It's easy to look upon the mythology of the
past where ancient peoples attempted to explain their world in stories or
magical accounts, that today - seem ludicrous to our 'enlightened' minds.
Even among scientists, there is a history where science incorrectly
made leaps of inference to explain phenomena like fire, lightning,
weather, comets, etc., -- inferences that now seem almost comical.
In some underdeveloped parts of the world, many of these ancient fallacies
would be easily passed as "knowledge" today because of the lack of
education in such regions disallows people to use established fact (that
they're unaware of) to discredit folly.
If the angels that had arrived in Sodom
(Genesis 19) had been more female in appearance; - I
wonder if fundamentalists would use the text as a "proof" against
what they deem as "HETERO-SEXUALITY"
Understanding that man is in the habit of 'myth' making, - gives us a hint
that we need be on the lookout for 'modern myths' - that are, in reality -
nothing more than well crafted stories that may rely on unproven
pseudo-science (Freud?) to explain areas of thought not well understood yet.
Probably one area that is most prone to modern mythology is the study of
psychology -- which could probably be defined as the "study of thought
processes". Since this 'science' is itself subject to the very
thought process it purports to study; - Special scrutiny must be paid to
hypothesis development. After all, if one is studying an abstract
intangible process, & looking for patterns, - one must remain aware that
the very principles of psychology that allow the magician to misdirect his
audience can inadvertently interact with the mind of the researcher &
mislead as well.
One inaccurate premise can influence an entire body
of conclusion/s, & then cascade into countless related areas of thought.
This is precisely what has occurred in the study of human sexuality.
Today, many researchers have realized past errors & are conducting
research to redefine subject matter in light of better understanding.
It is the exceptions to generalizations about gender that have been the
most helpful in redefining thought. After all, if "girls" are
genetically "XX" as a rule of thumb, but an exception is discovered; - The
'rule' can no longer be that "XX" means "girl" 100% of the time.
Such 'exceptions' have colossal implications! See (1+1) may always =
2; However, if "XX" does not always = "girl" then we know that the concept
of "male/female" is more complex
than two genetic letters! I.E:
Consider a gender-bending gene found in Central America. This gene
produces children that at birth are "clearly girls". These children
are raised as "girls". However, at puberty, the genitalia mature
into MALE & secondary MALE sex traits exert themselves producing a
fully functioning MAN . Girls becoming men? If you're stuck in the
outmoded thought process of (2) distinct genders ... this is exactly what
appears to be happening! However, if you understand that gender
is amorphous, - then such occurrences make much more
sense. The psychology of sex is just beginning to catch up, &
mind & body are not always in sync.
Although this part of this essay is not a
formal study on the Intersexed; -It is offered as a thought stimulus to
encourage the reader to consider the monumental permutations that exist in
the physical manifestations of gender. Hopefully, you may consider the
invisible, mental counterparts that are much harder to identify, not to
mention - quantify.
Those of us who have attractions to those who are
realize that the concept of "being intersexed" happens
neck up much more often, - than from the neck down; and is much more
common than most people have been lead to believe! Aesthetic beauty is
an abstract concept. Being able to appreciate it is purely subjective and
there is no "wrong" answer; - 0nly truthful ones.
Problematic are those people who are (still) relying
on outdated models to form arguments or promote certain ideas, agendas &
even laws! Once again, human sexuality becomes a point of
disagreement & conflict. The toll on basic human rights has been
staggering. It's time to mature beyond the outmoded concepts of
["Homo" vs. "Hetero"] sexuality. What should the thoughts then be?
Here is the new rule of thumb:
is a sexually compound being (physical & mental components coming from
both parents). Most are labeled by external
appearances as either "male" or "female", but some are more ambiguous than others.
Generally, people find certain traits or characteristics as 'attractive'
or desirable; & these attractions may cover a full range of male/female
moirés. Those attractions determine who we find desirable for
friendships & more. They vary
from person to person (sometimes substantially); -& because of social
moirés, expectations, & prejudices, - many people do not readily disclose
the details, range, or gamut of their attractions.
Society has been the victim of flawed
thinking evidenced by the use of a forbidden terminology. Earlier in this expose' , I mentioned that
the solution for bad thinking was to think outside of the box & outside of
classifications like "homosexual" & "heterosexual".
Scriptural perspective, there is another reason. Under the Law of
Moses, the term "HOMOSEXUAL" is actually a form of profanity!
God would not
use the term (except maybe to denounce the term itself). People who use
the term in prayer, may as well use the words
"kyke", "faggot" or "nigger" when they
address God about other people (Hey, now that would be an brow-raising
prayer)! How is this conclusion derived?
It is written: "Keep my laws.
... Do not put on a robe made of two sorts
- Lev 19:19c While shallow men cannot see the relevancy of this
Scripture, God does show us the hidden wisdom in the Law which we delight
in. Paul wrote that: "For we know that
the law is spiritual:" - Rom 7:14. In another letter, Paul
explains the meaning of another old testament law: "...for
the scripture says, 'You shall-not muzzle an ox that treads out corn';
So then: The workman is worthy of his hire." - 1Ti 5:18 So
then, what does a robe made out of (2) sorts of
In ancient times (& even today), a person's clothing often told you about
them. Even today, we recognize police, medical professionals,
athletes, etc., by the clothing they wear. However, words can also
often function like clothing (hence the concept of a 'blanket statement').
As a matter of fact, it's possible to use a single word to label a person so completely that the word takes on such proportion,
it obscures the rest of the person described by it! This is the case with the
How many times have we observed that word applied to somebody, & watched it
eclipse all the rest of the person's life? Hmm. However, that word has a dual origin. The person who
invented the term in the late 19th century, took the term "HOMO" from the
Greek -- meaning "LIKE";
And combined it with the Latin term "SEXUALis"
-- pertaining to sex. Consider:
Two words, each from a unique culture,
figuratively knit together (half from
& half from
to form a
term which expresses a concept foreign to over 4000 years of
recorded history about sexuality
[Different Sorts]), figuratively
knit together to form
blanket-term so bizarre in the new image it connotes
-as to make
irrelevant all the other characteristics of a person covered with
it)! It's a 'freak-term', an insult, and Scripturally: a cuss
-made from a lie. Purge it from your vernacular -except to recognize it as
the offense it is.
The citation in Leviticus that forbids the
mixing of cloth also forbids the mating of "different sorts". It
forbids the mixing of seeds in a field. The commandment in the
literal sense forbids making "freaks of nature". However, when it
gets to the part about "cloth", the meaning thrusts into the metaphysical.
Since MEN wear cloth, the commandment forbids wearing
the uniform that declares one a "freak" (an unLawful
Sarx" does not equal "Homo
The Scripture declares a severe curse upon anyone who adds to the
word of God (saying that He said something that He did not). This
damning pronouncement should cause alarm in the heart of anyone who
realizes that the term "HOMOSEXUAL" was created in the late 1800's,
- & that no Bible printed before then contained the term (it simply
Anyone who uses the least amount of common sense will immediately
stop & consider the glaringly obvious question: "So what terms
were used?". Another obvious query boils down to
the fact that the terms used were describing something common to
man. After all - the writers were discussing issues that were
part of civil law -- which by the existence of legal process
-demands exacting definitions. Yet
NOWHERE in the original Hebrew or Greek texts do terms which imply
"sameness" or "homo" (a Greek term itself & readily available for
use) ever get used to describe the moral
shortcomings that are TODAY relabeled "HOMOSEX".
The reason for this is glaringly obvious. If the condemned acts were
connected to "sameness", Paul (a lawyer) would have used terms to
connote the principle. He did not. The only specific
mention of Sodom's sex sins are in Jude - and Jude uses the term
"HETEROS SARX". "HETEROS" is the
precise OPPOSITE of "HOMO".
So then - the closest evidence the Scripture contains about Sodom's
precise sin is a word that implies the exact opposite
of what many Christians & even Bibles declare it to be! Hello?
I choose to believe JUDE.
"HETERO-SARX" can be directly cross-referenced to Leviticus 19:19; -
that forbids mating of DIFFERENT KINDS.
You don't make mules; - & you
don't mate humans with angels!
Elsewhere in Moses Law, - He places a death sentence on
bestiality. The straw that broke the camel's back in Sodom
-was when the mob of MEN
surrounded Lot's house & prepared to gang-rape a couple of
The intent to sin in Sodom on that occasion was multi faceted, &
violated a number of mala-inse' principles
- Attempt to assault agents of another
- Attempt to engage is sexual acts/assault
with another species
- That assault would have taken the form
- Attempted breaking & entering (of lot's
- Criminal threatening (of Lot & his
- Conspiracy to commit the above (Mob)
- Drunk & disorderly conduct
- Creating a public disturbance
- Denial of due legal process
lawlessness on many fronts. Anyone who teaches that
the account of Sodom has anything to do with "homosexuality"
The sad truth about the word
"HOMOSEXUAL" in the Scripture is that every time you see the term --
it is not the result of mere mistranslation...but outright
FABRICATION; --A LIE - bald faced and staring at you from
the translated text! And people who refuse
to blot it out are guilty of idolatry (worshipping men -
translators); - And idolaters are listed among those who will not
inherit God's kingdom!
The law of God - even natural law
itself; - has NEVER been concerned with the gender of lovers, - butt
specific acts that tend toward harm. It is those
ACTS that the Torah/law forbids because the purpose of the law is a
warning away from danger so to facilitate life by the avoidance.
It is that very reason why the gender of the intimate couple is
irrelevant. As long as actions do not work "ill", -- there can
be no transgression.
Govern yourselves accordingly.
To clarify: In the example we use here, the "uniform" is
single word used to "blanket" a person with. The term "homo-sexual" has
such power because it is a word subtly founded on a lie & the
spiritual origin is
disobedience, - an evil term possessing the power to destroy (native
language of the Devil). The man who "coined" the term had chosen
retain a knowledge of God [Torah] & for this reason, God gave him over to a
REPROBATE mind; -- & from his reprobate mind, came the reprobate term:
And, ironically, this hybrid term, used countless times daily to blanket
people with, is itself, forbidden by the very section of scriptural
by the self-righteous to condemn people the term is alleged
to apply! People doing the judging & applying this
term are the ones condemned by the very label
they apply to others! That's Divine irony; & a warning to those who
would profess themselves righteous while ignoring what God has actually
stated! You'll observe this
same folly repeated in related contexts on many levels & when the unveiling is done,
you'll understand why the people using this term to judge others with &
throwing around excerpts from Romans 1, -- are the very people guilty of the
offense/s they label others with (just as Romans 2:1 declares)! The term "HETEROSEXUAL"
is likewise, - a forbidden term based on a misperception of fundamental
human sexuality! See, the conditions these modern-cuss-words attempt to
describe do not exist; - Because these terms assert that people are either
completely male or completely female, - when the scripture
(& even science) asserts that every person is a combination of gender
(Male & Female)! And, according to the gospel, - gender ceased being a
dividing tool for the new, man-creature in Christ (Gal 3:28)! When you
stop using bad descriptions, you have to think differently to understand
things as God frames them! If you use these forbidden terms,
STOP the profanity!
As you've probably been
figuring out: The purpose of this website is
to direct the visitors to think differently, for themselves, & to be
fully convinced in their own minds that what they know,- they know because of
information, well reasoned, & in context with other rational sources. Many
people are visiting here because of abuse they have suffered elsewhere under
the heading of "truth"; & some are in such despair that they are willing to
give ear to any friendly voice. Rather than blindly follow a 'friendly
voice', - consider following the voice of a true friend who has been through
the 'religious guilt machine' & has uncovered some very different answers
(from the Book itself), - other than the
canned guilt-trips of what masquerades as "Gawd's voice".
What you'll discover is that the most accomplished liars often stand in the
pulpit & while they claim to speak for Gawd, they speak words of destruction
in complete opposition to the gospel! There is an often disturbing pattern of psychology behind
any person who wants to be THE
leader. In 3rd John, we find the only commentary in the Scripture
about such a 'church' man. It is written: "I
wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to be first, will have
nothing to do with us. So if I come, I will call attention to what he is
doing, gossiping maliciously about us. Not satisfied with that, he refuses
to welcome the brothers. He also stops those who want to do so and puts them
out of the church. Dear friend, do not imitate what is evil
but what is good.".
Astonishingly, much of religiondom has gone after a pattern that we have
been told N0T to imitate! This pattern results in refusal to accept
Apostles (which means a rejection of the basic, true teachings of the faith),
Expulsion of Christian brothers (rejecting redeemed people); -- But, it sure spews lots of rumors/gossip.
Sounds like many 'churches' today, doesn't it; -- Especially on
One last point: Because of the tendency
to conceal the intimate details of what we find desirable, it is often
virtually impossible to tell what another person feels by casual
observation. Although some people have body language that reveals
more about themselves than others; - This is the minority!
The warning: Crack a 'sex-biased' joke in front of your 'best friend' &
although it may generate a 'smile', - that 'smile' may hide a decision to
NEVER open up & trust you about what is 'really' on
the mind of your newly formed 'ex'-best-friend.
People who insist that "sexual attraction" is a "choice" are actually
telling you more about themselves than about anyone else!
"Therefore, you have no excuse-every one of you who judges. For when you
pass judgment on another person, you condemn yourself, since you, the
judge, practice the very same things." - Apostle Paul to the Romans