The Queen James Bible (The Gay Bible)

Today, the homosexual community is crying out for acceptance in our society. The community accuses the Body of Christ, in particular, of practicing bigotry, stating that Jesus Christ loves all people and does not frown upon nor condemn another for seeking to have relations with the same sex. In order to show their case as factual, they leave out the passages that condemn homosexuality, and say such things as, “Jesus loves.” However, that was just the beginning of the twisting of the sacred Scripture.

Recently, there was an altered version of the 1769 King James that was released. This altered version, the Queen James Bible (Gay Bible), has changed eight verses (Gen. 19:5; Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Rom. 1:26; 27; 1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Tim. 1:10; Jude 1:7). Of course, the text that was altered, removed, or replaced is done so to take out any form of homosexuality found within the passages of Scripture. The editors of the Queen James Bible say the following in regards to the alterations:

Most English Bible translations that actively condemn homosexuality have based themselves on the King James Version and have erroneously adapted its words to support their own agenda. We wanted to return to the clean source and start there. 

The Bible is the word of God translated by man. This (saying nothing countless translations and the evolution of language itself) means the Bible can be interpreted in different ways, leading to what we call “interpretive ambiguity.” In editing The Queen James Bible we were faced with the decision to modify existing interpretively ambiguous language, or simply to delete it.[1] 

Matt Slick, from CARM.org, states the following about the Queen James Bible:

I'm glad they acknowledge that most translations condemn homosexuality.  But, the anonymous editors of the QJV changed the translations, reinterpreted them, and made them say the opposite of what the original languages state. It says on page one of the QJV:  "The Queen James Bible is based on The King James Bible, edited to prevent homophobic misinterpretation."  Edit they did; translate they did not.[2]

The words of Mr. Slick, “Edit they did; translated they did not,” ring true. There was no proper translation of the biblical languages from the editors of this altered text, but simply an alteration to fit their depraved desires. The editor’s assertion of seeking to return to the “clean” source is nothing more than a lie, seeking to cause both those within the Body of Christ and the unbeliever to believe that the manuscripts actually did not condemn homosexuality.

The following are some facts about both the Old and the New Testament manuscripts.

THE OLD TESTAMENT

Up until 1947, the oldest manuscripts we had of the Old Testament text dated to A.D. 900. However, in 1947, the Dead Sea Scroll manuscripts, which date back 1,000 years earlier than those manuscripts to 150 B.C., were discovered. The discovery of this text in Qumran demonstrates the accuracy of the text the Church had used throughout its history. What is astonishing is that the variation between the two texts was a mere five percent, and this variation does not compromise any sort of doctrine taught from the Old Testament text. They are simply variations in spelling. These manuscripts are dated 1,000 years apart, and there are no major alterations. 

 THE NEW TESTAMENT
 

The number of manuscripts for the New Testament is more than 24,000, both partial and complete. Moreover, there are 86,000 quotations of the New Testament text found within the Early Church Father’s writings and in thousands of lectionaries. Within the 24,000 manuscripts, there are over 150,000 variants. That seems to be a huge number! However, most of these variations, 99% to be exact, are of no significance. These variants include misspellings or the order of words being reversed. Of the remaining 1% (50 variants), doctrine and any moral commandment remain unaffected.[3]

Comparison of the New Testament text to other ancient text[4]:

Ancient Author	Date Written	Earliest Copy	Number of Copies	Accuracy of Copies
Caesar	1st cent. B.C.	A.D. 900	10	- -
Livy	1st cent. B.C.	- -	20	- -
Tacitus	c. A.D. 100	A.D. 1100	20	- -
Thucydides	5th cent. B.C.	A.D. 900	8	- -
Herodotus	5th cent. B.C.	A.D. 900	8	- -
Demosthenes	4th cent. B.C.	A.D. 1100	200	- -
Mahabharata	- -	- -	- -	90%
Homer	9th cent. B.C.	- -	643	95%
New Testament	1st cent. A.D. (A.D. 50-100)	2nd cent. A.D. (c. A.D. 130)	5,000	99+%

As shown in the above chart, the New Testament text is superior to other ancient texts. Compared to other ancient texts, the New Testament is the most reliable with its accuracy and multitude of manuscripts.

If the biblical manuscripts were altered and in need of being corrected, as the editors of the Queen James Bible say, then they must disprove the absolute accuracy of the text that is listed above. Because God is not the author of confusion but the author of the Scriptures, we can rely on modern translations, such as the King James Bible, and see that the Queen James Bible is nothing more than a perversion of God’s truth.

For a greater understanding of the Queen James Bible and its fallacies, please read Matt Slick’s article found on the CARM website: http://carm.org/queen-james-bible.

---

[1] “Editor's Notes,” The Queen James Bible, http://queenjamesbible.com/gay-bible/ (accessed December 27, 2012).

[2] “The Queen James Bible, the Gay Bible,” CARM, http://carm.org/queen-james-bible (accessed December 27, 2012).

[3] Ron Rhodes & Marian Bodine, Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Mormons (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 1995), 165.

[4] Ibid., 167

Social Networking: Blessing or Burdensome?

Photo from http://seonewsblog.net/

For me, proclaiming the Gospel is my greatest desire and what gives me great joy. I can spend hours discussing the Bible and theology with whoever will listen. My passion to share the message of God to others began heavily once my father passed away in March 2011. Throughout any given week I would post between 15+ status updates and/or links, encouraging the Body of Christ with quotes, scripture, and my reflection on the things of God. Through the constant posting, I would receive comments that were very encouraging. Moreover, folks would share many of my status updates to encourage others on their friends list.

There were many times when I would receive inbox messages thanking me for my encouragement, giving me encouragement, asking me legitimate questions in regards to the Bible, giving prayer requests, and folks who struggled with addictions such as homosexuality and drugs. It was an abundant blessing to receive such messages. I knew the LORD was using me as a vessel on something so simple such as Facebook.

Social networking seems to be the way of communication in our modern culture. I can remember as a child when Yahoo Messenger was the dominating social site, then it went to MSN Messenger in my teenage years, then into early adulthood came MySpace and, the greatest to date, Facebook. However, the question is, are these sorts of social networking sites a blessing or a burden to the believer’s soul?

The Blessings for the Body of Christ

The following are blessings that can found within the social network as a believer:

·      Proclaiming the Gospel: Whether someone comments, or sends you an inbox, multiple sets of eyes are seeing the truth you are posting. You are reaching the lost each time you post.

·      Edification: Giving and receiving edification will occur with each biblical/godly post that is given (ex: Godly YouTube videos; Scriptures; sermon links, etc.)

·      Intercessory Prayer: Just as the Bible is the LORD’s communication to man, so prayer is man’s communication to the LORD. When in need of prayer, you can quickly send out a group inbox message or update a status, asking for the Body of Christ to lift you before the Throne of Grace.

·      Staying up with Family and Friends: Family and High school reunions are no longer what they used to be. Keeping up with folks is as simple as searching a name and clicking a button. You are able to follow a person’s progress in their life, whether it be an education, a new marriage, or a pregnancy. You are in the loop as much as they post on their social site. 

The Burdens for Me

Although there are tremendous blessings for believers within social networking, , there are sometimes more burdens than blessings. These burdens range from pride, strife, and envy to anger, laziness, lust, and wastefulness. Whether one wants to admit it or not, we have all fallen into one of these categories at one time or another. More than likely, while believers are browsing for hours on Facebook throughout the day, they won’t realize when they do something that is burdening them, thus grieving the Holy Spirit.

Multiple times I have seen believers arguing with other believers about a certain doctrine. An example is the popular Calvinism/Arminian argument. A lady who was attacking Calvinism on her status began to argue with another lady who supported it. In a nutshell, the one who opposed Calvinism made the claim that the lady who supported it wasn’t saved and “needed” Jesus. Moreover, a supporter of Calvinism would post almost daily rants against Non-Calvinists, asserting that anyone outside of Calvinism was not truly Christians. What’s the problem with these two folks? They were condemning one another because they did not believe in a particular doctrine. Unfortunately, these two doctrines will be debatable until King Jesus comes back.

So, what are some of the problems and burdens for believers on social networking? They are as followed:

·       Pride: Admit it, at one time or another you’ve wonder how many likes your post could receive on Facebook. Whether we admit it or not, when we watch our status to see how many likes or comments it receives, we are falling into the sin of pride. There are times when one can fall victim to this and not realize it. It is easy to become puffed up because of achieving approval from multiple friends via social networking. Let’s be reminded that God doesn’t want a prideful child: “Do you see a man wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him” (Proverbs 26:12).

·      Strife: Argumentation can easily result from certain posts on a social networking site. Oftentimes it is not even one who is proclaiming the glorious gospel and someone outside of Christ who begin to argue, but, rather, two Christians. King James only advocates and the ones who favor modern translations scold one another. Those who have different views on election/predestination do the same. The list could go on and on with angry argumentations. Whether it is over something within the Scriptures, or a popular controversy that is going on within the country (ex: Gun Laws), Christians can easily fall into the sin of strife. We must continue to seek the LORD, humble our hearts, and to listen to His voice. Instead of arguing or always wanting to be right, it is sometimes better to keep our mouths closed. As the Scripture says, “Even a fool, when he keeps silent is considered wise; when he closes his lips, he is considered prudent” (Proverbs 17:28). We need to be careful about how we present issues because it can cause a great deal of unneeded strife. 

·      Gossip: The infamous backbiting! There are so many times folks will vent over their social networking profile(s) about a friend, family member, or even someone they don’t even know. Famous music artists are known for trash talking another artist in their newest single and we call it out as absolutely wrong. However, individuals are often guilty of doing the same thing by broadcasting issues about an individual over their social networking site. For the Body of Christ, there is nothing wrong with pointing out a wolf in sheep’s clothing that is seeking to rip apart the church. However, it is another thing altogether to broadcast over social networking an issue that you have with another person.  Even liking it, or leaving a comment that references gossip, makes one just as guilty as the one who posted it. Stop talking about people and pray for them.

·      Lust: Pornography is running rampant on the Internet. I remember being exposed to online pornography at the age of 10. It’s a very serious thing, especially for men (although many women have issues with it as well). A person can stumble across pornographic profiles and pages on Facebook with ease. However, pornography isn’t the only issue. A greater issue that many would think would be harmless is simply checking out someone’s profile. So many times I’ve stumbled across women’s profiles where they have uploaded pictures that are very provocative. Naturally, men and women are attractive to opposite sex. However, in the world of social networking, we can find ourselves “checking out” the opposite sex in a sexual, impure way.

Social networking can be a way of hooking up with an old boyfriend/girlfriend or someone you may not even know. Currently, I know an individual who is fighting for his marriage because his significant other likes to have the opposite sex around them. The person that his spouse was seeing was someone they had on their Facebook friends list. Even if it is not your motive, others may seem to fall for you because their marriage may be failing and you happen to be the one who listens and encourages them on a consistent basis. Be careful! Marriages are being ripped a part because of what is meant to be a “friendly” social networking to reconnect with friends and family.

 Some passages we should keep in mind about sexual impurity:

“But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Mt. 5:28)

“Flee immorality. Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body” (1 Cor. 6:18)

“Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul” (1 Pet. 2:11).

·      Time waster: How true this is for so many folks! You get online to update a status and decide to scroll through your homepage for a few minutes. A few minutes turn into 45 minutes, and 45 minutes into an hour. I am guilty of such activity! As a Bible student, I have lost precious time of studying for exams and writing research papers because I was looking through updates and others’ profiles. There are so many hours we will not get back from our lives that we could have been in the Word, praying, washing dishes, straightening up the house, or outside the house sharing the Gospel with our neighbor. Social networking can be a great time consumer if one does not limit and balance their time. In many cases, it becomes an addiction

In regards to wasting time, the Apostle Paul reminds us the following, “Therefore, be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil” (Eph. 5:15-16). The former four sins demonstrate what happens when we are not making the most of our time on social networking. Our time should be balanced accordingly. If not, we can potentially cause serious damage to ourselves and to our family.

  

·      Idolatry: Spending more time worrying about how many likes and comments you receive than you spend in the Word is a reality of idolatry in your life. If your objective is to check new posts before being in the Word, that is indicative that Facebook, or whatever social networking site you enjoy, has become your god. Anything that is given more attention than God is an idol. When social networking becomes a priority in your life, you have certainly built yourself an idol that must be taken down. 

Conclusion

As shown, there are both pros and cons of social networking. Personally, I believe social networking can be a very fruitful tool for the Body of Christ, and for God’s Kingdom. However, I fell victim to the various sins listed. Taking a brief break from social networking proved to me the real issues that lie behind Internet activity. Be aware of such dangers and examine your heart to make certain you have not fallen victim to these. Be a light in the midst of darkness while posting online. God is glorified through any means of communicating His message. 

Accurately Handling the Word of Truth

Question: "What is the difference between exegesis and eisegesis?"

Answer: Exegesis and eisegesis are two conflicting approaches in Bible study. Exegesis is the exposition or explanation of a text based on a careful, objective analysis. The word exegesis literally means “to lead out of.” That means that the interpreter is led to his conclusions by following the text.

The opposite approach to Scripture is eisegesis, which is the interpretation of a passage based on a subjective, non-analytical reading. The word eisegesis literally means “to lead into,” which means the interpreter injects his own ideas into the text, making it mean whatever he wants.

Obviously, only exegesis does justice to the text. Eisegesis is a mishandling of the text and often leads to a misinterpretation. Exegesis is concerned with discovering the true meaning of the text, respecting its grammar, syntax, and setting. Eisegesis is concerned only with making a point, even at the expense of the meaning of words.

Second Timothy 2:15 commands us to use exegetical methods: “Present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.” An honest student of the Bible will be an exegete, allowing the text to speak for itself. Eisegesis easily lends itself to error, as the would-be interpreter attempts to align the text with his own preconceived notions. Exegesis allows us to agree with the Bible; eisegesis seeks to force the Bible to agree with us.

The process of exegesis involves 1) observation: what does the passage say? 2) interpretation: what does the passage mean? 3) correlation: how does the passage relate to the rest of the Bible? and 4) application: how should this passage affect my life?

Eisegesis, on the other hand, involves 1) imagination: what idea do I want to present? 2) exploration: what Scripture passage seems to fit with my idea? and 3) application: what does my idea mean? Notice that, in eisegesis, there is no examination of the words of the text or their relationship to each other, no cross-referencing with related passages, and no real desire to understand the actual meaning. Scripture serves only as a prop to the interpreter’s idea.

To illustrate, let’s use both approaches in the treatment of one passage:

2 Chronicles 27:1-2
“Jotham was twenty-five years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem sixteen years. . . . He did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, just as his father Uzziah had done, but unlike him he did not enter the temple of the LORD.”

EISEGESIS
First, the interpreter decides on a topic. Today, it’s “The Importance of Church Attendance.” The interpreter reads 2 Chronicles 27:1-2 and sees that King Jotham was a good king, just like his father Uzziah had been, except for one thing: he didn’t go to the temple! This passage seems to fit his idea, so he uses it. The resulting sermon deals with the need for passing on godly values from one generation to the next. Just because King Uzziah went to the temple every week didn’t mean that his son would continue the practice. In the same way, many young people today tragically turn from their parents’ training, and church attendance drops off. The sermon ends with a question: “How many blessings did Jotham fail to receive, simply because he neglected church?”

Certainly, there is nothing wrong with preaching about church attendance or the transmission of values. And a cursory reading of 2 Chronicles 27:1-2 seems to support that passage as an apt illustration. However, the above interpretation is totally wrong. For Jotham not to go to the temple was not wrong; in fact, it was very good, as the proper approach to the passage will show.

EXEGESIS
First, the interpreter reads the passage and, to fully understand the context, he reads the histories of both Uzziah and Jotham (2 Chronicles 26-27; 2 Kings 15:1-6, 32-38). In his observation, he discovers that King Uzziah was a good king who nevertheless disobeyed the Lord when he went to the temple and offered incense on the altar—something only a priest had the right to do (2 Chronicles 26:16-20). Uzziah’s pride and his contamination of the temple resulted in his having “leprosy until the day he died” (2 Chronicles 26:21).

Needing to know why Uzziah spent the rest of his life in isolation, the interpreter studiesLeviticus 13:46 and does some research on leprosy. Then he compares the use of illness as a punishment in other passages, such as 2 Kings 5:27; 2 Chronicles 16:12; and 21:12-15.

By this time, the exegete understands something important: when the passage says Jotham “did not enter the temple of the LORD,” it means he did not did not repeat his father’s mistake. Uzziah had proudly usurped the priest’s office; Jotham was more obedient.

The resulting sermon might deal with the Lord’s discipline of His children, with the blessing of total obedience, or with our need to learn from the mistakes of the past rather than repeat them.

Of course, exegesis takes more time than eisegesis. But if we are to be those unashamed workmen “who correctly handle the word of truth,” then we must take the time to truly understand the text. Exegesis is the only way.


Courtesy of gotquestions.org.

This article may be found at http://www.gotquestions.org/exegesis-eisegesis.html