King James who commissioned the Bible was totally, openly gay

[Melodybe]

Bring it up at your Thanksgiving family party, for any talibornagains.

[Pacifist Patriot]

1. I've already got my line for my fundy family members.

Each time I hear a Sean Hannity or Ann Coulter prevarication I'm simply going to respond with. "You are lying....but I forgive you." Then sneak off into the closet and chug.

[southpaw]

8. How about:

"Anne Coulter is a liar, and the truth is not in him"

[ProdigalJunkMail]

2. any particular reason you're posting this all over again? n/t

[DrWeird]

3. Sure drives the homophobes nuts.

They really get upset when you suggest or point out certain people are gay.

Didn't you get upset when somebody asked if Jesus was gay?

[ProdigalJunkMail]

4. no...i got upset because some asked to PROVE he wasn't

gay or not, Jesus was a heck of a guy. The logic part is what pissed me off...can't be proven one way or another and was just inflammatoyr. I just think a KICK would have been sufficient rather than start all over...

Thanks for your concern...
theProdigal

[ProdigalJunkMail]

18. maybe I should just ask you...are you calling me a homophobe?

because what I read here certainly sounds like a nice little bit of name-calling.

If you are calling me a homophobe, perhaps you should get to know me before you say such things and apologize until such time as you do know me.

If you are not calling me a homophobe and I have misread your use of language, I apologize for asking and return you to your regularly scheduled reading and posting...

theProdigal

[DrWeird]

19. No.

I'm saying people who get upset if other people question, or suggest, or assert that certain historical/ religious figures were homosexual are homophobes. Usually closet homophobes if it were.

I was just asking if you were the one, a couple of weeks ago, who got all upset when somebody suggested that Jesus was gay.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

20. thanks for clarifying

I have come a long way in my relationships over the years and one thing that has pained and strained at my relationship with my family is that I welcome openly gay people into my life. I get a little touchy when I feel as if someone is accusing me of something that I have worked and over which I have ached to blend into my family. It still isn't easy...the gay jokes happen at home sometimes, but at least now mom gets onto dad for it.

theProdigal

[ohio_liberal]

5. Not only that....

King James was a firm believer in the "Divine Right of Kings". King James commissioned a translation of the bible to discredit the Geneva version which did not fit his point of view.

[On the Road]

7. And the Language of the King James Bible

was obsolete when it was written. The language sounded poetic and grand even back then.

King James imported a bunch of Calvinist Scotsmen to work on it, too.

(As I understand it, anyway. Have not verified.)

[ohio_liberal]

14. Right....

The King James bible was written in a language that was never spoken by the common English. It was meant to be a "godly" language. The translation itself was done by the established Church of England and Scottish Puritans, a more radical sect of Calvinists.

[Algorem]

9. he decided the bible needed a 'makeover'

he had a queer eye for the theologian guy?he'd just wilt for a kilt.

[CatBoreal]

11. ROAR!!!!!! /nt

[Trajan]

27. HEY ! .... Your talking about our 'european' progenitors of freedom ....

Some say that the judeo-christian value system brought forth an impulse to liberate mankind from the clutches of the authoritarian worldview ....

I say: rubbish ... if it were up to a 'judeo-christian' value system to establish what kind of 'liberty' we would enjoy, we would be executed at the mere mention of the word ....

[msturgis524]

6. Thanks

I didn't know that

[parkening]

10. I'm a home-schooling dad

teaching my two oldest how to recognize logical fallacies.

This one happens to be a genetic fallacy.

[Thtwudbeme]

12. Not so fast there, Home-schooling dude

There are letters in existence that may show that James did have homosexual affairs.

Here's the scooperooni: This has never been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt...and is debatable.

Teach your kids to learn how to QUESTION---and search for truths--

Stephanie

[ohio_liberal]

15. Oh yes....

I think the love letters to Esme Stuart explain it all.

[papau]

23. Agree that there is no proof of a gay sex James

I do not think he means King James II (b 14.10.1633, d 19.09.1701) messed with Esme Stuart -5th Duke of Lennox and Richmond (b 02.11.1649 and died 10.08.1660), so we must be refering to King James I (b 19.06.1566, d 27.03.1625) having gay sex with his cousin Esme Stuart, 1st Duke of Lennox (b c1542, d 28.05.1583) a fellow who helped those trying to bring back Mary Queen of Scots?

Granted James liked him - promoted him from seigneur d'Aubigny to earl (1580) and duke (1581) of Lennox. But we only get close to "gay" Esme if Esme's friend James Stewart, who was made Earl of Arran, is also his "lover/companion". So the letters of James to Esme as proof of James being gay seem a stretch.

Now I recall that Bernard Stewart was the second son of Esme Stewart, 1st Duke of Lennox - not that it proves that he was not gay.

But I sure do wonder where do we get gay sex "love letters" from James to Esme?

or is the statement that James saying to Buckingham "my sweet child and wife." proves James gay toward the end of his life?

I'll leave to others the proof or disproof that Buckingham was gay!

Crazy thread!

have a great day all...

:-)

[DrWeird]

13. I'm not following.

What do you mean by "genetic fallacy?"

[Melodybe]

17. James was flaming! Pat Robertson and Gary Buaer now ask that Chirstians

reject the King James translation.

Proof of gayness:
" A large collection of letters exchanged between James and Buckingham in the 1620s provides the clearest evidence for James' homoerotic desires. During a protracted separation in 1623, letters between the two raced back and forth. These artful, self-conscious letters explore themes of absence, the pleasure of letters, and a preoccupation with the body. Familial and sexual terms become wonderfully intertwined, as when James greets Buckingham as "my sweet child and wife."

links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_I_of_England
http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon46.html
http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history...
http://www.infopt.demon.co.uk/jamesi.htm
http://hector3000.future.easyspace.com/kjames.htm



If you remember your history it was also one of the main reasons that the Cromwell and the Roundheads hated James.

[Algorem]

25. and speaking of Gary Bauer....

I mean,come on!

[Trajan]

29. From Wikipedia ....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy

Genetic fallacy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The genetic fallacy is a logical fallacy in which the origin of a belief, claim, or theory is confused with its justification. This fallacy is more often used to discredit a belief, though it may also be used to support one.

Examples:

The Nazis were the first to practice eugenics. So it must be a bad idea. (See reductio ad Hitlerum.)
You only believe in God because your parents taught you to. So your belief must be false.
This is a fallacy because the origin of the claim has no logical relation to its truth or falsity.

However, if you were sure that the origin of the idea (a person, usually) was always correct or was always wrong, you could safely move from the origin of the claim to an evaluation of its truth or falsity. See Reliabilism and appeal to authority.

According to the Oxford Companion to Philosophy, the term originates in Morris Cohen and Ernest Nagel's book, Logic and Scientific Method.

Genetic fallacies include the ad hominem, argumentum ad verecundiam and the bandwagon fallacy. They are red herring fallacies. Also see the slippery slope fallacy.

[Pacifist Patriot]

21. I'm lost. Can you explain?

[Ready4Change]

16. I heard that was why his version had anti-gay material.

I heard that King James was at odds with the church of his era. He asked to have a re-write of the Bible, and the church did so. However, they inserted anti-gay material in order to dislodge the support James had from the masses. But, before the King James version, there was little mention of gays, nor of Heaven being against that sort of thing.

Is there truth to that?

[forgethell]

22. What's the point?

KJ may have commissioned the translation, but he didn't have anything to do with writing it or translating it. Besides KJ had so many other things against him, from a fundie point of view, that this wouldn't make any difference if they cared, which they don't.

the thing about fundies is, they think all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23), so they don't expect their leaders to be perfect.

One thing that I DO NOT understand is the number of people in the progressive movement that think if they can just show the conservative, fundie, republicans that there are some hypocrites leading their side, they will immediately support our side. It just doesn't work like that. For one thing, they can point to an equla number of hypocrites on our side. Second, remember our death struggle defense of Bill Clinton? They WILL NOT try to defend someone who has broken their own moral codes. They will put him aside and find a new leader.

Finally, calling names, even deserved ones, and insulting people has never been shown to persuade anyone to change his mind. He might not vote, but equally he might decide to vote for his guy anyway, just to stick a thumb in the eye of the people who insulted him. One acquaintance of mine told me recently why he voted for *, even though he admitted all my arguments against him, "It's a thumb in the eye of the FRench". I cleaned that up a little, removing an obscenity and a racist, derogatory term for Frenchpeople.

[The Straight Story]

24. I would tend to agree with your analysis

Not to mention the bible is filled with sinners of all manner, including Paul. Adulturators, theives, liars, murderers, fornicators, and so forth abound - such is the nature of mankind. The idea is to fight that nature and rise above the animal instincts. Trying to say that KJ was gay and hoping that gets one anywhere is like saying Paul was ok with stoning someone before his conversion so it was ok.

Christians are sinners like others, the difference is they try to fight against that sin instead of saying it feels good and natural so it must be ok.

This is not an attempt to say they are right or wrong or to interject to others how I think they should live their lives, it is simply my own insight into such things. It is akin to buddhism in some ways in this train of denying oneself certain things for some reason, and it is also flows into the non-religious world where we have people who smoke, drink, eat too much, and so forth but are told it is wrong because it is bad for them and others. It all goes to a 'morals' thing, and everyone has some set of moral ideals and philosophy which they get from somewhere - either religion or self analysis of things. Thing too, is that everyone tries to evangelize their view and opinions by preaching to others how they should feel and act. We can complain about christians, et al, being in power and passing legislation which has a basis in their beliefs, but from where I sit that is precisely what everyone else does really - they just drop the scriptures and use the works of someone else or their own personal view.

To me the best way to get people on board with a train of thoughts or ideas is to understand theirs at the core and discuss with them things at that level. An example of this would be the amish and early christians who generally were/are not involved in the political arena - all they want is to be free to live in their own little place and live how they see fit (and this was something which occured often in the early US where we had communes from socialists to christians spring up - people lived their own way on their own land and the federal government was not overly involved in how people lived their lives and one group did not bother the other).

[forgethell]

30. I think you are right n/t

[Cronus Protagonist]

26. Link?

Surely it must be documented.

Buy my friend's car
http://losangeles.craigslist.org/car/49506670.html

[Algorem]

28. .

[winston61]

31. That's why many fundies don't use it

I know I shouldn't but I sometimes watch the holy roller channels on satellite. And Fox- sometimes. You know what Don Corleone says 'Keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer'. Just about all of the fundies use something called the 'Living Bible'. I've never seen a copy so I can't comment on the syntax. Fundies have told me that they view the King James as 'unclean' because James was homosexual. I've always read the King James because I love the language of the gospels of Christ. Right up there with Bill Shakespeare. Just today I ordered a new Bible from Oxford University Press. PLUG HERE- Oxford has got the New Revised Standard Bible 2002 on sale $9.99 marked down from $40.00.
Follow this link:

http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/24271/subject/Bibles/?view=usa&ci=0195288092

I've never read the NRS bible, so why not? I think that honest spirituality requires an open mind and an open heart. Something our fundies cousins would called heresy. Disclaimer: I am in no way associated with Oxford University Press. I'm just a book lover who loves a bargain.

[w4rma]

32. As far as I know there is no Christian Bible in existance today that isn't

the King James Version or translated FROM the King James Version.

All Bibles use the KJV directly or indirectly.

[ohio_liberal]

33. There's one....

The Reformation Bible(New Geneva Study Bible), an updated version of the Geneva Bible. I've not ever seen one or read it.