Here are some verses that come directly from the Bible that preachers refuse to quote publicly, proving that they selectively pick and choose verses out of context which justify their personal bigotry against gay and lesbian people. Take a look for yourself...

Some preachers often quote Leviticus 20:13 against gay and lesbian people, which says...

"If a man lies with a male 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." (Leviticus 20:13)

Let's now take a look at other verses that are in the same book as the above verse. This exercise proves that those preachers who are so enthusiastic about quoting Leviticus 20:13 become awfully quiet when it comes to other verses. Far from being about faith, this is really about the desires of certain preachers to promote religious prejudice against gay and lesbian people...

"For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him." (Leviticus 20:9)

Imagine what would happen today if we killed every child who was disrespectful to his parents. Most preachers conveniently choose to ignore this verse, which is merely 3 verses before Leviticus 20:13.

"If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has discovered her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from her people." (Leviticus 20:18)

Imagine what would happen today if we deported every man and woman who had ever had sex together while the woman was having her period (which is exactly what the above verse commands). Most preachers choose to ignore this verse, which is merely 5 verses after Leviticus 20:13.

"Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property." (Leviticus 25:44-45)

Did you ever wonder where racist Southerners and even the Supreme Court in the 1800's got the idea that slaves were just "property" and not people?

From the above verse, which most preachers, in their picking and choosing, choose to completely ignore. Or, maybe someone should ask those preachers if they support slavery, as does this verse.

Those Southerners were still racist, even though they were quoting the Bible to support their racism, just like some preachers quote Leviticus 20:13 to support THEIR bigotry against gay and lesbian people.

"Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard." (Leviticus 19:27)

Almost no preacher has never preached against the evils of shaving as they choose to completely ignore this verse as well. But that's what many anti-gay preachers do...they pick and choose what to believe. So much for being a "Bible believing" Christian, as many often claim to be.

"At the end of every seven years you must cancel debts." (Deuteronomy 15:1)

Imagine the chaos that would befall the American economy if the United States Government decided to "cancel" all debts every seven years. It would be an unmitigated disaster, which is probably why most anti-gay preachers quietly choose to ignore this verse, too.

"If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of the town. They shall say to the elders, 'This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard.' Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death..." (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)

If anti-gay preachers were to tell parents to bring their disrespectful children to City Hall headquarters to be stoned, they'd probably lose their entire following, which is why they also choose to ignore this verse, too.

"...do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear material woven of two kinds of material." (Leviticus 19:19)

Farmers in this country almost always grow more than one kind of crop in their fields, so most anti-gay preachers choose to ignore this verse as well. If they were to preach against farmers, they'd be in an uproar.

Most anti-gay preachers also ignore the Biblical command to not wear clothes that have two different kinds of material. I could be wrong, but the shirts that these preachers are often seen wearing must be a cotton/polyester blend, the most common in the United States of America. Yes, they choose to ignore this verse, too. "Bible believing" Christians? Hardly. They're one of those "pick and choose" Christians.

In conclusion...

What does this all mean? It means that most anti-gay preachers really ARE bigots even though they quote the Bible to back up their bigotry against gay and lesbian people. They pick and choose what parts of the Bible justify their condemnation of gay and lesbian people and ignore those which do not.

They quote the Bible against gay and lesbian people but conveniently choose to ignore verses that are in the very same chapter as the ones they quote. You have to understand, bigots usually ALWAYS use out-of-context facts ("non-sequiturs") and half-truths to justify their bigotry.

This proves that most anti-gay preachers choose which parts of the Bible endorse their own personal beliefs and ignore those that do not. What does this mean for you? It means that you can truly grow in the proper study of the Word ONLY by recognizing that the Bible shouldn't be misused the way those anti-gay preachers misuse it.

UPDATE

Many fundamentalist Christians have written to me since I first authored this page. They have argued that the verses I quote above are from the "Old Mosaic law". As such, they argue, the admonitions that it is OK to own slaves and forbidden to shave or wear clothes with two different fibers are not meant to be taken literally for our modern day.

My response is to agree completely! That is my whole point. If all the verses I quote above are NOT meant for today, then the anti-gay verses are not meant for today, EITHER. You can't say on one hand that, "Those verses are party of the old Mosaic Code" while using OTHER verses in that same code against gay and lesbian people.

The Old Mosaic code forbade homosexuality for a very simple, logical reason. The Jews believed that it was a sin for a man "to waste his seed". They believed that a man only had a limited number of sperm and once it was used up he could never have children again.

Therefore, the Jews, because they did not have the benefit of modern science, declared that sex must only be used for procreation. This is completely understandable since they were in desperate need to grow the Jewish population.

Today, however, it is foolish to take that verse out of context, given our historical understanding of its purpose. It is also foolish to apply a 4,000 year old admonition against homosexuality to our modern day, especially when we understand the reasons why it was made Old Testament law...to grow the Jewish population.

found this on fallwell.com

Views: 6667

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

None of those bible passages expressly talk about homosexuality. They are directed to fornicators.

1 Corinthians 14:34
"Women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says." (1 Corinthians 14:34)
theres only one difference in your argument ,all those laws of clothing,not shaving the corners of beard or side of head not mixing two kinds of seed etc....are not repeated in n.t. but teachings against homosexuality are: romans 1:26 talks about homosexuality and lesbianism, how its against nature p.s. when the bible says not to plant your field with two kinds of seed its talking about mixing two seeds together like a hybrid not that u cant plant two types of seed in the same field.PEACE!!!!!!!!!
And what does the Roman Catholic Church find a little too much for Roman Catholics?
Most of the Old Testament, especially those books to do with Slaughter and Genocide. The only books of the OT we did at Jesuit College were Genesis and Exodus, then skipped to the New Testament.
I think the World would be a much better place if that stupid old bible was totally ignored. I just finished reading "Godless" by Dan Barker, the former Pentecostalist preacher who, after much thinking and study realised there is no "god" and became Atheist and now runs with other people the Freedom from Religion Foundation. Barker was one of the speakers at the Global Atheist Convention held in Melbourne, Australia last month (March). I was at that Convention and throughly enjoyed every speaker: Richard Dawkins, Dan Barker, PZ Myers, A.C. Grayling and others. The Convention was such a success (2,500 attendees) that the Archbishops of Sydney (Roman Catholic and Anglican) preached scathing sermons at Easter services against Atheism and Atheists to half empty churches.
Jerry Falwell and his mob of money-grabbing Hell and Damnation preachers should suffer that same fate as those accused of the "sins" mentioned in the OT allegedly by "god": stoning to death. Like the Pope, Herr Papst Ratslnger they are a scourge on humanity.
2 Kings 8:26 says "Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign..." 2 Chronicles 22:2 says "Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign..."
2 Samuel 6:23 says "Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death" 2 Samuel 21:8 says "But the king took...the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul"
2 Samuel 8:3-4 says "David smote also Hadadezer...and took from him...seven hundred horsemen..." 1 Chronicles 18:3-4 says "David smote Hadarezer...and took from him...seven thousand horsemen..."
1 Kings 4:26 says "And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots..." 2 Chronicles 9:25 says "And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots..."
2 Kings 25:8 says "And in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month...Nebuzaradan...came...unto Jerusalem" Jeremiah 52:12 says "...in the fifth month, in the tenth day of the month...came Nebuzaradan...into Jerusalem"
1 Samuel 31:4-6 says "...Saul took a sword and fell upon it. And when his armourbearer saw that Saul was dead and...died with him. So Saul died..." 2 Samuel 21:12 says "...the Philistines had slain Saul in Gilboa."
Gen 2:17 says "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day thou eastest thereof thou shalt surely die [note: it doesn't say 'spiritual' death] Gen 5:5 says "And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died."
Matt 1:16 says, "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus..." Luke 3:23 says "And Jesus...the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli"
James 1:13 says "..for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man." Gen 22:1 says "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham..."
Gen 6:20 says "Of fowls after their kind and of cattle [etc.]...two of every sort shall come unto thee..." Gen 7:2,3 says "Of every clean beast thou shall take to thee by sevens...Of fowls also of the air by sevens..."
Luke23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost." John 19:30 "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."
Gen 32:30 states "...for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." John 1:18 states, "No man hath seen God at any time..."
Factual Errors
1 Kings 7:23 "He made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about." Circumference = Pi() x Diameter, which means the line would have to have been over 31 cubits. In order for this to be rounding, it would have had to overstate the amount to ensure that the line did "compass it round about."
Lev 11:20-21: "All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you." Fowl do not go upon all four.
Lev 11:6: "And the hare, because he cheweth the cud..." Hare do not chew the cud.
Deut 14:7: " "...as the camel, and the hare, and the coney: for they chew the cud, but divide not the hoof." For the hare this is wrong on both counts: Hare don’t chew the cud and they do divide the "hoof."
Jonah 1:17 says, "...Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights" Matt 12:40 says "...Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly..." whales and fish are not related
Matt 13:31-32: " "the kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed which…is the least of all seeds, but when it is grown is the greatest among herbs and becometh a tree." There are 2 significant errors here: first, there are many smaller seeds, like the orchid seed; and second, mustard plants don't grow into trees.
Matt 4:8: " Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them." Unless the world is flat, altitude simply will not help you see all the kingdoms of the earth.
This will be a length reply... but I will state the the Christian doctrine is that the original documents are the inerrant word of God in their original language which is not English

//2 Kings 8:26 says "Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign..." 2 Chronicles 22:2 says "Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign..."//

he correct age of Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem is 22. 2 Kings 8:17 tells us that Ahaziah's father Joram ben Ahab was thirty-two when he became king and he died eight years later, at the age of forty. Therefore, Ahaziah could not have been forty-two at the time of his father's death at age forty." (Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, page. 206-207.)

The discrepency in ages is due to a copyist error. We can see that the difference in ages is 20 years. The system of number notation used by the Jews at the time of Ezra consisted of horizontal hooks that represented decades. would equal the number 14 where would be 24. If one or both of the hooks were smudged or flaked off of a papyri, then the dates would be off by ten years or a factor of ten.

The fact that this is a copyist error does not invalidate the inspiration or authority of Scripture. Remember, God inspired the originals. They were without error. The copies have problems, though very very few. The copies are copies of inspired documents and, unfortunately, some copyist errors did creep into the manuscripts. However, they do not affect any doctrinal areas and are very rare.

//2 Samuel 6:23 says "Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death" 2 Samuel 21:8 says "But the king took...the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul"//

Saul had two daughters: Merab and Michal. 1 Samuel 14:49, says "Now the sons of Saul were Jonathan, and Ishui, and Melchishua: and the names of his two daughters were these; the name of the firstborn Merab, and the name of the younger Michal." Since 2 Samuel 6:23 states that Michal had no children, we can conclude that this is a copyist error that should have read Merab. "Many scholars substitute Merab for Michal in 2 Sam. 21:8, regarding it as an ancient scribal error, saying that after her death her sons were hanged to atone for Saul’s slaughter of the Gibeonites, a breaking of Israel’s covenant."1

//1 Chronicles 18:3-4 says "David smote Hadarezer...and took from him...seven thousand horsemen..."
1 Kings 4:26 says "And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots..." //

This is most probably a copyist error. Notice how the number is off by a single zero; that is, by a single notation of a digit. According to "Alledged Discrepencies of the Bible," page 382, regarding the characters used to designate numbers, "Nun final , was mistaken for dotted Zayin ," would account for the copyist error in the text. Most probably, the correct number is 7,000 charioteers.

//1 Kings 4:26 says "And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots..." 2 Chronicles 9:25 says "And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots..."//

There are two possible explanations for this discrepancy. 1) A copyist error. 2) The difference is due to time; that is, one account is at the beginning of Solomon's reign (1 Kings 4:26), and the other at the end (2 Chron. 9:25). I believe the most probable is a copyist error since we can see that Chronicles does have copyist errors in other areas. Therefore, it is probable that the same thing occurred here.

"In general it can be said that the books of Chronicles furnish approximate numerical estimates in the form of round numbers, frequently designed, as has been remarked, to express the magnitude of the occasion....Some estimates in Chronicles which appear to be particularly inflated can be corrected or scaled down by reference to the books of Samuel and Kings...However, it is not always the case that the figures in Chronicles exceed their counterparts in Samuel and Kings."1 The correct answer is probably 4,000 since 40,000 seems extraordinarily large. Furthermore, it seems likely that a single "10's" place was copied incorrectly accounting for the discrepancy.

//1 Samuel 31:4-6 says "...Saul took a sword and fell upon it. And when his armourbearer saw that Saul was dead and...died with him. So Saul died..." 2 Samuel 21:12 says "...the Philistines had slain Saul in Gilboa."//

1 Samuel 31:4-6 (New American Standard Bible)

4(A)Then Saul said to his armor bearer, "Draw your sword and pierce me through with it, otherwise (B)these uncircumcised will come and pierce me through and make sport of me " But his armor bearer would not, for he was greatly afraid (C)So Saul took his sword and fell on it.

5When his armor bearer saw that Saul was dead, he also fell on his sword and died with him.

6Thus Saul died with his three sons, his armor bearer, and all his men on that day together.

As we can see from this passage the death of Saul can be attributed to the Phillistines because he was in battle with them

//Gen 2:17 says "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day thou eastest thereof thou shalt surely die [note: it doesn't say 'spiritual' death] Gen 5:5 says "And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died//

I see you used the KJV which is the worst translation of the Bible LITV is the closest to the actual Hebrew which Genesis was inspired in "but of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil you may not eat, for in the day that you eat of it, dying you shall die"

//Matt 1:16 says, "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus..." Luke 3:23 says "And Jesus...the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli"//

It is customary to skip people in long genealogies and just because Luke chose to skip over Jacob is irrelevant

I dont have time to answer any more right now Bu I will later
So basically you follow a book that was written by goat herders, kings and fishermen 2,000 years ago....and this book has only ONE purpose....
To be the shining light to your god, proved unfalsifiable and perfect.

BUT...it's full of bullshit and copy errors?
It's PROVED to be faulty, but you still think it's ok to discriminate against others based on what it says?

Hey, here is an idea. Maybe that whole bit about hating gays is a copy error!
Maybe the misogyny is a copy error!
Sorry, but I wouldn't trust any book that is proven to be wrong on MULTIPLE accounts, especially when it tells me to hate or discriminate against other people.

If anything has ever reaffirmed my atheism, it's this discussion right here.
Thank you for that.
I dont understand why you think I hate gays "Love your enemy" would apply if I viewed them as an enemy. I suppose I neglected to mention that I am not in support of Rev. Fallwell and I actually and really annoyed with false teachers like him who give Christians a bad name

//BUT...it's full of bullshit and copy errors?
It's PROVED to be faulty, but you still think it's ok to discriminate against others based on what it says?//
The Bible actually showed the the earth was round l2500 years before it was proven to be round ( Catholics dont know their Bible)
Ex.
Job 26:10 (New American Standard Bible)


10"He has inscribed a (A)circle on the surface of the waters
At the (B)boundary of light and darkness.

Proverbs 8:27 (New American Standard Bible)


27"When He (A)established the heavens, I was there,
When (B)He inscribed a circle on the face of the deep,
Isaiah 40:22 (New American Standard Bible)


22It is He who [a]sits above the [b](A)circle of the earth,
And its inhabitants are like (B)grasshoppers,
Who (C)stretches out the heavens like a (D)curtain
And spreads them out like a (E)tent to dwell in.
Amos 9:6 (New American Standard Bible)


6The One who builds His (A)upper chambers in the heavens
And has founded His vaulted dome over the earth,
He who (B)calls for the waters of the sea
And (C)pours them out on the face of the earth,
(D)The LORD is His name.

I ask you how could the primitive writers of the Bible understand that the earth was round when they never even left their country. As for the Copyist errors they are very insignificant its not faith changing that a few people made a few mistakes when copying the holy texts of the Bible it happens
You could spend a lifetime trying to explain away all these scriptures to make them fit with what we know about the sun, the earth, stars, meteorites.

Go ahead and keep struggling with it because thats the only way we ever learn anything.

It doesn't help just to take it on faith.
If you would take time to undrestand it instead of just shouting contradiction anytime something looks a bit dicey I wouldnt have to explain all of it to like the example from Genesis when Jacob says that he saw God face to face then in john it says how no one has seen god face to face. Couldnt Jacob have been wrong but actually said that wihtout there being a contradciton? (THe ANswer is yes becassue that is the case)
LOL. Damn. You're a real piece of work. Have fun staying deluded and clinging to your precious book, lying to yourself that things aren't "dicey" just needing explanation like you're some real Bible scholar. It must be fun defending the indefensible.

RSS

  

Blog Posts

Labels

Posted by Quincy Maxwell on July 20, 2014 at 9:37pm 28 Comments

Services we love

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by Dan.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service