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.
These are translations of the bible. It is the goal of the translator to reproduce the text to be understood by the reader as closely as posible. So, the word of God isn't changing just how it is presented to the reader. If I wrote my words in brail would it make them any less my word? No.
The problem being that the translators are sometimes allowing their own ideas and thoughts to influence them while translating. In fact, in various instances, the meanings of the text were altered. Case in point....the original texts do not contain the word "homosexual". It wasn't coined until the 1800s and then when those who created the NIV completed their translation, you suddenly find the word in the Bible. In 1 Corinthians 6, they used it when translating the words "arsenokoitai" and "malakos", in which there is confusion as to the actual intended meanings. Look at this site: Translations
In certain translations, some say "malakos" meant "effeminate" while others say it meant "male prostitute"....neither of which clearly indicates homosexuals. Some say "arsenokoitai" means "pervert", with even the German version of the Jerusalem Bible saying it means "child molesters"! Interesting how the English version of the Jerusalem Bible refers to it as simply "sodomites". How could there be such a huge variance in the meaning of a word between two versions of the same Bible?
I briefly went to Bangkok, Thailand one time when I was single. One of the guys I worked with explained to me that if I wanted to pick up some girls there was a very simple rule to follow:
If it was one of the most beautiful women you've ever seen in your life and she was interested in you, chances were that it was a guy.
Yes! This is true! Asian men can be very androgenous looking. Shoulders are not that broad; not too tall; hands and feet are not too big; they often have small features; often their voices aren't too deep. OK, so what if they get lucky? They land a guy, then what? Do they say OK, oral only?
These are translations of the bible. It is the goal of the translator to reproduce the text to be understood by the reader as closely as posible. So, the word of God isn't changing just how it is presented to the reader. If I wrote my words in brail would it make them any less my word? No.
The point is, someone said the WORD OF GOD doesn't change. Well, it seems to change rather frequently, depending on the culture and the language.
Listen, anyone who strictly adheres to a literal translation is doomed for trouble. Because literalism leads to contradiction. And don't try to weasel out of it. IT DOES. Plain and simple. There are dozens of examples of literal self-contradictions in the Bible.
The Bible is an inspired piece of literature. It has tremendous truths. But to degrade it by taking it literally is an abomination itself. Literalism reduces deep truths to mere rules, regulations and so-called "facts." Literalism ignores the deeper meanings of the stories. Literalism ignores the Truth in favor of a knowing by the mind. But the mind cannot know deep truths. This is taught by every esoteric tradition in history. Only the spirit knows truth, not the mind.
The spirit does not operate on the level of words. It does not operate on the level of the literal.
Last edited by Astron1000; 11-19-2008 at 10:53 PM..
Well, I can tell right off the bat, you don't know anything about transexuality or gender dysmorphia. You should read about it. it's an interesting subject and you might actually learn something.
It's quite obvious you haven't read the bible.
I would refrain from coming up with anymore ideas until you get a solid grasp of the passages before trying to twist them for your pleasure.
Also, the NT teaches that marriage is between man and a woman.
Anything else is an abomination, and those will NOT inherit the Kingdom of God.
Caso cerrado.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aquila
So? It was an abomination. Do you eat pork? Do you know anyone who does? If so, do you preach to yourself and them about the abominable act that is being committed?
I'm sure Jesus meant two people of the same sex can get married.
Jews did not believe in homosexuality, and it would be nothing new for the Christians to believe the same thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by denverian
Stricly your opinion - nothing more. My church thinks your church follows beliefs contrary to the Bible. The only solution is to live and let live - and for your side to stop legislating your personal morality.
Sorry. I presumed you were still online when we were posting back and forth.
Fine, do you know ANY woman who wears jeans and button up shirts? If so, have you preached to them about the abominable thing they are doing?
And....? What does that have to do with this discussion? We're not talking about the NT now, are we? We're discussing that verse in Deuteronomy which clearly states it is an abomination for a woman to wear men's clothes and vice versa. Yet it's funny how Christians today will hurl the OT at us and state that homosexuality is an abomination. The church picks and chooses the verses to hurl around when it suits them the most. If someone else points out a verse against one of the practices of MANY believers (ie. wearing clothes meant for the opposite sex), they suddenly dismiss that verse as "no longer relevant".
The point I'm making here is that the church doesn't have a leg to stand on with respect to breaking out the OT and using its laws against homosexuals. In so doing, you're only pointing 3 of your fingers right back at yourself. So from here on out, if the church wants to use the Bible to bash gays and lesbians, it needs to stick with using NT verses only.....and those are quite a bit more vague.
No, actually I have. But you're wanting to argue semantics. So I admit...I made a mistake...I shouldn't have used the word "abomination". Of course, you being a fundamentalist Christian probably wouldn't forgive me for making such a dire mistake as that. After all, you're a saint and I'm only human.
The point was that pork was considered off-limits....unclean. And there are indeed acts of consuming certain animals listed in Leviticus which, if eaten, are referred to as abominations. Do I need to mention those? Because I can, you know. And I'm wondering if you have consumed any of them. Leviticus 11:11 states that even touching the carcass of some of those animals is considered an abomination.
Quote:
Originally Posted by renriq02
I would refrain from coming up with anymore ideas until you get a solid grasp of the passages before trying to twist them for your pleasure.
Well, it might behoove YOU to actually THINK logically before making your posts. I mean, come on....I'm guessing you think of yourself as a smart person and yet you're trying to dodge the whole "women/men wearing clothes of the opposite sex" abomination so CLEARLY referenced in this thread. Why don't you respond to that, I wonder? Probably because you can't....because you know it would make you a hypocrite because you probably don't go around telling women who wear jeans that they are committing an abomination.
So it's like this.....Christians simply have NO LEG to stand on if they want to hurl the OT at gays and lesbians by telling them "Leviticus says men lying with men is an abomination".
Quote:
Originally Posted by renriq02
Also, the NT teaches that marriage is between man and a woman.
Anything else is an abomination, and those will NOT inherit the Kingdom of God.
Do you want to discuss the NT or the OT? Make up your mind. As I said, you're simply wanting to dodge the abomination in question which is spoken of in Deuteronomy 22:5.
I'm sure Jesus meant two people of the same sex can get married.
Jews did not believe in homosexuality, and it would be nothing new for the Christians to believe the same thing.
You do realize there are many mainline Christian churches that don't believe gay people are satanic abominations, don't you? In my neighborhood, there are Lutheran, Presbyterian, Episcopal, Methodist, UUC, MCC, etc. - all denominations that don't use the Bible to support discrimination. And I know plenty of Jewish people who don't believe gay people are hell-bound abominations too.
Then you're free to go to a "bible believing" church that agrees with your anti-gay opinion. Just realize that it's your opinion and you have zero proof what God or Jesus thought, believed, or intended. Many of us have different opinions on the subject that you do.
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.
