home
RSS
My Take: What the Bible really says about homosexuality
The author argues that the meaning of the Bible's passages on homosexuality have been lost in translation.
May 15th, 2012
05:39 PM ET

My Take: What the Bible really says about homosexuality

Editor's note: Daniel A. Helminiak, who was ordained a priest in Rome, is a theologian, psychotherapist and author of “What the Bible Really Says about homosexuality" and books on contemporary spirituality. He is a professor of psychology at the University of West Georgia.

By Daniel A. Helminiak, Special to CNN

President Barack Obama’s support of same-sex marriage, like blood in the water, has conservative sharks circling for a kill. In a nation that touts separation of religion and government, religious-based arguments command this battle. Lurking beneath anti-gay forays, you inevitably find religion and, above all, the Bible.

We now face religious jingoism, the imposition of personal beliefs on the whole pluralistic society. Worse still, these beliefs are irrational, just a fiction of blind conviction. Nowhere does the Bible actually oppose homosexuality.

In the past 60 years, we have learned more about sex, by far, than in preceding millennia. Is it likely that an ancient people, who thought the male was the basic biological model and the world flat, understood homosexuality as we do today? Could they have even addressed the questions about homosexuality that we grapple with today? Of course not.

CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories

Hard evidence supports this commonsensical expectation. Taken on its own terms, read in the original languages, placed back into its historical context, the Bible is ho-hum on homosexuality, unless – as with heterosexuality – injustice and abuse are involved.

That, in fact, was the case among the Sodomites (Genesis 19), whose experience is frequently cited by modern anti-gay critics. The Sodomites wanted to rape the visitors whom Lot, the one just man in the city, welcomed in hospitality for the night.

The Bible itself is lucid on the sin of Sodom: pride, lack of concern for the poor and needy (Ezekiel 16:48-49); hatred of strangers and cruelty to guests (Wisdom 19:13); arrogance (Sirach/Ecclesiaticus 16:8); evildoing, injustice, oppression of the widow and orphan (Isaiah 1:17); adultery (in those days, the use of another man’s property), and lying (Jeremiah 23:12).

But nowhere are same-sex acts named as the sin of Sodom. That intended gang rape only expressed the greater sin, condemned in the Bible from cover to cover: hatred, injustice, cruelty, lack of concern for others. Hence, Jesus says “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 19:19; Mark 12:31); and “By this will they know you are my disciples” (John 13:35).

How inverted these values have become! In the name of Jesus, evangelicals and Catholic bishops make sex the Christian litmus test and are willing to sacrifice the social safety net in return.

The longest biblical passage on male-male sex is Romans 1:26-27: "Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another."

The Greek term para physin has been translated unnatural; it should read atypical or unusual. In the technical sense, yes, the Stoic philosophers did use para physin to mean unnatural, but this term also had a widespread popular meaning. It is this latter meaning that informs Paul's writing. It carries no ethical condemnation.

Compare the passage on male-male sex to Romans 11:24. There, Paul applies the term para physin to God. God grafted the Gentiles into the Jewish people, a wild branch into a cultivated vine. Not your standard practice! An unusual thing to do — atypical, nothing more. The anti-gay "unnatural" hullabaloo rests on a mistranslation.

Besides, Paul used two other words to describe male-male sex: dishonorable (1:24, 26) and unseemly (1:27). But for Paul, neither carried ethical weight. In 2 Corinthians 6:8 and 11:21, Paul says that even he was held in dishonor — for preaching Christ. Clearly, these words merely indicate social disrepute, not truly unethical behavior.

In this passage Paul is referring to the ancient Jewish Law: Leviticus 18:22, the “abomination” of a man’s lying with another man. Paul sees male-male sex as an impurity, a taboo, uncleanness — in other words, “abomination.” Introducing this discussion in 1:24, he says so outright: "God gave them up … to impurity."

But Jesus taught lucidly that Jewish requirements for purity — varied cultural traditions — do not matter before God. What matters is purity of heart.

“It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but it is what comes out of the mouth that defiles,” reads Matthew 15. “What comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this is what defiles. For out of the heart come evil intentions, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a person, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile.”

Or again, Jesus taught, “Everyone who looks at a women with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5:28). Jesus rejected the purity requirements of the Jewish Law.

In calling it unclean, Paul was not condemning male-male sex. He had terms to express condemnation. Before and after his section on sex, he used truly condemnatory terms: godless, evil, wicked or unjust, not to be done. But he never used ethical terms around that issue of sex.

As for marriage, again, the Bible is more liberal than we hear today. The Jewish patriarchs had many wives and concubines. David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi, and Daniel and the palace master were probably lovers.

The Bible’s Song of Songs is a paean to romantic love with no mention of children or a married couple. Jesus never mentioned same-sex behaviors, although he did heal the “servant” — pais, a Greek term for male lover — of the Roman Centurion.

Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter

Paul discouraged marriage because he believed the world would soon end. Still, he encouraged people with sexual needs to marry, and he never linked sex and procreation.

Were God-given reason to prevail, rather than knee-jerk religion, we would not be having a heated debate over gay marriage. “Liberty and justice for all,” marvel at the diversity of creation, welcome for one another: these, alas, are true biblical values.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Daniel A. Helminiak.

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Bible • Christianity • Gay marriage • Opinion

soundoff (8,831 Responses)
  1. tony

    The Bible. Something for everyone – what a great marketing tool!

    May 15, 2012 at 11:53 pm |
    • What???

      Not for everyone. All are called only few will chose.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:54 pm |
    • momoya

      I've noticed that whenever somebody says that they're always convinced that they are one of the chosen few.. Quite a coincidence!

      May 15, 2012 at 11:56 pm |
    • What???

      there will be many in the last days that will say Lord Lord have I not healed in your name and i will say get from before me you worker of iniquity I never knew you. You chose Christ, He calls you. Yea I stand at the door and knock if any hear my voice and open the door I will come in and sup with him and he with Me.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:01 am |
    • tony

      I wonder about the Billions of good people who lived and died prior to the Bible and it's word being spread. There will a lot of them in Heaven you'll have to converse with eternally. Proabaly outnumber the Christians 100,000 to 1.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:40 am |
    • fred

      .Tony
      The Bible is clear that from the first man God put His image into all were held accountable. Now, it is also clear we are only accountable for what we were given so you need not worry about who gets in and who does not. Unless of course you made that willful choice to reject God with full knowledge. It is better you would not have ever known how to find the way Jesus talked about

      May 16, 2012 at 12:48 am |
  2. Val

    The term "marriage", when pertaining to people, has always referred to the sacred union between a woman and a man. When I was married, I made vows which are sacred to me. No one has the right after all these centuries to tell me that they can just arbitrarily redefine something that is mine. Let them use another word to define whatever sort of union they have. Marriage has already been taken. What happens when all those folks who think beastiality is OK decide that they want to define that relationship as "marriage" also? And pedophiles, what if they decide that what they do should also be defined as "marriage"? Can people not see how dangerous it is to decide to redefine absolutes? You may think my examples are absurd but 20 years ago this whole thing would have been called the same. Now it is no longer absurd but frightening.

    May 15, 2012 at 11:52 pm |
    • BamaDaniel

      Well put

      May 15, 2012 at 11:54 pm |
    • momoya

      No.. You don't get to tell other people that they have to live by YOUR moral code.. It's rude.. Stop it.

      You get to marry who you want to and you don't have to marry a person who you would find it sinful to marry; the same goes for the gay folks.. They get to marry who they want to regardless of whether you'd marry that person or a person of that s3x or not.. Don't be a stupid bigot who thinks you can tell other people to live by YOUR morals; we're not demanding that you live by ours because it'd be stupid.. Stop being stupid.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:55 pm |
    • Observer

      Val,

      Marriage was never an "absolute". It has been redefined many times.

      It wasn't very long ago that marriage meant to only your own race.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:58 pm |
    • be

      When gays got married, it did nothing to redefine my marriage vows. They stayed the same.....thank God. Nor do I want my marriage vows to go back to the "traditional meaning" of marriage......ie.....I have no desire for my wife to become my property.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:59 pm |
    • GrowUp

      Go to school and maybe you will learn something. Historically, marriage had nothing to do with love or procreation. It had to do with property rights. There was nothing "sacred" about it. It was a business contract. You might want to know what you're talking about before you spout off.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:00 am |
    • fred

      Observer
      Thanks for agreeing that unless there is a godly standard the only standard will be whatever man in time embraces.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:04 am |
    • GrowUp

      Val - your "slippery slope"argument is specious. It would be like saying, "gee, if we allow a man to marry a woman then we will have to allow a man to marry his sister–where will it end?". By your "logic" nobody should be allowed to marry.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:05 am |
    • Derski

      If you're comfortable in your marriage, you shouldn't care what anyone else does. Do you think that someone who cheats on his significant other should have their marriage license revoked because YOUR vows said you never would?

      Marriage means different things to different people, always has, always will. Just a century ago it was little more than a way to pass on land and money to your widow or build bridges between different tribes/city states. It's changing, accept it.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:14 am |
    • DragonSlayer Lights Your Fire

      [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFkeKKszXTw&w=640&h=390]

      link thanks to momoya from another post. Loved it.

      May 16, 2012 at 4:13 am |
  3. Leigh2

    momoya

    Yet Christ said that "these signs shall follow them that believe" (speaking of healing, raising the dead, and casting out spirits).. Christians don't have theses signs and, in fact, have no "power' that's visible in anyway.. You're talking about an invisible god with invisible evidences to do invisible acts.. Puh-lease!!

    **** These signs that follow them THAT BELIEVE*****

    Read again what you just posted.

    May 15, 2012 at 11:51 pm |
    • What???

      Having eyes but do not see and ears and do not hear.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:56 pm |
    • momoya

      So you're saying that nobody believes since no christian is doing those things?

      May 16, 2012 at 12:08 am |
  4. God's Child

    I would like to know why you even bother to publish stories such as this one. This is just another attempt to water down God's word so some can justify in their mind going against God's Word. This is pure stupidity, and straight from the pit of Hell.

    May 15, 2012 at 11:51 pm |
    • be

      Actually, it is what we have done for ages. The Bible was used to argue why women should not have the vote. When we finally realized that was unjust, we interpreted the Bible in a manner that made sense with our new understanding of women's rights. The Bible was used to condemn desegregation and interracial marriage. When we finally gained the social maturity to realize that was unjust, we saw the passages in a new light. The same is simply happening with hom o se x u ality as well. In 20 years people will look back with the same disbelief that they do today over how anybody could believe that God would not want equal rights for women and harmony and love between the races.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:57 pm |
    • Cascadoux

      That is why you don't have to wait to go to hell; you are already there. The mind that you possess is the insult to the potential of love. You are the kind who would be approving of shoving a gun up a man's behind and pulling the trigger, than you would accept the tenderness of digit. Remember: you don't earn grace. It is freely given.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:05 am |
    • fred

      Be
      The Bible is clear man is the head over the woman and both are equal in Gods eyes. Order is important to God and God does not change. If man fails to obey God and breaks the order it is mans problem not Gods. The Bible never said women cannot vote so nothing has changed there. One clear theme in the Bible is that God allows man to reach the height of his goodness or godlessness. A woman voting is of little consequence.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:35 am |
  5. El Giblet

    Lol... lots of hateful remarks from atheists, gays and gay atheists in here. Figures... since CNN has become the, 'Gay Atheist Channel'.

    May 15, 2012 at 11:49 pm |
    • momoya

      Glad to have you finally aboard, fellow gay atheist!!

      May 15, 2012 at 11:51 pm |
    • GrowUp

      You can return to your regular programming now: Fox "News".

      May 15, 2012 at 11:52 pm |
    • Observer

      El Giblet,

      Please tell us when gays/atheists say something worse than the hidden agenda that if they don't do exactly as told, that they are such lowlifes that they deserve to spend eternity in hell.

      Good luck.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:53 pm |
    • El Giblet

      El Giblet is saddened that nobody had anything to say about this being the, 'Gay Atheist Channel' website. Instead, we got incoherent babbling and some, 'lookie here, ya gay atheist'. Then, i realized that I mistyped, 'Gay Atheist Liberal Oprah Lovers Channel'. Can we start over?

      May 15, 2012 at 11:58 pm |
    • Observer

      El Giblet,

      Still waiting for an answer. Still none?

      May 16, 2012 at 12:00 am |
    • El Giblet

      @Observer

      El Giblet answers not to gay atheists. Most definitely not to gay atheists that can not put together a coherent statement. You must try again, and, this time, please do not continue to embarrass yourself ;)

      May 16, 2012 at 12:05 am |
  6. smk

    In Quran God speaks to the whole humanity....

    “Proclaim, He is the One and only GOD. The Absolute GOD. Never did He beget. Nor was He begotten. None equals Him." [112:1]

    “They even attribute to Him sons and daughters, without any knowledge. Be He glorified. He is the Most High, far above their claims.” Quran [6:100]

    “The example of Jesus, as far as GOD is concerned, is the same as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him, "Be," and he was.” Quran [3:59]

    “No soul can carry the sins of another soul. If a soul that is loaded with sins implores another to bear part of its load, no other soul can carry any part of it, even if they were related. ... [35:18]

    It does not befit God that He begets a son, be He glorified. To have anything done, He simply says to it, "Be," and it is. [19:35]

    God will say, "O Jesus, son of Mary did you say to the people, `Make me and my mother idols beside God?' " He will say, "Be You glorified. I could not utter what was not right. Had I said it, You already would have known it. You know my thoughts, and I do not know Your thoughts. You know all the secrets.[5:116]

    The Messiah, son of Mary is no more than a messenger like the messengers before him, and his mother was a saint. Both of them used to eat the food. Note how we explain the revelations for them, and note how they still deviate! [5:75]

    Thanks for taking time to read my post. Please take a moment to clear your misconception by going to whyIslam org website.

    May 15, 2012 at 11:49 pm |
    • Techsupport

      Why indeed.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:52 pm |
    • Cascadoux

      Can someone tell me what is the benefit of having one god versus many? I for one prefers as many helping hands as I have need for. What is so great to take away or add to the glory of this One God? No disrespect, just wondering.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:10 am |
  7. BamaDaniel

    I'm sin free and I will be throwing cinder blocks damn a stone

    May 15, 2012 at 11:47 pm |
    • Techsupport

      If mixing fibers in fabric is an abomination, I think such an evil mixture of various crushed stones is certainly an abomination.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:51 pm |
    • DragonSlayer Lights Your Fire

      if you're sin free you must live a very boring life

      sorry to hear that

      May 16, 2012 at 4:27 am |
  8. manyopinions

    This is why there are Biblical scholars just like there are doctors, lawyers, etc. Without those who actually know how to study the Book people can come to any conclusion they want. I realize this author is citing his opinion, but, he should have consulted some Biblical experts.

    May 15, 2012 at 11:46 pm |
    • Techsupport

      Sounds like he kinda is one... Unless you just mean some 'experts' who agree more with you point of view.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:49 pm |
    • El Giblet

      Agreed.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:51 pm |
    • be

      The author is citing a very educated opinion.....one that is consistent with modern science. If one believes that God is the author of science than this gentleman's scholarly interpretation of the Bible is the only one that really makes any sense.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:52 pm |
    • Bee

      He is an expert!

      May 15, 2012 at 11:53 pm |
    • manyopinions

      My apologies to the author, he is a theologian. I did not read his credentials there. Sorry about that. I will have to take a deeper look into the original language... I'm just not very convinced on this reasoning. Especially in this day and age where people try to make the Bible fit all kinds of ambitions that it really doesn't fit at all.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:00 am |
    • theala

      Dude, the author IS a Biblical expert.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:03 am |
  9. fred

    The Bible says hom-$exuality sin. Sin is an offense against a Holy God. This is why ho-m-$exuals are in the same boat with all the other sinners. God is not a bigot and kept things nice simple and straight forward. Now, there is a list of sins and hetro$exuals top that list but, you can all breath easy because sin is sin as far as God is concerned. Because of Gods love it is not these sins that cause you eternal separation from God it is rejection of Christ. You want to be with God ask Jesus to cover your sins as it has already been done for you are forgiven. Just ask Jesus to help you find the way.
    Anytime someone uses the Bible to show how Gods truth is not the truth that person is at real risk. The worse thing someone can do is to lead a young believer away from from God.

    May 15, 2012 at 11:46 pm |
    • GrowUp

      Seriously? You've got to be kidding! Sleep it off.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:50 pm |
    • fred

      Grow UP
      Yep, God is Holy and sin is sin. Either there is a God or there is not. If there is a God then God is as Jesus said.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:54 pm |
    • GrowUp

      If that helps you get through your life, such as it is, then go with it Fred. Just leave the rest of us alone. Ya dig?

      May 16, 2012 at 12:10 am |
    • fred

      Growup
      The article was a typical piece of CNN attempt at Bible trashing. I have no problem setting the record straight as far as sin is concerned and the clarity of Bible as to how we honor and dishonor God by our actions.
      If God allows you to do as you will it is none of my business unless you start infecting Gods children with lies.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:41 am |
    • Amy

      it would take up to 3 days to get results. Here is my cneocrn: though I don't have full blown preeclampsia, I know high blood pressure isn't good for my unborn son or for me. One of the nurses told me that I'd have a seizure. If this is the case, why are they not inducing me?! I think it's ridiculous. My cervix is soft and open. I'm ready to roll. How can I get this show on the road? Any suggestions would be helpful and very much appreciated.She left town and the on-call doctor told me that she wants to be the one to deliver my son. She also said she'd induce me on the 4th when she came back from vacation, but changed her mind! Every time my husband and I go to an appointment, it's a different story.And my mother-in-law and aunt delivery babies and can't figure out why they are waiting so long when there is obviously stress being put on my body and my child's.

      September 9, 2012 at 2:40 am |
  10. be

    At some point even religion should defer to common sense. The "gay agenda" (as people call it) is (1) marriage – so that couples can live in a monogamous, loving, committed relationship (2) Family – so that children can be raised in a loving, stable home with two legally recognized parents. (3) Service to the Country – by serving in the military. You can't get a more ethical and moral "agenda" than that. What's the religious right's agenda (1) Deny civil liberties to a whole class of people (2) control women's reproductive rights (3) Keep their ministers out of jail for either se x ual impropriety or financial impropriety. Ummmm....it is a no-brainer as to who are the ethical one's here......and (if you believe in God) who God would smile upon here.

    May 15, 2012 at 11:45 pm |
    • BamaDaniel

      Yes deny recognition of anything other than sicko and sicko oh and marriage doesn't fill your relationship with love

      May 15, 2012 at 11:51 pm |
    • fred

      If I hear you correctly you are promoting sin. God does not smiile on that. God is holy not some cosmic Santa Clause. God is offended by sin. If God was smiling at you then Jesus did not need to die on the cross. Cannot have it both ways. Choose one or the other.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:52 pm |
    • be

      Luckily...as the article well points out....ho mo se x uality is not sinful......hence, no problem. Bigotry generally is considered sinful, however.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:00 am |
    • be

      Oh....and BamaDaniel....love may not be part of your definition of marriage, but thank God, it is integrally part of what defines my marriage.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:02 am |
  11. tnfreethinker

    Of religions
    There are alot
    Who names the best?
    The state should not!

    Americans United for separation of church and state

    May 15, 2012 at 11:45 pm |
  12. neverforget

    Perhaps the serial monogamy straight people practice is a better alternative to the gay lifestyle. Guess what, everyone out there that put themselves first before childern by divorcing their spouses will be in hell with me! that's 65% of you right winged loving bloggers out there. All you straight sodomites will be with me to. There goes another 40%. Man it's getting crowded down here. All you people who love money, you will be with me! Anyone that is fat will be with me for your sin of gluttony! I guess we will all be there! Oh but wait. God created the big "Get out of Hell free" card for you. The Jesus card! It's just gays that didn't get that card. Jesus cleans all sins away except the "Gay" one. How convienient for you! HYPOCRITES!

    May 15, 2012 at 11:43 pm |
  13. Daniel

    Hey CNN, how about reporting that he is openly gay. Hmmmm.....wonder if that will influence th ideological position of his "opinion" essay. Your agendas are showing...

    And love the statements about "separation of church and state" from people who have no clue what they are talking about...which is like 85% of the US population.

    Kudos to you Paul. Right on the money. There is no such thing. It's called the establishment clause. It's why we don't have a Church of America like in England.

    That's it. That is truly as far as it goes.

    May 15, 2012 at 11:42 pm |
    • GrowUp

      Wrong. Go to law school before you run at the mouth about the Establisment Clause. You have no clue what it means.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:46 pm |
    • tnfreethinker

      B S...separation of church and state is well established as an equality protection. Christians just believe it only applies to other religions. How do you feel about banning pork? Some religions believe eating pork is immoral.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:52 pm |
  14. TimJordan

    Best day of my life was when I realized I'm an atheist. Religion has done nothing but exploit the weak. From child molestation to manipulation of the elderly the proof is in the result.

    May 15, 2012 at 11:42 pm |
    • ironwolf56

      So the hundreds of millions of poor people they've helped don't count? All the social justice they've brought to the world? The impetus behind abolishing slavery was predominantly a religious one too. I'm not saying religion hasn't been used as an excuse for terrible things, but it's also been used as a catalyst for a lot of good things too. It's not a panacea, but it's not a cancer either.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:49 pm |
    • BubbaCo

      @TimJordan...too many are scared to break down the wall of religious mythology that so many have been brainwashed to believe (or threatened) since birth. Being a non-believer like yourself, I kinda sit back, stress free from the guilt that so many others carry, and watch the religious make fools of themselves. Here's to you!

      May 15, 2012 at 11:53 pm |
    • Scott

      By your logic then, you as an atheist are just as guilty as your communist brethren who murdered millions in their gulags and reeducation camps.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:54 pm |
    • momoya

      Scott, don't be stupid.. You're already a christian, don't make it worse for yourself.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:58 pm |
    • ricky

      you can help people without having to be religious. it's just a matter of respect. is it so difficult to see that every religion tries to conquer more adepts and starts always with the weakest ones? it injects fear instead of knowledge. See how f-up Africa still is. but we don't need to go to Africa to see how f-up we are too. thanks church

      May 15, 2012 at 11:58 pm |
    • Scott

      momoya, how patronizing of you. I'm not really sure what your response is supposed to mean, other than possibly just an indication that you have no answer to the fact that religeon is no more a cause of suffering than atheism is. People are the cause of suffering.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:07 am |
    • momoya

      Yep.. People are often times the cause of suffering.. People use religion to do that as well as use other mechanisms.. Again, don't be stupid.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:10 am |
    • Scott

      So since people can cause suffering by withholding food, we should ban food. Since people can cause suffering by creating tyrannical atheist governments, we should ban athiests...you're right, how stupid of me.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:17 am |
    • manbearpig

      Scott – yes, people do horrible things. The difference is that many horrible things are done in the name of religion or with religion as the prime motive...nnot so much with atheism. You should examine the difference and come to that conclusion logically on your own.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:20 am |
    • momoya

      No, Scott, you're doing it wrong, again.. Stop being stupid, I said.. Being an atheist isn't like being a cult follower..

      [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1BzP1wr234&w=640&h=390]

      May 16, 2012 at 12:22 am |
    • Scott

      "being an atheist isn't like being a cult follower" Tell that to the athiest communist party. Kinda in lockstep with each other. Every hear of the Dear Leader in North Korea? Yeah, no brainwashed atheists there. Lenin is enshrined in Moscow; you should go visit sometime, his undertaker did a nice job. Your asinine assertion that religeon is the CAUSE of suffering in the world still fails. Believe in God, don't believe in God, I don't care. I'm not going to come to your house and threaten you or your family because you don't believe in God. Good night, and God or flying spaghetti monster or no one bless.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:35 am |
  15. hitmeup

    Dont forget slave owners where christians and so were the nazis this should really make you think twice before you alow religion to rule your life

    May 15, 2012 at 11:40 pm |
    • Scott

      So I guess the Christians who ran the Underground Railroad missed the boat? The nuns who saved thousands of Jewish kids didn't know what they were doing? I would say don't let atheism ruin your life based on the millions your godless communists killed.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:57 pm |
    • Sven

      Actually, the Nazis only feigned Christianity; the leaders were predominantly humanists and atheists who manipulated the German Christian Church into supporting their regime. If you want to read about how real Christians acted during that period, just look into Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Karl Barth.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:58 pm |
    • Scott

      Sven they're probably going to bring up that "No True Scotsman Fallacy" fallacy, just to let you know. Just remind them that vegans don't eat meat, and that usually shuts them up.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:09 am |
  16. Rodney McNeely

    As a gay man and an atheist, I am continually amazed at the theological acrobatics people have to go through to keep the Bible from being anything other than the delusional ramblings of ancient mystics who didn't know that germs cause disease, the Earth isn't flat, and that magic doesn't work.

    Can we please put the fairy tales away and work on fixing our planet?

    May 15, 2012 at 11:39 pm |
    • momoya

      Apparently not.. Have you read some of the ridiculous comments from religious nu.tters on here so far?!?!?

      May 15, 2012 at 11:42 pm |
    • Techsupport

      If you believe even for a moment that that's even possible, you are just as delusional as they are.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:47 pm |
    • 31337

      As a straight man who is a minister, I agree. The bible is written by man and man tends to do things for his own selfish needs. Any church, not only the Catholic church but any religion that takes money for services is designed to take money to make the people running it RICH! and of course they will choose books or write things to support their position. Liberals do it too, but to justify taking money from people in the form of taxes, and use it to pay for things that keep them getting elected. The simple fact of the matter is this. If somebody comes asking for your money, be wary. If you give your money freely then do so. Donations are welcome everywhere, even the IRS. This whole thing is a play on words caused by people who wish to divide us and keep us away from the real issues by petty distractions such as this. People have too much time on their hands or have some sort of agenda and are using the herd. Its funny because people take religious books on faith alone but when presented with the possibility that the Earth was visited in the past by Aliens people just laugh even know there is more evidence to prove the Aliens than there is evidence to prove God

      May 15, 2012 at 11:54 pm |
    • fred

      Rodney
      Finally a voice of sanity. The Bible is true or it is not. This is why everyone attacks the Bible and not the Quran. Sin is sin and God is God. Once you twist the Bible it is no longer the Word of God it is your word.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:57 pm |
    • druusilla

      Thumbs up.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:29 am |
  17. Tom

    Daniel Helminiak, I REBUKE YOU IN THE NAME OF JESUS!!!

    May 15, 2012 at 11:38 pm |
    • momoya

      Oh my.. The virus in this one's brain has completely overtaken it.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:40 pm |
    • DragonSlayer Lights Your Fire

      lol@momoya

      May 16, 2012 at 4:35 am |
  18. Nance

    Most Earth species live on over time due to the male/female "thing" they do. The birds, the bees, the flowers. Just for the record my Catholic teachings as a younger person was that no "making it together" was OK unless it was for the sole purpose of begetting another living thing. Why the Catholics are against birth control. It is keeping a living thing from being born that may have some great impact on Earth, but it's life never becomes, killed by rubber. Ha! No I don't really think it's funny. Guess the gay people tend to keep Earth over population in control. Too bad there will not usually be reproductions of their genes in the future of the Earth unless they contract with someone of the opposite gender to unnaturally beget a child with them. Do what you want in life. IF there is really a God heaven, devil hell, after death guess we will find out then what was good or bad for us to do while alive. Just some life things I have been told or learned. Whatever.

    May 15, 2012 at 11:37 pm |
  19. Reality

    Not many NT passages pass rigorous, historic scrutiny to include many of the author's "thu-mpations" listed in his comments.

    Does the following "thu-mptation" pass rigorous, historic scrutiny??

    “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[a] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’[b]? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

    May 15, 2012 at 11:35 pm |
    • GrowUp

      Take your meds and do us all a favor: don't reproduce.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:40 pm |
    • BamaDaniel

      Grow up hopefully you won't pass on your sick genes

      May 15, 2012 at 11:44 pm |
    • Reality

      Actually, said passage does NOT pass rigorous, historic scrutiny !!! For example see the studies of Professors Crossan and Ludemann.

      Ho-mose-xuality in the 21st century:

      "Abrahamics" believe that their god created all of us and of course that includes the g-ay members of the human race. Also, those who have studied ho-mo-se-xuality have determined that there is no choice involved therefore ga-ys are ga-y because god made them that way.

      To wit:

      o The Royal College of Psy-chiatrists stated in 2007:

      “ Despite almost a century of psy-choanalytic and psy-chological speculation, there is no substantive evidence to support the suggestion that the nature of parenting or early childhood experiences play any role in the formation of a person’s fundamental heteros-exual or hom-ose-xual orientation. It would appear that s-exual orientation is biological in nature, determined by a complex interplay of ge-netic factors and the early ut-erine environment. Se-xual orientation is therefore not a choice.[60] "

      "Garcia-Falgueras and Swaab state in the abstract of their 2010 study, "The fe-tal brain develops during the intraut-erine period in the male direction through a direct action of tes-tosterone on the developing nerve cells, or in the female direction through the absence of this hor-mone surge. In this way, our gender identi-ty (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) and s-exual orientation are programmed or organized into our brain structures when we are still in the womb. There is no indication that social environment after birth has an effect on gender ident–ity or s-exual orientation."[8

      See also the Philadelphia Inquirer review “Gay Gene, Deconstructed”, 12/12/2011. Said review addresses the following “How do genes associated with ho-mose-xuality avoid being weeded out by Darwinian evolution?”

      Of course, those gays who belong to Abrahamic religions supposedly abide by the rules of no adu-ltery or for-nication allowed.

      And because of basic biology differences said monogamous ventures should always be called same-se-x unions not same-se-x marriages.

      From below, on top, backwards, forwards, from this side of the Moon and from the other side too, ga-y s-exual activity is still mutual mas-turbation caused by one or more complex s-exual differences. Some differences are visually obvious in for example the complex maleness of DeGeneres, Billy Jean King and Rosie O'Donnell.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:54 pm |
    • fred

      Keep it real stop twisting the facts. Orientation is not a choice. What you do with your orientation is a choice.

      May 16, 2012 at 12:07 am |
  20. neverforget

    Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.Judge not less you be judged. Love thy neighbor as thy self. If you're all going to heaven you should vote FOR gay mariage to kind of speed things up. This must be a DRAG being here on this horrible sinful evil earth. Wouldn't eternal bliss up in heaven better? Vote YES on gay marriage and get there sooner! Bring on Armogeddon!

    May 15, 2012 at 11:35 pm |
    • momoya

      LOL!! Yes.. Let's do this.

      May 15, 2012 at 11:37 pm |
    • BamaDaniel

      So gays screw themselves Willy nilly

      May 15, 2012 at 11:42 pm |
    • Reality

      Matt 7: 2 "For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."

      Professor Gerd Luedemann [Jesus, 150] concludes that this is not an authentic saying from jesus, although he notes that it represents sound Old Testament theology with God rewarding people according to their own actions.

      For analogous conclusions see: http://www.faithfutures.org/JDB/jdb060.html

      May 15, 2012 at 11:48 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.