Messages By: tulseyjoe

Please note that the quoted Scripture, which was literally written as instructions for and to the LEVITE Priests, all of whom were of the Israelite tribe of Levi, in the Hebrew implies that the man who lies with a male (the word "male" is used in the Hebrew) is pretending that he is having heterosexual type sexual intercourse with a woman. In the mind of the man, who was in the active role sexually with the "male" being passive here, he was having sexual intercourse with a woman. The pagan "holy" male in this context was actually pretending to be a woman for the man in the sex act.  

The same-gender sexual activity which takes place in Leviticus is literally a Canaanite homosexual man who has gone to a pagan place of worship to make a sacrifice of "seed" to the Canaanite fertility goddess Asherah, also known as Astarte. "When the Hebrew word, "zera," translated as "seed" appears in the Bible, it is a euphemism for "sperm/semen." It can refer to the male gamete, sperm, or to a man's children. Asherah's cohort/husband, was called "Ba'al" (which means "husband by ownership") and he was also called "Molech, Malcom, or Milcom" (all three of those names mean "king" in Hebrew. 

The Israelites were not to follow the pagan cultural/religous practices of the Canaanites. Just like the Canaanites, the Jews/Hebrews/Israelites did not literally separate their culture from their religion.  

Those who are exclusively homosexual in their sexual orientation and have a normal mindset do not have sex with a male person pretending that the male person is a woman. Oh, I have met lots of so-called, self-identified bisexuals who liked to be referred to as female or liked the other guy to refer to himself with female terms during the act of sex.  

And, several of those bisexuals whom I met actually thought they were better than women and gays, too. They not only looked down on women as inferior to them, they did the same for those who are exclusively homosexual, too. They even claimed a guy was not a real man until he had sexual intercourse with a woman. 

Literally and even figuratively speaking, here as a true scholar of the Bible and as one who has the New Testment in Greek, and as one who has had a college course in "Interpreting the Bible" (aka Biblical Hermeneutics), homosexuality as we know it in modern times is not even addressed in the New Testament's books at all.  

In fact, as it has been repeated over and over, the only kind of sexual activity that the Bible mentions in regard to the residents of Sodom was with prostitutes of the opposite sex. Or, figuratively speaking, they prostituted themselves with having illicit sexual activity with the opposite sex.  

The Greek word "arsenokoitai" translated as "homosexual" in some English translations of the Bible has never been found written in any Greek document or piece of literature outside of what the Apostle Paul wrote. Oh, people guess what it means; which is what the modern English translators literally did. Since the suffix (end of the word) is "ai," as a noun that means that the word is feminine plural. Yes, that it means more than one woman did it. And since "arseno" is Greek for "male" individuals and "koit" is Greek for "bed" (literally), one would think that it means "women who take a male to bed with them." The KJV has that word translated as "abusers of themselves with mankind,' and "abusers of mankind." Now what did they mean by those translations? No one knows today at all.  

In one of those places where Paul used "arsenokoitai," he used the Greek word "malakoi." Now the KJV translators translated that word as "effeminate." Well, in 16th and 17th Century England, "effeminate" was a figure of speech used for those who were living with royalty and did not have to work for a living and lived a soft/lazy, aka effeminate lifestyle" which had no connection with sexual activity. 

Well, Jesus used the word "malakoi" to describe the kind of "soft" or "fine as velvet" clothing worn by those who lived in kings' palaces.  

Oh, if you really understood the context of the situation where the woman was brought by a gang of men to Jesus because "she was caught in adultery," you would know that the whole thing was a double-entrapment set-up. 

The hypocritical faction of the Pharisees (all of the Pharisees and were not hypocrites) were always scheming to think up ways to entrap Jesus with his own word. 

And they actually got one of the men in the group to set up an entrapment situation with the woman, too. Why I say that is because I think that when Jesus wrote something in the dirt while they were all standing there, before Jesus said anything back to them, he wrote the name of the man who "caused" her to commit the act of adultery. 

Then Jesus said, "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." (TNIV) 

And then, he wrote someting else in the dirt again. When those gang of religious fanatics heard and apparently actually read what he wrote each time, they had guilty consciences and left on their own leaving the woman behind. They could no longer accuse the woman of adultery because of the unconfessed sin in their own lives.  

In another situation, Jesus did say entrapment was wrong. He said that while people might break the law, woe to those who caused one to break the law. Local law enforcement people as undercover officers, all around the USA (and I know for a fact in Los Angeles and in Tulsa) follow individual men into restrooms where they know that there would only be one "civilian" in the restroom to entrap them. I have NEVER read in the local news media, in either place, where those undercover officers every caught two men having sexual activity in a public restroom or even a public park, for that matter. 

The situation in John 8 has no connection whatsoever with homosexuals. To read that into the text is definitely called "deductive bible study" and proof-texting.  

People have only "used the religion of Christianity" after Christianity was offically recognized as a state religion and Constantine himself was the real founder of the "Religion of Christianity" (historically known as "Christian Orthodoxy" but not called "Orthodox Christianity").  In fact, in 325 AD, Constantine presided over the 1st of the Seven Church Councils which was supposedly comprised of "Early Church Fathers" in what is now the country of Turkey.  

The religion of Christianity, aka Orthodox Christianity," has literally replaced "The Way" which was the doctrinal belief system founded upon faith in Jesus the Christ and the pagan created mocking epithet "Christian" was replaced the original word used by Jesus' followers which was "Beliver" or "Faith (person)." 

Just because a person is called "Christian" or self-identifies as "Christian" is no sign the person actually believes in Jesus the Christ and also completely lives by Jesus' teaching as recorded in the Bible.  

"Your" is an adjective meaning "belonging to you." The contraction of "you are" is "you're."  

As I have posted over and over, homosexuality is NOT condemned at all in the original texts of the Bible. Not literally and not even figuratively.  

Oh, here is a scripture you should read from the OT Testament (that's Hebrew Scriptures): 

Ecclesiastes4:1, 7-12 (To show the gender of the Hebrew Nouns and adjectives, I have added in parentheses words to show the context's gender situation of the individuals in the quote.) 

   1So I returned, and considered all the oppressions that are done under the sun: and behold the tears of such as were oppressed, and they had no comforter; and on the side of their oppressors there was power; but they had no comforter. 

   7Then I returned, and I saw vanity under the sun.  

   8There is one (male) alone, and there is not a second (male); yea, he hath neither child nor brother: yet is there no end of all his labour; neither is his eye satisfied with riches; neither saith he, For whom do I labour, and bereave my soul of good? This is also vanity, yea, it is a sore travail.  

   9Two (males) are better than one (male); because they have a good reward for their labour.  

   10For if they fall, the one (male) will lift up his fellow: but woe to him that is alone when he falleth; for he hath not another to help him up.  

   11Again, if two (males) lie together, then they have heat: but how can one (male) be warm alone?  

   12And if one prevail against him (one of those two fellow males), two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken. (KJV with annotations by myself in parentheses) 

The "lie together" is the very same verb, "shakab" seen in the Hebrew Text of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 (translated in those places as "lie with"); but, in the Leviticus context, it is not two men sharing the same bed in their own home during the night, it is a heterosexual man having anal sexual intercourse with a Canaanite holy man in a pagan fertility rite. 

"Have heat and "keep warm" are translations of a Hebrew word, "kom," which was also used as a euphemism (that's a more polite substituted word for the actual word which could have been used) for "sexual arousal." Since YHWH Elohim (translated as LORD God in most English translations) created the act of sex for pleasure to be shared with another, solo sex, aka masturbation, is rather cold compared to mutual sexual activity.  

Although I had read the above chapter at least 40 times on my own, besides hearing other people reading it, too, I had never really saw what was in Ecclesiates 4 until my mother handed an open Bible turned to that chapter and told me to read it. I was surprised when she told me that the Bible did approve of same-gender committed relationships. 

Oh,  "fellow" in the above text besides meaning "companion" in some translations, is also called "Boyfriend" in modern Hebrew-English Dictionaries. An openly gay man's "Boyfriend" is generally the man's co-husband in a covenanted same-gender relationship in modern times. 

Constantine created the church denomination later known as the Eastern Orthodox Church; he did not create a "catholic" (universal church) denomination.  

Oh, believers in Jesus the Christ are not supposed to bet on anything. And, the claim that the followers of Jesus called themselves and each other "Christian" from the days of Jesus' time on earth living in a human body is false assumption. The time of the Christ began from before the creation of the earth and still continues today. While Simon, called "Peter" by Jesus as a nickname, knew that Jesus was the Christ, none of Jesus' followers called him "Christ" in public.  

I find it interesting that people will read a text in the Gospels or the book of Acts, where it literally says, "Jesus said" or "Jesus says" and after they read that they will say "Christ said." Nowhere in the Bible are the words "Christ said" when Jesus is being quoted. 

Because I have changed computers, I no longer have a link to the source of my information. 

As federal study was done of those pedophiles who were convicted and sent to jail and/or prison. In about 95 percent of the indiviuals in that study, it was found that those were males who were definitely exclusively heterosexual in their sexual orientation and they did not self-identify as gay, or homosexual, because they did not experience physiological sexual attraction directed toward adolescent boys or adult males at all.  

In that study, 2.5 percent were women, and in most of those cases, the women who where sexual molestors of children, were in relationship with men when they committed the crime of pedophilia. 

And in the majority of the remaining 2.5 percent, the men were exclusively homosexual in their sexual orientation AND they were also considered to be mentally retarded, too. That was because in the adult males' minds, they just thought they were the very same age of the boys whom the sexually molested. They did not know what they did was wrong.  

While a singe "gay" or "homosexual" gene has not been discovered yet, there is enough empirical evidence to prove that homosexuals are born that way. "Empirical" here means "wide-spread out as in a large empire." Millions of homosexuals have told thousands of licensed and certified mental health professionals (psychologists, psychiatrists, therapists, social workers) that they knew that their sexual orientation was not heterosexual because they realized they were different when they were very young.  

When I was in early puberty, at age 12 going on 13, I experienced my first physiologcial sexual attraction towards an adult male, who was a cowboy by profession. He NEVER knew that I had those feelings and I never told any other human being until many years after that. This was way back in the 1950s. That experience literally changed my sexual attractions toward boys of my own age and younger to that of those who were adolescents or older.  

I, as well as other openly gay men, also care about the protection of innocent children, too. And proper education of children and adults is going to help protect them.  

Homosexuals who are openly gay are not pushing for any special rights in the the USA or elsewhere; but, here in the USA, they are just wanted to be granted equal rights under the Constitution of the United States of America.  

Openly gay people have been protesting against peodophiles and other sexual predators for decades now. The fact that NAMBLA has been rejected by all of the major gay social origanizations in the USA for quite a while is further proof of that. 

Will you give the cited, aka quoted, original source, of the above information?  

Was if from a real newspaper editorial, or was it from a website created to fight against homosexuals having equal rights?  

I have noticed that on a message board such as this one, there are people who do what I call "post and run" in that they don't take enough time to read what the complete discussion is about and only post one or two messages.  

I know that what you cited is not true in regard to gay men and their relationship with their fathers while they were children. My family's relationship between the adults and children do not fit the homophobic stereotypes promoted by ex-gay/ex-homosexual organizations such as NARTH and Exodus International.  I had the right kind of relationship with both of my parents while I was growing up. And my parents had the right kind of loving and respectful relationship with each other.  

Oh, I did a search on the above and found it is from the NARTH organization's website. Here is the URL link for it: 

         http://www.narth.com/docs/okay.html 

NARTH's people have had their so-called "findings" aka their 'reseach," disproven over and over.  

The only women who were lesbians (and were not really homosexual but bisexual) who had a poor attitude toward men literally had them toward the men who had abused them, physically, verbally and/or sexually. And in many cases, they were married to men who were exclusively heterosexual, too.  

But, they did not literally hate men and had absolutely problem relating to men who non-abusive to women.  

I have observed that people like Linda Wall become either brainwashed, indoctrinated, or merely paid by homophobic group leaders to say and write things just like she did.  

Oh, many of the so-called ex-lesbians and ex-gays who claim they are no longer homosexual were and still are bisexual in their sexual orientation.