Nonsense
There’s a lot of nonsense floating around today. It seems that humans, when given the opportunity, will do whatever it takes to give an excuse to their behavior. One has to wonder why. Why go through all the trouble to justify evolutionary theory to the histories told in the Bible? It is so remarkable that when you remove the taint of evolutionary thought from real history, much clarity can be achieved. Why go through all the trouble of justifying sin by mitigating the justice of God displayed throughout all history? It is self evident that guilt is a condition of the human spirit, regardless of the depravity of the individual. Those who seek self-destruction seek to eliminate their “pain.” What do you suppose the source of that pain is?
Yet, anything and everything is used to substitute for the truth. I saw an interview with Elton John where he discussed a variety of topics, one of which was his newly adopted child. In the interview he stated that, when referring to his “partner” “we had Zachary on Christmas day…” They had a baby? What more could you expect from a society that chooses which babies should be born, and self-determines gender assignments. These things are a result of evolutionary thought and secularist philosophy, yet Christianity seems more and more to want to embrace these ideals. Just goes to prove “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” The man that coined this phrase ought to know. No one was better at making people accept horror as normal than Joseph Goebbels, Minister of Propaganda for the Nazi party. But, interestingly enough, he learned his trade from the progressives in the United States.
It was the progressives here, in the United States, that founded Union Theological Seminary, who’s purpose was to remake Christianity into a blend of socialist ideals and Christian doctrine. This school has, throughout the years, spun off many other schools and graduated thousands of pseudo-theologians, forever changing the concepts of Christianity around the globe. But, I don’t want the reader to assume that we should be blaming this one institution. No. In fact, the true meaning of conspiracy is the idea of one or more persons with the same agenda, collaborating towards a common goal. The real truth is that all you have to have is a common goal. You don’t even have to work together, or join as a single entity. All you have to do is work towards your ideals.
I recently read an article, happy to inform us that ancient Christians believed that there were two creations of humanity, and that the first creation was a hermaphrodite. This, despite the multiple references in the Bible to God as having made man first, and in his own image. This interpretation is, no doubt, due to a special reading of the word “man” as being generic to humankind, and not male in gender. Still, one might wonder how the writer concludes that there were two creations.
Using several disingenuous sources she then tells us that God’s original plan for humanity was that our sexuality would be androgynous. In other words, no need for human procreation at all. This despite the fact that one of the very first commands of God was to “be fruitful and multiply.” The reason for this is given as heterosexuality was an “afterthought designed to give back the man what he had lost.” An afterthought? Since when does God have afterthoughts? Wouldn’t that deny the concept that God is omniscient? If he didn’t know he was going to create heterosexuality before he created man, then doesn’t that mean He really isn’t a very good creator? Or, does that mean that He’s been forced to keep up with contingencies He didn’t foresee, or perhaps plan for?
The author goes on to tell us that David was a homosexual. It seems that the love between David and Jonathan must have been homosexual, because the Bible tells us that Jonathan loved David more than women. The author admits this premise is flimsy because she uses the phrase “the seemingly intimate relationship between… David and Jonathan…” Seemingly? You mean, you don’t know. This infers clearly that love means sex and that intimacy is a condition of a sexual relationship.
Unfortunately, for hundreds of generations of humans, love meant love and was separate from sex and intimacy simply meant a close familiarity either intellectually, or physically and in the case of a married couple, both. It makes me wonder what this author’s impression of the relationship between Frodo Baggins and Samwise Gamgee must have been. Take note men; according to this author you cannot have a loving, intimate relationship with a man unless it involves sexuality. I wonder, would the author be willing to suggest that Jesus was gay?
Next, using a totally out of context reference to Jude, she tells us that the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah were not homosexuality, but rather were the citizens attempts at sexually assaulting angels. She bases this conclusion on the idea that in the time of Noah God destroyed the earth for that very thing. This, despite the fact that the Bible itself tells us that “GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually” and this was the reason he “repented” that he had made man.
Finally she begins to tell us that the references against same-sex intercourse are for specific people, not all humanity and that they can be interpreted any number of ways, attested by the simple fact that she has just interpreted them in her own way.
Then comes the grand statement of her thesis:
“So why are we pretending that the Bible is dictating our sexual morals? It isn’t.
Moreover, as Americans we should have learned by now that such a simplistic approach to the Bible will lead us astray.”
Her statement is all too self-evident. The Bible isn’t dictating our sexual morals any more. But, her following statement that “we should have learned by now” is a clue to her progressive thought process, but that’s not what is the most disturbing. Because this article was posted online, there were comments from readers below. Browsing through these comments I found so much ignorance and stupidity as to be astounding. This idiocy is, unfortunately, not rare. Though I doubt that the readership of this magazine will have an issue understanding where the truth lies, it does amaze me how little our generation knows about reality.
This author, a woman, is a preacher, in a Christian church, who claims to be a Bible scholar. Why would a Christian preacher need to find ways to justify the morals of the world with the Bible? Where would she find a need to incorporate secular humanist morays into scripture by twisting both history, and Christianity, to fit a clearly non-Christian agenda? Moreover, why are so many respondents to this article so very clearly ignorant of the truth concerning the historicity of the Bible, so much so that many of the respondents claimed that Jesus didn’t even exist?
I don’t know if I can stress how far this world has gone in the last thirty years. I don’t know if I can express just how upside down we are in our own sin and degradation. Yet, I do know this; if we are quick to confess our sins and repent from them we will be saved, for if we do not we will surely be condemned. God will not suffer the name of His son to be blasphemed in this way for long.
Those of you who are waiting for a pre-tribulational rapture to catch you out of the wrath to come, don’t hold your breath. As for me and my house, we will prepare and hope that our flight doesn’t come in winter.
Loading ...