Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Homosexuality and the bible: Round 2 - morality.
almeyda
Inactive Member


Message 61 of 276 (110626)
05-26-2004 8:24 AM


The Greek word "arsenokoitai" used in 1 Timothy 1:10 literally means "men who sleep with men". It is the same Greek word used for "homosexual offender" in 1 Corinthians 6:9. Variously translated as "abusers of themselves with mankind" (KJV), homosexuals (NASB) or homosexual offender (NIV).
The Leviticus verses have been asked not to use but the Bible not only describes homosexual behaviour as detestable but it also calls for the punishment of those involved (Leviticus 20:13).

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by crashfrog, posted 05-26-2004 8:33 AM almeyda has not replied
 Message 64 by PecosGeorge, posted 05-26-2004 10:23 AM almeyda has not replied
 Message 66 by Dr Jack, posted 05-26-2004 10:40 AM almeyda has not replied
 Message 74 by coffee_addict, posted 05-26-2004 11:48 PM almeyda has not replied
 Message 76 by Rrhain, posted 05-27-2004 1:09 AM almeyda has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 62 of 276 (110628)
05-26-2004 8:33 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by almeyda
05-26-2004 8:24 AM


So you speak greek now, too?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by almeyda, posted 05-26-2004 8:24 AM almeyda has not replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6903 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 63 of 276 (110645)
05-26-2004 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by coffee_addict
05-24-2004 3:35 PM


Very much so
as I suspected most of the people here would do .... is dismiss my NT bible references (except for one still small voice) on this issue. You did exactly as you are supposed to do and said exactly what I knew you would.......think you are unique, don't you?
The creature dickers with the creator on what the creator deems the proper management of the creature. The creature, in its estimation, is very qualified to know what is good for it - and goes on its merry pursuit of destruction. Homosexuality is an inversion of the sexuality established by God to meet his purpose of 'fruitful and multiply'.
Jeez, you are dense. Keep up the good work, folks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by coffee_addict, posted 05-24-2004 3:35 PM coffee_addict has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by AdminBrian, posted 05-26-2004 10:29 AM PecosGeorge has replied
 Message 71 by crashfrog, posted 05-26-2004 5:46 PM PecosGeorge has not replied
 Message 73 by coffee_addict, posted 05-26-2004 11:43 PM PecosGeorge has not replied
 Message 77 by Rrhain, posted 05-27-2004 1:11 AM PecosGeorge has replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6903 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 64 of 276 (110646)
05-26-2004 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by almeyda
05-26-2004 8:24 AM


Thank you
still small voice. But you are bright, and the truth you speak sounds joy in my ears.
George

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by almeyda, posted 05-26-2004 8:24 AM almeyda has not replied

AdminBrian
Inactive Member


Message 65 of 276 (110647)
05-26-2004 10:29 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by PecosGeorge
05-26-2004 10:20 AM


Re: Very much so
Hi George,
I know this is an emotional subject, as are most personal faith related topics, but can I draw your attention to Forum Rule Three?
Respect for others is the rule here. Argue the position, not the person.
Comments such as 'Jeez, you are dense.' are not very constructive.
We encourage friendly debate here, we can do without the personal comments.
On a general note, there seems to be a trend developing whereby 'Christians' feel compelled to comment on the intelligence of others, I find it very strange.
AdminBrian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by PecosGeorge, posted 05-26-2004 10:20 AM PecosGeorge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by PecosGeorge, posted 05-26-2004 1:09 PM AdminBrian has replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 66 of 276 (110649)
05-26-2004 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by almeyda
05-26-2004 8:24 AM


IIRC, according to Rrhain it means 'male temple prostitute' - hmm, which of you shall I believe?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by almeyda, posted 05-26-2004 8:24 AM almeyda has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 424 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 67 of 276 (110652)
05-26-2004 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by Rrhain
05-26-2004 7:30 AM


Re: True
and I was wrong there. Mea Culpa.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Rrhain, posted 05-26-2004 7:30 AM Rrhain has not replied

Sleeping Dragon
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 276 (110660)
05-26-2004 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by Rrhain
05-26-2004 7:45 AM


Re: Only One Unambiguous Reference.
To Rrhain:
Thanks for clearing that up. I think I was talking about inverses.

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Rrhain, posted 05-26-2004 7:45 AM Rrhain has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by mike the wiz, posted 05-26-2004 11:55 AM Sleeping Dragon has replied

mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4755
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 69 of 276 (110662)
05-26-2004 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by Sleeping Dragon
05-26-2004 11:38 AM


Re: Only One Unambiguous Reference.
Here is that link again. Maybe you could read it this time, before suggesting I am an idiot.
The statement is made up, but shows Rrhain's point. The contra-positive is okay if the statement is true, in this example, we cannot know if my statement is true.
This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 05-26-2004 01:15 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Sleeping Dragon, posted 05-26-2004 11:38 AM Sleeping Dragon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Sleeping Dragon, posted 05-27-2004 12:39 PM mike the wiz has replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6903 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 70 of 276 (110683)
05-26-2004 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by AdminBrian
05-26-2004 10:29 AM


But and
whereas calling me an idiot is?
But thank you for taking the time.
Maranatha
George
Christ, and Paul, and God - even - would not fit in here, they had a distinct method of calling the kettle its right color. I particularly like Christ's allusion to 'generation of vipers', stung some ass with a whip, too, if I recollect correctly.
Be of good cheer, learning is a lifetime process.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by AdminBrian, posted 05-26-2004 10:29 AM AdminBrian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by coffee_addict, posted 05-26-2004 11:49 PM PecosGeorge has not replied
 Message 79 by AdminBrian, posted 05-27-2004 4:16 AM PecosGeorge has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 71 of 276 (110725)
05-26-2004 5:46 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by PecosGeorge
05-26-2004 10:20 AM


Homosexuality is an inversion of the sexuality established by God to meet his purpose of 'fruitful and multiply'.
If that's true, then why did God create homosexual animals?
Moreover, no population is expected to continually grow. Populations reach the carrying capacity of their environment - K.
Don't you think, with skyrocketing human populations leading to mismanagement and shortage of resources, God might be inclined to say "enough with the fruit, already!"
It sounds like you're saying that it's the puporse - nay, the commandment - of all humans to have as many children as possible. Isn't that a pretty stupid, reckless thing to advocate?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by PecosGeorge, posted 05-26-2004 10:20 AM PecosGeorge has not replied

coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 507 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 72 of 276 (110788)
05-26-2004 11:37 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by PecosGeorge
05-25-2004 6:06 PM


Re: From the idiot
Remember what I said about ignoring you and how you embraced my declaration? I'm going to break it upon your request.
I have not called anyone anything. Read that first post again. I said that I will (future tense) call anyone who refuses to provide evidence like you in the past an "idiot." In other words, I did not call you anything.
First a question. Why would you suppose that the God of the OT changes his mind and rules when the page is turned and it is now the NT?
I don't have a clue. I'm not a christian and I am certainly not a bible basher.
I don't quite get that, but that is o.k. Is it ok to kill, commit adultery, steal? No!
Wait, hang on a minute. Where the heck did I say that it is ok to kill or steal?
"Have you not read that........made them male and female........Matt. 19:4-5; Mark 10:6-7
So what if it "made them male and female...?" Remember that god made your legs for you to walk. Why are you using a car to travel? The anti-homosexuality from these passages are strictly from your interpretation or your imagination.
"Be not deceived........1Cor.6:9-10; again 1Tim.1:9-10; Rom 1:26-27, 29 --- and then take it from there, really, you need the process that only your very own research provides.
I am not a scholar. Care to explain what this has to do with homosexuality?
Let me turn the table on you using your method of debate. Your brain is made of 50% cheese and 50% cream. I don't need to provide any evidence. You should do your own research.
I think I am justified in losing my temper over your do-your-own-research attitude in a debate. With your attitude, I can claim just about anything I can possibly imagine without having to provide evidence or explanation. Afterall, it is the other person that's supposed to do his own research.
I am very close to calling you an "idiot." Let the record show that I have not called you that yet.

The Laminator

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by PecosGeorge, posted 05-25-2004 6:06 PM PecosGeorge has not replied

coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 507 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 73 of 276 (110791)
05-26-2004 11:43 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by PecosGeorge
05-26-2004 10:20 AM


Re: Very much so
PG writes:
as I suspected most of the people here would do .... is dismiss my NT bible references (except for one still small voice) on this issue. You did exactly as you are supposed to do and said exactly what I knew you would.......think you are unique, don't you?
I ignored you because you are not worth my time. The "do your own research" argument has been used by you several times now and it is making me rather angry. Read this very carefully. I will not do your research for you!
If you have something to say about it, spit it out!
The creature dickers with the creator on what the creator deems the proper management of the creature. The creature, in its estimation, is very qualified to know what is good for it - and goes on its merry pursuit of destruction.
I never liked poetry.
Homosexuality is an inversion of the sexuality established by God to meet his purpose of 'fruitful and multiply'.
What about love? I happen to love Will. Doesn't your god promote love?
Also, why didn't you start making babies when you turned 14 or 15? Afterall, wasn't that God's intent for you when he gave you the ability to reproduce?
Jeez, you are dense. Keep up the good work, folks.
I don't quite know what you mean by "dense" so I am taking no offense.

The Laminator

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by PecosGeorge, posted 05-26-2004 10:20 AM PecosGeorge has not replied

coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 507 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 74 of 276 (110792)
05-26-2004 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by almeyda
05-26-2004 8:24 AM


almeyda writes:
The Leviticus verses have been asked not to use but the Bible not only describes homosexual behaviour as detestable but it also calls for the punishment of those involved (Leviticus 20:13).
Don't tell me that you are following the other teachings of Leviticus, which I will copy from another thread here and paste below.
Lam writes:
Let's start with Leviticus. Leviticus 18:22 states, "you shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination."
Leviticus is, of course, old testament. Most Christians these days ignore the majority of the teachings in the old testaments for obvious reasons: they're considered outdated to our moral standards today.
Leviticus 21:9 states, "A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death."
Now really, do you think, with our modern sense of morality, that we can ever justify burning someone alive?
Leviticus 12:4-5 states, "and then she shall spend thirty-three days more in becoming purified of her blood; she shall not touch anything sacred nor enter the sanctuary till the days of her purification are fulfilled. If she gives birth to a girl, for fourteen days she sahll be as unclean as at her menstruation, after which she shall spend sixty-six days in becoming purified of her blood."
Ok, to plainly put it, these verses forbids a woman from entering church for 42 days after giving birth. The Catholic church has completely ignored this verse as far as creating their policies go. To our moral standards today, the notion of a woman somehow "unclean" for 42 days after giving birth is absurd.
Leviticus 25:44 states, "Slaves, male and female, you may indeed possess, provided you buy them from among the neighboring nations."
Leviticus 25:45, 46 states, "You may also buy them from among the aliens who reside with you and from their children who are born and reared in your land. Such slavesyou may own as chattels, and leave to your sons as their hereditary property, making them perpetual slaves. But you shall not lord it harshly over any of the Israelites, your kinsmen."
These verses clearly justify slavery, given that slaves are bought from neighboring states. Verse 25:46 clearly states that slaves are property.
During the 18th and 19th centuries, many Americans used these verses to justify slavery in this country. In other words, Leviticus was used to justify one of the darkest and most embarrassing part of our history.
Let us go back to Leviticus 18:22. If we think that this part of Leviticus in the old testament holds for our modern morality, then why not the other verses that I mentioned above? The verses that I mentioned above are only a few of the examples from the old testament where our modern sense of morality condemns as immoral.
If Leviticus 18:22 is the only thing that is telling you that homosexuality is wrong, I hope that you rethink about your position on the issue.
Are you picking and choosing what passages you like and don't like?

The Laminator

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by almeyda, posted 05-26-2004 8:24 AM almeyda has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by custard, posted 05-27-2004 2:54 AM coffee_addict has not replied

coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 507 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 75 of 276 (110793)
05-26-2004 11:49 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by PecosGeorge
05-26-2004 1:09 PM


Re: But and
I am having a deja-desdamona-vu.

The Laminator

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by PecosGeorge, posted 05-26-2004 1:09 PM PecosGeorge has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024