Influential Christians Guilty of Biblical & Scientific Distortion

[Dylan569]

I write specifically of Dan Zelzell in the Christian Post, about the label 'gay Christian' being unwise.

Zelzell starts off already convinced gay is sinful when he puts it into the following list: "Quick-Tempered Christians," "Gay Christians," "Anxious Christians," "Judgmental Christians." He has not shown that gay is sinful before putting it into that list of clearly sinful acts. Just as Jesus showed that "divorce" was not at the beginning, it is not always sinful as in the case of an unfaithful spouse; in like manner gay orientation did not exist in the beginning, but it is not always sin.

He then mentions a study that indicates 83% of gays/queers experienced childhood trauma and is a cause of same-sex attraction. That study does NOT indicate the trauma is what caused the homosexual orientation. He then denies DNA causes homosexual orientation, but scientific studies show the cause to come from multiple causes, not just DNA. He refers to gayness as "mysteriously" simmering in the sin nature. He is distorting science in order to make homosexual orientation come from a choice, rather than from factors not chosen by the gay. I find it ludicrous that he refers to it as a mystery, therefore he cannot understand it, but then proceeds to claim authority to oppose the science. Just a little research shows that to be misleading, or maybe even a prevarication. In a rather brief summation of the current state of science you find the following:

Homosexual orientation likely arises from a mix of biological, genetic, and possibly prenatal environmental factors. Social and cultural influences shape how it is understood and expressed, but do not cause it. No single cause has been definitively identified, and much remains to be discovered about the specific pathways that influence sexual orientation.

Zelzell then attempts to prove what he has assumed up to this point, that homosexuality is a choice and is sin. He quotes what appears to be the NIV condemning "male prostitutes" and "homosexual offenders". He claims Paul was inspired to use these "extremely revealing" labels. Well, claiming that malakos translated "effeminate" traditionally as in the KJV is incorrect, that is foolishness. You cannot find malakos used in a sexual conduct of any kind anywhere else in the NT, or in the Greek OT. You cannot find that definition in the Classical Greek Lexicon LSJ. So, you'll search a long time before you'll ever find a clear basis to make malakos mean "male prostitute" in the NT.

The next distorted translation or misleading rendering is "homosexual offenders". For one thing, this supposed inspired label from Paul never existed until the late 19th century and coming into English around 1900. If "homosexual' is used as adjectival noun, it merely means the offense spoken of was by two or more males; which can mean rape, coercion or abuse of any kind. The sin is what the offense is that Paul means, not that it refers to two gay males.

The KJV, RV, ASV, YLT did not use "homosexual" or any synonym thereof, and this practice is continued in the REB, RSV, NRSV, NRSVue. It is extremely strange that the meaning of those translations is cast aside by so-called evangelicals for "homosexual" a word and concept not in existence in the time of Paul. Paul apparently created the word. We know what the KJV, RV, ASV and YLT meant because the 1828 Webster's Dictionary tells us:

"ABU'SER, n. s as z. One who abuses, in speech or behavior; one that deceives; a ravisher; a sodomite. 1 Cor 6."

The meaning in one word was "sodomite", one that deceives, a ravisher. The standard translations after the 1946 RSV corrected the erroneous use of "homosexuals". Those calling themselves evangelicals insist upon re-translating in their versions in order to support their clear bias, their homophobia. That is NOT any different than the Jehovah's Witnesses translating "a god" in John 1:1 to support their theology! The JWs & evangelicals have a belief, then go so far as mis-translate to support it, to prop it up. It is clear that their claimed phrase "hate the sin but love the sinner" is a transparent attempt to hide their hateful homophobia!

 

[Rhema]

God didn't create people to be Gay.
It's that simple.

So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth."​

- Genesis 1:27-28 NRSV

God saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.​

- Genesis 1:31 NRSV

 

[Dylan569]

God didn't create people to be Gay.
It's that simple.

So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth."​

- Genesis 1:27-28 NRSV

God saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.​

- Genesis 1:31 NRSV

"Who do you think you are to answer God back? Can the pot say to the potter, ‘Why did you make me like this?’? Surely the potter can do what he likes with the clay. Is he not free to make two vessels out of the same lump, one to be treasured, the other for common use?" (Rom 9:20-21 REB)

"The Lord said to him, ‘Who is it that gives man speech? Who makes him dumb or deaf? Who makes him keen-sighted or blind? Is it not I, the Lord?" (Exod 4:11 REB)

Who is to say that God makes a man blind or deaf in the physical realm that is far from the perfection of creation; yet He also makes or forms the man's sexual orientation, which may not be the perfection of the creation, but that does not make it sin? We live in a fallen world, not the perfection of creation, but everything that is different from Eden's perfection is not sin. The law defines sin, not the created order.

Only a fool or a liar would claim that he chose his sexual orientation, so who did make that determination? A man certainly has control over how he lives out his God-given situation, and even men are not always given the gift of sexual abstinence, even for a temporary period:

"I should like everyone to be as I myself am; but each person has the gift God has granted him, one this gift and another that. To the unmarried and to widows I say this: it is a good thing if like me they stay as they are; but if they do not have self-control, they should marry. It is better to be married than burn with desire." (1Cor 7:7-9 REB)

Later in the chapter we see Paul applying these rules to the then difficult times:

"I think the best way for a man to live in a time of stress like the present is this—to remain as he is." (1Cor 7:26 REB)

Paul gave as the solution as being "marriage", so you either accept 'gay marriage' or you are okay with a gay man marrying your daughter, if you have one. Ecclesiastes 4:7-12 gives the answer for the gay man.

 

[Rhema]

"Who do you think you are to answer God back? Can the pot say to the potter, ‘Why did you make me like this?’? Surely the potter can do what he likes with the clay. Is he not free to make two vessels out of the same lump, one to be treasured, the other for common use?" (Rom 9:20-21 REB)

To use scripture to voice your own personal "righteous indignation"??? How pompous. Paul was just being a bully, trying to silence others from expressing legitimate concerns and asking appropriate questions.

And to select one portion of scripture to contradict another portion of scripture, especially when the context has nothing to do with the subject of the matter is an obvious act of desperation. God did not make you gay. Now if you wish to reject the very scripture that God gave to show that He only created Male and Female to be fruitful and multiply and that this was good, well you wouldn't be the first to person in history to try and pervert scripture to pursue a personal agenda.

"The Lord said to him, ‘Who is it that gives man speech? Who makes him dumb or deaf? Who makes him keen-sighted or blind? Is it not I, the Lord?" (Exod 4:11 REB)

You would quote scripture from a people who would have stoned you without a second thought? Not very thoughtful.

And why would this verse not also apply to the pedophile? The serial killer? The thief? The rapist? Your attempt to use Exodus 4:11 to say "God made me do it," is worse than those who would claim "The devil made me do it."

Jesus was posed this very same question to address Exodus 4:11.

And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him. I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world. When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay, And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing.​

- John 9:1-7 KJV

If God had indeed made this man blind, then it's obvious that Jesus directly disobeyed the will of the Father by healing him.

But make no mistake about it, sin entered the world and broke all the goodness that God had made. It wasn't a specific sin of the blind man (he was, after all blind from birth) nor was it any specific sin of the parents, but rather that creation itself was broken. The way that God had designed the world - to be good - was no longer so.

For you to continue to trumpet out that GOD WANTS GAY PEOPLE in creation, is rather pitiful, and truly cannot be distinguished from GOD WANTS CHILDREN TO SUFFER EXTREMELY PAINFUL CANCER.

Personally, I recognize six genders (and NO I won't be addressing this further), but four of these stem from the genetic damage that Adam gave himself in the garden - as does all disease and death.

I won't pretend to understand the inner compulsion that drives your appetites, just as I don't understand what is inside a person giving into their inner lusts to have an affair (meaning become an adulterer).

This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.​

- Galatians 5:16-17 KJV

Live by the Spirit, I say, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh. For what the flesh desires is opposed to the Spirit, and what the Spirit desires is opposed to the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you want.​

- Galatians 5:16-17 NRSV

Many of your posts here seem to be a justification for you to gratify the desires of your flesh. Now is it for me to condemn you? No. Just to point out that such gratification is not borne out by the life of the Spirit.

The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery; and making her stand before all of them, they said to him, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" ... And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again."​

- John 8:11 NRSVA

He also makes or forms the man's sexual orientation, which may not be the perfection of the creation, but that does not make it sin?

No.
He doesn't.
And anything outside the perfection of creation IS sin by definition.

The law defines sin, not the created order.

YOU DON'T HAVE THE CREATED ORDER (or you wouldn't be gay). And do you think that creation doesn't follow The Law? Creation WAS the Law, until it was broken. What then follows is the attempt of God to fix things as best can be fixed.

the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them.​

- Matthew 11:5 NRSV

Even then YOU DON'T HAVE THE LAW, beyond the Teachings of Jesus:

How can you say, "We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us," when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?​

- Jeremiah 8:8 NRSV

Even what you have as law (including Exodus 4:11) cannot be trusted to not be a lie. Especially when such scripture is used to promote a perverted end.

Yes, you are perverted. So am I. We all are. In different directions, yes, but all sin is the perversion of the perfection of creation as God had intended.

Repent,
Thus sayeth the Lord...


Rhema

 

[B-A-C]

Who do you think you are to answer God back? Can the pot say to the potter, ‘Why did you make me like this?’?

Did God create people to sin?
Some people like drugs, some people like adultery, some people like fornication, some people like alcohol, some people like gambling, some people like violence, some people like pedophelia, ... and it seems some people like to have sex with the same gender they are. But just because you like to do something... does that make it not a sin?

Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
Rom 1:27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
Rom 1:28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,

1Cor 6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,
1Cor 6:10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

Lev 18:22 'You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.

 

[Dylan569]

To use scripture to voice your own personal "righteous indignation"??? How pompous. Paul was just being a bully, trying to silence others from expressing legitimate concerns and asking appropriate questions.

And to select one portion of scripture to contradict another portion of scripture, especially when the context has nothing to do with the subject of the matter is an obvious act of desperation. God did not make you gay. Now if you wish to reject the very scripture that God gave to show that He only created Male and Female to be fruitful and multiply and that this was good, well you wouldn't be the first to person in history to try and pervert scripture to pursue a personal agenda.


You would quote scripture from a people who would have stoned you without a second thought? Not very thoughtful.

And why would this verse not also apply to the pedophile? The serial killer? The thief? The rapist? Your attempt to use Exodus 4:11 to say "God made me do it," is worse than those who would claim "The devil made me do it."

Jesus was posed this very same question to address Exodus 4:11.

And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him. I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world. When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay, And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing.​

- John 9:1-7 KJV

If God had indeed made this man blind, then it's obvious that Jesus directly disobeyed the will of the Father by healing him.

But make no mistake about it, sin entered the world and broke all the goodness that God had made. It wasn't a specific sin of the blind man (he was, after all blind from birth) nor was it any specific sin of the parents, but rather that creation itself was broken. The way that God had designed the world - to be good - was no longer so.

For you to continue to trumpet out that GOD WANTS GAY PEOPLE in creation, is rather pitiful, and truly cannot be distinguished from GOD WANTS CHILDREN TO SUFFER EXTREMELY PAINFUL CANCER.

Personally, I recognize six genders (and NO I won't be addressing this further), but four of these stem from the genetic damage that Adam gave himself in the garden - as does all disease and death.

I won't pretend to understand the inner compulsion that drives your appetites, just as I don't understand what is inside a person giving into their inner lusts to have an affair (meaning become an adulterer).

This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.​

- Galatians 5:16-17 KJV

Live by the Spirit, I say, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh. For what the flesh desires is opposed to the Spirit, and what the Spirit desires is opposed to the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you want.​

- Galatians 5:16-17 NRSV

Many of your posts here seem to be a justification for you to gratify the desires of your flesh. Now is it for me to condemn you? No. Just to point out that such gratification is not borne out by the life of the Spirit.

The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery; and making her stand before all of them, they said to him, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" ... And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again."​

- John 8:11 NRSVA


No.
He doesn't.
And anything outside the perfection of creation IS sin by definition.


YOU DON'T HAVE THE CREATED ORDER (or you wouldn't be gay). And do you think that creation doesn't follow The Law? Creation WAS the Law, until it was broken. What then follows is the attempt of God to fix things as best can be fixed.

the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them.​

- Matthew 11:5 NRSV

Even then YOU DON'T HAVE THE LAW, beyond the Teachings of Jesus:

How can you say, "We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us," when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?​

- Jeremiah 8:8 NRSV

Even what you have as law (including Exodus 4:11) cannot be trusted to not be a lie. Especially when such scripture is used to promote a perverted end.

Yes, you are perverted. So am I. We all are. In different directions, yes, but all sin is the perversion of the perfection of creation as God had intended.

Repent,
Thus sayeth the Lord...


Rhema

Rhema, I know you think you are a better translator of God's word than all the recognized, standard English translators; now I see that you think the Apostle Paul was merely a bully, by your sinful, godless judgment. This is enough wasting time on you, because as has been shown before, you show no evidence whatsoever online of being truly "born from above", a regenerate person. I can only imagine how corrupt your life in person must be. I've figuratively shake the dust from my cyber-sandals as I end any more dialogue with you.

 

[Dylan569]

Did God create people to sin?
Some people like drugs, some people like adultery, some people like fornication, some people like alcohol, some people like gambling, some people like violence, some people like pedophelia, ... and it seems some people like to have sex with the same gender they are. But just because you like to do something... does that make it not a sin?

Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
Rom 1:27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
Rom 1:28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,

1Cor 6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,
1Cor 6:10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

Lev 18:22 'You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.

You wrote "Did God created people to sin"? God is not the author of sin, so of course not. Your problem is, you cannot show anywhere that the New Covenant Christian male is condemned for being in a faithful, gay relationship. I've gone over and over the applicable verses and shown that they do not refer to men in relationship with men. I refer the readers to: OP "Gay or Homosexual" originally posted Jan 10, 2022 in the Bible Study forum. In that thread I have posted expositions of each of the verses many parrot over and over, without proving what they claim what they state.

It does no good to quote such reference works such as the "New Strong's Dictionaries of Hebrew and Greek", when they are creations of the same homophobic types heard so often among evangelicals today. The author's use of a Biblical word overrides any man-made definition because if the verses were only understood to mean "homosexuals" as defined today, then the church through 19 centuries was teaching the verses leaving out the true sin, since homosexual is a new word and concept coined in 1869 Germany and coming into English around 1900.

The silliness is exposed when the logic is conflicting. Why would the translators not simply translate fornication and adultery as "heterosexuals"? The only literal use of the fornication and adultery in the Bible where genders are shown, is ALWAYS M-F. If pointing to verses that do refer to some sort of sexual sin between males, what logic is there to translate that by sexual orientation instead of actually taking the time to study to see what is truly being condemned? Sodom was clearly about attempted rape, Leviticus clearly is for Old Covenant Israel, and was male temple prostitution, Paul's writings of course are shown to refer to some type of abuse and promiscuity not simply two males in a loving relationship that included physical intimacy.

 

[Garee]

I write specifically of Dan Zelzell in the Christian Post, about the label 'gay Christian' being unwise.

Zelzell starts off already convinced gay is sinful when he puts it into the following list: "Quick-Tempered Christians," "Gay Christians," "Anxious Christians," "Judgmental Christians." He has not shown that gay is sinful before putting it into that list of clearly sinful acts. Just as Jesus showed that "divorce" was not at the beginning, it is not always sinful as in the case of an unfaithful spouse; in like manner gay orientation did not exist in the beginning, but it is not always sin.

He then mentions a study that indicates 83% of gays/queers experienced childhood trauma and is a cause of same-sex attraction. That study does NOT indicate the trauma is what caused the homosexual orientation. He then denies DNA causes homosexual orientation, but scientific studies show the cause to come from multiple causes, not just DNA. He refers to gayness as "mysteriously" simmering in the sin nature. He is distorting science in order to make homosexual orientation come from a choice, rather than from factors not chosen by the gay. I find it ludicrous that he refers to it as a mystery, therefore he cannot understand it, but then proceeds to claim authority to oppose the science. Just a little research shows that to be misleading, or maybe even a prevarication. In a rather brief summation of the current state of science you find the following:

Homosexual orientation likely arises from a mix of biological, genetic, and possibly prenatal environmental factors. Social and cultural influences shape how it is understood and expressed, but do not cause it. No single cause has been definitively identified, and much remains to be discovered about the specific pathways that influence sexual orientation.

Zelzell then attempts to prove what he has assumed up to this point, that homosexuality is a choice and is sin. He quotes what appears to be the NIV condemning "male prostitutes" and "homosexual offenders". He claims Paul was inspired to use these "extremely revealing" labels. Well, claiming that malakos translated "effeminate" traditionally as in the KJV is incorrect, that is foolishness. You cannot find malakos used in a sexual conduct of any kind anywhere else in the NT, or in the Greek OT. You cannot find that definition in the Classical Greek Lexicon LSJ. So, you'll search a long time before you'll ever find a clear basis to make malakos mean "male prostitute" in the NT.

The next distorted translation or misleading rendering is "homosexual offenders". For one thing, this supposed inspired label from Paul never existed until the late 19th century and coming into English around 1900. If "homosexual' is used as adjectival noun, it merely means the offense spoken of was by two or more males; which can mean rape, coercion or abuse of any kind. The sin is what the offense is that Paul means, not that it refers to two gay males.

The KJV, RV, ASV, YLT did not use "homosexual" or any synonym thereof, and this practice is continued in the REB, RSV, NRSV, NRSVue. It is extremely strange that the meaning of those translations is cast aside by so-called evangelicals for "homosexual" a word and concept not in existence in the time of Paul. Paul apparently created the word. We know what the KJV, RV, ASV and YLT meant because the 1828 Webster's Dictionary tells us:

"ABU'SER, n. s as z. One who abuses, in speech or behavior; one that deceives; a ravisher; a sodomite. 1 Cor 6."

The meaning in one word was "sodomite", one that deceives, a ravisher. The standard translations after the 1946 RSV corrected the erroneous use of "homosexuals". Those calling themselves evangelicals insist upon re-translating in their versions in order to support their clear bias, their homophobia. That is NOT any different than the Jehovah's Witnesses translating "a god" in John 1:1 to support their theology! The JWs & evangelicals have a belief, then go so far as mis-translate to support it, to prop it up. It is clear that their claimed phrase "hate the sin but love the sinner" is a transparent attempt to hide their hateful homophobia!

Yes, God hates (does not bless) the sin performed by the sinner. Hates both.

Identity theft by Satan the master of identity theft. . with all power and signs and lying wonders to deceive , as if true prophecy (2 Thessalonian 2:9)

The I will, I will ascend to the presence of Christ the clouds . . rainbow clouds used to represent his unseen presence

Isaiah 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

Giving the illusion he can see into the hearts of all of mankind, in order to set up his racism doctrines or called today DEI making the government the accuser of racism, mysoginism, gender confusion hatred of Isreal etc. . . . .hatred for one another,

God is not a racist Isreal his chosen people not chosen race to be used as metaphors in parables. Christ made all nations as families his eternal bride.

It would seem many are under the pagan foundation called "re-incarnation" the return in another body human and even animal. male to female, or female to male. . just simply believe or imagine there is no upcoming heaven or hell as if the resurrection on the last day under the Sun has come . even some believers will fall for the lying signs to wonder after rather than believing prophecy hook it line and sinker

2 timothy2 seems to support the spiritual understnding of faith

2 Timothy 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.

Imagine by the Beatles the day dreamer, theology. The foundation or song of the left, the progressively losing foundation.

Imagine​

Song by​

John Lennon
Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try

No Hell below us
Above us, only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today
I
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do

Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too

Imagine all the people
Living life in peace
You

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can

No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
You

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one