PRO-HOMOSEXUAL THEOLOGY VS CHRISTIANITY

AGAINST QUEEN JAMES HERESY & GAY THEOLOGY of LGBT REVISIONIST:

​

Persons have revised the Bible and produced Queen James Bible. There are 3 options they give the Christians.

1. Keep the Bible but reinterpret it so you are affirming homosexuality.

2. Change the bible i.e. rewrite the Bible. 

3. Acquiescence: Keep the bible but: be silent on LGBT issues. Below are some answers to their theological positions. 

Below are some responses to the Pro-homosexual apologist's assertions.

​

JESUS IS GAY?JESUS IS GAY

[1]. Jesus is Gay. Jesus walked around with 12 men and John leaned on him (Jn 13:23). Answer: If Jesus is a member of the Trinity then it means God is homosexual. How comes that a homosexual God would only design a heterosexual relationship (Gen 2:22-24, Gen 1:26) while condemning homosexuality at the same time (Gen 19:, Lev 18:22 & Lev 20:13). An openly gay Jesus would lose his disciples immediately, undergo stoning from the Jews and face open condemnation from God. If was so obvious that Jesus was homosexual, why was this not condemned by the Sadducees and Pharisees or the general public. The culture was for Rabbis to be male and to have male disciples not females. The culture also permitted friends to lean on each other while eating so this behaviour was familiar can a common practice.

JOHNATHAN WASS A HOMOSEXUAL?

[2]. Johnathan was homosexual 1 Sam 18:1. Answer: We really can’t take them seriously. This is a clear interpolation. Johnathan said he loved David like his soul his soul means as he loved himself. He never said as a he loved a woman. David truly understood God’s law of loving other’s as you would love yourself. Does this mean Johnathan loved himself sexually? Only a sexually driven, perverted mind will see this as sexual.

DAVID WAS HOMOSEXUAL?                                               

[3]. David was homosexual. Answer: 2 Sam 1:26 David spoke publicly of his best friend who was dead that his love surpassed that of a woman. 1) David could not stand before the congregation of Israelites and declare he was gay for he would have loss all respect from the priest and people and he would have been stoned immediately in a extremely zealous and strict religious culture.

2) The word Love was innocently used in those times to describe relationships between, family and friends without perverted meaning. 2) David is describing a bond between men where one will die for another best friend and he said this love was greater than love in his relationships. This is not unusual for friends to have stronger bonds than family members or even husbands and wives.

These two men were good friends and soldiers on a battlefield who would have developed bonds for life that they may never experience in a marriage. David’s loving bond was a lifelong bond between two men. David and Johnathan had a brotherhood relationship. The perverted, overly sexed mind of homosexuals cannot accept that the brotherly bond of men can be very strong and intimate without sex or sensualness so gays say they had to be sex involved or they were lovers because of the words love and woman.                                         

[4]. Ruth & Naomi were lesbians (Ruth 1:16) we are dealing with a oversexed, perverted, degenerate mind that would see two women holding hands and can only conclude they have to be homosexual, they can’t be friends…And Ruth said, Intreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God:... Answer: If you told your mother you will not separate from her but return home with her would anyone think this is a sexual comment of course not. The LGBT has a problem with this statement and two women living in the same house. We clearly see from the text, Naomi explaining there is no future for the two daughters (in-law) without a man (husband) Ruth 1:12-13, then from the time the two adventured forward Naomi the mother focused every effort to find her adopted daughter a man (husband). Only a hyper sexed person like the LGBT will read sex into it.

Can two women have sex without penetration? Yes, sex is not the penetration alone it includes everything that is involved to express sexual desire (lust) for another of the same sex that is wrong. Whether it is thinking/ lusting, touching, kissing, fellatio, penetration etc are all pertaining to sex. The issue God has is not the penetration or lack of it but that it’s two men or two women that is kissing or petting or penetrating. God’s is with the sexual desire for same sex.

SODOM & GOMORRAH JUDGEMENT

[5].                     Sodom & Gomorrah judgement. Gen 19: QJV says God did not punish them for homosexuality but rape. Answer: The Sodomites refused to rape Lot’s daughters (lot’s daughters were married or betrothed Genesis 19:12-15 but had not intercourse), this is proof that the rejection of the women showed they wanted a particular type of sex, specifically homosexual sex. Men lying with men is what would have brought them pleasure not the women.

In the Benjimites city the almost exact same thing happened (Judges 19:22-25). In both events they wanted to indoctrinate the men into their homosexual thinking/traditions/practices. There are two reports on why Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed.

Homosexuals only quote Ezekiel.

a. Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication (ἐκπορνεύω ekporneuo (ek-por-nev'-ō) v.to be utterly unchaste. (of either sex), and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Jude mentions two reason for the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and both had to do with sex. Fornication is made from two words ek and pornevo. The word πορνεύω porneuo (por-nev'-ō) v. 1. to act the prostitute. 2. (literally) indulge unlawful lust. The phrase strange flesh is two separate words ἕτερος heteros (he'-te-ros) adj. (an-, the) other or different and σάρξ sarx (sarx') n.1. flesh (as stripped of the skin). This refers to flesh other than human which could be animal flesh.

b. Ez 16:49-50 said, “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”.50 And they were haughty, and committed abomination. LGBT only quote Ezekiel.    

 Gen 19: Sodom and Gomorrah LGBT Bible revisionists defense: …The text of the story tells us that "the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man" (vs. 4) gathered at Lot's door and demanded that his guests be brought out to them. This language is important because it makes clear that the group at Lot's door was comprised of either all the people of the city (men and women) or, at a minimum, all the males of the city, both boys and men. This is a telling fact. …If the Scripture text had told us that "certain men of Sodom" or even "many men of Sodom" gathered at the door, we might then surmise that the men at the door could have been motivated by homosexual desire….

Response: (Gen 19:4 [KJV]) But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed (cabab) the house round, both old and young, all the people (`am) from every quarter(qatseh):

ALL PEOPLE?: The LGBT revisionists argued that “all people” in Gen 19:4 means all human beings including females so this was not a male gang, wanting homosexual sex. Incorrect! There is no word for ‘all’ in the Hebrew text here only a Hebrew word for ‘people’. Read what the word means- the H5971 עַם `am (am) n-m. 1. a people (as a congregated unit). 2. (specifically) a tribe (as those of Israel). 3. (hence, collectively) troops or attendants. 4. (figuratively) a flock. It is clear the meaning of scripture should be understood in the following way, there was a collection or congregation of men from every quarter/corner of Sodom.

Even if the whole town was present does not mean the women took part in the act. It may mean they spectated. This seemed to be a common feature and would be a grand spectacle or entertainment for this immoral town, drawing people from all around.

MEN & WOMEN?: The use of the word ‘enowsh’ translated as ‘men’ in genesis scripture etimology, H582 אֱנוֹשׁ 'enowsh (en-oshe') n-m. אֲנָשִׁים 'enowsh (en-oshe') [plural]  1. (properly) a mortal (and thus differing from the more dignified H120). 2. (hence) a man in general (singly or collectively). Lets look at the meaning of the word men in use in the book of Genesis. The word Adam is translated men which can be singular male or human (male and female)H120 אָדָם 'adam (aw-dawm') n-m. ruddy i.e. a human being (an individual or the species, mankind, etc). We see in Gen 6:1 Adam may mean in general human (male and Female or only male) or specific male. But from Gen 6:4 onward the writer only uses the word ENOWSH consistently to mean male gender Gen 6:4 “which were of old, men of renown” uses enowsh to represent powerful male warriors. Gen 12:20 And “Pharaoh commanded his men “[Enowsh -meaning male (solders)]. Gen 13:13 “But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the LORD exceedingly”- Enowsh -meaning male. Gen 14:24 and the portion of the men which went with me. Gen 17:23 every male among the men of Abraham's house; and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin…(only men were circumcised) Gen 17:27 all the men of his house, ...were circumcised…(only men were circumcised) Gen 18:2   three men (angels) stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them… so when the writer gets to Gen 19: we see the clear use of the same word enowsh used to mean male gender so the reader cannot misinterpret what the writer is saying. Gen 19:4 But before they (angels) lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: Gen 19:5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them. It is impossible to be confused which gender he is speaking of. There were no women in this gang rape. J

ESU NEVER CONDEMED HOMOSEXUALITY

[6] Jesus never condemned homosexuality. Answers:

(1) Jesus is the word, the word is a member of the Trinity, the Trinity is the God head, God is unified in nature, purpose, thought, word and deed and speaks as one God. Since Jesus is a member of the Trinity (God), Jesus / God unified in speech, spoke to the Jews of the Old Testament where he designed marriage & condemned homosexuality as recorded in Gen 1:26-28; where he created male and female; Gen 2:24; Lev 18:22 & 20:13; Gen 19: and affirmed his position in Matt 19:5.

We would have to assumed that in the New Testament Jesus’ views remained the same until proven otherwise. Therefore, the burden of proof is not on the Christian but on the person who practice homosexuality and Pro-gay theologians to prove Jesus changed his views or the Father’s view which is his also. If the Trinity is in disagreement all heaven will break loose.

Matt 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

(2) Jesus on Homosexual Marriage- Jesus was in existence before the incarnation during Christ's presence on earth and after he left earth. Since Jesus is member of the Trinity, he's omniscient and he knew this very well. So when he spoke of marriage it was intentional that he chose to speak of only one type of the two marriages that existed and it was intentional that he left out the other one. God is consistent and he recognizes only one type of marriage.no the fake one.    

Why Jesus did not defend homosexual marriage?

Jesus knew they were a small percentage of the world who were homosexual. If they were born that way or created that way or it was God’s design, then here was his chance to rescue even them from their oppressors and haters and deliver this minority group. Oops he did not. Why? He could have save them yet he left them out, he ignored them, he turned his back on the homosexual marriage, he

There was a discussion over marriage and instead of choosing sides Jesus took them to the scriptures. To the origin of marriage. The side that agreed with Genesis 2:22-24 would be standing in truth. Likewise, if Jesus was here today among the many debates on this issue. He would take us to Gen 2:22-24. The side that adheres to this teaching would be correct.

(3) Jesus, Holy Spirt of God killed homosexuality

The homosexual behaviour (Rom 1) that was practiced comes to an end (1 Cor 6:9) when you are washed, sanctified and justified in the name of Jesus and by the Spirit of God. The Holy Spirit is what puts it to death not Paul or any Christian. Here is the continued condemnation of homosexuality by God in the New testament for those who say it was not addressed by God.

(4) The socio-politico-religio-cultural context -did not permit for homosexuality to be conversation piece at the home table, in public, in the temple, and no one would dare ask Jesus the question. The answer was obvious and the stoning response to homosexuality contained any discussions. So, you won’t see it in Jesus’ sermons.

(5) Jesus’ apparent silence? Homosexuals argue that Jesus never said anything about homosexuality as if to suggest that this is some kind of approval. This is a logical fallacy. It’s the same argument that says Jesus never said anything about rape therefore he approved it.

(6) Jesus said sexual immorality defiles a person. Also, Matt 15:19 Jesus said sexual immorality which includes homosexuality defiles a person. (18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. 19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, sexually immoral, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: 20 These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.

[7] 1 Tim 1:10 said men defiled with men would not get to heaven but QJV deleted “defiled”. Answer: They have no response for this so they deleted God’s word. Defile is a translation of the word arsenokoites. Arsenokoitai is a Greek combined form of two words. Arsen correctly transliterated male and Koite (κοίτη) correctly translated bed, lying or cohabitation, hence when the two words are combined, they mean, men lying or in bed with men. There is no special context for them to put it in e.g. homosexual-sacrificial sex, homosexual-pederasty, homosexual-pedophilia, homosexual-prostitution, homosexual-rape, homosexual-incest, homosexual-adultery etc. Why did they delete it, I believe it speaks plain and simple to man to man sex without all of these suffixes or motives or distinctions or without special conditions. They try to add all these suffixes to homosexuality to say it is situational sex but God does not care for the situation, man to man is wrong especially scene in Rom 1: 26-27. It does not depend on the circumstances or context or motive.  

[8] Rom 1:26-27 … 26 women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27And 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. Answer: [QJV] claim they don’t know what unnatural means even though a clear context is given. For this reason God gave them over to dishonorable passions (pathē πάθη passions/ longing/desire) (root word πάθω patho means sensation). For their women change the natural (physical sensations) for that which is against nature (the physical) 27 and likewise (the men did the same thing)the men also abandoned natural [φυσικός phusikos meaning physical] relations with women and were inflamed in their passions [longing/desire] for one another [men]”. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

2. Physical relations- These are not political, spiritual, financial, sex with minors nor social class relationships. These are physical relationships that involved physical or biochemical sensations between man and woman (opposite sex-heterosexuality) that were being changed toward the same sex (homosexuality). Paul wrote in argument form using logic. What exactly was the unnatural act of women in vs 26? Look at vs 27, it tells us what it was. It said that the men dis the same thing as the women and then tells us what the men did which was to have homosexual intercourse.

Premise 1: the women were homosexual,

premise 2: the men were homosexual.

Conclusion: God gave them over because of homosexuality. The context in which we find the words/texts ‘unnatural, men abandoning women for men, men committing shameless acts with men and vile passions, all describe what is called in the modern era homosexuality an unnatural sexual act. Paul’s claim that homosexuality is one reason why God “gave them over” is very clear.                      

1) Pederasty-homosexuals claim it was pederasty. Also, Romans 1 is not about Pederasty. (Greek & Roman men kept young slave boys for sex). Paul said the men were doing what the women were doing. Since the women were not engaged in Pederasty he was not speaking of Pederasty. /                     2) God’s views unchanged- If 2000 years ago God’s stance on homosexuality had changed Paul would have preached the new position but his condemnation of it means it remained long after Jesus ascended into heaven.

​

SOFT OR HOMOSEXUAL                                                

[8]. 1 Corinthians 6:9: QJV claims that the word effeminate is unrelated to how the word is used today; rather, it means “morally weak.” Answer: The Greek word for “soft” is translated as “effeminate”; that is, a “soft, womanly man.”

Can homosexuals change. 1 co 6:11 “and such were some of you. The Holy Spirit power helped homosexuals to change”.  

According to QJV 1 cor 6:9 “the male who has many beds,” was an expression referring to men who are promiscuous. Answer: the Greek says “nor “malakos” nor “arsenokoites”. The Greek word arsenokoites translated here as “abusers of themselves with mankind,” Arsenokoitai is a Greek combined form of two words. Arsen correctly transliterated male and Koite (κοίτη) correctly translated bed, lying or cohabitation, hence when the two words are combined, they mean, men lying or in bed with men. Now homosexuals argue that it refers to those men who used their political power to force other men to have sex. Men lying with men for power, love, marriage, lust, prostitution, Pederasty, sacrifice, rape, dominance or cowardice are not the issue. The motive for lying with men does not matter it is this act of lying with a man that is a sin as pointed out in 1 Tim 1:10.

​

WAS LEVITICUS 18 ABOUT TEMPLE SEX?

[10] Leviticus 18:22 & 20:13 was revised to say, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind in the temple of Molech; it is an abomination. The Molech verses are clearly separated from the other verses. Here they try to say that sacrificial sex (Priest with the males) was the issue not a loving homosexual relationship. So, they condemn sacrificial sex but hold up intimate (love) sex. Vs 13 had nothing to do with Molech. The whole passage is not about Molech its about sexual sins period. For some reason child sacrifice to Molech was inserted. Homosexuality is clearly a different and unique crime or sin that stands on its own and is not judged within the context of Molech at all. Lying with a man is wrong and condemned even if you put the word love in front of it or  even if it was temple sex or not. There is no condition that makes it righteous.                     

​

DID PAUL SPREAD DIS-INFORMATIONDID PAUL DID PA

[11] It is said that Paul mislead people with his own doctrine and condemnation of homosexuality. 2Pet3:16 Answer: Here is what the Apostle Peter said of Paul. 2Pet 3:16 ”speaking of these things in all his letters. Some things in these letters are hard to understand, things the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they also do to the rest of the scriptures”. It is understood that Paul’s letters are compared with Old Testament scriptures which are the inspired word of God. Then these are not Paul’s perversions but the Holy Spirit writing through Paul. Paul is known to say when he not the Holy Spirit is giving his opinion on a topic and he has never said the condemnation of homosexuality was an opinion.                                 

Mat 19: 11-12 Also, the burden of proof is on the person to prove this refers to homosexuality.  Now what does the Eunuch have to do with marriage union. Absolutely nothing. Jesus only mentions it because of the disciple’s comment. The disciple could not handle the limited options Jesus said the husband have. The disciple said you will be better off if you are single.

​

DID JESUS SAY EUNUCHS ARE BORN THAT WAY?

Now what does the Eunuch have to do with marriage union. Absolutely nothing. Jesus only mentions it because of the disciple’s comment. The disciple could not handle the limited options Jesus said the husband have. The disciple said you will be better off if you are single.

Jesus responds to this observation of his teaching by the apostle and said, you are not the only one, a lot of people cannot handle this teaching except those who have this gift from God. Marriage is a gift from God. Not everyone can handle this lifetime commitment he spoke of. So only those persons who have been given the gift of marriage can handle the commitment. Those men who avoid marriage are called Eunuchs.

Then he said there are 3 types of Eunuchs Some that are born some are castrated by men and some voluntarily become Eunuchs so that they may enter the Kingdom of heaven.  The most interesting one of these is the last one. Who does that - voluntarily become a unit for the Kingdom?                   In 1 Corinthians 7:7 Paul said that he did it and he wish others could live alone and avoid marriage like him but it is a gift from God and there are some that can handle marriage because it is a gift to them to do so..

WHY WAS ADULTERY A CAUSE FOR DIVORCE?

Mat 19: 11-12 Jesus said that divorce was never in God's plan for marriage because the two people he married were perfect. but since the fall and sin entered into the marriage then permission has been given by God for divorce. However, you can't get a divorce for any reason except extra-marital sex or lust. Why is this cause for a divorce- because the woman sinned against her body which is also your body. It is no longer her body but yours because the two of you are one flesh. So, you can divorce because sin has been brought into the union. To God the marriage has become foul with sin and the union of two is now three so the union is now corrupted. Therefore, the man can separate himself from that sin by divorce. The Holiness and the righteousness of marriage has been corrupted with sin. Not just you but your marriage union has been corrupted.

In the covenant of marriage, they lived unselfishly for each other, they give up their own desires for each other as long as they lived.  vincent smith
 vincent smith