Highly civilized sin of sodomy

GK Chesterton called homosexuality a "highly civilized" since its tends to be more common is wealthier societies, at his times the English aristocracy supposed has a large amount of them. Even in the case of Sodom, it was a city under a king when many were still nomads and herdsmen like Abraham. The Bible on Sodom's wealth says:

Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. They were haughty and did an abomination before me. So I removed them, when I saw it. --Ezekiel 16:49-50

Nothing has changed, homosexuality is still most prevalent and accepted in the worlds most wealthy, fattest, most educated nations. Even despite all this education and knowledge about how overtly destructive sodomy is to the person and humanity--homosexual men account for most of the HIV infections in the USA, and it destroys the body. But false compassion is more important that telling them the truth about sodomy.

Its interesting how desperate people are to suppress the studies showing homosexuality is a symptom of homosexual sexual abuse as a minor.

Jesus beating Bad Bishops

In Luke 12, Christ gives several parables, including ones about not being greedy, suffering for His Name, and also against corrupt clergy. Is it convenient that now that the reasonable hope of universalism as a possibility is preached those in the very office of which is told will be "beaten with many stripes" should they not prepare the household of the Lord for His unexpected return? The warning applies the most to this with the most authority. This means at Judgement Day, Christ judge with the most severity Popes, then Patriarchs and Cardinals, then Archbishops, then Bishops, then monsignors, then simple priests, then deacons, and finally the laity.

Christ was fully aware, being God, that His own Church would have corrupt leaders, including Popes. Yet, despite the harshness He speaks about the clergy, He never proposes vigilante justice, or starting a new church with new clergy, as the Baptists tend to. Rather Christ seems to be saying, that if the very ones not setting the Household of the Lord in to place, the Lord Himself will come and set things straight--and punish the guilty parties in proportion to their responsibility and knowledge they possessed. The commentary of Cornelius van Lapide states the fear that the pious associate with their responsibility:

In like manner, as far as they could, SS. Gregory, Chrysostom, Ambrose, Basil, Nazianzen, Nicholas, Athanasius, shunned the office of Bishops; and in our own times Pius V., when chosen Pontiff, turned pale and almost fell into a faint. When asked the reason he frankly answered, “When I was a Religious of the Order of Benedict, I had very good hope of my salvation; when I was afterwards made a Bishop I began to have a dread about it: now that I am chosen Pontiff I almost despair of it, for how am I to give account to God for so many thousands of souls as are in this whole city, when I can scarcely answer for my own soul?” So it is in his life. Finally, the Council of Trent declares the burthen of a Bishop’s office to be one formidable to the shoulders of angels.--Lapide Commentary on Luke 12:48 

TBC

Answering Muslim in Comments

I received a year ago comments from a Muslim with the username Kemo 2002 on YouTube in response to my video on whether Muhammed is mentioned in Songs of Solomon. Since I neglected to address his comment at the time, I feel I should address it here. In his comments its evidence, like most Muslims, he does not know what the Trinity is, nor does he seem aware Islam has Allah praying to himself.

Here is a screen shot of the comment I will be addressing

In the following I will repost his comments in a more readable format with my added responses.

Kemo 2002: Ha...Would u even bear  to hear that a perfect being gets crucified and naked and rotten on a crucifix?!
Ohh how dumb u are  to think like that he wasnt killed nor crucified.. But Allah the Almight and only one god lifted him in a way we dont know maybe the one who was crucified looked like him but only Allah knows  best.

Me: What is preventing  perfect human being from being executed? Many prophets were killed. In Islam Muhammad slowly died from poison meat. How is this even a point to make? Christ in the gospel says He LAID DOWN HIS LIFE WILLINGLY (John 10:18). He could have avoided death. There is a debate whether the Quran really says Jesus was not crucified since some Muslims insist the Quran is not denying this, but denying God's word could be killed. If Jesus avoided crucifixion it would make him a false messiah and a false prophets since the Scriptures in Isaiah 53, Zechariah 12:10, Psalm 22, etc predicted He would be crucified and would raise up. Jesus himself spoke about how he would die at the hands of the Jewish authorities and Romans. Furthermore, why would Jesus need a replacement if He would simply be taken up to Heaven. Its not like the Romans would go to heaven and take him back to be crucified. If Allah knew best, why would be needlessly haves Jesus' disciple be killed in Jesus' place?

Kemo: And if u said that we are terrorists think again isis(Muslim killers pretending  to be muslims.) is made by the cia to make corruption and temptation among muslims and especially so non muslims reject the truth..If u believe we are terrorists then ur brainwashed because theyre is no where in the Quran says go strap ur self with explosive and blow ur self up but the  opposite if u commit  suicide ur going to hellfire. If u have any questions or would u like to debate in depth my instagram is:K4mo0o

Me: Instagram is a very poor media for debate. Why cannot you accept they are Muslim, what evidence do you have they are run by the CIA, why would the USA help destroy them? Why does Islam rely on many conspiracy theories?

Kemo: 1.) The Bible says that Jesus prayed. If Jesus is God, he would simply be praying/talking to himself...

Me: First, the Quran says Allah prays to himself, though most English translations deliberately try to obscure this by saying salloo means "bless":

He it is who prays (yusallee) for you and His angels too, to bring you forth out of the darkness into the light, for He is merciful to the believers. S. 33:43 Palmer 

Verily, God and His angels pray (yusalloona) for the prophet. O ye who believe! pray for him (salloo) and salute him with a salutation! S. 33:56 Palmer

In fact, this is what SAW means when Muhammed's name is mentioned. So how can you find an issue with "God praying to himself"?

Furthermore, Jesus is not praying to himself. Jesus is both God and a man. As a man, Jesus prayed, worshipped, got hungry, thirsty, tired, bleed, cried, and so on. How Islam makes sense of Allah praying to Himself, I have no idea. The Divine aspects of Jesus are mentioned at times in the Quran, like the passages alluding to Jesus creating a bird from clay and breathing into it.

Kemo: 2.) It says God had to turn his back on Jesus, when he took on the sins of the world. (So he somehow turned his back on himself?)

Me: This is a Protestant claim, I am Catholic and do not make this statement, since as you point out, it seems contradictory. A Protestant would explain this as the Trinity, three separate persons, the Father turns his back on the Son. However, logically, a Christian cannot hold this view either since it would mean there is separation and disunity in the Trinity, imply a temporary fracture in God's oneness, or Jesus being split into two. The view Jesus is separated from the Father is based on an interpretation of the verse where Jesus cries out--quoting Psalm 22, "My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?". The Catholic view is Jesus is quoting the Psalm, and by his death, suffering the fate like a sinful criminal would, can express the sentiment of a sinner worthy of death. The abandoning is simply God's permission for Jesus to be crucified by the hands of wicked men. Christ Himself said He died willingly for His sheep, however, as a man, he desired it occur through other means that would not have His people bear more guilt for killing their King. In the Catholic view, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all on the same page, as they must be as they all possess the same will, though Christ has two wills--a divine will that is the Father's will, and a human will that He acquired when he was conceived (John 1:14 "the word was made flesh and dwelt among us").

Kemo: 3.) Jesus was asked when the end of the world would be and his response was roughly, “I do not know, only my Father in Heaven knows”. If Jesus is God, he was then lying to the man who asked the question. The trinity is one of the “doctrines if demons” that the Bible warns about.

Me: St Paul was the one that spoke against the "doctrine of demons." Are you now admitting St Paul was a true apostle? I have a video on Matthew 24:36/Mark 13:32. Jesus in this passage is saying the Father is the source of this knowledge, the fact Jesus describes the event in detail and says He will appears riding a cloud (an allusion to Him being God in Daniel 7) shows He is in control. Elsewhere, Jesus says only God is good, He was not deny others can be good, but rather that God is the original of this. Jesus in Acts 1:6-7 when asked a related question by the Apostles, tells us that events ordained by the Father are not for humans to know. Elsewhere, like John 21 the Apostles Peter tells Christ, "you know all things!."

Kemo said:

Muslim : Who is God?  

Christian : Jesus   

ME: The FATHER, SON, and HOLY SPIRIT.

Kemo:

Muslim : Is Jesus the son of Mary.  

Christian : Yes  

Muslim : Who created Mary?  

Christian : God.  

Muslim : Who is God?  

Christian: Jesus 

ME: The FATHER, SON, and HOLY SPIRIT. 

Kemo:

Muslim : Jesus is the begotten son.  

Christian : Yes  

Muslim : Who is his father?  

Christian : God.  

Me: The Father is a specific person in the Trinity that is the head and source of the Trinity, He Is unbegotten. The Son did not beget Himself, rather He is eternally begotten of His Father.

Kemo:

Muslim : Who is God? 

Christian : Jesus.  

Me: The FATHER, SON, and Holy Spirit are God.

Kemo:

Muslim : Jesus is a servant of God.  

Christian : Yes  

Me: Jesus as a man is the servant of God, since He took form of a servant according to Philippians 2:7, which you have previously acknowledged that St Paul is a legitimate writer and Apostle of Jesus.

Kemo:

Muslim : Jesus died on the cross?  

Christian : Yes  

Muslim : Who resurrected him?  

Christian : God.

Me: According to Jesus himself in John 2, He would resurrect HIMSELF, why not? He resurrected other people which Islam acknowledges, and He could create as the Quran acknowledges with the clay birds. The New Testament says the Father, Son and Holy Spirit were all involved in the resurrection of Jesus, because they are one God and do not operate as separate beings with separate wills, rather they have One will, not 3 united wills.

Kemo:

Muslim : Is Jesus a messenger. 

Christian : Yes  

Muslim : Who sent him?  

Christian : God.  

Muslim : Who is God?  

Christian : Jesus.  

Me: Jesus was sent by the Father, it was the Father's will for the Word of God to become a human. It must also be noted, we believe that the will of God the Son is the same will as the Father, its just that the will's origin is the Father. The doctrine you seem to be refuting is a non-trinitarian doctrine called modalism which technically is like the Unitarianism that Islam believes in, however it says God appears in three forms: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but are really just the same exact person.

Kemo:

Muslim: Did Jesus worship while on earth.  

Christian: Yes  

Muslim: Whom did he worship?  

Christian: God.  

Muslim : Who is God?  

Christian : Jesus.

Me: Jesus is both God and man. As a man, to be a perfect example for us, took on a human nature and led by example of how to pray, be righteous, and be a servant for humanity by preaching to it, healing, forgiving sins, resurrecting people, and dying for their sins. Muhammed's examples are an example of how NOT to be as divorce, lusting and taking your adopted sons wife, a grown mad lusting after a pre-pubescent girl, sex slavery, and raping married women in front of their husbands are examples of wickedness, deserving of great damnation in eternal Hell fire.

Kemo:

Muslim : Did God have a beginning?  

Christian : No  

Muslim: Then who was born on 25/DEC?  

Christian : Jesus.  

Muslim : Is Jesus God.  

Christian : Yes

Me: God has no beginning. Jesus' human beginning was March 25 over 2000 years ago. Jesus pre-existed as God. The Son of God has two births, one of His Father eternally, and one of the Virgin Mary at one time and place 2000 years ago. When Christ was born of the Virgin Mary, God experienced birth, though in Divinity was not born of Mary.

Kemo:

Muslim : Where's God?  

Christian : In heaven.

Me: A real Christian would say everywhere. Many Muslims believe God is ONLY in the highest heaven above His Throne. Christians believe that while Heaven is a sort of "home" of God, He being God is everywhere, in fact this way of describing it is misleading it implies God comes to an occupies space, when in reality, space was permitted to occupy along side with God a location. God does not simply occupy the universe, the universe is contained WITHIN God, since He is much greater than the universe.

Kemo:

Muslim : How many Gods are there in heaven?  

Christian : Only one God.  

Muslim : Where's Jesus?  

Christian : He is seated on the right hand of his father. 

Me: We say He is seated at the right hand of the Father. This is more of a description of His relationship, not a physical reality, since we do not believe the Father has a body in anyway, whereas Allah does.

Kemo:

Muslim : Then how many are they in heaven?  

Christian : Only one God.  

Muslim : Then how many seats? 

Christian : one  

Muslim : where's Jesus?  

Christian: Seated next to God.  

Muslim : How are they seated on one chair?  

Christian : Its only understood by those with the Ghost. You need Ghost my friend

Me:  Its likely there is no actual throne, however, if there is Christ would be seated on it since He is part of the Trinity that has a bodily form. The book of Revelation, written by the Apostle John, describes heaven as having a throne where Christ being called "the lamb" is seated with the Father. The book is highly metaphorical, and like much of the Bible to explain to human, describes spiritual things in physical terms, much like Daniel 7, Exodus 33 and Isaiah 6 did when they said they "saw God." Since the Father and Holy Spirit have no actual physical body, there is no need for an actual throne, furthermore, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are omnipresent. They are even present in Hell, since Hell itself exists within God. In Hell man is eternally deprived of the full extent of God's mercy since they already rejected it.

You speak of the "ghost" a term we Christians rarely use anymore to describe the "Holy Spirit" which Muslims believe is the angel Gabriel, a person that claimed to talk frequently with this "ghost" that choked him demanding him to read. Some Christians believe there is a type of violent ghost called a "polstergeist" which Muhammed may very well have encountered and presented itself as an angel of God, though in reality being from Hell. St Paul, a man you seem to think of as worthy of being cited as being a legitimate writer of the Bible, said Satan can appear as an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14). St Paul further warned of being deceived by a man, or a so called "an angel of heaven" preaching another gospel (Galatians 1:8). Muhammad promoted the false gnostic gospels, and denied doctrines the real gospel teaches.

Hadith shows Quran is either imitable, not perserved, not clear

Muslims and the Quran itself insist the Quran is so great no chapter can be imitated by humans, even if a group of them came together and tried.

Say, "If mankind and the jinn gathered in order to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like of it, even if they were to each other assistants."--Quran 17:88

Or do they say, "He has made it up"? Rather, they do not believe. Then let them produce a statement like it, if they should be truthful. --Quran 52:33-34

There are more instances where the Quran makes similar claims (eg. 2:23, 10:38, 11:13). The Quran, which insists its a clear book (11:1, 16:89, 41:3), gives no clear criteria for how to judge inimitability, which has caused different scholars to speculation on how it is inimitable. Regardless, whatever the case may be is not really relevant to this argument.

Another claim common among Muslims is that the Quran has been perfectly perserved, that is, it has not been corrupted, no verses have been lost. I am not aware of any actual Islam text
(other than commentaries) stating the Quran today is the same as that at the time of Muhammed's death (despite the fact variants like Ḥafs and Warsh). The following verse was taken by commentator ibn Kathir to mean the Quran cannot be added to subtracted to:

 But this is an honored Qur'an  [Inscribed] in a Preserved Slate.--Quran 85:21-22

as we see in his Tafsir:

(In Al-Lawh Al-Mahfuz!) meaning, among the most high gathering, guarded from any increase, decrease, distortion, or change. This is the end of the Tafsir of Surat Al-Buruj, and all praise and blessings are due to Allah.--ibn Kathir Tafsir on Sura 85:21-22

Likewise, Surah 6:115,

And the word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can alter His words, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing.--Quran 6:115

According to Tafsir al-Tabari, men cannot "add or delete from Allah's Books,"

The word of God meant in this verse is the Quran. This word is complete in truth and justice. Nothing can change Allah's word which he revealed in his BOOKS. The liars cannot add or delete from Allah's BOOKS. This is referring without a doubt to the Jews and Christians because they are the people of the books which were revealed to their prophets. Allah is revealing that the words they (the people of the book) are corrupting were not revealed by Allah, since Allah's word cannot be changed or substituted. --Tafsir al-Tabari, on Quran 6:115 (cited by Sam Shamoun and accepted by Bassam Zawadi, as I cannot get the source myself)

The claims that 1) the Quran is inimitable, 2) is perfectly preserved seems to be contradicted by the hadith.

There are sunnas that claim the Quran has missing verses, one of these is the following:

 Ibn Abbas reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: If there were for the son of Adam a valley full of riches, he would long to possess another one like it. and Ibn Adam does not feel satiated but with dust. 1413 And Allah returns to him who returns (to HiM). 1414 Ibn Abbas said: I do not know whether it is from the Qur'an or not; and in the narration transmitted by Zuhair it was said: I do not know whether it is from the Qur'an, and he made no mention of Ibn Abbas.-- Sahih Muslim, Book 005, Number 2285

 In addition to ibn Abbas, also Abu Harb said similar:

Abu Harb b. Abu al-Aswad reported on the authority of his father that Abu Musa al-Ash'ari sent for the reciters of Basra. They came to him and they were three hundred in number. They recited the Qur'an and he said: You are the best among the inhabitants of Basra, for you are the reciters among them. So continue to recite it. (But bear in mind) that your reciting for a long time may not harden your hearts as were hardened the hearts of those before you. We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara'at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it:" If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust." And we used so recite a slirah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it, but remember (this much) out of it:" Oh people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise" (lxi 2.) and" that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection" (xvii. 13).--Sahih Muslim, Book 005, Number 2286

To this dilemma, some Muslims response either 1) yes, some of the Quran was lost,  or 2) No, the text cited by Sahih Muslim from ibn Abbas and Abu Harb is actually a hadith, not a verse from the Quran.

If 1) is true, it means the claim of perfect preservation is not true, seeming to imply both the greatest Islamic commentators ibn Kathir and al-Tabari were mistaken. Also, in turn means the Quran is not as clear as it claims itself to be since even the greatest Tafsirs got it wrong.

However, the more damaging path to take for a Muslim is 2) that ibn Abbas/abu Harb are mistaking it for a hadith. It would be better to claim the Quran has not been preserved without defect, that is this passage lost. The admission that these individuals mistook a hadith for the Quran demonstrates Muhammed's speech does resemble the Quran, making the Quran imitable, contradicting the Suras stating even a team of humans and jinn would fail.

In summary:

Premise 1: The Quran's states it is inimitable (2:23, 10:38, 11:13, 17:88, 52:33-34)
Premise 2: Early Muslims mistook a hadith for the Quran itself.
Conclusion: The Quran is imitable, contradicting its own claim, therefore the Quran is false.

or,

Premise 1: Parts of the Quran are missing according to early Muslim sources like ibn Abbas, abu Harb and Muhammed's child bride, Aisha.
Premise 2: The Quran states it is a clear book.
Premise 3: The top Islamic commentators of the Quran commenting on the Quran state that Allah's book cannot have anything lost.

Conclusion: The Quran is not clear since the top scholars misunderstood the Quran (unless the Quran was wrong too!) when the Quran claims to be preserved, therefore the Quran is false.