Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Where on earth do you get "men defiling themselves with other men"? There is no specific gender mentioned here at all. Are you making this stuff up as you go? What you are (conveniently) interpreting is not what either the KJV or the original manuscript of scripture states. Even if they did (which they don't) you could just as well include heterosexuals among those who defile one another. It refers to 'them' ...NOT men. The key word would be 'defile' ...regardless of which gender is doing the defiling. If anything (and NO ONE knows what this text is referencing!) it would be those folks who 'defile' themselves with shrine temple prostitutes (both male and female) and Pagan idolatry sex rituals. Gay people (whatever intimacy they might get up to when in private) would not be seen as 'defiling' one another. Even if they were (which they are not) Paul would not have known what people do in private. I don't know how many times this needs to be said before some people catch on. The things that Paul refers to are 'early Christian Church related' and were either visible to the onlooker or within earshot of the listener. And, you can bet your bottom dollar that these things related to worship practices in some way ...worship practices that involved other than the ONE true God!
Where were these things occurring in this particular instance? In the growing Ephesian Church, that's where. It would appear that a major problem in the Ephesian Church was a heresy that combined the false doctrines of Gnosticism, decadent Judaism and false asceticism ...all of which probably require a discussion thread of their own.
I've already given 'my side' of the argument ...repeatedly, in fact. It's YOU that is leveling the charge against gay people. And, you're claiming to have the backing of your God ...the Bible. The onus is on you to prove your claims. I remain as ever ...there is no reference to homosexuality in the Bible other than in regard to Pagan worship practices and, perhaps, rape.
<sigh> I'm more and more sounding like a worn out record.
Yeah, I know ...slavery in Bible times wasn't really slavery.
As for my picking and choosing verses, I never quoted a verse. All I said was that Paul preferred a more kind and gentler form of slavery which implies, of course, that slave owners generally mistreated their slaves.
I have never attempted to change what that text says. It states what you say. HOWEVER, when placed in its proper context it DOES refer to the acts affiliated with Pagan idolatry.
I really DO feel the need to ask this. Are there those among us who have the verses 18-25 missing from their Bibles? Does your version of Romans 1 begin at verses 26-27? Well, I would suggest that you get a new Bible (I'm joshing, of course) or start your reading of Romans 1 AT THE BEGINNING! This should then open up a whole new world of understanding for you as to what the scripture is talking about!
Leviticus offers no problem at all for the gay person. Actually, it's rather embarrassing that Leviticus is still used by some to justify 'gay-hatred' in the year 2016 where those of us who know better still have to fend off this nonsense.
I usually prefer not to do this but it's much easier to present a very short (8 minutes-plus) video that explains the Leviticus texts quite adequately. Why this video has become somewhat important for me is because I presented it on another forum several years ago and had a Jewish scholar authenticate its accuracy. Since then another couple of Jewish scholars have confirmed that it's pretty much 'spot on'.
Here are the comments both from me and from the Jewish scholar from the other Christian forum. I don't know if I'm allowed to name names or give the location of the other forum but will do so if asked. I can even supply the date and the page where this appears:
Me to *********: Since you appear to be quite knowledgeable of the Torah, I wonder if you would spend 8:28 of your time and view the below video entitled The Truth About Leviticus & Homosexuality ...?
Since I'm a defender on this forum of those that appear to be 'born' homosexual but are nevertheless condemned by many present-day Christians, it's essential to me that I speak as accurately as I'm able whenever I debate the 'clobber' passages of Leviticus (and other allegedly anti-gay scriptures) with others.
Would you say that the 'explanations' of the Leviticus 'clobber' passages as given in the video to be at least feasible based on what you know?
*********: I watched the video, and it's quite good. A trifle oversimplified when it comes to discussing other religions of the Bronze Age -- they weren't ALL obsessed with fertility rites and so on, and there were other contexts for "gay sex" as well, e.g. homosexual anal rape as a formal humiliation in war or feud -- but the analysis of the language of the Hebrew Bible is right on the money.
As I said, the Bible does not seem to be "aware," so to speak, of homosexuality as a sexual orientation; the reason the ACT is the point of reference is that it never occurred to the writers that anyone would do this because they WANTED to, or that one could be attracted to the same sex and want to live in a gay relationship.
Whatever. The fact is, we know things now that we didn't then, and the world is different. How many rules can one find in the Hebrew Bible that are no longer kept, or even understood in today's world? I eat shellfish, and often; I eat pork, I wear mixed fabrics, and when I had a garden I planted different crops together because they enriched the soil and kept the pests off each other. Anybody wearing a cotton/polyester shirt with clams or shrimp on his breath who points to these so-called "Clobber Passages" is either (a) ignorant or (b) a flaming hypocrite. I've got no patience for people who want to tell me that they "chose" to be straight and that gays can "choose" to change. That's nonsense.
Proof? Okay. CHOOSE TO BE GAY. Right now. You don't have to DO anything about it, mind; just CHOOSE to feel attracted to the other sex.
Can't be done.
My converting rabbi used to say, "If you see something in Torah that you KNOW to be wrong, there are two and only two alternatives. Either you are not reading the Torah properly -- or the Torah is wrong."
Notice that the third alternative, the one most commonly chosen by fundamentalists -- that is, "Discard your own rationality and moral sense in favor of religious dogmatism dictated by a literal reading" -- is not available to us. We are NOT allowed to stop thinking and just do as we're told. Not EVER. The Bible doesn't interpret itself, and even if it did, OUR MINDS STILL WORK. THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO.
As I've said elsewhere; a literal reading disfigures and denigrates the Bible. In the mouths of fundamentalists, it does that inadvertently; they make the book look stupid and wrong by using it to support stupid and wrong views. Atheists use literal readings to make the book look stupid and wrong too, only they do it on purpose: "Look at all these horrible massacres!" as if they really happened and must have been approved by God because they're so presented, never mind that Moses sometimes defied God's orders and Abraham even argued with him. These things aren't as simple as BOTH sides try to portray them. The Bible isn't a comic book; it's ancient literature, and it's DIFFERENT.
Either way: The meaning of Scripture doesn't lie on the surface, and we're still obligated to use our brains and remember that these documents are thousands of years old. It's not rational to dismiss them entirely, but it's even less rational to follow them without engaging a few brain cells -- not to mention some human compassion and empathy -- of our own.
Romulus, it's way too early for me to be able to rep you again, but this is a quite fine post. And I learned something from the video you linked. For all the years I have studied Scripture I never realized how Leviticus 18:21-22 are so tied together with the worship of Molech. I was aware of prohibitions against temple prostitution, but Scripturally it never clicked with me that Molech was (a) about child sacrifice, and (b) required conjoining with a male temple prostitute to revive fertility. Now it all comes together in a much better picture.
Romulus, it's way too early for me to be able to rep you again, but this is a quite fine post. And I learned something from the video you linked. For all the years I have studied Scripture I never realized how Leviticus 18:21-22 are so tied together with the worship of Molech. I was aware of prohibitions against temple prostitution, but Scripturally it never clicked with me that Molech was (a) about child sacrifice, and (b) required conjoining with a male temple prostitute to revive fertility. Now it all comes together in a much better picture.
Thanks for your many good posts.
Thank you very much. I realize that a lot of these YouTube clips are often suspect and agenda driven while others can be downright fabrications. And so, with regard to the Leviticus clip, I needed to know if it was the genuine article or not. Therefore, I enlisted the knowledge of a respected practicing Jew and Jewish scholar who often appeared on the previous forum I mentioned. Actually, for what it's worth, if it isn't against this forum's rules, the link to my conversation with this Jewish person on that particular site is here under the thread title:
Romulus, it's way too early for me to be able to rep you again, but this is a quite fine post. And I learned something from the video you linked. For all the years I have studied Scripture I never realized how Leviticus 18:21-22 are so tied together with the worship of Molech. I was aware of prohibitions against temple prostitution, but Scripturally it never clicked with me that Molech was (a) about child sacrifice, and (b) required conjoining with a male temple prostitute to revive fertility. Now it all comes together in a much better picture.
Thanks for your many good posts.
DITTO! This is why I stick around, I continue to learn -- even when I think I know it all..
Where on earth do you get "men defiling themselves with other men"? There is no specific gender mentioned here at all. Are you making this stuff up as you go?
How can you say there is no gender mentioned?
" their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error."
The gay translation, which you keep quoting, is a perversion of the truth.
Romulus, it's way too early for me to be able to rep you again, but this is a quite fine post. And I learned something from the video you linked. For all the years I have studied Scripture I never realized how Leviticus 18:21-22 are so tied together with the worship of Molech. I was aware of prohibitions against temple prostitution, but Scripturally it never clicked with me that Molech was (a) about child sacrifice, and (b) required conjoining with a male temple prostitute to revive fertility. Now it all comes together in a much better picture.
Thanks for your many good posts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber
How can you say there is no gender mentioned?
" their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error."
The gay translation, which you keep quoting, is a perversion of the truth.
and "greek" for shameful acts is what? What exactly does SHAMEFUL acts mean? gambling? drinking?
Romulus, it's way too early for me to be able to rep you again, but this is a quite fine post. And I learned something from the video you linked. For all the years I have studied Scripture I never realized how Leviticus 18:21-22 are so tied together with the worship of Molech. I was aware of prohibitions against temple prostitution, but Scripturally it never clicked with me that Molech was (a) about child sacrifice, and (b) required conjoining with a male temple prostitute to revive fertility. Now it all comes together in a much better picture.
[color="navy"]Where on earth do you get "men defiling themselves with other men"? There is no specific gender mentioned here at all. Are you making this stuff up as you go? What you are (conveniently) interpreting is not what either the KJV or the original manuscript of scripture states. Even if they did (which they don't) you could just as well include heterosexuals among those who defile one another. It refers to 'them' ...NOT men.
Your argument hinges on the translation of one word, "arsenokoitai". And "arseno" means male. The verse clearly is talking about a sinful act between two men.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV
The key word would be 'defile' ...regardless of which gender is doing the defiling. If anything (and NO ONE knows what this text is referencing!) it would be those folks who 'defile' themselves with shrine temple prostitutes (both male and female) and Pagan idolatry sex rituals. Gay people (whatever intimacy they might get up to when in private) would not be seen as 'defiling' one another. Even if they were (which they are not) Paul would not have known what people do in private. I don't know how many times this needs to be said before some people catch on. The things that Paul refers to are 'early Christian Church related' and were either visible to the onlooker or within earshot of the listener. And, you can bet your bottom dollar that these things related to worship practices in some way ...worship practices that involved other than the ONE true God!
Yet the verse in 1 Timothy says absolutely nothing about temple prostitutes. Unless you have that clear distinction, there is no argument here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV
I've already given 'my side' of the argument ...repeatedly, in fact. It's YOU that is leveling the charge against gay people. And, you're claiming to have the backing of your God ...the Bible. The onus is on you to prove your claims. I remain as ever ...there is no reference to homosexuality in the Bible other than in regard to Pagan worship practices and, perhaps, rape.
<sigh> I'm more and more sounding like a worn out record.
I don't have to prove anything. The Bible is clear as day. Verses referring to same sex relations are seen throughout the Bible in the context of sexual immorality and sin. The fact that you can't get away from is that there is not a single verse in the Bible that speaks positively of homosexuality. If God designed it as just another blessed orientation, the Bible would be more ambigiously referring to marriage as unions between your mate, not specifically man and wife like Jesus said in Matthew 19:4.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV
Yeah, I know ...slavery in Bible times wasn't really slavery.
As for my picking and choosing verses, I never quoted a verse. All I said was that Paul preferred a more kind and gentler form of slavery which implies, of course, that slave owners generally mistreated their slaves.
The Bible also tends us to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s. I bring up this verse because it highlights that Jesus and later Paul's mission was never to incite a revolution. That's what the people were asking Jesus and He diffused it by saying to just obey your government and laws. Put your focus on getting your heart right with God. Slavery was a highly ingrained institution in the culture. IT would require a complete overall of the economic structure, hence a revolution and civil war to uproot it. The bigger mission is the salvation of people's heart so the Bible told them how to operate best in such a society rather than overturn it. Otherwise, Jesus would have told them to fight against Caesar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV
I have never attempted to change what that text says. It states what you say. HOWEVER, when placed in its proper context it DOES refer to the acts affiliated with Pagan idolatry.
I really DO feel the need to ask this. Are there those among us who have the verses 18-25 missing from their Bibles? Does your version of Romans 1 begin at verses 26-27? Well, I would suggest that you get a new Bible (I'm joshing, of course) or start your reading of Romans 1 AT THE BEGINNING! This should then open up a whole new world of understanding for you as to what the scripture is talking about!
Nope, the complete chapter in my verse describes their many sins. Idoltry was one of them. Homosexuality was another. Evil, greed and depravity are others. Are you going to tell me that Paul only means evil and greed within pagan worship? You desperately want to tie everything to the pagan worship and it just doesn't work. The verse clearly says same sex relations are unnatural.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV
Leviticus offers no problem at all for the gay person. Actually, it's rather embarrassing that Leviticus is still used by some to justify 'gay-hatred' in the year 2016 where those of us who know better still have to fend off this nonsense.
I usually prefer not to do this but it's much easier to present a very short (8 minutes-plus) video that explains the Leviticus texts quite adequately. Why this video has become somewhat important for me is because I presented it on another forum several years ago and had a Jewish scholar authenticate its accuracy. Since then another couple of Jewish scholars have confirmed that it's pretty much 'spot on'.
Here are the comments both from me and from the Jewish scholar from the other Christian forum. I don't know if I'm allowed to name names or give the location of the other forum but will do so if asked. I can even supply the date and the page where this appears:
Me to *********: Since you appear to be quite knowledgeable of the Torah, I wonder if you would spend 8:28 of your time and view the below video entitled The Truth About Leviticus & Homosexuality ...?
Since I'm a defender on this forum of those that appear to be 'born' homosexual but are nevertheless condemned by many present-day Christians, it's essential to me that I speak as accurately as I'm able whenever I debate the 'clobber' passages of Leviticus (and other allegedly anti-gay scriptures) with others.
Would you say that the 'explanations' of the Leviticus 'clobber' passages as given in the video to be at least feasible based on what you know?
[color="DarkRed"]*********: I watched the video, and it's quite good. A trifle oversimplified when it comes to discussing other religions of the Bronze Age -- they weren't ALL obsessed with fertility rites and so on, and there were other contexts for "gay sex" as well, e.g. homosexual anal rape as a formal humiliation in war or feud -- but the analysis of the language of the Hebrew Bible is right on the money
I watched the video and doesn't prove anything. The crutch of the argument is that Leviticus 18:21 talks about idol worship and then it is followed by a verse condemning homosexuality. How is that proof that verse 22 only refers to practices in idol worship? Each verse in that chapter is self contained referring to a specific sin act. So you have zero proof that verse 21 and 22 are tied together. If that's the case then the conclusion is that incest and bestiality outside of worship to Molek is fine and dandy.
Your argument hinges on the translation of one word, "arsenokoitai". And "arseno" means male. The verse clearly is talking about a sinful act between two men.
Yet the verse in 1 Timothy says absolutely nothing about temple prostitutes. Unless you have that clear distinction, there is no argument here.
I don't have to prove anything. The Bible is clear as day. Verses referring to same sex relations are seen throughout the Bible in the context of sexual immorality and sin. The fact that you can't get away from is that there is not a single verse in the Bible that speaks positively of homosexuality. If God designed it as just another blessed orientation, the Bible would be more ambigiously referring to marriage as unions between your mate, not specifically man and wife like Jesus said in Matthew 19:4.
The Bible also tends us to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s. I bring up this verse because it highlights that Jesus and later Paul's mission was never to incite a revolution. That's what the people were asking Jesus and He diffused it by saying to just obey your government and laws. Put your focus on getting your heart right with God. Slavery was a highly ingrained institution in the culture. IT would require a complete overall of the economic structure, hence a revolution and civil war to uproot it. The bigger mission is the salvation of people's heart so the Bible told them how to operate best in such a society rather than overturn it. Otherwise, Jesus would have told them to fight against Caesar.
Nope, the complete chapter in my verse describes their many sins. Idoltry was one of them. Homosexuality was another. Evil, greed and depravity are others. Are you going to tell me that Paul only means evil and greed within pagan worship? You desperately want to tie everything to the pagan worship and it just doesn't work. The verse clearly says same sex relations are unnatural.
I watched the video and doesn't prove anything. The crutch of the argument is that Leviticus 18:21 talks about idol worship and then it is followed by a verse condemning homosexuality. How is that proof that verse 22 only refers to practices in idol worship? Each verse in that chapter is self contained referring to a specific sin act. So you have zero proof that verse 21 and 22 are tied together. If that's the case then the conclusion is that incest and bestiality outside of worship to Molek is fine and dandy.
.
That statement alone speaks VOLUMES about the poster.
That statement alone speaks VOLUMES about the poster.
A pointless post. Guess that speaks volumes about the poster.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
