I appreciate your post and your links for further understanding.
Hoping there would be something new, after reading the first 2 and some of the 3rd, I decided my intelligence had been insulted enough.
Let me explain….
The first guy claims to be a DR. Ok, fine. He doesn’t state where he got it from which I find unusual.
He claims to have studied for 50 years. Ok. He doesn’t know if there are 6 or 7 verses talking about homosexuals? From the website:
'• Jesus says nothing about same-sex behavior.
• The Jewish prophets are silent about homosexuality.
• Only six or seven of the Bible's one million verses refer to same-sex behavior in any way -- and none of these verses refer to homosexual orientation as it's understood today. '
He states there are 1 million verses in the Bible? Ok. There are 31102 verses in the Bible.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/study/misc/66books.htmlHe Claims that Sodom was destroyed because they didn’t give to the poor??? Oh, please! They did all kinds of evil things and God destroyed them because they didn’t help the needy? He states:
'Listen to what Ezekiel 16:48-49 tell us: "This is the sin of Sodom; she and her suburbs had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not help or encourage the poor and needy. They were arrogant and this was abominable in God's eyes."'
He seems to have missed verse 50 for some reason…
Ezk 16:50 They were haughty and practiced abominable deeds before me. Therefore when I saw it I removed them.
He goes on and on but never really gets to any real substance about anything.
He has no references at all to support anything he says.
I marvel at his ability to earn a Masters degree and to learn Hebrew and Greek, but, sorry, he has not said anything credible here other than his own theories.
Your 2nd link is about as good.
I really like this self-defeating statement from their page:
‘Bible translators must be aware of the errors that have been made in previous versions of the Bible; they are widely discussed in theological literature. But it would probably not be economically possible at this time to produce a translation of the Bible that was accurate. People are so used to expecting homophobic references in a half-dozen locations in scripture that they probably would not buy a Bible that was accurate to the original text, or which admitted that the meanings of certain words are unknown. ‘
Give me a break! Same old song, 2nd verse. People wouldn’t buy an accurate Bible?? Too expensive?? Fine, let’s all go on being incorrect and keep this silly debate going.
They even go on the claim that the Bible translators are anti-gay and therefore translated in the negative toward gays! Again, no supporting reference, who, where, etc.
It goes on to say there were 3 different possible same-sex relationships in the Bible that are not condemned. 2 of them they admit are not sexual. (why would they even list them?) On the 3rd, David and Jonathan, they try to draw a conclusion that they were without any supporting evidence other that the same “interpreted wrong” stance.
Surprisingly, they do show different versions of the Bible, which all say the same thing, and claim, again, they’re all incorrect and its interpreted wrong. No citations as to where to find the correct translation or writings.
They do have some footnote references. They are just more gay publications that will try to support their claims or from where they got their info from. A slanted view? Sure. They also reference different Bible versions.
On the 3rd link, I gave up after I saw they were blatantly twisting Scripture.
You know, twisting it to fit what someone wants to believe or to support their claims.
Again, on the Sodom event, they claim that all the men that wanted to have sex with the Angels, really just wanted to see their papers since they were visitors???
From the article:
‘Because Lot was not a 'permanent inhabitant' of Sodom but was a ger or sojourner (that is residing temporarily) he needed permission to entertain foreign guests at night. Lot may have exceeded his rights by receiving and entertaining two foreigners whose intentions might have been hostile and whose credentials it seems, had not been examined. This explanation provides a natural reason for the demand, "Where are the men who came to thee this night? Bring them out unto us, that we may know them." Hence, when the men of Sodom gathered around to demand that the strangers be brought out to them, "that they might know them" they meant no more than to "know" who they were and the city was consequently destroyed not for sexual immorality but for the sin of inhospitality to strangers. ‘
Again, read Ezekiel 16:50 above.
From the net.Bible.org website, commentary about genesis 19:5,
10 tn The Hebrew verb éÈãÇò (yada’, “to know”) is used here in the sense of “to lie with” or “to have sex with” (as in Gen 4:1). That this is indeed the meaning is clear from Lot’s warning that they not do so wickedly, and his willingness to give them his daughters instead.
sn The sin of the men of Sodom is debated. The fact that the sin involved a sexual act (see note on the phrase “have sex” in 19:5) precludes an association of the sin with inhospitality as is sometimes asserted (see W. Roth, “What of Sodom and Gomorrah? Homosexual Acts in the Old Testament,” Explor 1 [1974]: 7-14). The text at a minimum condemns forced sexual intercourse, i.e., rape. Other considerations, though, point to a condemnation of homosexual acts more generally. The narrator emphasizes the fact that the men of Sodom wanted to have sex with men: They demand that Lot release the angelic messengers (seen as men) to them for sex, and when Lot offers his daughters as a substitute they refuse them and attempt to take the angelic messengers by force. In addition the wider context of the Pentateuch condemns homosexual acts as sin (see, e.g., Lev 18:22). Thus a reading of this text within its narrative context, both immediate and broad, condemns not only the attempted rape but also the attempted homosexual act.
This was a nice try; but overall, all these say the same thing: the Bible is interpreted wrong, and gives nothing as to where it can be found that is right.
You know, I really was joking about someone writing a new version of the Bible so it could fix all the errors and mistakes, but I wish someone would so we can all be on the same page, so to speak.
I have not had a chance to look at the Torah, but I will try when I get time.
I feel that I've seen, heard, and read enough.
