Gay Bible Rewrites the Word of God

Patriot News Daily ^ | 7/15/2015 | Staff

[HomerBohn]

Five Supreme Court Justices found within themselves the authority to rewrite the ancient definition of marriage, so a gay group has taken it upon themselves to do the same with the word of God.

In an effort to resolve “any homophobic interpretations of the Bible,” the group has come out with the Queen James Version of the Good Book.

Within its pages, they have taken the liberty of changing every verse that condemns homosexuality.

One example of the difference between the Queen James and the King James can be found in Leviticus 18:22. The original text reads as follows: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.

The new, LGBT-approved text reads: Thou shalt not like with mankind as with womankind in the temple of Molech: it is an abomination.

This new interpretation tackles each problematic verse in the same fashion, adding restrictions and disclaimers in an attempt to make Biblical condemnation of homosexuality a thing of the past. “We wanted to make a book filled with the word of God that nobody could use to incorrectly condemn God’s LGBT children, and we succeeded.”

A Meaningless Change Changes like these only matter if you believe the Bible is just another man-created book of myth and fiction, subject to the trends and whims of the times. And if you believe that, then what is the point of worrying what it says to begin with?

If you believe instead that the Bible is the divinely-inspired, perfect word of God, then changing it to fit your political sensibilities is an exercise in futility. No, actually, it’s worse than that. It encourages Christians to cherry pick which parts of the book to follow and which parts to ignore. It deceives believers into thinking they are living lives that please their Creator. Beyond the Fringe If it ended with this group’s “Gay Bible,” it would be nothing more than a trivial story to laugh at. But there is ample reason to suspect that the “Queen James Version” could have a much larger influence on Scripture in the years to come. It wouldn’t surprise us to see these new gay-friendly verses find a home in mainstream copies of the Bible. It’s not even beyond the realm of possibility that these verses could eventually set the new standard while versions that retain the “homophobia” fall out of fashion.

Remember when the LGBT lobby promised that they had no interest in attacking Christian beliefs? Remember when they swore that they merely wanted equal rights? Yeah, those were lies if you haven’t figured it out by now. They didn’t – and don’t – want tolerance. They want fealty. -

[HomerBohn]

Any true Christian following the Bible knows that Jesus would NOT approve of such a degrading life style and is very definite in his teaching. I may not judge you in your final death here on earth but if you think you can openly defy Jesus you are wrong and you WILL go to Hell.

[Junk Silver]

“you WILL go to Hell.”

These people are already there.

[rjsimmon]

“We wanted to make a book filled with the word of God that nobody could use to incorrectly condemn God’s LGBT children, and we succeeded.”

So many things wrong with this statement:

• We are not all God's children. We are His creation. Only those that accept Christ as their savior are His children (John 1:12)
• God has condemned homosexuals, not man.
• You succeeded only in find and replace editing. Changing the inerrant Word of God is impossible.
• Your book is not filled with the Word of God, it is a forgery and the author has an excellent memory.

[piytar]

What they are doing is not some disagreement on translations amongst honest theologians. Rather, they are intentionally perverting the Word of God to serve their agenda. Woe be unto them:

Rev 22:18-19:

I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this scroll.

And if anyone takes words away from this scroll of prophecy, God will take away from that person any share in the tree of life and in the Holy City, which are described in this scroll.

[Jan_Sobieski]

Homotheology is already being preached from our pulpits. Why not have a Sodomite Bible? "As it was in the Day of Lot (Sodom)..."

[HomerBohn]

Satan has taken over the Churches of the world. Clueless phony Christians have allowed this.

I honestly believe the second coming is coming soon, and not to a theatre near you!

[sphinx]

I wonder if the edited version is published with a disclaimer explaining that it is not faithful to the original text. If not, there is a truth in labeling issue here.

[TexasRepublic]

It’s gonna suck to be them on Judgement Day. Mocking God is a bad idea!

[BunnySlippers]

I personally like the LOL Cat Bible

1 Oh hai. In teh beginnin Ceiling Cat maded teh skiez An da Urfs, but he did not eated dem. 2 Da Urfs no had shapez An haded dark face, An Ceiling Cat rode invisible bike over teh waterz. 3 At start, no has lyte. An Ceiling Cat sayz, i can haz lite? An lite wuz.4 An Ceiling Cat sawed teh lite, to seez stuffs, An splitted teh lite from dark but taht wuz ok cuz kittehs can see in teh dark An not tripz over nethin.5 An Ceiling Cat sayed light Day An dark no Day. It were FURST!!!1 6 An Ceiling Cat sayed, im in ur waterz makin a ceiling. But he no yet make a ur. An he maded a hole in teh Ceiling.7 An Ceiling Cat doed teh skiez with waterz down An waterz up. It happen.8 An Ceiling Cat sayed, i can has teh firmmint wich iz funny bibel naim 4 ceiling, so wuz teh twoth day.

[Alex Murphy]

Five Supreme Court Justices found within themselves the authority to rewrite the ancient definition of marriage, so a gay group has taken it upon themselves to do the same with the word of God. In an effort to resolve “any homophobic interpretations of the Bible,” the group has come out with the Queen James Version of the Good Book. Within its pages, they have taken the liberty of changing every verse that condemns homosexuality.

LOL but they told us there were no such verses!

[Bidimus1]

This is different than say .. BOM how ?
(note that I do disagree with the BOM and its followers in religion but most of their social beliefs are ones I agree with.. at least till poly becomes and issue.)

[caww]

Their fantasies are about as real as as "Oz"!

[Safrguns]

I wonder what they did with the last few verses in the bible?

Rev 22:18

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

[xp38]

Deuteronomy 22:5
The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

[piytar]

Yup.

(One nitpick: I’d say ATTEMPTING to mock God is a bad idea. God Himself cannot successfully be mocked by mere humans. /yeah, I know, picky...)

[subterfuge]

Historically, even non-Christians had sense enough not to mock Him. You know, just in case. God will NOT be mocked!

[Ancient Man]

Where’s Tomás de Torquemada when we need him?

[PATRIOT1876]

“I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy in this book: If anyone adds anything to this, God will strike him with the plagues that are written in this book”
~Revelation 22:18

“Professing to be wise, they became fools”
~Romans 1:22

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil”
~Isaiah 5:20

[Old Sarge]

So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel — let the reader understand — then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.
Matt. 24:15-16

[Steve_Seattle]

"You shall not lie with a man as with a woman in the Temple of Moloch."

This is the same crap that a local gays-for-Jesus guy tries to get away with, i.e., claiming that all Biblical prohibitions of homosexuality refer only to temple prostitution. There is no textual basis whatsoever for that narrow interpretation.