King James added anti-gay passages to the Bible during war, why?
460451
Your question starts with a faulty presupposition.  The King James version has many flaws and does not reflect the best of Textual Criticism that we know today.  That beind said, no significant anti-gay passages were added and the 6 main texts that are used to argue against it are found in the original Hebrew and Greek.
268068
Nope,it's one of those passages that I disagree with.What you quoted was one of many unethical verses in the bible.I don't believe or follow everything I read.
1160332
Firstly, it's not the first commandment--it's buried somewhere around the middle.\n\nSecond of all, the bible has a huge list of exceptions to that particular rule.\n\nBesides, since Judaism evolved from the worship of a Canaanite God of War, it's unlikely that his Judaic descendent would be anti-war, would he?
696714
I don't think many Republican Christians like this bit of the Bible.\n\nA rich Christian is much more of an oxymoron than a gay Christian.
1087166
because much of the Bible was written by men, who are homophobic but enjoy two women togther.
1159860
I am not afraid of, nor am I offended by gay people. Since when does gay mean you can't keep your hands to yourself???\nAs far as the Bible saying 'One man shall not lie with another' B/S\nIf we were so concerned about living our lives according to the bible, why is there murder? Or adultery? Or blasphemy? or anything else that the Bible condems???\nLive your life the way you want, love whomever you want, don't hurt me, and I won't hurt you. That's how it should be. Period.
884507
Not at all! I back them up actually. If God wanted to promote homosexuality, then he would allow man-man woman-woman realationships, but he doesn't. He actually destroyed 2 cities (Sodom and Gomorrah) with a rain of fire because they were practising homosexuality.
585362
You jackass. the verse (8:68) refers to distribution of spoils of war. Now, anymore FAKE KORANIC VERSES I NEED TO READ?\n\nWho's the one embarrased now?\n\nEDIT:I want to make it clear. This verse is not taken out of the context because IT WAS NEVER IN THE CONTEXT!! It's fictitious.
803400
James I reigned as king of England from 1603 to 1625. He was the son of Mary Queen of Scots, and he had been king of Scotland before succeeding to the English throne at the death of Queen Elizabeth I. He was prompted to produce an English Bible because of the poor and tendentious copies being circulated in England. He feared these could be used by seditious religious and political factions. \n\nHis authority was one usurped from the Catholic Church, beginning with his predecessor King Henry VIII. Henry had broken with the Catholic Church and made himself the head of the Church in England, which soon enough became the Church of England. You could say James had no more authority in biblical matters than any head of state, basically none.
235132
because it is unnatural , and you can't say it has been around as long as heterosexuality, if you read the history you will find that it came around when the sexual cantact between men and women was restricted by religion. If people like you don't encurage it and it was punishable by law, there would be no more gay people around.
155166
It was added to Revelations. Satan did not exist in the bible, as he does today, until King James. Infact some believe that most of Revelations has been changed, added to, etc.
730879
I watched I program on the History channel and they were cruel they didn't want anyone going against their rule & King James was a wize at munipulating the bible to fit him and his court of preist, it was the oofecil church of england and holding any type of other church or teachings was a crime, they is where christianty got it first atart, I wish i could remember more, it was F'th up I'll tell you that
298784
Many peole who hate homosexuals claim that the Bible backs them up. But what does the Bible say?\n\nIn the Old Testament God condemns homosexuality for his Chosen People, the Children of Israel (Leviticus 18:1-3, 22). They are to be fruitful and multiply until they become as numerous as the stars in the sky and occupy the land between the River Nile in Egypt and the River Euphrates in Iraq (Genesis 15:5, 18). God's prohibition of homosexuality applies only to the Hebrews, not to the Gentiles.\n\nIn the New Testament Jesus says nothing about homosexuals. Paul condemns them, not because he wants to increase the population, but because he opposes all sexual activities, even within marriage (1 Corinthians 7:1, 5, 8-9, 29).\n\nAccording to the Bible, if you are a Jew, you must not be gay; if you are a Christian, you must not just refrain from homosexual activities, you should not have sex at all - unless you are a weak-willed wimp who cannot practice self-control.\n\nUnless you are a Jew or a Christian virgin, the Bible give you no right to bash gays. And if you want to be like Jesus, you won't condemn them at all.
872379
The biggest problem about where it was copied from the KJV Bible isn't the exact language that was used but the fact that even the italicized words were included as part of the text without comment. Just so everyone knows. Those were were added to make the translation flow properly in English. It's not always possible to translate even from another Latin based language to English with out adding some wording to make it flow properly in syntax. But to add them as though they are part of the Scripture is wrong.. No not wrong  EVIL is a better word...   Jim
695555
Some ancient societies, such as Greece and Japan, fostered erotic love bonds between experienced warriors and their apprentices. It was believed that a man and youth who were in love with each other would fight harder and with greater morale. A classic example of a military force built upon this belief is the Sacred Band of Thebes.\nIt was organized in 378 BC by the Theban commander Gorgidas\nHe claims inspiration from Plato's Symposium.  Although there are some earlier writings this is the earliest example I can find of a man actually 'coming out' as such and this could have alot to do with the Greek acceptance of homosexuality!
866828
The bible does not say that.  \n\nFROM DIGNITYUSA.ORG\n\nWhat was the point of the Bible texts if not to condemn homosexuality? \n\nIt is not easy to summarize briefly the body of research on homosexuality in the Bible. But these are the interpretations that some scholars are proposing:\n\n•The story of Sodom in Genesis 19 is about offense against the sacred duty of hospitality. That is how Ezekiel 16:48-49 and Wisdom 9:13-14 interpret this text. The attempted male rape only heightens the atrocity of this offense. \n\n•Leviticus 18:22 does forbid male-male sex as an "abomination." But the word simply means an impurity or a religious taboo — like eating pork. As in the case of Catholics who used to be forbidden under pain of mortal sin to eat meat on Friday, the offense was not in the act itself but in the betrayal of one's religion. The ancient Jews were to avoid practices common among the unclean Gentiles. \n\n•Romans 1:27 mentions men having relations with men. But the terms used to describe them are "dishonorable" and "shameless." These refer deliberately to social disapproval, not to ethical condemnation. Moreover, according to Paul's usage, different from the prevalent Stoic philosophy of the day, para physin ("unnatural") would best be translated "atypical" or "beyond the ordinary." So it bears no reference to natural law. And it can imply no ethical condemnation because in Romans 11:24 God is said to act para physin. Paul sees gay sex as an impurity (see Rm. 1:24), just like uncircumcision or eating forbidden foods. He mentions it to make the main point of his letter, that purity requirements of the Jewish Law are not relevant in Christ Jesus. See L. William Countryman, Dirt, Greed, and Sex. \n\n•1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:8-10 list arsenokoitai among those who will be excluded from the Reign of God. This obscure term has been translated "homosexuals" but its exact meaning is debated. It certainly does not include women but only some kind of male sexual offenders. If it does refer to men having sex with men — which is dubious — it must be interpreted in light of the abuse and licentiousness commonly associated with male-male sex in the Roman Empire. See Robin Scroggs, The New Testament and Homosexuality. \n\n•Finally, Genesis 1-3 shows Adam and Eve created for mutual companionship and procreation. These accounts use the most standard of human relationships to teach a religious lesson. The point is the love and wisdom of God, who made all things good and wills us no evil. Nothing suggests the biblical authors intended a lesson on sexual orientation.
403385
Depends on who you ask, but neither is. If you read the oldest and purest form of the bible it says nothing about being gay. It is true that the old testament talks about spilling the sperm and wasting, but you have to understand the science (or lack thereof) of the time. They believed that the whole baby was in the sperm and the womb was just an incubator. There for any time a man climaxed out side of a woman, it was killing a child. Many laws in the old testament were built off this belief. \nAnd also note that all the law about this are in the old testament, when Jesus came he said because of his death, the old laws were void. As for the new testament, remember that most of the  books were written by more then person, some books by many of different people. Their students (their intentions may have been good) pieced together teaching and  beliefs from themselves and the disciples. \nMy advice would be to do a lot of research on both sides of the argument, and look with yourself. There is a good book called "Gay theology with out apology" I don't know the author. good luck.