This in reply to your 8/03 post Reply to Donna Danna (3 Aug 2026) re Sodom & Gomorrah/Gays/Bride of Christ
In your 8/03 post you mentioned a Roman Catholic monk named Damian who you stated added the homosexual verses to the Bible in the 1600's. However, I found the opposite to be true. Although Peter Damain was a Benedictine monk according to the article at St. Peter Damian – EWTN Great Britain he was a church reformer in the eleventh century, and the article at Homosexuality Criminalized and Subject to Death Penalty | History | Research Starters | EBSCO Research states, "In the eleventh century, the zealous reformer Damian denounced homosexuality as a sin comparable to blasphemy. He objected especially to sodomy among the clergy, a practice he saw as rampant. While he considered anal intercourse the most unclean act of all, he also listed solitary and mutual masturbation as sodomitical sins. He cited the death penalty that Leviticus invokes and urged that all sodomites be beaten, spat upon, chained, imprisoned, and starved. Although Pope Leo IX (1048-1054) did not sanction or institute such harsh plans for punishing homosexuals, Damian’s claim that sodomy outranked all sexual sins gradually found acceptance in canon law., the zealous reformer Damian denounced homosexuality as a sin comparable to blasphemy. He objected especially to sodomy among the clergy, a practice he saw as rampant. While he considered anal intercourse the most unclean act of all, he also listed solitary and mutual masturbation as sodomitical sins. He cited the death penalty that Leviticus invokes and urged that all sodomites be beaten, spat upon, chained, imprisoned, and starved. Although Pope Leo IX (1048-1054) did not sanction or institute such harsh plans for punishing homosexuals, Damian’s claim that sodomy outranked all sexual sins gradually found acceptance in canon law."
So neither a Roman Catholic monk named Peter Damian nor anyone else from the Roman Catholic Church in the 1600's added homosexual verses to the Roman Catholic Bible so that King James had to pay the church a large penance for his homosexual sins. The Roman Catholic Bible called the Vulgate Latin Version was written in 382 A.D. which already contained the verses in Leviticus 18:22, 20:13 about homosexual sins along with the story in Genesis 19:1-17 about the men from Sodom wanting to have sex with the two angels. Therefore, no one from the Roman Catholic Church added any verses to the Bible about homosexual sins in the 1600's because they were already in the Bible in 382 A.D.
The article at Vulgate Latin Bible With English Translation states "The Vulgate is a Latin version of the Holy Bible, and largely the result of the labors of St Jerome (Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus), who was commissioned by Pope Damasus I in 382 A.D. to make a revision of the old Latin translations. By the 13th century this revision had come to be called the versio vulgata, that is, the "commonly used translation", and ultimately it became the definitive and officially promulgated Latin version of the Holy Bible in the Catholic Church. The Vulgate is usually credited to have been the first translation of the Old Testament into Latin directly from the Hebrew Tanakh, rather than the Greek Septuagint." The Latin Vulgate written in 382 A.D. which was written long before the 1600's when the King James Bible was written shows Leviticus 18:22 & 20:13 as follows:
18:22 cum masculo non commisceberis coitu femineo quia abominatio est
Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind: because it is an abomination.
The Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate Bible written in 382 A.D. as stated above was translated into Latin from the Hebrew Tanakh Bible (Tanach) - Hebrew & English | Bekiut Below are the same verses Leviticus 18:22 at Leviticus Chapter 18 - Hebrew & English Bible | Bekiut and Leviticus 20:13 at Leviticus Chapter 20 - Hebrew & English Bible | Bekiut which state the same thing as the Latin Vulgate Bible:
20:13 qui dormierit cum masculo coitu femineo uterque operati sunt nefas morte moriantur sit sanguis eorum super eos
If any one lie with a man as with a woman, both have committed an abomination: let them be put to death. Their blood be upon them.
Leviticus 18:22You shalt not lie with a man after the manner of a woman: it is abomination. ואת זכרלא תשכב משכבי אשה
תועבה הוא
Leviticus 20:13אשר ישכב את זכר משכבי אשהIf a man also lie with a man, as one lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. ואיש
תועבה עשו שניהם
מות יומתו דמיהם בם
As for the Masoretic Text, it was written by Jewish scholars long before the 1600's, and it has remained unchanged. The article at The Masoretic Text — History, Structure, and Authority - Updated American Standard Version states"the Masoretic Text (MT) is not an invention of the Middle Ages. It is the mature expression of a textual line whose roots extend back many centuries earlier. The Masorites did not decide which books belonged in Scripture; they did not rewrite chapters according to their own theology. Instead, they received a canon and a consonantal text already regarded as fixed and devoted themselves to copying and safeguarding it with unparalleled rigor." If the original Masoretic Text did not originally contain verses Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 about homosexual sin, then it still wouldn't be in today's Bibles, and someone from the Roman Catholic Church cannot add verses to the Hebrew Bible or Masoretic text. However, both of these verses are in the Bible from the very beginning.
Here is the Masoretic Text at Bible | Manuscripts - Masoretic (MT) Bible | Manuscripts - Torah (Law - LXX) in which Leviticus 18:22 states, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind; it is abomination," while Leviticus 20:13 states, "And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Both the Roman Catholic's Vulgate and the Jewish Masoretic Text are in agreement with each other in regards to Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. Therefore, these verses have remain unchanged even before the 1600's when the King James Bible was written. These verses were not added to the Bible by anyone in the Roman Catholic church so that King James had to pay a penance for his homosexual sins. These verses were in the Bible from the very beginning. These verses do not say "thou shalt not lie to mankind nor lie to God;" they say, "thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind" which means a man should lie with a man to have sex with him as a man lies with a woman to have sex with her.
As for the story of the two angels visiting Lot in Sodom, and the men of Sodom wanting to know them (have sex) with them, the Jewish Masoretic text for Genesis 19:1-17 at Bible | Manuscripts - Genesis (MT), and the Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate Bible at Latin Vulgate Old Testament Bible - Genesis 19 both contain the same verses, and were not added to these Bible in the 1600's; these verses were in both Bibles long before the 1600's when the first King James Bible was published in 1611.
As for your statement "Regarding "same sex" relations - where the Bible presently says 'man shall not lie with man,' is not what the original manuscripts said. It actually meant man shall not lie to God Almighty as the heathen do. The meaning changed over the centuries as you will see below," it is not true. The Roman Catholic Vulgate Bible written in 382 A.D. which was translated from the Hebrew Tanakh has never changed. These Bible verses remain the same and the meaning of them remains the same. "Man shall not lie with man, as with a woman" means man shall not have sex with another man." This verse has nothing to do with a man lying to God Almighty.
As for your statement, "I do know Jesus told someone He is "bi-sexual," which makes sense because as our Creator and God in human form, He loves everyone - male or female," it sounds like this is one of those Near Death Experiences in which a person claims Jesus said that because I am sure that Jesus knows the meaning of bi-sexual which is having sex with both males and females so it could not have been the real Jesus who said He is bi-sexual.
As for your statement, "Jesus told His disciples that some people can't "receive" what He had to say about gays (aka eunuchs), except those to whom it is given," the word "gays" is not in that Bible verse of Matthew 19:12 although the word "eunuchs" is. That verse has nothing to do with homosexuals. I have never heard of a homosexual making himself a eunuch (castrated) for the kingdom of heaven's sake when all he has to do is not have sex with another man and repent of his sin. And if he is having a problem giving up his homosexual sin, then he should ask Jesus to help him.
You also stated the following:
Rabbi Lapin, "America's favorite Rabbi," http://www.rabbidaniellapin.com/index.php, who is a Hebrew scholar, explained on TV not long ago that Adam was both male/female (hermaphrodite) until God used Adam's genetics/rib to make a female. Hermaphrodites are a recessive gene in the human gene pool. There are three hermaphrodite types:1 & 2) Those with both male/female genders;3) and those who are gender neutral - not distinct enough to be either male or female and have both sexual genders. They are not defects or mutations, they were part of the original human creation (i.e., Adam who was both male/female until God separated the female aspect of him to make Eve).
Adam was created as a male according to the Bible; he was not a hermaphrodite who had both male and female sexual organs nor was he gender neutral because gender neutral does not refer to either sex but only to people in general. Also Adam's rib was not a female rib, but the Lord somehow used the DNA from Adam's male rib bone matrix and marrow to create Eve. He must have used Adam's X chromosome and not his Y chromosome to create Eve since females have XX chromosomes and males have XY chromosomes. The article at Eve's DNA - Genesis and Genetics states,
"First of all, does the man’s rib contain enough genetic information to make a woman. The answer is “yes,” Adam’s ribs contained many copies of the genetic information required to make a woman. However, it is interesting to note that if the first human were a woman, her rib would not contain enough information to make a man. This is because women do not have the y-chromosome. So, if the Bible stated that the woman was created first and man was formed from her rib, the Bible would be in error; but, the Bible got it right and stands true. This all seems elementary to us now, but remember that the scriptures were given to us long before any discoveries of the workings of genetics and DNA." FULL STORY at above link.