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.
Actually, you're wrong. Malakoi meaning soft referred to moral character, not being effeminate. And Arsenokoites did not originally refer to same-sex behavior. In fact, in all classical usage after Paul coined the term, it's never even used in sexual vice lists. It was also translated as masturbators for some time. It was a linguistic corruption that that word was changed to mean what it means in modern day Bibles. And Arsenokoites cannot refer to lesbians, which means homosexuality itself is not the topic ever being addressed.
No, not wrong, because I Cor 6:9-10 corresponds with Romans 1:27. There isn't anyway of getting around that unless it is just ignored, which seems to be the case.
Romans 1:27
New International Version (NIV)
27 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.
Phil Robertson was just pointing out the scripture in his redneck way. He was also aware he was speaking to a men's magazine, GQ, and spoke on the subject man to man. That is why I didn't find his wording vile. It was his opinion that he was not attracted to male parts of the body. He can say that. Most straight men and women were thinking it anyway.
No, not wrong, because I Cor 6:9-10 corresponds with Romans 1:27. There isn't anyway of getting around that unless it is just ignored, which seems to be the case.
No it doesn't correspond with Romans 1:27, which you conveniently removed from its entire context. Even Saint Augustine directly stated Romans 1 is condemning heterosexuals. By your own logic, Romans 2 means YOU are gay.
You do not know what you're talking about. Stop pretending to understand the Bible. It wasn't written in English.
Actually, you're wrong. Malakoi meaning soft referred to moral character, not being effeminate. And Arsenokoites did not originally refer to same-sex behavior. In fact, in all classical usage after Paul coined the term, it's never even used in sexual vice lists. It was also translated as masturbators for some time. It was a linguistic corruption that that word was changed to mean what it means in modern day Bibles. And Arsenokoites cannot refer to lesbians, which means homosexuality itself is not the topic ever being addressed.
No, not wrong, because I Cor 6:9-10 corresponds with Romans 1:27. There isn't any way of getting around that unless it is just ignored, which seems to be the case.
The Interlinear terms it as effeminate. And Thayer's says:
μαλακός, μαλακή, μαλακον, soft; soft to the touch: ἱμάτια, Matthew 11:8 R G L brackets; Luke 7:25 (ἱματίων πολυτελῶν καί μαλακων, Artemidorus Daldianus, oneir. 1, 78; ἐσθής, Homer, Odyssey 23, 290; Artemidorus Daldianus, oneir. 2, 3; χιτών, Homer, Iliad 2, 42); and simply τά μαλακά, soft raiment (see λευκός, 1): Matthew 11:8 T Tr WH. Like the Latinmollis, metaphorically, and in a bad sense: effeminate, of a catamite, a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness, 1 Corinthians 6:9 (Dionysius Halicarnassus, Antiquities 7, 2 under the end; ((Diogenes Laërtius 7, 173 at the end)).
Catamite: a boy kept by a pederast. Greek mythological character. Ganymede was an attractive Trojan boy who was abducted to Olympus to become the cupbearer of Zeus and later his homosexual lover.
Romans 1:27
New International Version (NIV)
27 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.
Phil Robertson was just pointing out the scripture in his redneck way. He was also aware he was speaking to a men's magazine, GQ, and spoke on the subject man to man. That is why I didn't find his wording vile. It was his opinion that he was not attracted to male parts of the body. He can say that. Most straight men and women were thinking it anyway.
No it doesn't correspond with Romans 1:27, which you conveniently removed from its entire context. Even Saint Augustine directly stated Romans 1 is condemning heterosexuals. By your own logic, Romans 2 means YOU are gay.
You do not know what you're talking about. Stop pretending to understand the Bible. It wasn't written in English.
So, Romans 1:27 is condemning heterosexuals? Interesting as reading it, it doesn't say that.
Romans 1:27
New International Version (NIV)
27 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.
It's not the most pressing moral question of our times. Homosexuality is. Sometimes the Bible is going to rub you the wrong way. That's the nature of addressing sin. If we are committed to the authority of the Bible, we are going to confirm it's teaching.
The passage that Phil quoted is from I Corinthians 6:9-10. Here it is in the New International Version, which is the most popular version among evangelicals and conservative Christians:
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
New International Version (NIV)
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
Footnotes:
1 Corinthians 6:9 The words men who have sex with men translate two Greek words that refer to the passive and active participants in homosexual acts
Effeminate - "malakoi," which means "soft" in Greek came to mean "effeminate," which is how the King James Version of the Bible translates it. It would refer to a boy in a relationship with an older man. Mankind - "arsenokotai", means "male sex." It refers to the other half in the man-boy relationship, common in Greece at the time, the older male having sex with the "soft one."
I'd never heard of it (I'm Australian), so I downloaded an episode and tried to watch it. I couldn't watch all of it it was so mind-numbingly bad.
Different strokes for different folks I guess. I suppose if you had an IQ below 80 it might be entertaining.
Everyone has their heros. The American television viewer has always been suckers for those that project an image.
Many televsion viewers believe characters protrayed by actors are the actors "real life" persona. The genius in the DD crew is that they knew which "actions" that would make them iconic forto the American televison viewers.
Of couse the production team or the family's handelers chose to show the family in their best light. Of course when asked of "sin"...their patriarch wasn't going to speak on his or that of his family, he was going to give well heeled answers that he believed the public wanted...or were used too hearing.
If someone askes me of sin, I would have refected on my shortcomings and not give a list of others.
No, not wrong, because I Cor 6:9-10 corresponds with Romans 1:27. There isn't anyway of getting around that unless it is just ignored, which seems to be the case.
Romans 1:27
New International Version (NIV)
27 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.
Phil Robertson was just pointing out the scripture in his redneck way. He was also aware he was speaking to a men's magazine, GQ, and spoke on the subject man to man. That is why I didn't find his wording vile. It was his opinion that he was not attracted to male parts of the body. He can say that. Most straight men and women were thinking it anyway.
Romans 1 wasn't about homosexuals either. Try reading the verses in their original context.
Paul purportedly wrote that letter from Corinth. He was writing for the people of his time who would understand the connection to all the local Corinthian temples dedicated to pagan fertility gods when he wrote of people turning away from his God. In these temples, sacred temple prostitutes engaged in ritual vaginal and anal sex to worship pagan fertility gods and goddesses. The men had vaginal sex with the women, then the women had anal sex with the men, and likewise, the men had anal sex with men - while worshiping idolatrous statues and figures in the of form of birds, snakes etc.
This has nothing to do with homosexuals. To use it to condemn 21st century gay and lesbian people is to dishonestly twist it out of it's original context.
Yes, you are wrong. Romans 1 wasn't about homosexuals either. Try reading the verses in context.
Paul purportedly wrote that letter from Corinth. He was writing for the people of his time who would understand the connection to all the local Corinthian temples dedicated to pagan fertility gods when he wrote of people turning away from his God. In these temples, temple prostitutes engaged in ritual vaginal and anal sex to worship pagan fertility gods and goddesses. The men had vaginal sex with the women, then the women had anal sex with the men, and likewise, the men had anal sex with men - while worshiping idolatrous statues and figures in the of form of birds, snakes etc.
This has nothing to do with homosexuals. To use it to condemn 21st century gay and lesbian people is to dishonestly twist it out of it's original context.
"modern homosexuality.
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.
