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.
You have proven nothing other than your lack of knowledge of biblical texts and the cultures in which they were written. You just keep repeating the same modern English verses out of their original context and show no understanding of them. I have shown you that context. Pretending the context doesn't exist is foolish.
You deny the fact that not all of God's statements against Homosexual acts had anything to do with these temple prostitutes. I have shown you the facts and you ignore them. You are simply believing or trying to convince yourself of a lie. If you had understanding of biblical language and really understood the context you would agree with me. But some will believe a lie as long at is makes them feel better about their sin. So is it because the truth exposes your sin that you call God a liar?
You deny the fact that not all of God's statements against Homosexual acts had anything to do with these temple prostitutes. I have shown you the facts and you ignore them. You are simply believing or trying to convince yourself of a lie. If you had understanding of biblical language and really understood the context you would agree with me. But some will believe a lie as long at is makes them feel better about their sin. So is it because the truth exposes your sin that you call God a liar?
Please link to the posts you 'claim' to have have made discussing the language and context of any of the verses typically used against homosexuals. I have seen none from you. If you want anyone to take you seriously, try responding with something other than bluff, bluster, false claims, accusations and insults.
For example, you haven't even tried to refute (with any kind of intelligent or knowledgeable discussion) the points I made in these posts:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaymax
The King James translators used the word 'sodomite' as a translation of the Hebrew word 'qadesh" which actually means male temple prostitute, cult prostitute, shrine prostitute etc
KJV: Deut 23:17 "There shall be no w-h-o-re (6948)of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite (6945) of the sons of Israel".
However most modern translations use the correct translation of the Hebrew:
Deut 23:17: "None of the daughters of Israel shall be a cult prostitute (6948), nor shall any of the sons of Israel be a cult (6945) prostitute.
After the command not to give your offspring over to the Canaanite god Molech in verse 21, (Molech is associated in several places in the OT with mentions of giving over sons and daughters to be male and female temple prostitutes), verse 22 probably refers to male temple prostitutes, then verse 23 to female temple prostitutes (who also had anal sex with men as well as with animals to worship the gods)
Leviticus 18:21- not giving sons and daughters over to worship of Molech (to be temple prostitutes eg Deut 23:17)
Leviticus 18:22 -about males temple prostitutes (qadesh).
Leviticus 18:23 - about female temple prostitutes (qadesha)
Leviticus 18:24 -warning that other nations (Egypt and Canaan) became defiled by worshipping other gods so don't follow their practices.
There are more than half a dozen verses in the OT about not giving over sons and daughters to be temple or cult prostitutes, yet never again outside Leviticus does it state that men should not lie with a male and women should not lie with an animal.
eg Deut 23:17: "None of the daughters of Israel shall be a cult prostitute (6948), nor shall any of the sons of Israel be a cult (6945) prostitute.
To me, it's so obvious that Lev 18:22 and 20:13 are references to male temple prostitutes when you follow simple honest Biblical hermeneutics. That's not a blanket description of homosexuals or 21st century gay men
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaymax
Nothing to do with lesbians. The women were having anal sex with men. That's how the early church fathers like St Augustine saw it.
Augustine (354–430 C.E.):
"But if one has relations even with one’s wife in a part of the body which was not made for begetting children, such relations are against nature and indecent. In fact, the same apostle earlier said the same thing about the women, For their women exchanged natural relations for those which are against nature (Rom 1:26).
Augustine, Marriage and Desire 20.35 (trans. Roland Teske; ed. John E Rotelle; Answer to the Pelagians, II; New York: New City Press, 1990), 75-76.
Blessings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaymax
Quote:
Originally Posted by twin.spin
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God?
Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders,
nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified,
you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."
The same verse was used for centuries to condemn masturbators not homosexuals. The word 'homosexuals' was only used (incorrectly) as a translation of the Greek word arsenkoites in an English version in 1947.
Paul was referring to heterosexual gentiles who had known his God then reverted back to their previous pagan religions worshipping fertility gods and goddesses. He wrote the letter from 1st century Corinth- where there were many temples to pagan fertility gods and goddesses.
Notice that first, these men and women Paul were referring to were having 'degrading' idolatrous sex with each other (males with females - Verse 24) and worshipping idols made in the likeness of mankind, birds, reptiles etc. (This would only be happening in the temples dedicated to fertility gods and goddesses in Corinth where Paul wrote the letter, otherwise the whole idolatry thing doesn't make sense)
21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the desires of their hearts to impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. (males with females) 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator
So it was BECAUSE these men and women were having degrading idolatrous sex with each other (ie women with men) while worshipping pagan idols that:
26 Because of this, God gave them over to dishonorable passions. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another.
Anyone who thinks this letter is about gay and lesbian people hasn't given it any thought at all and has their prejudice well in place. These were heterosexual people engaged in idolatrous sex acts with each other while worshipping their old pagan gods. Then the men 'exchanged' their 'use' of women and penetrated each other, and the women exchanged their 'natural' sex for sex 'contrary' to their nature- which was anal sex with the men (according to early church fathers like St Augustine).
St Augustine (354–430 C.E.)
"But if one has relations even with one’s wife in a part of the body which was not made for begetting children, such relations are against nature and indecent. In fact, the same apostle earlier said the same thing about the women, For their women exchanged natural relations for those which are against nature (Rom 1:26).
Augustine, Marriage and Desire 20.35 (trans. Roland Teske; ed. John E Rotelle; Answer to the Pelagians, II; New York: New City Press, 1990), 75-76.
Please link to the posts you 'claim' to have have made discussing the language and context of any of the verses typically used against homosexuals. I have seen none from you. If you want anyone to take you seriously, try responding with something other than bluff, bluster, false claims, accusations and insults.
For example, you haven't even tried to refute (with any kind of intelligent or knowledgeable discussion) the points I made in these posts:
Just scroll down. They are there. Just because you refuse to believe what God has said does not change the facts.
Done with your games. I will stand with God and not call God a liar as you do. Your fight is not with me but with God. You will loose. Sorry!
The closing argument of people who are afraid of what they may learn. IMHO. One rarely sees it used by anyone willing to exchange ideas and grow.
What are you afraid of balunman? That you may find out that God loves members of the LGBT community as much as He loves you? Because He does. He loves each of us beyond our comprehension. Even when we are unwilling to love each other. Even when we are unwilling to treat each other as children of God but, instead, choose to treat others as outcasts because we believe what we've been told by fallible men in the name of religion.
To Christian conservatives everywhere:
If you want to please God, concentrate on feeding the hungry and befriending the friendless. Choosing the LGBT community to talk about sin is just ludicrous in a world where kids are going hungry and dying of diarrhea because they have no clean water. You think God wants you to condemn gays? Really? I think He wants us to change a world where innocent kids are dying in refugee camps while spoiled Americans, who have the luxury of polished pews and clean clothes on Sundays, are shaking their fingers at gay men. (After a nice Sunday dinner when your bellies are full.)
Come judgement day I don't think God is going to care that you preached against gay men in Podunk. I think He's going to show you what you SHOULD have been doing with your time on this earth. Helping people. Feeding people. Taking care of the innocent.
Last edited by DewDropInn; 07-14-2013 at 07:54 PM..
So you think God created Pedophiles too?
How about serial killers?
If God made them that way then why did He say they should be put to death? God is the one who set's the rules and not you.
Sin is sin and once your thumb your nose at God and decide He is wrong your on the wrong side.
Personally I don't care if homosexuals carry on all they want. That's no business of mine. But when you come here and start attacking my God and calling Him a liar I take issue with that. Only a servant of satan does this.
LoL
Oh really, you just had to compare gays to murderers and pedophiles didn't you?
Yes God set the rules but not every rule in the Bible is from God it is mixed with ideas which originated from men who thought they knew what was best and what God wanted.
First a sin is any act which causes harm to ones self or another person, gays do not harm any one by living a life style of their choosing. However when a killer takes a life he has infringed upon some ones free will and that is a sin. Any act which unjust-fully infringes upon free-will is a sin. A lie also does cause harm in a psychological fashion and in relationships when found out, lying about some ones reputation is known as slander and I personally feel people who commit slander should spend a week in jail.
Murderers are not destined to be killers they arrive at that point do to choices they make.
Some things such as our genes, orientation, and gender are predetermined and can not be changed while other things are the product of choices and their consequences, and experiences.
It is written:
"There is a time for every thing and a season for every activity under the sun."
Laws are not always concrete rather they are situational, the mercy of God allows for us to discern what courses of action must be taken in each variable situation and because God is merciful intent for an action done is take into judgement as well.
The same verse was used for centuries to condemn masturbators not homosexuals. The word 'homosexuals' was only used (incorrectly) as a translation of the Greek word arsenkoites in an English version in 1947.
BTW, the second link I gave to the exact same article was from a College associated with the Methodist Church - "The College embodies the spirit of John Wesley, founder of the Methodist tradition, in its emphases on scholarly inquiry, academic freedom, and spiritual growth". I guess that's not your thing either?
And here is yet another link to the same article from the book. The editor is Robert L. Brawley -Professor Emeritus of New Testament at McCormick Theological Seminary in Chicago, Illinois.
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.
