LearnGospelMusic.com Community

Please login or register.
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Queen James Version  (Read 1643 times)

Offline Hasmonean1

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
  • Gender: Male
    • HVAC International Parts

Queen James Version
« on: December 21, 2012, 01:18:58 PM »
I heard on talk radio that the Gay-Lesbian community will be soon coming out with this version of the bible that excludes negative references to their lifestyle.

What kind of impression do you think this version will or should make on society concerning them?

Offline dingster1

  • LGM Royalty
  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1166
    • DINGTHING

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #1 on: December 21, 2012, 01:31:04 PM »
Be not decieved, God is not mocked. What soever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

Offline thunderkat

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 174

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #2 on: December 21, 2012, 02:22:48 PM »
I heard on talk radio that the Gay-Lesbian community will be soon coming out with this version of the bible that excludes negative references to their lifestyle.

What kind of impression do you think this version will or should make on society concerning them?

I'm not sure but, we should have expected this.

Everyone should have known that part of their agenda is to twist, distort, and even re-write God's very word to suit the lifestyle that they want to live.

I do not hate gays and lesbians but I do hate these types of agendas that so many of them stand for.

Offline gtrdave

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4895
  • Gender: Male
  • Men always ought to pray and not lose heart.
    • Check out some of my music!

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #3 on: December 21, 2012, 05:12:21 PM »
Sadly, this does not surprise me if it's true.

In related news, recent scientific research has found what's possibly the "cause" of homosexuality and it has something to do with epigenetics and testosterone during the fetus' time in the womb:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/scientists-uncover-source-homosexuality-article-1.1218017
Music theory is not always music reality.

Offline THE WOLFMAN

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7556
  • Gender: Male
  • .........

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #4 on: December 21, 2012, 07:11:07 PM »
irt the thread title,

Offline phbrown

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12070
  • Google Fiber

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #5 on: December 21, 2012, 09:16:04 PM »
I heard on talk radio that the Gay-Lesbian community will be soon coming out with this version of the bible that excludes negative references to their lifestyle.

What kind of impression do you think this version will or should make on society concerning them?



Offline Hasmonean1

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
  • Gender: Male
    • HVAC International Parts

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #6 on: December 22, 2012, 12:27:12 AM »
irt the thread title,




Oh no according to this reputable talk show host who discusses relevant issues, this is an actual version of the bible that will be coming out some time next year.

Offline smalls85s

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #7 on: December 22, 2012, 06:05:37 AM »
Seriously?????

First of all, why is this even relevant? Since when has Satan and man kinds unfruitful works of wickedness been able to adversely affect the kingdom of God.  They can have their own little church services and (not)bible studies all they want, but hell is still going to be the same temperature.

Offline SavnBass

  • LGM Royalty
  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1536
  • Gender: Male
  • Saved by GRACE .. Bass by choice

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #8 on: December 22, 2012, 07:06:53 AM »
Reminds me of that gender neutral bible.
Start where you are. Use what you have. Do what you can.

Offline thunderkat

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 174

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #9 on: December 22, 2012, 09:53:01 AM »
Reminds me of that gender neutral bible.

I haven't heard of that one yet but again... I'm not surprised.

There are some "big time" pastors and bishops out there preaching that God does not see gender in the spirit. They usually use this as a way to ordain women to be deacons and bishops.

This type of doctrine leaves the door wide open for gay marriage. It's sad.

Offline funkStrat_97

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5431
  • Gender: Male
  • Da' House Rocka' is in Da' House!
    • Facebook

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #10 on: December 22, 2012, 11:43:10 AM »
Reminds me of that gender neutral bible.

Seems that over the years, there have been many attempts to shoehorn the Bible to be compatible with the latest and greatest trends of day.
“Don't bother to give God instructions, just report for duty”
- Corrie Ten Boom

Offline gtrdave

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4895
  • Gender: Male
  • Men always ought to pray and not lose heart.
    • Check out some of my music!

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #11 on: December 22, 2012, 07:46:07 PM »
I haven't heard of that one yet but again... I'm not surprised.

Allegedly, it's the newest of the "New International" versions.

I prefer the old "New International" version, myself...
Music theory is not always music reality.

Offline funkStrat_97

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5431
  • Gender: Male
  • Da' House Rocka' is in Da' House!
    • Facebook

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #12 on: December 23, 2012, 05:04:12 PM »
Here is Leviticus 18:22 from the Queen James Version:

Quote
Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind in the temple of Molech: it is an abomination. (QJV)

Compare to the King James Version:

Quote
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination. (KJV)
“Don't bother to give God instructions, just report for duty”
- Corrie Ten Boom

Offline phbrown

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12070
  • Google Fiber

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #13 on: December 23, 2012, 10:33:54 PM »
you know i just realized I don't think I have ever really read from Leviticus ... i wonder if there is anything in my lifestyle that is considered against the law in the book of Leviticus

Offline funkStrat_97

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5431
  • Gender: Male
  • Da' House Rocka' is in Da' House!
    • Facebook

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #14 on: December 24, 2012, 09:05:38 AM »
you know i just realized I don't think I have ever really read from Leviticus ... i wonder if there is anything in my lifestyle that is considered against the law in the book of Leviticus

Some of the laws and regulations that are written in the book of Leviticus would have no practical meaning in today's world simply for the fact that certain things are not done anymore and with the shedding of Christ's blood, we no longer have to do certain things like sacrifice animals for our sins.  Also, while much of it is ceremonial, I think that there is a passage that prohibits joining on-line communities such as LGM so in short, yes....your LGM lifestyle is a violation of Levitical law..........................











psyche!!!! ;D
“Don't bother to give God instructions, just report for duty”
- Corrie Ten Boom

Offline phbrown

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12070
  • Google Fiber

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #15 on: December 24, 2012, 09:24:14 PM »

Offline Salvador

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 324
  • Gender: Male

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #16 on: December 25, 2012, 04:20:11 AM »
you know i just realized I don't think I have ever really read from Leviticus ... i wonder if there is anything in my lifestyle that is considered against the law in the book of Leviticus
I'll try to keep it brief because I could go on for hours.  :o

But essentially the laws were understood to fall in three separate categories; two (the Judicial stuff, ceremonial) don't apply anymore.
So when people bring up sea food, shaving, tattoos, wearing polyester(!), you're free to roll your eyes.
The last, the one that applies still, are universal morals. Don't kill. Don't steal...
The question is where would homosexuality fall?

It's pretty obviously the last. What this "bible" did was try to pull the 'ol "temple prostitution" type argument. But it fails.
In the Chapter 20 homosexuality reference it falls smack in the middle of sexual morality and explains these are the reasons the other nations are being judged.

The Chapter 18 reference from what Strat posted is rendered as: Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind in the temple of Molech: it is an abomination. (QJV)
That particular line is sandwiched between a reference to child sacrifice and bestiality; I'd like to ask the QJV translators if they think child sacrifice and bestiality are permissible outside of temples of Molech or does only homosexuality get special exemption?
I think the Molech mention is important and it goes over the QJV crowd's head. I would say the Ch 18 reference is a bit of a polemic (mirroring what Paul would do with Homosexuality in the NT as well). Basically Ch 18 isn't saying "homosexuality [human sacrifice, bestiality] is wrong when connected with Molech." It's saying child sacrifice, homosexuality, bestiality, are all reasons why Molech worship is wrong!

As a bit of a throwaway to keep in mind when people say "Jesus didn't say anything about homosexuality..." there's like at least three things off the top of my head that are very wrong with that statement. But I always kinda chuckle to myself because of the Second YHWH concept in the OT. Basically, you have a good number of times where you have God interacting with...another God. For Christians this isn't an issue; that's Jesus who God is interacting with. And if we understand it as such there's two Sodom and Gomorrah verses that become very interesting. They say essentially "the Lord rained down fire from the Lord." So if Jesus is to be identified as the second YHWH, he maybe didn't mention homosexuality explicitly in the NT, but in the OT he punished homosexuality personally!  :o

Anywho...Merry Christmas LGM.  :)

Offline phbrown

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12070
  • Google Fiber

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #17 on: December 25, 2012, 11:53:11 AM »
wow  :o ... thank you

and MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Offline thunderkat

  • LGM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 174

Re: Queen James Version
« Reply #18 on: December 26, 2012, 12:53:59 PM »
I'll try to keep it brief because I could go on for hours.  :o

But essentially the laws were understood to fall in three separate categories; two (the Judicial stuff, ceremonial) don't apply anymore.
So when people bring up sea food, shaving, tattoos, wearing polyester(!), you're free to roll your eyes.
The last, the one that applies still, are universal morals. Don't kill. Don't steal...
The question is where would homosexuality fall?

It's pretty obviously the last. What this "bible" did was try to pull the 'ol "temple prostitution" type argument. But it fails.
In the Chapter 20 homosexuality reference it falls smack in the middle of sexual morality and explains these are the reasons the other nations are being judged.

The Chapter 18 reference from what Strat posted is rendered as: Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind in the temple of Molech: it is an abomination. (QJV)
That particular line is sandwiched between a reference to child sacrifice and bestiality; I'd like to ask the QJV translators if they think child sacrifice and bestiality are permissible outside of temples of Molech or does only homosexuality get special exemption?
I think the Molech mention is important and it goes over the QJV crowd's head. I would say the Ch 18 reference is a bit of a polemic (mirroring what Paul would do with Homosexuality in the NT as well). Basically Ch 18 isn't saying "homosexuality [human sacrifice, bestiality] is wrong when connected with Molech." It's saying child sacrifice, homosexuality, bestiality, are all reasons why Molech worship is wrong!

As a bit of a throwaway to keep in mind when people say "Jesus didn't say anything about homosexuality..." there's like at least three things off the top of my head that are very wrong with that statement. But I always kinda chuckle to myself because of the Second YHWH concept in the OT. Basically, you have a good number of times where you have God interacting with...another God. For Christians this isn't an issue; that's Jesus who God is interacting with. And if we understand it as such there's two Sodom and Gomorrah verses that become very interesting. They say essentially "the Lord rained down fire from the Lord." So if Jesus is to be identified as the second YHWH, he maybe didn't mention homosexuality explicitly in the NT, but in the OT he punished homosexuality personally!  :o

Anywho...Merry Christmas LGM.  :)

Thanks Bro.
Pages: [1]   Go Up