tagReviews & EssaysFundamentalists and the Bible 01

Fundamentalists and the Bible 01


The Bible, Fundamentalists, & Lesbian Sex ©

By: wistfall1

Author's note of acknowledgement: I wish to thank those who helped by reading and offering suggestions. They put in much time and effort to help me to make this more easily read, and for that, I am grateful. That said, I must also say that I alone am responsible for any errors or omissions that this essay may contain.

What is Fundamentalism?

There has been much ado lately about the bible and homosexuality, and most of it raised by what are known as Fundamentalists.

Fundamentalists became widely known from Jerry Falwell's preaching, and also by Pat Robertson of the "700 Club" on television, as well as from many others. What is Fundamentalism?

Fundamentalism in the Christian world is the belief in the Bible as the literal and inerrant word of God, the God of the Jews in what is known as the Old Testament. It is without error, they proclaim, and many, if not most Fundamentalists, have a belief that our nation, America, should be a nation under God's law as in the Old Testament, and punishments for violating those laws should be meted out as prescribed by the Old Testament.

What is seemingly upper most for the Fundamentalists, at least in the public purview, is that homosexuality is not only a violation of God's law, but treat it as though it is of the utmost importance to God over most other laws, and is a sin that some have openly stated should be punished by death as in the Old Testament. They have also decided that homosexuality is against God's law not only for men but for women also.

Several questions arise from this:

Is the Bible literally the word of Divinity, of a real God, one who purposefully created the Universe, and humans as special beings with a purpose that is as dear to him?

Are Fundamentalists correct in saying that there is no error in the Bible because it is God's word either written by him, or him having others to write it as he dictated it? Is it truly inerrant—error free—as the Fundamentalists claim?

And finally, for the purpose of this essay, did God say, or command in the Bible, that there should be no homosexuality between women?

This last, minor though it may seem in the "big picture", is salient for a couple of reasons, not the least of which is that this essay is directed to lesbians in particular. Lesbians are paying a very high price in emotional distress from church humiliation, shame, guilt, terrorism, the pressure of family, prevalent church society, and damnation and an everlasting journey into the burning fires of hell for heeding the call from within their very being to be lesbians, and have lesbian sex as a result of their love of other women.

Whether lesbian sex is prohibited by the Bible or not, also speaks to the veracity of the Bible, and those who say the Bible is error free.

This leads me to the first exploration of facts:

Lesbian Sex, Fundamentalist's Beliefs, and the Bible.

One of the leading Fundamentalists had this to say on a sex question, and how the Bible deals with it as far as Fundamentalists are concerned, at least from his point of view. Here is an excerpt:

Pat Robertson Says Oral Sex Is Fine If You're Married [easily found in an Internet search, as are the other quotes cited here—Literotica doesn't permit links to the Internet. Italicized are quotes from the Internet, as well as from the Bible.]

Perhaps only a few topics could make a co-host of the Christian Broadcasting Network's "700 Club" become "verklempt." [Yiddish for passionate, most likely.] But while Kristi Watts was overwhelmed by the inquiry concerning oral sex in the context of marriage, Pat Robertson took it in stride.

"The Bible doesn't make that sinful," [my bold] Robertson said. "The question is: What's in your heart?"

Robertson endorsed the act if it's a sign of love and compassion between two married people.

His co-host was quick to cite the biblical backing. The verse, found in Hebrews 13:4, reads: "Let marriage be kept honorable in every way, and the marriage bed undefiled. For God will judge those who commit sexual sins, especially those who commit adultery" (International Standard Version).

"It's a question of what is in your mind," Robertson said. "If you feel it's sin -- it's sin."

So there's one of the leading Fundamentalists stipulating just how literally he takes the words in the bible. If it's not specified, then it isn't sinful. Man sexually with a man is prohibited specifically more than once in the Old Testament as an abomination before God, and punishable by death. Oral sex is not mentioned, so it is okay.

Sex between women isn't mentioned either, so it is okay too, according to Pat Robertson's interpretation, and in accord with basic Fundamentalist beliefs.

Note how he was quick to make the assumption of it being okay if in loving marriage though the Bible doesn't address that. Isn't that like claiming to know the mind of God?

Then again, isn't Pat Robertson putting words into God's mouth (again, if you believe in the Bible) when he says oral sex is fine if in a loving context of marriage. The Bible, again, says nothing about oral sex, so isn't he adding to the word of God as he shouldn't be? They do seem to have a habit of picking and choosing what is said, and how to take it, God's word or not

Not all of the books of the Bible, especially the New Testament, have a known writer, and therefore may have absolutely no claim to be apostolic in any way. Hebrews is one of those books.

There is one more news item to help make what comes later clear:

Charles L. Worley, North Carolina Pastor: Put Gays And Lesbians In Electrified Pen To Kill Them Off

[Easily found on other sites on the Internet.]

The barrage of anti-gay sermons delivered by North Carolina-based pastors to hit the blogosphere continues with yet another disturbing rant caught on tape.

The pastor...Charles L. Worley of Providence Road Baptist Church in Maiden, N.C., condemns President Obama's [endorsement of same sex marriage], while calling for gays and lesbians to be put in an electrified pen and ultimately killed off.

"Build a great, big, large fence -- 150 or 100 mile long -- put all the lesbians in there," Worley suggests in the clip, reportedly filmed on May 13.

He continues: "Do the same thing for the queers and the homosexuals and have that fence electrified so they can't get out...and you know what, in a few years, they'll die out...do you know why? They can't reproduce!"

He also said that if he's asked who he'll vote for, he'll reply, "I'm not going to vote for a baby killer and a homosexual lover!" Many of the congregants cheer and reply, "Amen."

Worley added, ""It makes me pukin'' sick to think about -- I don''t even whether or not to say this in the pulpit -- can you imagine kissing some man?""

The pastor's comments seem in line with statements made by Ron Baity, founding pastor of Berean Baptist Church in Winston-Salem and head of the anti-marriage equality organization Return America, who told his own congregation that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) [be prosecuted as they were historically—was originally shown as a link] and Pastor Sean Harris of the Berean Baptist Church in Fayetteville [who advocated punching the child—was a link] if he is effeminate and "crack that wrist" if he is limp-wristed.

Similarly, Tim Rabon, ... condemned states such as Massachusetts, Connecticut and Maryland which have already "re-defined" marriage to include lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) couples before asking his congregants, "What is stopping them from refining marriage from a person and a beast? We're not far from that."

Note that Charles L. Worley, the North Carolina pastor, includes lesbians in his call to put them in an electrified fence to kill them off. Again, as Pat Robertson properly points out (if one believes in the Bible), if there is nothing specifically said in the Bible, how can it be a sin and punishable by death to the God in the Bible?

At this point, I think it is appropriate to point out a couple of verses from the New Testament:

O the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgements and how inscrutable his ways!

'For who has known the mind of the Lord?

Or who has been his counsellor?'

(Romans, chapter 11, verses 33-34, from New Revised Standard Version of the Bible)

If these are in the Bible, and true, how is it that Pat Robertson can add that oral sex is okay in marriage only? Further, how can Charles L. Worley condemn lesbians when the Bible doesn't, and say that they must be punished just as homosexual males are to be punished? How is it that these two can add to God's inerrant words and still say that the bible is to be taken literally? How is it that they decide to speak for God when God didn't speak as they felt he should? Is God dumb, or absent minded? Or maybe he never suspected that women could love other women sexually because he's not omniscient. My, my, how could God be so absentminded as to not outlaw what is so despised by so many men of the cloth, and many of those not of the cloth too.

And funny, there is no mention of pedophiles which is of great concern to all of us in our day. Didn't children matter to God back then, or is this just things that men who wrote the Bible were against?

How can it be that pedophilia isn't mentioned? Is it something that the Catholic church invented?

And if the Bible speaks against bestiality, how can it not be known about the desire many men—and some women—have for sex with children, even mere babies? Please, please, don't tell us that since God didn't say anything...

This bespeaks a fallacy in their thinking, their assuming too much.


And this leads to another point about their mentality, and the accuracy of what they claim to preach for the Divine, for God himself.

Let's consider Fundamentalism and the Bible as to its veracity.

Fundamentalists and the Bible

According to the Fundamentalists, as I've said, they take each word in the Bible to be literally the word of God, and to be obeyed; the Bible is without error, inerrant.

And as with all Christians, the Old Testament is the foundation for the New Testament and Jesus himself.

The question, since the Fundamentalists are now pushing to have God's word to be our nations law, is whether or not the Bible is truly God's word without error? Also, all should obey God's injunctions or be found guilty of sinning against God, and be punished now as they are reported in the Old Testament as being punished then. As said by the Fundamentalists, there should be absolutely no error in the Bible because God wrote it, or had it written under his auspices, and thus just as if actually written by God himself.

Or did men, without God's direct participation, write it? If this is so, how can it be proven as belief is mostly...well, belief? Actually, it can be proven. How? By using the Bible itself, along with objectively known history, as well as proven history, and archeological history and known and accepted scientific proofs.

Surely the Bible has many good things to say, to wonder at, and is doubtless written by many intelligent and creative people. Be that as it may be, I don't in any way begrudge the Jews their God, nor argue against their sacred writings with only an intent to be harmful to them. However, what much of Christianity has done, how they've melded their New Testament onto the Old Testament, and now, as in times past, seek to make one and all be under the Mosaic laws whether we like it or not, I do have much against.

Unfortunately, this will also bring into question whether or not the Bible is truly God's word, or the word of man. Is it true, or is it a lie, or maybe only meant for the Jewish people?

We, I, must ask, if the Bible really is the word of God; if the God of the Jews truly is the creator of the Universe and of humans, and particularly of Jews as his special people?

The following is a look at many of the verses in the Bible and the veracity of what the Bible says, using the methods I've outlined above. Readers will note that the Bible itself provides most of the proofs.

Each reader is very specifically asked to verify all that is herein written.

[Note: Some of the verses are without a doubt in error, wrong in what they say, or contradictory one verse to another.]

Just one error, invalidates the inerrancy claim of Fundamentalists, but you'll see that there are many more than just one, and some of them are huge.

Those verses with major errors will be so noted, and highlighted with five asterisks ***** to show it plainly to be in error that none can deny. Some other verses are very questionable, and indeed are argued on by Fundamentalists, and seen as uncertain by others not familiar with the Bible as some are. These are so noted, and highlighted by two asterisks ** to show it plainly that these are questionable verses.]


Chapter 1

1 In the beginning when God created* the heavens and the earth,

2 the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God* swept over the face of the waters.

3 Then God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light.

4 And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.

5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.

I consulted, in addition to the NSRV cited here, the King James Version (KJV), and a Catholic bible. All start out the same, save for the New Revised Standard Version (NSRV) which uses the word: "when" as in "...when God created..."

Saying that on the first day, the earth and the heavens were created, and then all the rest came later is, according to physicists, astronomers, and cosmologists, etc., incorrect. The Sun is much older than the earth, and the Earth is held in place by the greater gravitational pull of the Sun. This is a gross error. *****

In other words, no Sun, or substitute for our Sun, and our Earth has nothing to hold it in any one place. Also, other planets in our solar system have their gravitational influences on Earth, as does the moon, and other planets. We do exist in a "solar system" with the sun as our center, though not the center of the Universe.

This has to be a huge error in the Bible, but understandable if it was written by humans, though not at all understandable if written by God, though many Fundamentalists will argue this.

And God made light, and separated it from the darkness?

The Universe and its space are both dark and cold. Light is provided by stars, of which our Sun is one. No Sun, no stars, no light. We'll see more on the Sun shortly, however: Stars give off light from the heat generated by the star condensing, squeezing atoms deeper and deeper within itself.

This is a huge indisputable error. *****

So, was the light made on the first day or the fourth day? A contradiction to be sure, therefore an error plain and simple, and very possibly indicative of more than one human "writer" of the Bible, maybe someone who "added" words to whatever was originally written.

A contradiction is an error, plain and simple. *****

6 And God said, 'Let there be a dome in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.'

7 So God made the dome and separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome. And it was so.

8 God called the dome Sky. And there was evening and there was morning, the second day.

The "dome", or firmament in other Bibles; apparently those who wrote the Bible believed that there was a solid dome that at times was opened up to allow rain to fall on the Earth. In those days no one had any idea of how rain came to be, and thus probably thought of it being held above the earth by God, or the gods. The Babylonians were said to believe in a tripartite setting (Earth as a flat disc with the heavens above and whatever below) that would account for this "dome" or firmament, if, as believed by many researchers, the Old Testament was greatly written then.

Also, in many places, the Bible speaks of the Earth as having "foundations" (as in, "...the foundations of the world were laid bare...", NRSV, 2 Samuel, chapter 22, verse 16, and "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?", Job, chapter 38, verse 4, KJV), indicating that the earth was a flat disc and held up by pillars giving more credence to how the Earth was seen as being. Again, Fundamentalists may argue this point. However, no one can find a "dome" of any kind above the earth.

This has to be a huge error, but as I said, Fundamentalists argue against it. *****

This "dome" is odd. It seems as if it's thought to be a real thing, a physical thing, and it had water above it that was separate from that on the earth. We'll see this in the chapters that talk about Noah and the flood.

9 And God said, 'Let the waters under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.' And it was so.

10 God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

11 Then God said, 'Let the earth put forth vegetation: plants yielding seed, and fruit trees of every kind on earth that bear fruit with the seed in it.' And it was so.

12 The earth brought forth vegetation: plants yielding seed of every kind, and trees of every kind bearing fruit with the seed in it. And God saw that it was good.

13 And there was evening and there was morning, the third day.

The earth was there already, per verse 1. Okay, we'll skip that, but... How can vegetation, plants yielding seed, and trees of every kind bearing fruit with the seed in it be possible? The Bible definitely says that "The earth brought forth vegetation..." in verse 12.

Every child still in school knows that it takes water and sunlight to begin to make vegetation grow, and keep growing, trees included. Where's the sun? No sun yet? We'll see it a day later (some people say that a day with God is as a thousand years—hope the trees and plants can wait if that's so).

This is another error-ridden writing that is supposed to be inerrant—error free, that is. A huge, unmistakable error. *****

14 And God said, 'Let there be lights in the dome of the sky to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth.' And it was so.

16 God made the two great lights—the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night—and the stars.

17 God set them in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth,

18 to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good.

19 And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day.

This is the third time that he has lights "to separate the day from the night". Makes one think of those jokes of how many people it takes to change a light bulb. In and of itself, this is another mix up in the Bible. *****

When the Bible says: "Let there be lights in the dome of the sky..." it is as if there is definitely a solid dome in which the "lights" are to be set, and not in the heavens above the earth. Who knows for sure what the writer meant, but here we see the Sun and the Moon, as well as other Suns, or stars also as if locked in this dome. Did this dome circle the earth with the sun, moon, and other stars? However, in verse 8 it says "God called the dome sky", whereas in verse 17 here it says "...the dome of the sky", not in the sky, or below the sky. Which is it? **

Report Story

bywistfall1© 9 comments/ 8384 views/ 3 favorites

Share the love

Report a Bug

7 Pages:123

Forgot your password?

Please wait

Change picture

Your current user avatar, all sizes:

Default size User Picture  Medium size User Picture  Small size User Picture  Tiny size User Picture

You have a new user avatar waiting for moderation.

Select new user avatar: