THE GOD OF THE BIBLE FORCES THE PEOPLE TO KILL THOSE CAUGHT IN GAY LOVE MAKING
The Infallible Word Speaks!
Christians believe that God inspired the Bible and is so tough on certain sins
because he has high standards.
The Old Testament, especially the Book of Leviticus, teaches that God commanded
that certain sinners must be stoned to death without mercy. Christian belief is
that God wrote the Bible as much as man did. Some go as far to say that God
dictated even the words. But all agree that the Bible is infallible.
The talk of Old Testament and New Testament is only a practical one. In reality
the Bible claims to be a simple testament. Jesus actually spends more time
affirming the authority of the Old Testament than his own doctrine! There is no
room for pretending he gave a licence to abandon and ignore the Old Testament.
Jesus claimed to have inspired the Old Testament. The Bible claims to have two
authors, God wrote it as much as man did.
Christians use speculation not argumentation to show that we must not stone
people today. That they have to use opinion in a matter so serious is itself
telling. A truly good religion makes it fact that it is wrong to stone gay
people or adulterers or whoever. Opinion is not enough. And today's opinion is
yesterday's opinion tomorrow.
Hebrews 6:4-6 warns that it is impossible for some sinners to repent. The same
idea recurs in the First Letter of John. The logic is that the sinners will not
repent because they are being put to death which leaves it too late. If a sinner
is dying in his bed then the Christian thinks God is taking his life as in death
penalty and thus is endorsing the death penalty by proxy. Or did stonings to
death still happen?
The Church
Pius XI, in his encyclical letter, Casti Connubii, stated that God detests
deliberately sterile sex even between man and wife "with the deepest hatred and
has sometimes punished it with death." He goes on to indicate his approval of
how God put Onan to death for preventing conception. If contraceptive sex
between a husband and wife is so bad imagine how bad gay sex must be! The letter
logically proves that the Catholic faith even if it does not execute gay men
does not think it is intrinsically bad to put them to death. Catholic teaching
that a doctrine accepted as correct by the whole Church is necessarily
infallible for God protects the church from error in such matters. The whole
Church did accept the doctrine. It has only been met with dissent in more recent
years.
Catholic teaching is that Jesus is still with us and teaches through the Church.
So to reject the Church is to reject Jesus. The Church teaches that in a real
sense, the Bible is Christ.
The New Penalties are not lighter
The New Testament says that penalties are worse under the New Testament not
lighter.
"Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two
or three witnesses. How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be
punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy
thing the blood of the covenant that sanctifies him, and has insulted the spirit
of grace? For we know God who said, "It is my job to avenge and I will repay!" -
Hebrews 10.
The text will consider gays to be among those who reject the law. It has no
sympathy for those who died. It implies that the law is from God for it cannot
be an example of how God gets revenge unless it is from him.
The Law is said to be no longer obligatory for us in the sense that we want to
obey it so it is no longer like a Law and in the sense that if we fail Jesus has
obeyed the Law for us in our place so we are still counted as obeying the Law
perfectly. The fact that we need Jesus to do some of the work for us indicates
that the Law has his sanction as being fair and correct.
The Roman Church argues that God will punish all unrepented sin. But there are
four sins which cry to God for vengeance - they try to provoke him. They are
then necessarily sins of self-destruction. One of those sins is sodomy - having
unnatural sex with another person. Sodomy most often refers to anal sex between
gay men. What if the sin is not intentional? The Church says that if you do
something forbidden without knowing it is evil, you do a grave evil yes but you
are not intentionally evil or sinful thus you will not be punished. Evil results
will follow but they are not punishment. Suppose the claims about sodomy are
true. Suppose it is calling down evil and suffering - even when it's not meant to
provoke God. The sodomite cannot say he doesn't intend to do evil. It would
follow that the sin is always intentional. The gossip may tell herself that her
evil is unintentional but she is aware of the consequences of her chatter so she
cannot expect us to think she is not intentionally evil.
The New Testament promises hellfire to those who die in unforgiven homosexual
sin. Any rational person would prefer to be stoned than tormented forever!
The excuses for not stoning
The Christian cannot give you a single text that shows that the command to stone
is done away. The door is opened for stonings to resume.
They give nonsensical reasons for why the law does not apply any more. Thus they
are still to blame if somebody sees through them and then starts stoning.
The Law of Moses is not for the Hebrews alone but for the world. The law says
that it is a wise and good law meaning that non-Hebrew nations should learn from
its principles at least if they won't follow all the laws. And one principle is
that people viewed as very bad should be stoned to death.
Some argue that we cannot interpret the Bible God as urging the killing of gay
people for as God is love we must take the most charitable interpretation. But
that does not change what the text says. You simply cannot interpret the law for
killing as charitable unless you are going to say that gay men are better off
dead. And it is possible to think you are being charitable by killing gays when
God tells you to for God knows what is best.
Why do members of a religion argue that a violent interpretation of the word of
God in the holy book is possibly valid? They cannot say that unless there are
violent texts in that book. And it could be right or if wrong then it is still a
reasonable or understandable interpretation. If God likes violence and you
engage in it in a way he does not approve of then it is hardly a huge mistake
considering he is usually okay with violence anyway. Violent scriptures give an
excuse for violence. A religion with violent messages from God be it Islam or
Christianity is giving evil people an excuse for violence - giving the means to
make an excuse. The less chance there is for making an excuse the better.
Excuses should not be enabled by religion. The better the excuse, the more the
religion is to blame.
If a tyrant tells you to murder people will blame the tyrant for telling you
even though it was your choice to listen. Yet we have to endure people who say
that if you obey evil scriptures it is all your fault not the fault of the
scriptures. It's just a perpetual double standard.
I recall how the New Testament teaches that the Jewish Law wherein God commanded
that homosexuals be stoned to death is right. The New Testament is said to
favour mercy over such "justice". But even if it does it still regards it as
justice. Mercy is not a repudiation of the executions but only means the
criminals are being forgiven. It is not true that the executions were based on
Torah civil law - the Torah claims to be a religious law not civil law. So
Christians cannot say, "It was only the law for the Jewish theocracy so it does
not apply to us for we have no Jewish theocracy today."
And what about the violent God who Christ gave allegiance to? God commanded that
brides who didn't seem to be virgins on the wedding night be stoned to death.
And there were many other "sins" that got that fate. Christ never apologised for
the murders carried at at God’s behest in the Old Testament and indeed insisted
on believing in the Old Testament as having been written by God through men. The
fact that most Catholics today do not obey these commands only means the
following: that they think they don't apply in current circumstances, that
somebody else can put them into action instead - not everybody has the same job
to do in life, that they don't have enough faith. None of these reasons are
praiseworthy. If their faith is too weak for them to consider killing then it is
proof that they refuse to kill in so far as they are not touched by their faith.
They are not being very Catholic if they would refuse to kill if God commanded
them to. It would be foolish to point to them as proof that people as Catholics
are not enablers or doers of violence.
The stoning of gays still in force
God declared in the Bible that a man lying with a man is an abomination and they
have nobody to blame but themselves for being stoned to death. They are killed
simply because it is retribution. It is not about any social good or anything
else. The rule cannot be done away for it is about principle and not about
anything else.
Jesus said he advocated love your neighbour as it was in the law of God - the
law is clear that this law does not exclude killing adulterers or homosexuals.
He was not taking the command out of context. He said he was using the
commandment as the law gave it. The command comes from Leviticus 19 the most
murderous book God ever allegedly wrote. The rule is about how people should act
from day to day not about how the law should be applied. So the commandment in
essence means, "Be good to your neighbour except when the law tells you." And
the rule specifies that you must not hold a grudge against your kinsman but love
him as yourself meaning that the law of love does not apply to non-Hebrews or
those who excommunicate themselves and become ex-Hebrews such as gay men.
Jesus stated that he had no intention of relaxing any law of God in the Old
Testament. "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I
have not - not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the
Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the
least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in
the kingdom of heaven".
Jesus told the Jews off for giving people who cursed their parents a light
penalty and not the death penalty as required by God's law (Mark 7).
Jesus did not say that it was wrong to stone the adulteress to death. He said if
you were any better than her it was okay to cast the first stone. That is saying
the death penalty is right in principle even if not always practical or
possible. Obviously if it is not wrong in principle it is not the worst sin if
you go out and murder an adulteress! He did not even declare the stoning to be a
necessary evil but something that is a mark of sanctity.
Jesus did not say, "I abolish the laws of the Old Testament commanding that
homosexuals be put to death." You need that in such a serious matter and if you
want to say Jesus was all about peace and love.
Jesus never apologised for the deaths.
Jesus even if he did not demand stoning to death of people made it clear that he
is going to murder them himself. Vengeance is mine I will repay - Romans 12:19.
Jesus keeping the law for us means the law is still in force. See also Romans
1:31 "God’s righteous decree is that those who do such things deserve death".
The decree refers to the death penalty in the law of Moses.
Jesus says in the gospel he authorises the apostles to be his voice. That was
why he wrote nothing. authorised Paul's teaching and Paul taught that gay sex is
a serious sin and results in everlasting damnation.
Finally
The Bible is an evil book that deserves to have its pages torn out and used to
shine windows. Any other use is criminal. Stop calling it the good book. It
should be banned for it opposes social order and commands religious murder.
Liberal Christians tend to argue that the Bible only condemns gay people using
each other lustfully instead of desiring each other as partners in love. But a
condemnation of lust would cover that! And it is still attacking the vast
majority of gays who have one night stands. And why single gays out when most
lust is heterosexual? If homosexuality is okay if it is done in love then why
put two men to death for having loveless gay sex? The Liberals are distorting.
The killing commanded in the Bible is definitely as good as still in force if
not literally in force.