Written and compiled by Gary Kukis

Preface:   There are a great many dishonest graphics posted on the internet. The internet and email has allowed for those who are against the Bible to devise cleaver anti-Bible graphics, and then to post them on facebook (or, wherever) and then allow these graphics to proliferate.

These graphics have become the bumper stickers of the 21^st century. They are brief enough for those with a short attention span, yet long enough to make their point.

It is certainly reasonable to ask, why call these graphics dishonest? After all, not everyone knows the Bible very well. So, maybe they are just mistaken or ill-informed. Here is why they are dishonest: if you tell the person who has posted an anti-Bible graphic where they are wrong, and correctly explain the passage, they are not going to remove the graphic. They are not going to say, okay, I get it now; I have a better understanding now; and then delete the graphic from their personal web page or facebook page. They will leave it up. They leave it up because they are against the Bible. So, it does not matter how well their mistaken notion is correctly explained to them; they are still going to leave the graphic up—which makes it, at that point, a dishonest graphic. Their purpose is to promote their discomfort with the Bible as the Word of God; and they hope that you adopt their position as well. They are not worried about getting this or that point of doctrine wrong.

Many of these graphics are posted by groups who go by names like the Christian Left. These are a mixture of people who have strong, leftist convictions. They are liberals or socialists first; and then, whatever else, second. Some of them have believed in Jesus Christ; some have not. However, when a graphic that they come across and post turns out to contradict the Bible; rarely do they remove it. Rarely do they write a retraction. Rarely do they post next to this graphic, “I am mistaken. This graphic which I posted presents the Bible incorrectly.”

Science, Origins of Man, Origins of the Universe
Learn cosmology from the Bible
Social Issues
God is Good with Slavery		Marriage = “Marriage Alternatives” found in the Bible (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).
So you still think homosexuality is sinful and therefore gays shouldn't be allowed to marry?
False Assertions
Most Christians don't know this but,...		Shrimp Wrapped in Bacon?
Jesus Christ
Jesus is not a Liberal (HTML) (PDF) (WPD)

Dishonest graphics dealing with science or the origins of man and the universe:

Learn cosmology from the Bible.

Graphic from Belief Delusion of Word Press. I first saw it posted in facebook.

The Earth is flat (Isa. 24:1 Matt. 4:8)

Isa 24:1 Behold, the LORD will empty the earth and make it desolate, and he will twist its surface and scatter its inhabitants. (ESV). It is not uncommon for a verse to be quoted that does not exist or is not the right verse. Accuracy is not really a part of anti-Biblical graphics. I checked the KJV as well, and it says roughly the same thing in Old English.

The surface of the earth can certainly be twisted or distorted without there being some requirement for the earth to be flat.

Matt. 4:8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. This is a far more interesting verse, because the impression given is, once they get high enough, Satan and Jesus could see the entire earth. Robert J. Schadewald comments: Obviously, this would be possible only if the earth were flat. (And he adds Rev. 1:7 to the mix, where every eye will see the returning Jesus.)

However, just as obviously, how can Jesus, from any distance, see a kingdom and its glory from, say, 100 or 1000 miles away, let alone, on the other side of the earth? To say that this passage unequivocally means that the earth is flat, accepts, apparently without question, that Jesus can see several thousand miles away.

Furthermore, there must be something supernatural about this encounter between Satan (a fallen angel) and the Lord, which goes beyond what we as man are capable of. About Bible Prophecy says: How else would the devil manage to find Jesus in the desert in Matthew 4:3? How else would the devil bring Jesus to the 'the highest point of the temple' in Matthew 4:5? And how else would he transport Jesus to the 'very high mountain' in Matthew 4:8? 

The only explanation, given the context, is this vision of the kingdoms of the world and their glory had to be supernatural. Jesus cannot see thousands of miles away; and Jesus cannot be transported to these various places almost instantly by normal means. So, a question which must be answered is, if this is simply a vision, why not reveal this vision to Jesus in the desert or in a valley? About Bible Prophecy explains: a king is elevated. It is the king who has the highest seat in a palace. It is the king who has the highest seat in a coliseum. It is the king to whom others lower themselves by bowing. So if the devil is going to tempt someone by offering to make him the king of the world, where else would be more appropriate than the top of a 'very high mountain?'  Satan is saying, in essence, “You will be above all of this. All You have to do is worship me.”

Let’s add to this list of passages, Rev. 7:1 After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth, that no wind might blow on earth or sea or against any tree. This passage simply refers to the compass points of the earth; and anyone who speaks of north, south, east or west is not someone who believes the earth to be flat, but simply uses these terms to speak relatively (compass directions are relative to where you are; just as the terms up and down are relative to where you are).

What does the Bible teach about the shape and location of the earth?

The earth is round and it appears to hang upon nothing.

Isa. 40:21–22 Do you not know? Do you not hear? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth? It is He who sits above the circle [= round, spherical] of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in;... (ESV; capitalized) We have both the shape of the earth and the concept of the atmosphere, stretched out over the earth, as a tent for us to dwell in, both presented in this passage.

A similar expression is found in Job 26:10 He has inscribed a circle [round, spherical] on the face of the waters at the boundary between light and darkness. How do you make the face of the waters spherical, except upon a spherical earth?

Job 26:7 He stretches out the north over the void and hangs the earth on nothing. This is rather a dramatic statement, to hear the God hangs the earth upon nothing (which is what it would appear to be from a distance vantage point).

The Earth does not move (1Chron. 16:30)

1Chron. 16:30 ...tremble before Him, all the earth; yes, the world is established; it shall never be moved. (ESV; capitalized)

One more time, the verse, without the commentary:

Tremble before Him, all the earth;

even though the [entire] earth is firmly established [by Him]—

it is not tottering [or, it will not be dislodged; it will not be thrown into disarray].

The heavens rejoice and the earth goes in a circle [in joy];

they say among the Gentiles [or, the peoples], “Y^ehowah reigns.”

So, the actual Hebrew suggests that the earth is actually in an orbit!

The Earth rests on pillars (2Sam. 2:8)

1Sam. 2:8 He raises up the poor from the dust; He lifts the needy from the ash heap to make them sit with princes and inherit a seat of honor. For the pillars of the earth are the LORD's, and on them He has set the world. (ESV; capitalized)

From the exegesis of 1Sam. 2:8 The noun this is affixed to is the feminine singular noun earth (all or a portion), land. This gives us: ...because to Y^ehowah [are] the pillars of the earth. It appears as though we have a figurative use of the word pillars as the support of the earth. In all reality, we know that He hangs the earth upon nothing (Job 26:7). Therefore, we should discuss these pillars: First of all, these pillars are also mentioned in Job 9:6: “Who shakes the earth out of its place, and its pillars tremble.” They are mentioned as well in Psalm 75:3: “The earth and all who dwell in it totter. It is I who have firmly set its pillars.” What these pillars are, are simply the Laws of Physics, which is, in itself, a misnomer, because those with doctorates in Physics did not originate these laws nor do they enforce them—God originated the Laws of Physics and He enforces them. Here’s the deal: God designed gravity, centrifugal force, relativity and the laws of motion—and then He placed His physical universe within the confines of these laws. These laws are the pillars or the foundation of the physical universe.

Then we have the wâw consecutive followed by the 3^rd person masculine singular, Qal imperfect (it has been awhile since we have had a Qal stem) of to set, to place. Then we have the preposition upon with a masculine plural suffix, followed by the feminine singular noun the fertile and inhabited earth, the habitable globe, world. This gives us: ...and so He places upon them the world. An interesting aspect of this line is the imperfect tense. We would expect, even with the language of accommodation, for God to have placed the world upon these pillars (or, whatever) in the beginning. That is, we would expect a perfect tense right here. However, what we have is an imperfect tense, indicating an ongoing action. Pillars provide stability for a portion of a building which would otherwise be unstable (an overhang, for instance). Also, the pillars and overhang provide an additional stability for the entire structure. My thinking is that this stability refers to gravity, which is what provides us with some modicum of stability in this world, along with the other laws of physics alluded to previously. In fact, it is this, along with the orbits of the planets and stars (also a function of gravity and centrifugal force) which provide the stability for our universe (or, if you will, the pillars of our universe). That the term pillars does not have to have a precise literal sense is found in Rev. 3:12, where those who overcome will be made pillars of the Temple of God.

Taking both parts of this verse together, we may further extrapolate this concept to the basic laws of physics as they affect motion and gravity. His Son...holds up all things by the word of His power (Heb. 1b, 3b). He established the earth upon its foundations so that it would not totter forever (Psalm 104:5). This is the imperfect tense, the ongoing, continual tense. God continues to hold things together; God continues to enforce the physical laws of the universe.

The key in all of this is the use of the imperfect tense rather than the perfect tense. If there were these great big pillars and God just placed the earth upon them, then the perfect tense would have been used. The perfect tense refers to a point in time or the action of a verb seen from the perspective of completion.

One of the problems with examining Scripture as I do is, we get so caught up in examining one tree that we lose complete sight of the forest. Why are we talking about God being the Originator of the laws of physics? How does that fit into this psalm? God’s control is the key—there are time when he shatters the bows of the mighty; there are times that He makes the poor rich and times when He impoverishes the rich; not only does God take man down to the grave, but He brings men up from the grave. Do you remember the kîy conjunction? God is able to do all of these things because He set into motion the laws of physics for this earth. If His power extends to the very foundations of this earth, then His authority extends to being over all things upon the earth.

The Sun goes round the Earth (Joshua 10:13)

Joshua 10:13–14 And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stopped in the midst of heaven and did not hurry to set for about a whole day. There has been no day like it before or since, when the LORD heeded the voice of a man, for the LORD fought for Israel. (ESV)

What we have hear is simply a miracle, and how it was accomplished is quite difficult to explain. Take the miracle of turning water into wine—there is no simple explanation as to how that happened. It defies all laws of organic chemistry. The same thing is true of this miracle.

However, this does not mean that the sun revolves around the earth, any more than when a person speaks of the sun rising or setting, does that indicate that this person believes the sun revolves around the earth. That is simply describing what it looks like from planet earth.

Stars are lights set in a dome over the earth (Gen. 1:16–17)

Gen. 1:16–17 And God made the two great lights--the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night--and the stars. And God set them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth,... (ESV).

The Bible simply does not say what this graphic alleges.

Dishonest Graphics and Social Issues:

God is Good with Slavery

Graphic is from Faith vs. Reason; accessed March 17, 2015.

Slavery has existed since man was able to institute it. There are two points which are extremely important to note: (1) slavery, as we think of it, was outlawed by the Bible for Israel. It is called man-stealing, and it was a both a sin and the breaking of the Mosaic Law—punishable by death in some circumstances. Ex. 21:16 Deut. 24:7 (2) slavery was a normal form of employment in many societies. The Bible highly regulated slavery, so that the masters would not abuse their slaves; and so that many slaves saw a way out from slavery, if they desired that.

Slaves, in the Bible, came from a number of different sources. Parents might sell their own children into slavery (primarily because the parents are extremely poor); a person might sell himself into slavery; when a nation was beaten at war, some or all of the remaining population could be enslaved.

We have at least two instances where particular slaves were held in very high regard. Abraham had a slave who handled all of Abraham’s financial affairs. Joseph, Abraham’s great grandson, was put into slavery, and rose to the rank of prime minister of Egypt, despite starting out as a slave.

The Bible accepts a great many customs; and God is able to work with men and with societies, despite some of the customs. This does not mean that these customs are condoned by Scripture.

The Bible is not out to change societies. Socialism and communism are great evils; but those who believe in Jesus Christ in those societies are not urged by the Bible to revolt against communism or socialism.

There are the laws of divine establishment which define the best approach to life, for believers and unbelievers. However, those who have believed in Jesus Christ are not ever urged by the Bible to institute such changes in a society by revolution.

Paul, when writing to a slave owner, urged him to free his slave Onesimus, because Onesimus had believed in Jesus Christ, and was therefore a brother. The book of Philemon.

The movements to stop slavery in the United States and in England were spearheaded by Bible- thumping believers.

So you still think homosexuality is sinful and therefore gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry? From Patheos.com, accessed March 18, 2015.

This is not exactly true. When He was asked about divorce, He explained what marriage was all about. He [Jesus] answered, "Have you not read that He Who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate." (Matt. 19:4–6; Gen. 1:27 2:24; ESV; capitalized) Here, and throughout Scripture, marriage is always presented as ideally between one man and one woman. This was the precedent set by God. There are other kinds of marriages found in the Bible, but they are never praised or condoned—only the marriage between one man and one woman. Regarding the Old Testament, Jesus said, “The Scriptures cannot be broken.”

In the Old Testament, committing a homosexual act was punishable by death, indicating that it was a pretty serious sin. The other things mentioned were not sins. Moses was teaching some basic life skills when he spoke about the different fabrics because the people before him had never sewn before; their parents were dead; and their clothes had not worn out in the desert. So, he did not indicate that the mixing of fabrics was sinful, but that it does not work to sew together materials which shrink differently. There were also clean and unclean foods, which paralleled the believer being clean or unclean at any point in his life; and the food spoken of was more likely to spread disease in a culture where there were no refrigerators. Becoming unclean was not something that was punishable by death.

Now, although we are not under the Law, this does not mean that things that used to be sinful are now okay to do. That would make very little sense.

Here, the meme author tries to cover all bases. The New Testament condemnation of homosexuality is quite clear and it occurs in several passages. One of them reads: Professing to be wise, they became foolish and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into a likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and four-footed animals, and creeping things. Because of this, God gave them up to impurity in the lusts of their hearts, their bodies to be dishonored among themselves, who changed the truth of God into the lie, and worshiped and served the created thing more than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Because of this, God gave them up to dishonorable passions, for even their females changed the natural use to that contrary to nature. And likewise, the males also forsaking the natural use of the female burned in their lust toward one another, males with males working out shamefulness, and receiving back within themselves the reward which was fitting for their error. (Rom. 1:22–27; ESV; capitalized) In pretty much every translation, this is the way that it reads.

What some homosexual scholars have done is claim that this or that word in the New Testament refers not to homosexuality, but to some other act (most of which are quite rare, although the 3 listed above are not quite as rare). I have heard some explain it as, committing a homosexual act, but it was not really right for you (not an exact quote). I work with about 60 or more Bible translations. I also have 4 or 5 Greek lexicons. For some reason, these scholars come up with information not found in any Bible translation (insofar as I know) or in the Greek lexicons. Or, they take a very secondary meaning of a Greek word from a Greek lexicon, but set aside the more common use of a word. In any case, they are quite self-serving. The scholars who have come across these revelations also want to commit homosexual acts without calling them sin.

This is not a difficult thing to grasp: all believers and unbelievers sin and have desires to sin. When we sin, we get out of fellowship. When we name this sin, we are restored to fellowship. There are some Christians who have homosexual desires—this might be their area of weakness. It would be best that they understand this is a sin, so that they can confess that sin if they commit it.

God designed men and women to have a natural attraction to one another, both physically and soulishly. There is a natural match between the man and the woman because of the makeup of their souls. This is also important for any family which might result. There are few children alive who, if they are without a mother or father, do not have a natural desire to know that missing parent. Furthermore, in all families, what a child receives from his father is much different than what he (or she) receive from his mother. We are very much a product of both parents—both physically and culturally.

Simply because something is found in the Bible does not mean that God condones that. Cain murdered his brother Abel. Is there anyone who thinks that was a good thing and that God wants all of us to practice this? Obviously, no. When describing marriage in the ideal, or as it should be, it is always one man and one woman. This is even true in the book of Proverbs where David (who had many wives) is teaching his son Solomon (who also had many wives). No one every slips up and accidentally says that polygamy is a good thing, even though several writers of Scripture were polygamists.

The rapist and his victim is simply a mistranslation—and this mistranslation is found in a few Bible translations. The conquering soldier and a female prisoner of war is still one man and one woman, but who have met under unusual circumstances.

This is not really the issue. The attempt of this graphic is to turn the Christian in favor of gay marriage. However, no props to their dishonesty about the types of marriages defined by the Bible or about their self-serving discoveries of the Greek language.

Isn’t that special? They do exactly what they claim Christians do—they become judgmental and Christo-phobic.

However, let me clear up a few things. Men are set up as leaders or those with authority in Scripture. This does not mean that every man has authority over every single woman. The authority of the man of the woman is specific in Scripture, being applied to marriage and to Bible teaching (a woman cannot teach men the Bible from the pulpit). I realize that this counts as sexist and chauvinistic among the pro-gay-marriage crowd, but I have found them to be rather intolerant and judgmental anyway.

Regarding the concept of judging. The person who believes in Jesus Christ is allowed to determine what is sinful and what is not. That is not being judgmental. What is judgmental is, you assign a sin to someone else which they may or may not commit. If you run into a male and they speak with a lisp or have exaggerated hand gestures, it is judgmental (and a sin) to think that they commit homosexual acts. However, it is not judgmental to think that homosexual acts are wrong.

Regarding xenophobia—I do not see how an intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries figures into this discussion. Perhaps the meme writer is judging that if someone believe homosexual acts to be sinful that they must dislike other nationalities as well? That strikes me as being rather judgmental.

And, as a biological aside, cultures do not advance very far without a large number of heterosexuals in the group.

Graphics which are simply false:

Most Christians don’t know this but,...

Graphic is from Nicami1's Photobucket (I also saw this graphic at Faith vs. Reason.

Anyone could have determined this to be a false statement by a simple google search.

The Oldest Secular Accounts & Historical Evidence on the Existance of Jesus of Nazareth from Agape Bible Study; accessed March 17, 2015.

1.     Cornelius Tacitus (AD55-120) Roman historian: Most acclaimed works are the Annals and the Histories. The Annals cover the period from Augustus Caesar's death in AD14 to the death of the Emperor Nero in AD68, while the Histories begin after Nero's death and proceed to the reign of Domitian in AD96. In the Annals, Tacitus alludes to the death of Christ and to the existence of Christians at Rome. See Annals XV,44: But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also." (The misspelling of Christ as "Christus" was a common error made by pagan writers). It is interesting that Pilate is not mentioned in any other pagan document which has survived. It is an irony of history that the only surviving reference to him in a pagan document mentions him because of the sentence of death he passed on Jesus the Messiah.

2.     Suetonius: Roman historian and court official during the reign of the Emperor Hadrian. Suetonius wrote in his Life of Claudius: "As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome." (Life of Claudius 25.4). Chrestus is a misspelling of Christus; the spelling probably assumes that the spelling of Jesus' title "Christos" was the same as ate ChiRho symbol which was also a literary device which indicated a quote worthy of note = the 'chrestus" symbol. Claudius' expulsion of the Christians form Rome is mentioned in Acts 18:2. This event took place in 49AD. In his work Lives of the Caesars, Suetonius also wrote: "Punishment by Nero was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition." Assuming Jesus was crucified in the early thirties, Suetonius places Christians in the Roman capital less than 20 years later and he reports that they were suffering for their faith and dying for their conviction that Jesus had really lived, died and that He had risen from the dead!

3.     Pliny the Younger: Roman governor in Bithynia AD112 wrote to Emperor Trajan to seek advice as to how to treat the Christians. He recounts that he had been killing Christian men, women, and children. He is concerned that so many have chosen death over simply bowing down to a statue of the emperor or being made to "curse Christ, which a genuine Christian cannot be induced to do." (Epistles X, 96)

4.     Tallus: Tallus was a secular historian who (circa AD52) wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean from the Trojan War to his own time. The document no longer exists but it was quoted by other writers like the Christian, Julius Africanus, who wrote around AD221. He quotes Tallus' comments about the darkness that enveloped the land during the late afaternoon hours when Jesus died on the cross. Julius wrote: Tallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away this darkness as an eclipse of the sun unreasonably, as it seems to me (unreasonably of course, because a solar eclipse could not take place at the time of the full moon, and it was at the season of the Paschal full moon that Christ died." Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18.1 The importance of Tallus' comments is that the reference shows that the Gospel account of the darkness that fell across the earth during Christ's crucifixion was well known and required a naturalistic explanation from non-Christians.

5.     Phlegon: Julius Africanus also quoted another secular scholar whose works are now lost. Phlegon wrote a history called Chronicles. Phlegon also comments on the darkness at the time of Christ's crucifixion: "During the time of Tiberius Caesar an eclipse of the sun occurred during the full moon." Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18.1

(The 3rd century Christian apologist Origen also references Phlegon's record of this event in his work Celsum, 2.14,33,59 as does the 6th century writer Philopon (De.opif.mund. II, 21.

6.     Mara Bar-Serapion: Syrian stoic philosopher who wrote a letter from prison to his son circa 70AD. He compares Jesus to the philosophers Socrates and Pythagoras.

7.     Josephus ben Mattathias (also known as Flavius Josephus): 37-100AD, Jewish priest, general and historian. He wrote two great works of Jewish history: The Jewish War, written in the early 70's and Jewish Antiquities, which was finished about AD94. In his work, Jewish Antiquities, there is a passage that has created heated debate among scholars for many decades: "Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this day." Antiquities, XVIII, 33

8.     Lucian of Samosate: Greek satirist later half of 2nd century spoke scornfully of Christ and the Christians but never argued that Jesus never existed. "The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day, the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account..." The Death of Peregrine, 11-13

9.     The Babylonian Talmud: "It has been taught: On the eve of Passover they hanged Yeshu. And an announcer went out, in front of him, for 40 days (saying): 'He is going to be stoned, because he practiced sorcery and enticed and led Israel astray. Anyone who knows anything in his favor, let him come and plead in his behalf.' But, not having found anything in his favor, they hanged him on the eve of Passover." Sanhedrin 43a; df.t.Sanh. 10:11; y. Sanh. 7:12; Tg. Esther 7:9 (Another version of this text reads: "Yeshu the Nazarene." Yeshu or Yehoshua is Hebrew (or Aramaic) for Jesus in English this name is also translated "Joshua." The Old Testament hero bore the same name as Jesus the Messiah. "Hanged" is another way of referring to a crucifixion; see Luke 23:39 and Galatians 3:13

“No serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non-historicity of Jesus.” Otto Betz

Historian Will Durant reviewed the historicity of Jesus in his book Jesus and Caesar, a history of Roman civilization and of Christianity from their beginnings to 325 A.D. MJF Books 1971. Durant concluded: "..That a few simple men should in one generation have invented so powerful and appealing a personality, so lofty an ethic and so inspiring a vision of human brotherhood, would be a miracle for more incredible than any recorded in the Gospels. After two centuries of Higher Criticism the outline of the life, character, and teaching of Christ, remain reasonably clear, and constitute the most fascinating feature in the history of Western Man". (p.557)

See also      http://www.nelsonprice.com/early-secular-writings-regarding-Christ/

and              http://y-jesus.com/is-there-any-evidence-from-secular-sources-that-jesus-even-existed/

Shrimp Wrapped in Bacon

Sorry, Christians, your God forbids it. That’s just more for the rest of us. What? You thought Leviticus only talked about gays?

There are dietary restrictions in the Mosaic Law; and related to this is, some foods are called clean and others are called unclean. These dietary restrictions are given to the Jews in particular during the Age of Israel; and these dietary restrictions are removed for Christians in the Church Age.

Clean and unclean in the Mosaic Law is a combination of dietary restrictions in order to perpetuate the Jewish race (particularly in a time where there was no refrigeration) and spiritual illustration. Just as there are clear standards of morality—things which are right and wrong—there were limitations on the foods that could be eaten. Some were considered clean and others unclean.

Anti-Bible types portray this to be on the same level as homosexuality. They are both mentioned in the book of Leviticus; they are both forbidden—therefore, the Christian today must accept homosexuality or he must accept a life without shrimp wrapped in bacon.

Homosexuality is portrayed clearly as a sin in the Old and New Testaments. See the Doctrine of Homosexuality (HTML) (PDF) (WPD). In the Old Testament, those who committed a homosexual act were put to death. There is no similar requirement in the New Testament because the New Testament does not teach a law for a nation. However, homosexuality is clearly portrayed in the New Testament as sinful (Rom. 1:21–32—see the Doctrine of Homosexuality for more details).

On the other hand, clean and unclean foods are not portrayed as sinful in the same way. No one ate pork-pulled sandwich, and then faced execution.

When it comes to the New Testament, these restrictions have been removed. Col. 2:16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. (ESV). Rom. 14:3 The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. 1Tim. 4:1–5 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer. (ESV) Heb. 9:6–14 These preparations [or observations of Temple worship] having thus been made, the priests go regularly into the first section, performing their ritual duties, but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people. By this the Holy Spirit indicates that the way into the holy places is not yet opened as long as the first section is still standing (which is symbolic for the present age). According to this arrangement, gifts and sacrifices are offered that cannot perfect the conscience of the worshiper, but deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation. But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. What was done in the Old Testament looks forward to the coming of Jesus Christ. Many of these things were set aside after Jesus came and died for our sins. The sacrifice of a lamb was representative; it looked forward to the coming sacrifice of the Lamb of God. So, once Jesus died for our sins, there is no need to return to the types of the Old Testament.

Much of the book of Hebrews explains to Jewish believers that the Mosaic traditions have been set aside, as they were types of the Lord who would come.

The people who put out these graphics to begin with are not Biblical scholars; or, if they know a great deal about the Bible, then they present it dishonestly. The New Testament verses above are clear in pretty much any translation.