And Now: The Homosexual Bible


Christianity and Religious Biblical tenets in the West are withering to nothing, evidenced by the myriad translations of the scriptures to suit each and every type of sensibility there is.  So it comes as no surprise that an official “gay” perversion of the scriptures would be presented to suit the needs of the homosexual hedonists in society demanding divine justification for their abominations.

Gay Bible angers Christians

A gay version of the Bible, in which God says it is better to be gay than straight, is to be published by an American film producer.

New Mexico-based Revision Studios will publish The Princess Diana Bible – so named because of Diana’s “many good works”, it says – online at in spring 2009. A preview of Genesis is already available, in which instead of creating Adam and Eve, God creates Aida and Eve.

“And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Aida, and she slept: and he took one of her ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; and the rib, which the Lord God had taken from woman, made he another woman, and brought her unto the first. And Aida said, ‘This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of me. Therefore shall a woman leave her mother, and shall cleave unto her wife: and they shall be one flesh.’ And they were both naked, the woman and her wife, and were not ashamed.”

The film studio said it would also adapt and direct the revised Bible as a two-part mini-series, The Gay Old Testament and The Gay New Testament, once it is completed.

“There are many different versions of the Bible; I don’t see why we can’t have one,” said Max Mitchell, who directed the science fiction comedy Horror in the Wind, in which an airborne formula invented by two biogeneticists reverses the world’s sexual orientation.

“I got the idea for the Princess Diana Bible from Horror In The Wind,” he added. “After the world becomes gay, religious people create The Princess Diana Bible, which says that gay is right and straight is a sin. Then they burn all the King James Bibles.”

The move has already provoked upset among Christians, with the blogger Douglas Howe at the Idol Chatter site describing it as “inspired by a political agenda and one person’s desire to contort not only the text but the very context of it to suit his own perspective”.

There was also criticism on Mitchell’s Princess Diana Bible site, where one commentator said the choice of title was “very disrespectful to the late Princess Diana … It’s just one more thing to link her to what many people believe is immoral. Sad, very sad indeed.”

But Mitchell said: “There are 116 versions of the Bible, why is any of them better than ours?”



Filed under Chrisitan Viewpoint, Culture War

14 responses to “And Now: The Homosexual Bible

  1. John Smith

    So what?

  2. invar

    So what?

    Ahem, well, bastardizing the word of God to fit a comfort zone with sin, and rewriting the Bible to give sin divine justification is gross heresy.

    Would it be okay with Homosexuals if Christian zealots decided to rewrite the Constitution to fit their particular worldview preference? I mean, so-what, right?

    Perhaps we can learn from the example of the folks rewriting the Bible and establish the First Amendment to now say:

    “Congress shall make no law, respecting an establishment of special rights for homosexual people, and may prohibit the free exercise thereof;
    or abridging the freedom to condemn such behavior, or of the church; or the right of the people peaceably to condemn, and to petition the Government to outlaw such behavior.”

    I mean hey, if we can rewrite the Word and Law of God to suit ourselves – surely we can rewrite a law of men to do the same.

    That’s fair, right?

  3. John Smith

    So don’t read it. Problem solved.

  4. invar

    Oh really?

    So if I rewrite the Constitution and our Laws to suit myself – I can say simply that you should not read my revisions to the Law of the Land and any problems you have with my usurpation are solved.


  5. John Smith

    You can rewrite the Constitution all you want. Unless your rewrites are ratified by Congress and the states, it’s not like the rewrites will carry any force of law or anything. So rewrite away.

  6. invar

    This is where clueless folks like yourself are so blinded.

    When did Congress or the States ratify a Constitutional Amendment to make abortion a right?

    When did Congress or the States ratify a Constitutional Amendment to regulate firearms and even ban them?

    When did Congress or the States ratify a Constitutional Amendment to ban and restrict the right to acknowledge or worship God in public with free exercise?

    When did Congress or the States ratify a Constitutional Amendment to make healthcare a right as they are now proposing?

    When did Congress or the States ratify a Constitutional Amendment to nationalize private property and business?

    Since when have all of these usurpations and abridgements of liberty been ratified by Congress and the States to become defacto-law?

    Even though NONE of them should carry any legal weight – why do they?

    Because people like you think it’s no big deal when Law is usurped and replaced by the desires and tyranny of men.

    So when we rewrite laws to suit ourselves by the pound of a gavel and the cheer of the crowds at political rallies, they suddenly have abrogated power for themselves as law – and the Constitution is diminished.

    Same deal with the bible.

    If you are going to rewrite it to legitimize your own twisted desires, it will be used not only to absolve oneself of guilt, but it will eventually be used as a bludgeon destroy the rest of scripture and replaced with the word and morality of men.

    Then it will have no power or meaning beyond words on paper.

    Which is exactly where our Constitution itself now lies because the clueless have no idea how much and how badly it has already been destroyed and replaced by the dictates of men.

  7. John Smith

    Or you could, you know, just not read it, and then maybe you’d stop being so stressed out about it.

  8. invar

    Sounds like the same advice Goebbels gave the Munich Post back in the 20’s when they were all stressed out over “Mein Kampf”.

    Just ignore it, don’t read it – and you’ll feel fine.

    Genocidal tyranny happens with such advice there Mr. Smith.

    Interesting to see you are an advocate of such “close your eyes to portents and reality”.

  9. John Smith

    You should really meet a nice girl (or boy) and get out of the house more often.

  10. invar

    That’s the best rebuttal you’ve got?

    Thanks for illustrating that having a battle of wits with an unarmed imbecile is futile and not worth the time.

  11. ambasoder

    The Lord came unto me and showed me his tree he said unto me ” My son does thou see thy branch that bears thee name “Mystery Babylon thee Great, The Mother of Harlots and Abominations of The Earth” Also named “America”? For I shall cut thee from this tree and cast it into the fire, if she does not Repent.” The Lord came to me today saying this. All other books will burn in the burning lake of fire, and the sheep that are blind like you John Smith.

  12. invar

    Completely unscriptural.

    I suppose you think you speak for God in making such inane statements and attributing them to God?

    We call that blasphemy here.

  13. Boomer

    To quote right-winger Adrian Cronauer:

    You’re in more dire need of a blow job than any white man in history.”

  14. invar

    Why thank you.

    I’m sure my wife will oblige me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s