thump (n): The muffled sound produced by or as if by a blow with a blunt object

It seems that there are people in this world who believe that if they adjust or reinterpret translations of the Holy Bible that they will be able to beat those people over the head who are disinterested in what it says. For example, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (King James Version) reads as follows:

"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Assuming the words are accurate, let's examine Leviticus. Now, based on the film The Ten Commandments (or so it seems), many believe that God spoke only to Moses through the burning bush or when giving him the Torah on Mount Sinai. The Jewish faith tells us that Moses was but one leader amongst a nation of Jews who heard the word of God. Christian religions are based on the Old Testament (or Jewish Bible) and then the New Testament(s) that came after the birth of Jesus Christ – yet there is disagreement on who heard the voice of God. Now where were we...

In the King James Bible, 18 Leviticus 22 is translated: "You shall not lie with mankind as with womankind. It is an abomination." More contemporary translations have broadened both the scope and interpretation of the statement by the gender neutral statement that homosexuality (rather than the implied sexual activity of men and heterosexual men) is an abomination. Of course, this statement is preceded by a long dissertation on your father being the only person allowed to see each and every female member of his family naked. In fact, it seems the only women he can't take a naked gander at is his daughter-in-law. Presumably because she is your wife and her nudity is for your eyes only. Also your daughter and any other female in the family save for your own daughter-in-law.

Now, if you follow EVERY line related to human relationships then men are permitted, and encouraged, to have as many wives as they want. So an alternate interpretation is to only have ONE male partner, and many female partners because you would not be lying with women as you laid with men since your numbers are different. It just goes to show that translating ancient Aramaic is open to everyone, though it is clearly not an exact science. Of course, you should also know the history of the "scripture" you adhere to with such steadfast certainty. Society has changed in the last 5000 years of recorded (recorded, remembered, or invented?) history. Luckily, its rules have not.

According to 18 Leviticus 29, “Whoever commits such abominations shall be cut off from among their people.” We still do that one. Check out the statistics on today's prison populations. And in 19 Leviticus 15, “You shall do no injustice in judgment” we clearly have a perfect system of laws and a perfect system of jurisprudence. Innocent people have never been sentenced to prison and the state of prisons is perfectly humane. Right? And today we are free to marry multiple wives. Women who are unfaithful are still ritually slaughtered while men who are unfaithful aren't really unfaithful at all. Polygamy is endorsed by our laws. Isn't it?

But let's get back to the LGBTQ community. 19 Leviticus 19 tells us that “A garment of mixed linen and wool shall never come upon you.” Somehow, I don't think the gays invented poly-blends but I'd have to study fashion history. I wonder if Tim Gunn is busy?

20 Leviticus 13 is more difficult to refute. “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.” Here's my response. Don't lie. I try to be as honest as possible – with men and women. But, this is just a rehash of 18 Leviticus 22 with the added death penalty. See above.

This brings us, then, to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah: two cities destroyed by God when the angels he sent to investigate the cities were not turned over to the Sodomites by Lot who wished to “know them.” “Know them” has been reinterpreted in the New International Version to state “have sex with them.” It must be said that if I knew my neighbour was hosting a couple of divine beings in his house, I would want to meet them – to know them, if you will. It may be out of jealousy, or out of a selfish need to experience the divine. That being said, I don't think I would be particularly aroused by the idea. In fact, I would be scared out of my wits. Fear and sexual arousal rarely go hand in hand. Rarely.

Anyway, I am beginning to feel like this diatribe has been rather biased in terms of gender. 1 Romans 26-7 states that “God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.” While it mentions women being contrary to the natural order, it really only damns men with any specificity. And yet, these are men who refuse to believe Paul, an apostle of Christ, preached the word of God with any authority. They essentially said, “Paul, I know the word of God as well as you do.” Then they went about lusting after same sex partners. Well, if someone calls you an idiot there is little chance you'll speak well of them. It sounds like Paul's version of “That's so gay.”

Finally, 2 Timothy 3:16 states that “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” Fundamentalists have used this statement to suggest that God sat down and wrote the Bible – or at least controlled the hands which wrote it down. And I quote: "Scripture is given by inspiration of God." Our sense of morality, and the metaphorical texts which permeate our understanding of divinity, is inspired by the divine. But if we follow the fundamentalist interpretation, the words are literal and unalterable. It is highly ironic that these same fundamentalists have revised the Bible according to their own contemporary belief structure almost generationally.

So, I, and others, have done your homework to ensure you are better armed to deal with the fundamentalists who seek conflict in order to further an agenda of hate and cruelty. Do with it as you will. I do urge you, however, not to seek the conflict. Simply be prepared to respond. If I have learned one lesson in this life, it is to let the offence initiate their own defeat. Remain grounded and focused and simply reorient and redirect the vitriol being spewed in your direction. Eventually, the offender will talk her/himself into a corner.