PDA

View Full Version : More Homosexuals behind the NIV exposed



Nazaroo
March 13th, 2015, 01:57 PM
Its not just the fact that a Lesbian was one of two final editors of the NIV text.


"[Virginia Mollenkott writes] 'I worked on the NIV during the entire time it was being translated and reviewed, although I was never free to attend the summer sessions even when I was invited to do so. Elisabeth Elliot and I were the Stylistic Consultants: our job was simply to make sure the translation would communicate clearly to modern American readers, and that the style was as smooth and understandable as possible. I was never removed, sacked, or made redundant from my work on the NIV; if I were, my name would not have appeared on the list sent out by the IBS. It was Dr. Edwin Palmer, who lived near my college, who invited me to work on the NIV. He had heard me speak and respected my integrity and my knowledge. So far as I know, nobody including Dr. Palmer suspected that I was lesbian while I was working on the NIV; it was information I kept private at that time. Dr. Palmer always sent me the batches of translating to review, and I always returned them (with my comments) to him. I have not kept track of which of my suggestions made it into the final version; I am a busy person, and it was a labour love in the scriptures. I do not think anything concerning homosexuality was in any of the batches I reviewed. I do not consider the NIV more gay-friendly than most modern translations, so I do not understand why anybody would want to bash the NIV because a closeted lesbian worked on it. I was not a translator; if I were I would have argued that the word/concept "homosexual" is too anachronistic to be utilised in translating an ancient text. But I was a stylist and nobody asked me. ...'


Its also that years after the fact, other homosexuals involved keep surfacing:




"Why could not Dr. Barker have told the truth in the first place? Taking Mollenkott's words at their face value, the NIV publicity machine has nothing to worry about. Does their anxiety to distance the NIV from homosexual associations reveal something more sinister?
"In the light of the following, I believe it does, as it has now come to light that THE CHAIRMAN OF THE NIV'S OLD TESTAMENT TRANSLATION COMMITTEE, DR. MARTEN H. WOUDSTRA, WAS A HOMOSEXUAL. This is much more serious than Mollenkott's involvement. Here we have one of the leading scholars on the NIV CBT who is a homosexual. Obviously this fact compromises the whole project, especially as this fact was well known by his colleagues for many years. However, only now is this fact coming to the notice of the general public through articles like the one you are reading.



"Dr. Woudstra, who died in the early 1990s, was a long-time friend of Evangelicals Concerned Inc. This organisation was founded in 1976 by New York psychologist, Dr. Ralph Blair, as a nation-wide task force and fellowship for gay and lesbian 'evangelical Christians' and their friends. ECI's address is 311 East 72nd Street, New York, NY 10021. They can be found on the internet at http://www.korpi.com/ECWE/
"It was during a series of research phone calls to Dr. Blair that I first confirmed the fact of Dr. Woudstra's homosexuality. Blair and Dr. Woudstra were friends. Dr. Woudstra had been on the mailing list of Evangelicals Concerned from its inception, and although he had no formal ties with ECI, on one of his many trips to New York he called in and had tea with Dr. Blair. Dr Blair told me that Dr. Woudstra shared the viewpoint of ECI that lifelong 'loving monogamous relationships' between gay men or women were acceptable to God.He believed that there was nothing in the Old Testament (his special area of technical expertise) that corresponded to 'homosexual orientation'. The 'sodomy' of the OT simply involved temple rites and gang rape (Gen 19). Notice the similarity between this view and that of Virginia Mollenkott. Dr. Blair clearly stated to me on the phone on 23rd September 1997 that Dr. Woudstra, a lifelong bachelor, was a homosexual. He intimated that other members of the NIV translation committee were also quietly supportive of ECI, but he was not able to tell me who they were (for obvious reasons). He later called them 'bigger' names than Dr. Woudstra.
"As to Dr. Marten Woudstra theologically, he was once the OT Professor at Calvin Seminary, the college of the Christian Reformed Church (Dutch Calvinistic). Over 70% of this denomination's churches now use the NIV. Dr. Woudstra was considered very 'conservative' within Calvin Seminary. He wrote the Joshua Commentary in the New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Eerdmans) which was also contributed to by such illustrious 'evangelical' names as F.F. Bruce.
"In 1973 the Christian Reformed Church published their official position relative to homosexuality. There is currently discussion, debate and disagreement over the issue of homosexuality within the CRC as in the wider Reformed denominations. For instance, the CRC's sister denomination, the Reformed Church of the Netherlands, took the position in 1979 of actually approving homosexual behaviour within certain bounds. This is a more liberal position than the CRC has ever yet taken. Is it not incredible to think how far the CRC has travelled over the years when one considers some of the former teachers, professors and presidents Calvin Seminary has had, such as Harry Bultema, Herman Hoeksema, H.J. Kuiper, Louis Berkof and William Hendrikson, to name a few.
"In 1970, the CRC Synod appointed a six man committee to study homosexuality. Its report was adopted by the same Synod in 1973. One of the six, Clarence Boomsma, was four times moderator of the CRC and pastor of two CRC churches. In fact Boomsma held the record for the longest pastorate in the CRC; 35 years in the CRC church in Grand Rapids, near the Calvin Seminary.
"I called Clarence Boomsma on the phone in October 1997, and had a long talk about Dr. Woudstra since he had know him for many years and had been his friend. HE TOLD ME THAT DR. WOUDSTRA ASSISTED THEM IN WRITING THE REPORT ON HOMOSEXUALITY. I have a copy of the complete report in my office. It takes a compromised 'middle line' between the Biblical anti-homosexuality absolute, and the Reformed Church of the Netherlands liberal acceptance of homosexual behaviour within certain bounds.
...

"I asked Boomsma if Dr. Woudstra was an 'active' homosexual. Although he knew Dr. Woudstra's views on homosexuality very well and holds in his possession a written dissertation by Dr. Woudstra on the subject, he did not feel free to comment on its contents. However, he did tell me about a '[homosexual] incident' in Dr. Woudstra's career in which his professorship was at stake. Woudstra survived and was not fired by the Seminary.


"Boomsma also spoke of Dr. Woudstra's frequent trips to New York 'which like all large cities has a large homosexual population'. On his return Woudstra would tell Boomsma how much he enjoyed the 'plays' in New York. I asked were these 'gay plays'. Boomsma would only say that New York has a large gay culture and is dotted with gay bars, and it was his impression that his friend, Dr. Woudstra, took part in this side of New York's social scene.
"I submit this research as I feel it has a direct bearing on how the NIV treats homosexuality. By removing the word sodomy and sodomite from the Old Testament, the language is changed and new ideas are introduced. By speaking of homosexual 'offenders' in I Corinthians ch. 6, the NIV allows for people to be homosexual as long as they don't 'offend' by being 'active'; and this is the position of the Christian Reformed Church, Calvin Seminary, Evangelicals Concerned, and who knows, quite a few other members of the NIV Translation Committee other than the late Dr. Woudstra. The fact that Leviticus denounces homosexuality in total does not worry them as such ethical condemnations do not apply today!

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/woudstra.htm

john w
March 13th, 2015, 02:40 PM
Naz,

What is the relevance? Moses struck the rock twice, Rehab "fooled around," Paul wasted a few people, Isaac told a few fibs, as did his daddy............................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .........................

Truster
March 13th, 2015, 02:43 PM
Read the history of the translators of the KJV...shock horror. I think James himself was a wearer of pink.

oatmeal
March 13th, 2015, 02:46 PM
Homosexuals most definitely do not have sound minds.

They are reprobates. Romans 1:18-33

Truster
March 13th, 2015, 02:47 PM
There were also a number of homosexuals involved in the invention of the computer.

Nazaroo
March 13th, 2015, 03:00 PM
Naz,

What is the relevance? Moses struck the rock twice, Rehab "fooled around," Paul wasted a few people, Isaac told a few fibs, as did his daddy............................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .........................

tru dat.

James at least was Scottish.

Base12
March 13th, 2015, 07:26 PM
What is the relevance?

Bias.

The word Sodomite was taken out.

You really think that was a coincidence?

Let's not forget the NIV had to be changed considerably to fictionalize it in order to qualify for copyright.

:greedy:

freelight
March 13th, 2015, 08:29 PM
Its not just the fact that a Lesbian was one of two final editors of the NIV text.


"[Virginia Mollenkott writes] 'I worked on the NIV during the entire time it was being translated and reviewed, although I was never free to attend the summer sessions even when I was invited to do so. Elisabeth Elliot and I were the Stylistic Consultants: our job was simply to make sure the translation would communicate clearly to modern American readers, and that the style was as smooth and understandable as possible. I was never removed, sacked, or made redundant from my work on the NIV; if I were, my name would not have appeared on the list sent out by the IBS. It was Dr. Edwin Palmer, who lived near my college, who invited me to work on the NIV. He had heard me speak and respected my integrity and my knowledge. So far as I know, nobody including Dr. Palmer suspected that I was lesbian while I was working on the NIV; it was information I kept private at that time. Dr. Palmer always sent me the batches of translating to review, and I always returned them (with my comments) to him. I have not kept track of which of my suggestions made it into the final version; I am a busy person, and it was a labour love in the scriptures. I do not think anything concerning homosexuality was in any of the batches I reviewed. I do not consider the NIV more gay-friendly than most modern translations, so I do not understand why anybody would want to bash the NIV because a closeted lesbian worked on it. I was not a translator; if I were I would have argued that the word/concept "homosexual" is too anachronistic to be utilised in translating an ancient text. But I was a stylist and nobody asked me. ...'


I agree with Virginia's statement above, "I do not consider the NIV more gay-friendly than most modern translations, so I do not understand why anybody would want to bash the NIV because a closeted lesbian worked on it.". I also see no law in 'biblical translation' where any assistant to the translation process cannot have a homosexual orientation. While one might assume a gay person would have a homosexual-bias and could influence a translation in such a pro-friendly manner, the terms used in original languages pose the problem of translation into more modern words like 'homosexuality' or 'sodomy', since we now understand and define homosexuality differently then in ancient times, while the prohibitions against 'gay-sex' dealt with idolatrous temple prostitution, and same-sex-acts associated with idolatry,...not to the orientation of 'homosexuality' itself that we in modern times have a better understanding of.

We deal with this more in depth in the Queen James Bible thread here (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93156).

More liberal views/research of the Bible and homosexuality, and 'affirming church associations' here (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3466526&postcount=13).

A survey of what passages in the NIV are in question as taking a softer or more accepting view of homosexuality, could be in order, to see if any gay persons involved in the translation process affected anything. Note that these bible committees are made up of mostly heterosexual persons, so that an adverse or negative translation manipulated in favor of homosexuality would not likely make it past an entire committee of committed translators, concerned about an accurate, integrous rendering of scripture.

This would address the below as well, as one being a homosexual may or may not affect the translation-process of a certain piece of literature.



Its also that years after the fact, other homosexuals involved keep surfacing:


"Why could not Dr. Barker have told the truth in the first place? Taking Mollenkott's words at their face value, the NIV publicity machine has nothing to worry about. Does their anxiety to distance the NIV from homosexual associations reveal something more sinister?
"In the light of the following, I believe it does, as it has now come to light that THE CHAIRMAN OF THE NIV'S OLD TESTAMENT TRANSLATION COMMITTEE, DR. MARTEN H. WOUDSTRA, WAS A HOMOSEXUAL. This is much more serious than Mollenkott's involvement. Here we have one of the leading scholars on the NIV CBT who is a homosexual. Obviously this fact compromises the whole project, especially as this fact was well known by his colleagues for many years. However, only now is this fact coming to the notice of the general public through articles like the one you are reading.



"Dr. Woudstra, who died in the early 1990s, was a long-time friend of Evangelicals Concerned Inc. This organisation was founded in 1976 by New York psychologist, Dr. Ralph Blair, as a nation-wide task force and fellowship for gay and lesbian 'evangelical Christians' and their friends. ECI's address is 311 East 72nd Street, New York, NY 10021. They can be found on the internet at http://www.korpi.com/ECWE/
"It was during a series of research phone calls to Dr. Blair that I first confirmed the fact of Dr. Woudstra's homosexuality. Blair and Dr. Woudstra were friends. Dr. Woudstra had been on the mailing list of Evangelicals Concerned from its inception, and although he had no formal ties with ECI, on one of his many trips to New York he called in and had tea with Dr. Blair. Dr Blair told me that Dr. Woudstra shared the viewpoint of ECI that lifelong 'loving monogamous relationships' between gay men or women were acceptable to God.He believed that there was nothing in the Old Testament (his special area of technical expertise) that corresponded to 'homosexual orientation'. The 'sodomy' of the OT simply involved temple rites and gang rape (Gen 19). Notice the similarity between this view and that of Virginia Mollenkott. Dr. Blair clearly stated to me on the phone on 23rd September 1997 that Dr. Woudstra, a lifelong bachelor, was a homosexual. He intimated that other members of the NIV translation committee were also quietly supportive of ECI, but he was not able to tell me who they were (for obvious reasons). He later called them 'bigger' names than Dr. Woudstra.
"As to Dr. Marten Woudstra theologically, he was once the OT Professor at Calvin Seminary, the college of the Christian Reformed Church (Dutch Calvinistic). Over 70% of this denomination's churches now use the NIV. Dr. Woudstra was considered very 'conservative' within Calvin Seminary. He wrote the Joshua Commentary in the New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Eerdmans) which was also contributed to by such illustrious 'evangelical' names as F.F. Bruce.
"In 1973 the Christian Reformed Church published their official position relative to homosexuality. There is currently discussion, debate and disagreement over the issue of homosexuality within the CRC as in the wider Reformed denominations. For instance, the CRC's sister denomination, the Reformed Church of the Netherlands, took the position in 1979 of actually approving homosexual behaviour within certain bounds. This is a more liberal position than the CRC has ever yet taken. Is it not incredible to think how far the CRC has travelled over the years when one considers some of the former teachers, professors and presidents Calvin Seminary has had, such as Harry Bultema, Herman Hoeksema, H.J. Kuiper, Louis Berkof and William Hendrikson, to name a few.
"In 1970, the CRC Synod appointed a six man committee to study homosexuality. Its report was adopted by the same Synod in 1973. One of the six, Clarence Boomsma, was four times moderator of the CRC and pastor of two CRC churches. In fact Boomsma held the record for the longest pastorate in the CRC; 35 years in the CRC church in Grand Rapids, near the Calvin Seminary.
"I called Clarence Boomsma on the phone in October 1997, and had a long talk about Dr. Woudstra since he had know him for many years and had been his friend. HE TOLD ME THAT DR. WOUDSTRA ASSISTED THEM IN WRITING THE REPORT ON HOMOSEXUALITY. I have a copy of the complete report in my office. It takes a compromised 'middle line' between the Biblical anti-homosexuality absolute, and the Reformed Church of the Netherlands liberal acceptance of homosexual behaviour within certain bounds.
...

"I asked Boomsma if Dr. Woudstra was an 'active' homosexual. Although he knew Dr. Woudstra's views on homosexuality very well and holds in his possession a written dissertation by Dr. Woudstra on the subject, he did not feel free to comment on its contents. However, he did tell me about a '[homosexual] incident' in Dr. Woudstra's career in which his professorship was at stake. Woudstra survived and was not fired by the Seminary.


"Boomsma also spoke of Dr. Woudstra's frequent trips to New York 'which like all large cities has a large homosexual population'. On his return Woudstra would tell Boomsma how much he enjoyed the 'plays' in New York. I asked were these 'gay plays'. Boomsma would only say that New York has a large gay culture and is dotted with gay bars, and it was his impression that his friend, Dr. Woudstra, took part in this side of New York's social scene.
"I submit this research as I feel it has a direct bearing on how the NIV treats homosexuality. By removing the word sodomy and sodomite from the Old Testament, the language is changed and new ideas are introduced. By speaking of homosexual 'offenders' in I Corinthians ch. 6, the NIV allows for people to be homosexual as long as they don't 'offend' by being 'active'; and this is the position of the Christian Reformed Church, Calvin Seminary, Evangelicals Concerned, and who knows, quite a few other members of the NIV Translation Committee other than the late Dr. Woudstra. The fact that Leviticus denounces homosexuality in total does not worry them as such ethical condemnations do not apply today!

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/woudstra.htm


Again, if anyone has proof that the NIV has made a more gay-friendly translation, we'd have to dive deep into ancient & modern language comparisons and linguistics, and proper context issues, plus other factors (cultural-context, specific terms, unknown or flexible word meanings, etc.). Its a complex matter. ALSO, the NIV is not a literal 'word for word' translation, but more of a balancing act between a 'word for word' and 'thought for thought' paraphrase.




pj

freelight
March 13th, 2015, 11:17 PM
~*~*~

oXlYLaZUlhg

Looking into some interviews of Virginia Mollenkot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Ramey_Mollenkott), and her more feminine based progressive theology today.



pj

Arthur Brain
March 14th, 2015, 01:32 AM
There were also a number of homosexuals involved in the invention of the computer.

Wow, they sure do get around don't they? Considering you've just used a computer to post this comment you can't have that much of a problem with it...

Nazaroo
March 14th, 2015, 03:56 AM
Wow, they sure do get around don't they? Considering you've just used a computer to post this comment you can't have that much of a problem with it...

There won't be any homosexuals in Heaven.

There won't be any cocaine.

There won't be any alcohol.

Don't bother coming.

everready
March 14th, 2015, 02:41 PM
Satan takes the easy way he goes after our kids, women children he doesn't care as long as its easy.

It is some of the information on these pages that is alarming. These pages give the standard dictionary definition for the topic, and then Zondervan provides an "alternative definition" for the topic. The "alternative definition" is obviously aimed directly at the Christian teenager.

http://biblebelievers.com/watkins_teen-niv/teen-niv.html

everready

freelight
March 14th, 2015, 09:36 PM
Satan takes the easy way he goes after our kids, women children he doesn't care as long as its easy.

Well, one could suppose that, assuming a 'Satan' of some kind exists, and you're well acquainted with his tactics. However one can take this conspiracy theory overboard, beyond just being an intelligence cognizant person, looking out for one's well being.


It is some of the information on these pages that is alarming. These pages give the standard dictionary definition for the topic, and then Zondervan provides an "alternative definition" for the topic. The "alternative definition" is obviously aimed directly at the Christian teenager.

(as a preface, lets note that your criticism above is on the commentary given in the NIV teen bible, and NOT the NIV translation itself, unless you specify that).

Ok,....I myself don't care too much for some of those 'study commentary' bibles, since some are so filled with notes/comments that it seems its really the commentator's bible, filling up so many pages with a bunch of fluff, props and illustrations of all kinds. I'd prefer the pure text itself, without commentary, except for helpful footnotes on manuscript variants like the giant print, center-column reference Thomas Nelson NKJV Bible has.

Granted, I agree with some of the criticism of the 'alternative definitions' given for teen-agers, as its 'custom-targeted' for teens within a secular environment, and heaven knows what standards are involved in communicating to teens of our day, with secular/worldly terms and values. When I look at a bible with all these commentary/notes (some pages of commentary being more than the text itself), it just seems like a collage or 'scrapbook'. I say give me the pure word, minus the props.


http://biblebelievers.com/watkins_teen-niv/teen-niv.html

In the end part of the article posted above, its evident that this ministery is of a KJV Only perspective, which raises a red-flag from the get-go, - it also comments from Gail Riplinger's 'New Age Bible Versions' book, which doesn't hold much credibility IMO. We've already been exposing the extreme beliefs of the KJV Only movement here (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=106233).

Dr. James White also takes on Riplinger's book in a video interview here (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4181175&postcount=179). Having seen enough of the extreme side of KJ Only folks and the 'mentality' associated therewith, same ole cult antics.

Blasting the NIV as the "Non Inspired Version" or such is rather silly, since at the core and the entire context of the translation....all the standard traditional-orthodox Christian doctrines are taught in it, while much noise is made over a few 'variants', some ommisions or additions of words or whole passages, which still do not affect the theology, since the NIV upholds those same teachings in other places.

The burning of NIV bibles by some extreme KJV Only zealots is also absurd, see here (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4256732&postcount=290).



pj

patrick jane
March 14th, 2015, 10:19 PM
There won't be any homosexuals in Heaven.

There won't be any cocaine.

There won't be any alcohol.

Don't bother coming.

19380

Truster
March 15th, 2015, 03:36 AM
Satan takes the easy way he goes after our kids, women children he doesn't care as long as its easy.

It is some of the information on these pages that is alarming. These pages give the standard dictionary definition for the topic, and then Zondervan provides an "alternative definition" for the topic. The "alternative definition" is obviously aimed directly at the Christian teenager.

http://biblebelievers.com/watkins_teen-niv/teen-niv.html

everready

Satan always goes for the weakest link and that's why he went for Eve. Just take a look at the temptation of Eve and what women are tempted by today...'' it was pleasant to the eye'' ''ye shall be as Elohim'' ( having power) ''the fruit would satisfy'' ''ye shall be wise'' .....and she did eat thereof.

Not a popular doctrine, but a factual one.

The fruit of rebellion and the temptation of all the above is irresistible...just ask nang.

This Charming Manc
March 15th, 2015, 03:53 AM
Big assumption


There won't be ... in Heaven.

There won't be any alcohol.



I tend to think there will be a very limited number of self righteous jerks as well.

Nazaroo
March 15th, 2015, 11:00 AM
Big assumption



I tend to think there will be a very limited number of self righteous jerks as well.
While you're tending to think,
go all the way, and actually think.

freelight
March 15th, 2015, 10:18 PM
There won't be any homosexuals in Heaven.


Hi Naz,

I suspect you would not be surprised to know I probably disagree with you here, on a series of levels, concerning how we understand and define what a 'homosexual' is, homosexuality being a natural inward disposition for some, which is present whether a person acts upon this attraction or not. You'd have to prove that being a 'homosexual'(having a natural attraction towards a person of the same gender) is a sin in and of itself, and then we'd have to determine what 'actions' are sins or are acceptable, as we've done elsewhere on other threads. So just claiming "there wont be any homosexuals in heaven" doesn't cut it, until we establish meanings/definition of the term, and proofs for why such a person would be barred from heaven.


There won't be any cocaine.

Cannot be compared.


There won't be any alcohol.

Well, didn't Jesus say we would enjoy the new fruit of the vine, and drink and sup with him in the kingdom? Sure, symbolic....but there you go.


Don't bother coming.

Oh dear. Now we're just getting a bit belligerent there. Pharisaical perhaps? According to traditional evangelical theology, didn't Jesus give his life for all sinners, for all souls? Didn't this giving of his soul make an atonement for all? Does the father in the parable of the prodigal son, stop waiting and wishing that his son will return home? Are all human souls the offspring of God, and does God's will include that all be saved? Is Love a respector of persons, is it partial, selective, arbitrary?

What might be happening here is a personal disdain for a particular group of people or a kind of assumed 'behavior' (homosexuality) (perhaps misconceived) that becomes fuel for hate, which then clouds the bigger picture and reality of God's love which is all-inclusive and all-sufficient. As far as sin, pride and depravity goes, I'm sure there is at the root of the most dark side of the human psyche (ego) much greater issues that seek to corrupt and make insane the soul, than what some religionists claim about homosexuality. Ontop of that, we also have those of transgender orientations, which is even more complex,...but don't forget...these souls are still God's children. Instead of deal with that, and research on the entire collection of knowledge we have about homosexuality today, I think some just choose to demonize it, and those who are of a homosexual or transgendered orientation, consigning them to the fires of hell. I think theres more to it.




pj

patrick jane
March 15th, 2015, 10:42 PM
that's ALL gone in Heaven. why imagine it or consider it ? - :Patrol:


19394

chrysostom
March 16th, 2015, 05:51 AM
There won't be any homosexuals in Heaven.

There won't be any cocaine.

There won't be any alcohol.

Don't bother coming.

just those who love their neighbor

Nazaroo
March 16th, 2015, 01:02 PM
Quote:
Don't bother coming.

Oh dear. Now we're just getting a bit belligerent there. Pharisaical perhaps? According to traditional evangelical theology, didn't Jesus give his life for all sinners, for all souls? Didn't this giving of his soul make an atonement for all? Does the father in the parable of the prodigal son, stop waiting and wishing that his son will return home? Are all human souls the offspring of God, and does God's will include that all be saved? Is Love a respector of persons, is it partial, selective, arbitrary?
Hi Freelight:

My meaning in its concise context should be clear,
but I'll spell it out to remove any ambiguity.

If you're expecting homosexual orgies, cocaine, and alcohol,
don't bother knocking on heaven's door.
You'll be disappointed on every level.

Sorry if what seemed crystal-clear to me appeared ambiguous.

freelight
March 16th, 2015, 03:02 PM
Hi Freelight:

My meaning in its concise context should be clear,
but I'll spell it out to remove any ambiguity.

If you're expecting homosexual orgies, cocaine, and alcohol,
don't bother knocking on heaven's door.
You'll be disappointed on every level.

Sorry if what seemed crystal-clear to me appeared ambiguous.



I hear you Naz,....I agree there probably isn't going to be orgies allowed (ha!) of either gender orientation in the traditional-orthodox concept of 'heaven', as the function of physical sexual relations will probably be transcended for more spiritual-emotional relationships.

My fine points on the definition and understanding of the condition of homosexuality itself, and what are acceptable or unacceptable activities between two consenting adults is a subject unto itself, which is a more complex issue that deserves further research.



pj

Base12
March 16th, 2015, 08:07 PM
that's ALL gone in Heaven. why imagine it or consider it ?


Exactly.

Galatians 3:28
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus"

No Male and no Female.

Problem solved.

:sheep:

serpentdove
September 21st, 2015, 01:14 PM
Satan always goes for the weakest link and that's why he went for Eve.

Adam stood by his wife and did nothing (Ge 3:6). It was his role to lead.

chair
September 21st, 2015, 02:21 PM
There won't be any homosexuals in Heaven.

There won't be any cocaine.

There won't be any alcohol.

Don't bother coming.

Welcome to Hell (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91DSNL1BEeY)

Arthur Brain
September 21st, 2015, 02:29 PM
There won't be any homosexuals in Heaven.

There won't be any cocaine.

There won't be any alcohol.

Don't bother coming.

Will there be conspiracy theorists and tin foil hats?

:Plain:

Sherman
September 21st, 2015, 02:38 PM
Will there be conspiracy theorists and tin foil hats?

:Plain:There won't be any of that in heaven either.

I just got through talking with a guy about conspiracy theories. Morality and conspiracy theories are apples and oranges. The two are not related. Conspiracy theories will go out the window right along with drugs and sexual immorality.