Corinthians. Just because a person who claims to be a Christian commits a sin, doesn’t change the fact that it’s wrong.
Miller spoke on queers in the Greek and Jewish culture. She states that while the Jews (rightfully) had an aversion to homos, the Greeks accepted it. She spoke of how queers were fully accepted in the Greek military because it was felt that is created a closer bond between soldiers and that the men would be less likely to shame themselves in battle in front of their “lovers”. Soldiers have always risked their lives for their fellow soldiers and it wasn’t because they were sodomizing each other. She also mentioned that upper-class men during the samurai era were often queer. Again, just because a certain perversion is commonly practice doesn’t make it right.
The last discussion topic was what Jesus taught about queers, or as it was put, what did Jesus say against homos. I can’t find any scripture where Jesus specifically spoke against faggots, but neither can I find any scripture where He spoke against, men sleeping with their daughters or sons sleeping with their sisters or men or women sleeping with animals.
During our small group discussion, the discussion leader asked if anyone could find a passage where Jesus condemned queers. I had looked up several verses during a break, and while I couldn’t find passages where Jesus spoke against queers I did find a few where He spoke of a man leaving his parents and becoming one with his wife. The group pointed out that the reference was to divorce to which I agreed but that the passage also confirmed the natural order of the world, that being, male-female relationships and not male-male or female-female.
Even if you don’t believe the Bible, as is the case with Episcopalians, Unitarians the “Church” of Christ and several other apostate denominations, nature and a basic knowledge of anatomy should tell you that homosexuality is wrong. The queer lobby can twist the Bible all it wants, but it won’t change the facts.
Robot
Last Saturday, I attended a discussion titled “Homosexuality and The Bible” hosted by a local Episcopalian “church”. Not surprisingly, the opinion of the main speaker, a Rev. Susan Miller was that there is nothing Biblically wrong with queers. Miller informed the audience (roughly 30+ people) that the Episcopalian “Church” ordained its first queer in the 1980’s.
I was probably the only person there who opposed homos. While they gave us name tags, I only used my first name. My opinions on faggotry had recently been published in a local paper and I didn’t want t a fight to start before the discussion began. I also saw that a woman (Who later identified herself as a “pagan”, i.e., a lite-satanist) whose letter to a local paper I responded to several years ago was there. Fortunately, I recognized her by name and we had never seen each other in person before.
Miller spoke of the differences of a literal and symbolic interpretation of the Bible, claiming that the symbolic interpretation is the “broader” view. In other words, the “broader” view is twisting what is plainly written until it conforms to whatever you want it to say.
One of the more important things I learned there was that the New Revised Standard version of the Bible was translated and/or endorsed by the World Council of Churches (WCC). The WCC is group of left-wing “churches” who often support Red causes. But, I’ll write more about that in a later post. I’m debating on whether I should burn my NRSV Bibles or simply throw them away.
We broke off into smaller discussion groups several times to discuss, or rather to pervert passages of Scripture that condemn queers.
The first small group discussion question was what was the sin of Sodom. Most would agree that the sins of Sodom were many, homosexuality being one of them. However, the conclusion reached by our group (Me excluded) was that Sodom’s sin was violence and inhospitality toward strangers. Miller used Luke 10:10, which spoke of how to deal with towns that wouldn’t accept Christian missionaries to claim Sodom’s sin was inhospitality, and Ezekiel 16:49 to claim its sin was in not providing for the poor. I’m no expert on ancient history, but I assume that was more than common among most societies in those days.
She, like others who try to legitimize homos, mention Leviticus and how most Fundamentalists reference its passages against faggots, but not the many other prohibitions. Perhaps it was a typographical error, but in one of her handouts, she claimed the Leviticus prohibited temple whores, male and female but did not prohibit “loving” “mutually supportive” relationships between homos.
In her handouts, she referenced Jude 1:7 where it was written that Sodom was punished for indulging in sexual immorality and unnatural lust. Most people would see that as including homos.
I should briefly go over what Episcopalians consider “marriage”. No, it doesn’t include actually being married. As Miller describes “marriage” it consists of two “committed” people, straight or queer.
When speaking on the New Testament passages against homos, Miller claimed that Paul opposed them because in “his” view of the world, heterosexuals are the natural order of God’s world. I would say that it isn’t just Paul’s view; a basic knowledge of anatomy reveals that to all thinking people.
When she spoke of chastity and marriage, Miller claimed that some “Christian” communities wanted their unmarried women to become pregnant before marriage to insure that they could become pregnant. (Presumably by the future husband. This begs the question on what happened if the man changed his mind after she was knocked-up) She also claimed that some “Christians” went to prostitutes. It was more than likely perversions like these that led Paul to write letters like the one’s he wrote to the Corinthians. Just because a person who claims to be a Christian commits a sin, doesn’t change the fact that it’s wrong.
Miller spoke on queers in the Greek and Jewish culture. She states that while the Jews (rightfully) had an aversion to homos, the Greeks accepted it. She spoke of how queers were fully accepted in the Greek military because it was felt that is created a closer bond between soldiers and that the men would be less likely to shame themselves in battle in front of their “lovers”. Soldiers have always risked their lives for their fellow soldiers and it wasn’t because they were sodomizing each other. She also mentioned that upper-class men during the samurai era were often queer. Again, just because a certain perversion is commonly practice doesn’t make it right.
The last discussion topic was what Jesus taught about queers, or as it was put, what did Jesus say against homos. I can’t find any scripture where Jesus specifically spoke against faggots, but neither can I find any scripture where He spoke against, men sleeping with their daughters or sons sleeping with their sisters or men or women sleeping with animals.
During our small group discussion, the discussion leader asked if anyone could find a passage where Jesus condemned queers. I had looked up several verses during a break, and while I couldn’t find passages where Jesus spoke against queers I did find a few where He spoke of a man leaving his parents and becoming one with his wife. The group pointed out that the reference was to divorce to which I agreed but that the passage also confirmed the natural order of the world, that being, male-female relationships and not male-male or female-female.
Even if you don’t believe the Bible, as is the case with Episcopalians, Unitarians the “Church” of Christ and several other apostate denominations, nature and a basic knowledge of anatomy should tell you that homosexuality is wrong. The queer lobby can twist the Bible all it wants, but it won’t change the facts.
Robot
posted by ROBOT at
20:43
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home