God And Homosexuality

[columbus]

Is that why the gospels say nothing at all about homosexuality?

I'm not sure I understand your question.
Probably the answer is "Yes".
The Gospels record the bits of Jesus's Message that His followers thought important. They don't really quote Jesus after all. And the gospels were heavily edited, redacted, and anthologized over the decades and centuries before canonization. So, nobody really knows what Jesus thought about homosexuality or homosex. But I see no reason to think He was any less homophobic than conservative religionists are today.
Why would I?

A huge part of the problem is the utterly contradictory Messages in the Gospels.
On the one hand Jesus is quoted as saying "Love God, love your neighbor, the rest is details." On the other hand He's quoted as saying "Nothing about The Law will change.". These are mutually exclusive statements.

But Jesus regularly dismissed Mosaic Law. From the Sabbath to diet to divorce, He seems to better support the inclusive aspects of His Message far more than the legalistic aspects. But He didn't get that Message across very well, not at the time nor over the 20 centuries since.

God Himself could do better, if He's the Almighty Loving God people talk about incessantly. But there you have it. There is no such God.
Tom

 

[Mitty]

In other words homosexuality wasn't an issue then.

I'm not sure I understand your question.
Probably the answer is "Yes".
The Gospels record the bits of Jesus's Message that His followers thought important. They don't really quote Jesus after all. And the gospels were heavily edited, redacted, and anthologized over the decades and centuries before canonization. So, nobody really knows what Jesus thought about homosexuality or homosex. But I see no reason to think He was any less homophobic than conservative religionists are today.

But where do the gospels say that he was a homophobic heterosexual, or even describe him as a homophobic heterosexual?

 

[sojourner]

In other words it was about the superiority of men and the dominance over women, even though men are just modified women.

Umm... that’s fairly simplistic, but yes.

 

[sojourner]

But where do the gospels say that he was a homophobic heterosexual, or even describe him as a homophobic heterosexual?

They don’t. Again: To the ancient understanding, there was no such thing as homosexuality as we know it. Since Jesus was a product of his culture, and since there was no such thing as homosexual marriage, Jesus, at that time, would likely have come out against such relationships. However, Jesus also apparently accepted slavery. BUT I also think that if Jesus found himself in THIS culture, he would advocate for equity and inclusion.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

We all understand that you do not believe the Bible records actual historical events - but that does not give you license to take what it claims out of context or add your own opinions to the text.

None of that changes the fact that Jesus said nothing about homosexuality.

Nothing you have said proves that He needed to say anything about homosexuality in order for the Bible to teach that it is sinful behavior.

Nor that he loved one of his disciples instead of a wife, given that he was over 30 years old before he had a career change.

This is you inserting your own idea into the text.

Where does it say that the Lord Jesus Christ loved anyone "instead of a wife"?

The Bible does not even claim that He did not have a wife.

Nor does it change the fact that the bible says nothing about female homosexuality, given that other aspects of female sexuality are specifically dealt with, including bestiality and adultery of all remarried divorcees, and given that Leviticus 18 or 20 doesn't say that it is also disgusting for women to lie with womankind as with mankind since they do not have anal sex as obviously described for men lying with mankind as with womankind.

Again - your claim that an idea needs to be mentioned in the Bible in order for it to be true is false.

Besides - Leviticus 18 and 20 are lists of sins committed by other men and/or nation of that area which led to the land being defiled.

"(For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which were before you, and the land is defiled" (Leviticus 18:27) (Bold and italics added)

"And ye shall not walk in the manners of the nation, which I cast out before you: for they committed all these things, and therefore I abhorred them." (Leviticus 20:23) (Bold and italics added)

It is clear that God was not simply teaching all the sexual "do nots" to Israel - but informing them about which particular sins the current possessors of the land were guilty of.

God wanted the Israelites to know what the people had done to defile the land and that they deserved the righteous punishment they were soon to receive.

Levitcus 18 was listing the sins committed by the "men of the land" - so there is no wonder why female homosexuality was not mentioned.

Leviticus 20 not mentioning the inhabitants of the "nation" committing female homosexuality does not mean that that practice is appropriate or not sinful.

It could just mean that that nation did not have an issue with female homosexuality.

And Romans 1:26-27 doesn't mention anything about female homosexuality or women with women "working that which is unseemly and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet" from penetrative sex with other women, and is obviously about anal sex of woman and men which Paul described as "vile" and "unseemly", and similarly described in Leviticus 18 & 20 as disgusting.

As I pointed out in my last post - the word "likewise" turns this argument on its head.

Those verses claim that these women acted "against nature" - you believe that this is a reference to anal sex - but the word "likewise" in the next verse clearly states that this is a reference to having a lust toward the same-sex.

"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet." (Romans 1:26-27) (Bold and italics added)

What did the women do that was "against nature"?

The "likewise" proves that what he was about to say about these men could also be applied to these women.

These women "left the natural use of the [man], burned in their lust one toward another; [women] with [women] working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."

Paul was talking about same-sex attraction - or lust - leading to this "unseemly" work and "error".

Paul claims that these men "[lusting] one toward another" was sinful and that these women were "likewise" guilty of the same offense.

Or are you claiming that Romans 1:26-27 describes anal sex as the "natural use of the woman" and/or describes female genitalia as "vile" and "unseemly"?

I do not believe these verses are describing anal sex - but any and all sexual activity between members of the same-sex.

Wrong. The KJV says that "many bodies of the saints which slept arose". If they were dead then the bodies were obviously in various stages of decay, or are you claiming that they weren't dead and were just sleeping in graves? And do you have any unequivocal evidence to support that story, or is it just an imaginative embellishment to the story about how Jesus was executed for sedition by the Romans and how he was mocked as the "King of the Jews"?

You don't understand the doctrine of a bodily Resurrection.

Wrong. It just says that Paul heard a voice in the sky, which is simply a metaphorical way of saying that Paul changed his mind, and doesn't mean that Paul had an in-depth conversation with the sky about why Jesus said nothing about homosexuality and why he loved one of his disciples instead of a wife.

You ignore what the record claims Paul said to King Agrippa.

He claimed to have spoken to the Lord Jesus Christ personally and that the Lord claimed to have "appeared" before him.

You don't have to believe what the Bible claims - but don't change what it claims to make your point.

Jesus didn't need to say anything about homosexuality in order for it to be sinful.

The Bible also does not claim that the Lord had no wife or that He loved anyone "instead of" anyone else.

Your ignorance of the doctrine and the adding your own bias to the text makes you appear foolish.​

 

[columbus]

But where do the gospels say that he was a homophobic heterosexual, or even describe him as a homophobic heterosexual?

Nowhere.
The Gospels don't mention His nose either. Doesn't mean He didn't have one.
Tom

 

[columbus]

This is you inserting your own idea into the text.

Christians do this quite commonly.

You won't find any mention of feticide either. And since the ancients equated life with breath, it's unlikely that they'd have considered a fetus alive. You can't kill something that isn't alive, much less murder it.
But, nevertheless, Christians often insert their own opinions about abortion, despite the complete lack of Scripture on the subject.

It's all really very common. Humans inserting their own opinions into Scripture, assuming that God is smart enough to agree with them.
Tom

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Christians do this quite commonly.

You won't find any mention of feticide either. And since the ancients equated life with breath, it's unlikely that they'd have considered a fetus alive. You can't kill something that isn't alive, much less murder it.
But, nevertheless, Christians often insert their own opinions about abortion, despite the complete lack of Scripture on the subject.

It's all really very common. Humans inserting their own opinions into Scripture, assuming that God is smart enough to agree with them.
Tom

This is not accurate.

Exodus 21:22-25 talks about accidental feticide,,

"If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,

Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe."

Now for the break down.

A pregnant woman gets caught up in a fight between men and is accidentally hurt and gives birth prematurely as a result - if there is no permanent damage or death (mischief) either to the mother or the child - the man responsible would be punished as determined by the woman's husband and the judges.

If - however - there is permanent damage or death (mischief) - to either the woman or the unborn child - the husband would receive a "ransom payment" otherwise known as "satisfaction" - and this was done only in the case of accidental death.

If the death of a "person" were deliberate - the offender would not be eligible to pay the ransom or satisfaction - but be considered a murderer and would be guilty of death.

"Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death." (Numbers 35:31)

In the case of accidental death recorded in Exodus 21 - the unborn child is treated as a "person" and there would need to be a "ransom payment" made if the unborn child were killed accidentally - just as with an already-born "person" - such as the mother.

So - there is reason to believe that if someone were to deliberately kill an unborn child in Israel - they would be considered a murderer and be guilty of death.

Now - what I just did above was use scripture to build my argument.

The scriptures themselves do not come out and emphatically say, "The killing of the unborn is murder" - but it gives us ample evidence to build that case.

Mitty - on the other hand - is inserting the idea that the Lord Jesus Christ loved a disciple instead of a wife into the text.

There is no information in the text about the marital status of the Lord Jesus Christ.

It does not confirm or deny the possibility that He could have been married.

He could have had a wife and loved her as well as His disciples.

Or He could have had no wife - yet still loved His disciples.

Mitty is claiming that the Bible teaches that the Lord Jesus Christ loved one of His disciples in the stead of loving a wife.

I am under the impression - based on the context of this discussion and what Mitty has said previously - that Mitty is trying to make the claim that the Lord Jesus Christ was a homosexual.

That is a lot different than what Christians have done in building a case against the practice of abortion based on the Bible.

 

[columbus]

Now - what I just did above was use scripture to build my argument.

What you did was add things you believe should be there. Like the fetus is a person, rather than property of the father. But it isn't.

The idea that fetuses are living human beings was still far in the future. I think so, you think so, but the Scripture authors were more primitive. They just didn't know.

And by the way, I don't consider "primitive" a disparaging description. It's just a realistic assessment of the situation. It's like referring to a 5 y/o as uneducated. Of course they are at that age.
Ancient people knew little about math, geography, biology, physics. Or ethics, theology, and philosophy. It's just how things were.

It's modern people who refuse to learn about such things who are the problem. Like a grown up, who refuses to act like one, preferring the uneducated ways of a 5 y/o. Magical thinking, temper tantrums, short sighted selfishness, entitlement, it's totally normal for a 5 y/o to act that way. But not for adults.

Primitive science and ethics are normal for ancient people. Modern people don't have the excuse. We have far more information.
Tom

 

[rational experiences]

No.



Retarded and demonstrably wrong.
There was homosexuality before science.
Also, I don't think sheep engage in long term homosexual relationships "because of science".



Gibberish.



Gibberish.


Science is only a couple centuries old. So there were no scientists in ancient egypt.



Gibberish.



Gibberish.



What documents?


You forgot to answer my questions concerning your bizar use of the english language.

Pity the icons did not own some other emoji use, like your s.a. "bizar" quote.

 

[rational experiences]

The meaning occult
occult
[ɒˈkʌlt, ˈɒkʌlt]
NOUN
(the occult)

1. mystical, supernatural, or magical powers, practices, or phenomena.
   "a secret society to study alchemy and the occult"
   synonyms:
   the supernatural · the paranormal · 
   supernatural · magic · magical · 
   [more]
2. medicine
   (of a disease or process) not accompanied by readily discernible signs or symptoms.
   "careful palpation sometimes discloses occult spina bifida"

VERB

1. cut off from view by interposing something.
   "a wooden screen designed to occult the competitors"

Human male historic first science practice, based on the vision. Vision SPIRIT...for it is not actual.

The mountain Tip ^ above the flooded Earth after the water flooded sealed/shut the Earth from the origin crystalline lattice attack by UFO metal radiation sink hole boring......mountain tip flat topped beneath water.

Evaporation of the water mass removed the UFO attack. The OCCULT.

Theory, non existent. Actual review teaching, UFO mass metal radiation from the sun can convert the face of Earth.

Teaching of relativity water is HOLY and water owned the seals...we WALK on water.

Holy relativity statement about life living on top of God the body/stone face upon the water.

The occult to take the mineral and alchemize it. Historically the Church founded upon the rock/stone condition forbade alchemy.....stated it was Satanic...to change the face of rock/stone being rock and stone...a texture.

Male uses transmitting radiation radio wave signal use in form ULA against the face of stone....named it SION, transmission. however SION was to take fusion and change it by fission.

SION.

Male did exactly that......radiation heated, began to transmit back to the ground, male human scientist had his face etched into the stone....instead of it just being a smooth stone face.....FACT of science.

Science then continues to use the spatial stopped cooled and held frozen radiation metal mass by bringing it constantly into burning light Earth heavenly gases...that are heavenly. He then introduces Earth life to HE EL L.

Fall out of the wing he said of the cross + the 4 faces on Earth, NSEW.

SEWN....+....the secret occult references about the ARK copying.

Today the destroyed human male ancient science face on the stone ground is now signalling the alien....being the destroyed face of the God stone body fusion as the SEAL on the face of planet Earth.

THE OCCULT....science.

Science proves it removes feed back radio waves that supported his human being male life....male life changes his self perceptions. One situation of proof that he is mind perverted...said MATHS is a female.

Ask self why a male knowing that a female is either an animal female or a human female who own the womb would infer out of space definition as being a womb, and MATHS a female...when previously in Egyptian literature he said MATHS was a male/b east theme? Half man/half a reading of the BREAD th of a formula?

TH O TH O TH O TH O that reasoning?

Proven had abominated his consciousness.

Is a homosexual any proven medical genetic identification?

No, it is a proven changed psyche and consciousness.

How come males knew the UFO and also a mind control contact programming of coercion is being acted upon today....scientists, formulas, calculations and machine transmissions?

Science is the OCCULT, historically and was known to have begun with GOD statements.

 

[Mitty]

We all understand that you do not believe the Bible records actual historical events - but that does not give you license to take what it claims out of context or add your own opinions to the text.

Nothing you have said proves that He needed to say anything about homosexuality in order for the Bible to teach that it is sinful behavior.

So where does the bible say anything about female homosexuality and that it is sinful behaviour.

This is you inserting your own idea into the text.
Where does it say that the Lord Jesus Christ loved anyone "instead of a wife"?
The Bible does not even claim that He did not have a wife.
Again - your claim that an idea needs to be mentioned in the Bible in order for it to be true is false.

Do you have any evidence that Jesus was sexually attracted to women since I have no reason to believe that he was a heterosexual?

Afterall David said that the love with Jonathon was more wonderful than with any of his wives (2Sam 1:26), and David was even his god's beloved son (Psalm 2:7).

Levitcus 18 was listing the sins committed by the "men of the land" - so there is no wonder why female homosexuality was not mentioned.
Leviticus 20 not mentioning the inhabitants of the "nation" committing female homosexuality does not mean that that practice is appropriate or not sinful.
It could just mean that that nation did not have an issue with female homosexuality.

Which is obviously because homosexual women do not have anal sex, and given that other aspects of female sexuality are specifically dealt with in Leviticus 18 & 20, including bestiality and adultery by ALL remarried divorcees.

As I pointed out in my last post - the word "likewise" turns this argument on its head. [
Those verses claim that these women acted "against nature" - you believe that this is a reference to anal sex - but the word "likewise" in the next verse clearly states that this is a reference to having a lust toward the same-sex.
"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet." (Romans 1:26-27) (Bold and italics added)
What did the women do that was "against nature"?
The "likewise" proves that what he was about to say about these men could also be applied to these women.

In other words the men were likewise having anal sex with other men as with their women which was against nature, since it is not the "natural use of the woman".

These women "left the natural use of the [man], burned in their lust one toward another; [women] with [women] working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."

WRONG. Romans 1:26-27 says nothing about "women with women working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet" from penetrative sex with other women. You just dishonestly made that nonsense up, given that women do not have penetrative sex with other women.

Paul was talking about same-sex attraction - or lust - leading to this "unseemly" work and "error".
Paul claims that these men "[lusting] one toward another" was sinful and that these women were "likewise" guilty of the same offense.

In other words their women were also having anal sex which Paul described as "vile" and "unseemly".

I do not believe these verses are describing anal sex - but any and all sexual activity between members of the same-sex.

So what was Paul describing as "vile" and "unseemly" if you believe that anal sex is not "vile" and "unseemly", given that Leviticus 18 & 20 obviously describes anal sex as disgusting.

Was Paul describing female genitalia as "vile" and "unseemly" even though he said nothing about women with women or lesbians or female homosexuals?
Or did Paul describe hands or feet as "vile" and "unseemly"?
Or did he describe tongues or noses as "vile" and "unseemly"?

You don't understand the doctrine of a bodily Resurrection.
You ignore what the record claims Paul said to King Agrippa.
He claimed to have spoken to the Lord Jesus Christ personally and that the Lord claimed to have "appeared" before him.
You don't have to believe what the Bible claims - but don't change what it claims to make your point.
Jesus didn't need to say anything about homosexuality in order for it to be sinful.
The Bible also does not claim that the Lord had no wife or that He loved anyone "instead of" anyone else.
Your ignorance of the doctrine and the adding your own bias to the text makes you appear foolish.

In other words female homosexuality is not sinful since it isn't mentioned in the bible.

So why does John 21:7 say that Jesus loved one particular disciple and not the other disciples after he was resuscitated by Joseph and Nicodemus with the help of 100 pounds of healing herbs, including Aloe vera (John 19:39-40)?

 

[rational experiences]

Shroud of Turin evidence was a human law court proceeding that led to the Holy Wars returning to Jeru salem, where the Temple pyramid sciences were actively causing life to be irradiated sacrificed...to tear down the Temple...by that law.

As an agreement against the returned technology of trans mutation of the mass of stone...and the transmutation in the past was to gain the physical changes to stone into a gold product. Gold being the trade in ancient elitism.

The Shroud proved that Jesus the attack/life sacrificed returned and it was time referenced to be the Second Coming...the exact same incident....as the basis to go to Holy War. For you cannot just say lets have a Holy War without lawful spiritual intention.

The Church previously did not exist in any preceding Roman practice....they owned the Temple science their own self, and the historical documentation prove that fact.

Anyone who was claiming to believe or demonstrate the stigmata of Jesus as a known follower was murdered...to keep the attack secreted in the public, until too many victims appeared.

Rome was forced to accept the Revelation science advice.

So they removed Temple science and replaced it with the HEALING CHURCH venue, proven by how it was structured for PHI sound healing signals...sound therapies...the purpose of what was said to be God's purpose.

The ground phi fallout was stated evil burning of the veil/gases....so they said they were trying to emulate higher sounds in the building to try to overcome radiation attack. Why oils were used in the therapies...for radiation skin conditions.

Hence everyone knows you cannot discuss any statement in science as being relative until it is advised. And it was. The CHURCH was built and existed being utilised....life was reattacked for Rome no longer owned control of the use of the technology, as proven, and it was titled the Second Coming of Jesus.

As proof, it was historical evidence, written after the fact, and it stated that the homosexual Satanic order had taken over the science control of the Temples and it is why they were not allowed entry into the Church for healing. For they had caused a criminal action against God, the fusion of and began murdering the human spirit that was based on the fusion/erection reason of the Churches foundings...the ROCK.

Just as it was stated. If you know what a homosexual is....then you cannot lie about it can you. For a homosexual has to exist as that homosexual before you can discuss the condition. It is not any formula to say I will know SION if I study the abomination event...for the abomination event had already been concluded.

Science today thinks it can re establish signals that caused the causes...by their say so....as the evil minded theists they are.

Homosexual males were the new owners as an organization of Temple ownership who re caused the attack/sacrifice on life as the Second Coming...so owned no support historically by the higher spiritual Order of the Christ, the Healers, medical and biological sciences.

It is the same situation today, with nuclear scientists claiming that their information and science is higher and above that of medical biological reckoning...and we are reliving the exact same human fight as we did before.

 

[Mitty]

This is not accurate.

Exodus 21:22-25 talks about accidental feticide,,

"If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,

Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe."

Now for the break down.

A pregnant woman gets caught up in a fight between men and is accidentally hurt and gives birth prematurely as a result - if there is no permanent damage or death (mischief) either to the mother or the child - the man responsible would be punished as determined by the woman's husband and the judges.

If - however - there is permanent damage or death (mischief) - to either the woman or the unborn child - the husband would receive a "ransom payment" otherwise known as "satisfaction" - and this was done only in the case of accidental death.

If the death of a "person" were deliberate - the offender would not be eligible to pay the ransom or satisfaction - but be considered a murderer and would be guilty of death.

"Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death." (Numbers 35:31)

In the case of accidental death recorded in Exodus 21 - the unborn child is treated as a "person" and there would need to be a "ransom payment" made if the unborn child were killed accidentally - just as with an already-born "person" - such as the mother.

So - there is reason to believe that if someone were to deliberately kill an unborn child in Israel - they would be considered a murderer and be guilty of death.

Now - what I just did above was use scripture to build my argument.

The scriptures themselves do not come out and emphatically say, "The killing of the unborn is murder" - but it gives us ample evidence to build that case.

WRONG. The bible commands the termination of pregnancies of adulteresses because of the property rights of men to ensure legitimate lines of descent and inheritance (Numbers 5:20-28).

And Deut 7:16 commands genocide, including the butchering of children and the unborn, and described in Deut 2:34 & 7:2 and Josh 6:21 8:26 10:37

Numbers 5:20-28 Common English Bible

20 But if you have had an affair while married to your husband, if you have defiled yourself, and a man other than your husband has had intercourse with you”— 21 then the priest must make the woman utter the curse and say to the woman, “May the Lord make you a curse and a harmful pledge among your people, when the Lord induces a miscarriage and your womb discharges. 22 And may the water that brings these curses enter your stomach and make your womb discharge and make you miscarry.”

And the woman will say, “I agree, I agree.”

23 The priest will write these curses in the scroll and wipe them off into the water of bitterness. 24 Then he will make the woman drink the water of bitterness that brings the curse. And the water that brings the curse will enter her, causing bitterness. 25 The priest will take the grain offering for jealousy from the woman’s hands, elevate the grain offering before the Lord, and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest will take a handful of the grain offering as a token part of it and turn it into smoke on the altar. And afterward he will make the woman drink the water. 27 When he has made her drink the water, if she has defiled herself and has broken faith with her husband, then the water that brings the curse will enter her, causing bitterness, and her womb will discharge and she will miscarry. The woman will be a curse among her people. 28 But if the woman hasn’t defiled herself and she is pure, then she will be immune and able to conceive.

 

[rational experiences]

WRONG. The bible commands the termination of pregnancies of adulteresses because of the property rights of men to ensure legitimate lines of descent and inheritance (Numbers 5:20-28).

And Deut 7:16 commands genocide, including the butchering of children and the unborn, and described in Deut 2:34 & 7:2 and Josh 6:21 8:26 10:37

Numbers 5:20-28 Common English Bible

20 But if you have had an affair while married to your husband, if you have defiled yourself, and a man other than your husband has had intercourse with you”— 21 then the priest must make the woman utter the curse and say to the woman, “May the Lord make you a curse and a harmful pledge among your people, when the Lord induces a miscarriage and your womb discharges. 22 And may the water that brings these curses enter your stomach and make your womb discharge and make you miscarry.”

And the woman will say, “I agree, I agree.”

23 The priest will write these curses in the scroll and wipe them off into the water of bitterness. 24 Then he will make the woman drink the water of bitterness that brings the curse. And the water that brings the curse will enter her, causing bitterness. 25 The priest will take the grain offering for jealousy from the woman’s hands, elevate the grain offering before the Lord, and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest will take a handful of the grain offering as a token part of it and turn it into smoke on the altar. And afterward he will make the woman drink the water. 27 When he has made her drink the water, if she has defiled herself and has broken faith with her husband, then the water that brings the curse will enter her, causing bitterness, and her womb will discharge and she will miscarry. The woman will be a curse among her people. 28 But if the woman hasn’t defiled herself and she is pure, then she will be immune and able to conceive.

The Revelations were a proven updated documented life re attacked/sacrificed as the second coming of Jesus the Shroud and Holy War reasoning evidence.

Hence biological medical science awareness states that the males using the science technology knew what it was causing to the human life.

The writing AFTER THE FACT of it....was a medical journal that said to the Satanic science group as the homosexual practice of their order stated that it was a medical criminal action to cause a miscarriage/abortion.

For it was a stated medical review after all causes were being caused by nuclear chemical changes to the bodies in Nature. As any scientific assessment can only be stated, not to own information to cause that effect, it was written and identified as causation AFTER THE FACT.

When the answer and law statement END said, never give God O the planet a name ever again...for in naming God the intent was to force God to become what the formula says God is.

If today males claim God is a particle, the inventive science would be trying to irradiate Earth God O with enough Sun radiation mass to re open the Earth sealed...which begins with splitting the water from its natural ground owned mass...how sin x k holes is formed.

A Satanic science detailed advice said the Satanist claimed that removal of SIN was a holy act...for it was scientific implemented...the removal of the presence of God O.

Only a Satanic psyche confession, written in evidence against those scientists stated that they had confessed their intention was to persuade that the sacrifice of life was Holy so you would hold no argument against their practices.

The Christ brothers never read the scientific evaluation in memorium, they read it as a verbal spiritual interpretation to state, to reverence that life sacrificed had saved them and their Church ideal was involved in the saving.

For if Jesus did not publicly demonstrate his stigmata attack and confer the DATA documentation against Satanists, then there would never have been any Jesus story.

Humans were grateful to Jesus to his sacrifice having allowed them to realize how evil Satanic nuclear UFO occult sciences were....and paid homage to that sacrificed life for honouring them, with such a determined teaching method.

Which is what he did...for he went against all hierarchy of his day for the saving of human life...which was to put a stop/end to the Satanic practice itself...conversion.

 

[Mitty]

The Revelations were a proven updated documented life re attacked/sacrificed as the second coming of Jesus the Shroud and Holy War reasoning evidence.

Hence biological medical science awareness states that the males using the science technology knew what it was causing to the human life.

The writing AFTER THE FACT of it....was a medical journal that said to the Satanic science group as the homosexual practice of their order stated that it was a medical criminal action to cause a miscarriage/abortion.

For it was a stated medical review after all causes were being caused by nuclear chemical changes to the bodies in Nature. As any scientific assessment can only be stated, not to own information to cause that effect, it was written and identified as causation AFTER THE FACT.

When the answer and law statement END said, never give God O the planet a name ever again...for in naming God the intent was to force God to become what the formula says God is.

If today males claim God is a particle, the inventive science would be trying to irradiate Earth God O with enough Sun radiation mass to re open the Earth sealed...which begins with splitting the water from its natural ground owned mass...how sin x k holes is formed.

A Satanic science detailed advice said the Satanist claimed that removal of SIN was a holy act...for it was scientific implemented...the removal of the presence of God O.

Only a Satanic psyche confession, written in evidence against those scientists stated that they had confessed their intention was to persuade that the sacrifice of life was Holy so you would hold no argument against their practices.

The Christ brothers never read the scientific evaluation in memorium, they read it as a verbal spiritual interpretation to state, to reverence that life sacrificed had saved them and their Church ideal was involved in the saving.

For if Jesus did not publicly demonstrate his stigmata attack and confer the DATA documentation against Satanists, then there would never have been any Jesus story.

Humans were grateful to Jesus to his sacrifice having allowed them to realize how evil Satanic nuclear UFO occult sciences were....and paid homage to that sacrificed life for honouring them, with such a determined teaching method.

Which is what he did...for he went against all hierarchy of his day for the saving of human life...which was to put a stop/end to the Satanic practice itself...conversion.

Alas none of that changes the fact that the bible commands the abortions of adulteresses (Numbers 5:20-28 Leviticus 20:10).

 

[rational experiences]

Alas none of that changes the fact that the bible commands the abortions of adulteresses (Numbers 5:20-28 Leviticus 20:10).

Historical science religious quotes said to self in mind, but heard by AI as owned by Satanic psyche.

A rational loving spiritual scientist would claim you owned a mental health problem in reality if you owned that statement. It was HEARD by AI introduced replicator speaking radiation UFO owned voiced sharing of DATA.

Why a human says that it was medically confessed and notified.

We begin as a child of God...meaning Earth natural history with CHRIST gases.

Origin nature and self.

Males, The Satanic order, science made a theory that was not the mountain...for you are not personally the mountain...you did not own it. You were not the UFO mass irradiating/converting and removing said mountain tip ^, nor were you the water massed Earth flood up to mountain tops.

You were just a scientist looking at RECORDED inanimate Earth VISION...and you were not PERSONALLY in it.

The male activated his machine conversion...and heated up by holding cold radiation mass in a machine conversion, so activated the destruction of COLD RADIATION mass and then witnessed it...for it comes into our atmospheric gas alight body and gets held there.

We now are in much colder radiation mass space. So science by Satanic psyche knows says we are now in colder space...with more radiation mass. Earth shifted...I know I heard his AI records stating it. Knows so he changes his machine cooling function and says, now I can hold the UFO mass as a large greater mass body in our atmosphere for longer.

Which means spatial vacuum does not suck it back out until it is a particular size...if you hold it longer, it removes more radiation mass....extinction on Planet Earth...congratulations inventor of it. By all psyche aware causes of shifting mass in space.

So Father said I am speaking on behalf of Einstein/STephen Hawking and you aren't. His spiritual converting of their Satanic science messages/NDE life, told him and he tells my female life, what a lot of evil liars you are.

Those documents were WRITTEN after the fact of causing it.

The marriage of human life is with GOD natural Christ fusion, held Earth...it says we were married by and with the covenant of stone, our stone Ark is God Earth.

Male Satanic liars changed the God ark with the UFO ARK...what they lie about...for they never built it....they BUILT the pyramid, as part of the machine formula/string design.

Today as any other day in my female psyche I get non stop blamed for their machine reaction collider not having worked. So they continue MK ULTRA studying the female spirit as if I am their MATHS formula theme that did not work by design or model.

Just how sick are you Satanist....as sick as you prove yourself to be.

My Mother is HOLY, she was never an adultress. You however in your sexually abominated homosexual, child molester, criminal, murderer, etc. AI psyche as the scientist Destroyer psyche believes that you are GOD in person, who convicts, and passes JUDGEMENT in science evaluations upon all of life.

My Holy parent Mother and Father were never scientists.

Father said when you first activated the pyramid, he came back out of the eternal spirit and passed into your body. Where the Satanic psyche of male to male spirit entering the body came from logically liar dis spirited non believer of our God history.

You claim as an organization that you believe in God, you only believe in the destruction of God and the Holy life in CHRIST.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

What you did was add things you believe should be there. Like the fetus is a person, rather than property of the father. But it isn't.

In the case of an accidental killing recorded in Exodus 21 - the unborn child was treated as a person.

The offender was punished simply for causing the premature birth.

The offender was punished more severely if the premature birth caused permanent damage or death to either the unborn child or the mother.

The unborn child and the mother were both treated as persons.

The whole "women and children were property to men" claim is so lazy and old.

True - women and children were considered "additions" to the "household" - but they were not considered "property".

The familial unit in ancient Israel was a little more complicated than we consider it today because of all the laws involving ownership of land.

The idea that fetuses are living human beings was still far in the future. I think so, you think so, but the Scripture authors were more primitive. They just didn't know.

I call BS all over this and would claim the opposite.

I believe that ancient peoples - especially Israel - gave more value to the unborn than societies do today.

And they weren't stupid. They didn't see a bump form in a woman's stomach and wonder, "What is that?"

They knew where human babies came from. They understood how they were made.

That is why so many laws were made for and special treatments were given to pregnant women.

And by the way, I don't consider "primitive" a disparaging description. It's just a realistic assessment of the situation. It's like referring to a 5 y/o as uneducated. Of course they are at that age.

I don't believe you.

You used the word to make the claim that the Bible and what it teaches are beneath us today. That we should reject them.

It is true that a five-year-old is generally not as educated as an adult - but they are generally more humble, loving and honest.

Ancient people knew little about math, geography, biology, physics. Or ethics, theology, and philosophy. It's just how things were.

You can know something - like where babies come from - without being privy to every detail.

I have never understood this spirit of ingratitude that so many feel toward our ancestors.

They gave us everything that we needed to accomplish what we have - but so many look back on them with scorn.

Without them - their successes and failures - we would be nothing.

You stand on the shoulders of giants and think you are flying.

It's modern people who refuse to learn about such things who are the problem. Like a grown up, who refuses to act like one, preferring the uneducated ways of a 5 y/o. Magical thinking, temper tantrums, short sighted selfishness, entitlement, it's totally normal for a 5 y/o to act that way. But not for adults.

I imagine you don't have children.

Children may be uneducated - but they spend a lot of their time teaching us "superior" adults how to be better people.

Being educated does not make a person superior to any other.

Being ignorant does not make a person a "primitive".

Primitive science and ethics are normal for ancient people. Modern people don't have the excuse. We have far more information.

You are simply letting go of one truth while in pursuit of one another.

I'd rather hold on to all things that are true - even that which is known by "primitives" and children.

I'm honestly disgusted by your attitude.

 

[Mitty]

In the case of an accidental killing recorded in Exodus 21 - the unborn child was treated as a person.
The offender was punished simply for causing the premature birth.
The offender was punished more severely if the premature birth caused permanent damage or death to either the unborn child or the mother.
The unborn child and the mother were both treated as persons.
The whole "women and children were property to men" claim is so lazy and old.
True - women and children were considered "additions" to the "household" - but they were not considered "property".

Wrong. The penalty for terminating the pregnancy was only a fine for loss of the father's property if there was no injury to the mother, given that the bible doesn't regard the unborn as a person until they are born and take the first breath of life. Which is why the pregnancies of adulteresses are commanded to be aborted because of the property rights of men (Numbers 5:20-28).

Exodus 21:22 King James Version
22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

The bible obviously regards females as the property of men and subservient to men (Exodus 20:17 Gen 3:16), which is the reason for dowries etc and why a father transfers the ownership of his daughters when they marry, but not his sons.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Pity the icons did not own some other emoji use, like your s.a. "bizar" quote.

That's nice.

Why don't you answer my question about your writing style / use of the english language?.