30 Apr 2007, 12:31 am
DejaQ wrote:
If God is real, I don't think he endorses half of the things that are said or done in his name. 
Indeedy! How true that is, and how very sad too.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, the Leviticus verse (English translation) is widely accepted by theologians as a mistranslation anyway and has no relevance in a debate about gay marriage. English translations of the scriptures in general are a bit hap-hazard anyway, and that is why it's important to check the original text before claiming that "God thinks THIS".
The verse (alluding to male anal sex only at the very most) also sits right in the same chapter as other 'abominations' such as wearing clothes of mixed fabric types, failing to change bed-linen and shower immediately after sex, eating shellfish, mixing seeds in a border, arguing at any point in life with parents (or simply getting up later than they do in the morning) - or doing anything other than rest and worship on a Saturday...
Seems peculiar that there are still people who will state "in God's name" that being in a committed gay relationship is so evil (when in fact this is not mentioned in the original scrolls at all), yet will blatantly ignore what IS mentioned explicitly and repeatedly (like loving all people around us and not judging others, for example).
30 Apr 2007, 7:08 am
I'm glad to see common sense rule these forums. Religion basically is the only thing one could extract objections from against gay marriage. The whole "The human race will die out!" thing is ridiculous, as they will always remain a minority. Gay relationships are actually good on the long term, as they don't contribute to overpopulating the earth.
Quote:
Seems peculiar that there are still people who will state "in God's name" that being in a committed gay relationship is so evil (when in fact this is not mentioned in the original scrolls at all)
The Bible actually states that gays should be stoned to death, so I presume that includes gay marriage as it is a further stage in a relationship. My grande blasphemic question is: "If God created all, why would he create it in such an imperfect way gays would exist?" First creating something to defy predifined values to throw it in hell later? I'm sorry if I offend anybodies beliefs with this.
Quote:
yet will blatantly ignore what IS mentioned explicitly and repeatedly (like loving all people around us and not judging others, for example).
You will ignore loving all people and not judging them? [/nitpick]
30 Apr 2007, 2:55 pm
Let's see what my score on the Leviticus test is....
badwhippet wrote:
Consulting with a psychic or medium or had a tarot card reading (20:6)
Had a juicy steak or hamburger (17:10)
Eaten pork (11:7)
Stolen anything at anytime in your life (19:13)
Worked on a Saturday (19:3)
Talked back to your parents (19:3)
Said “I hate you” to a parent or sibling (19:17)
Kept something you found without trying to find the owner (6:3)
Trimmed your beard or the hair around your temples (19:27)
Gotten out of bed later than either parents or grandparents (19:32)
Had a juicy steak or hamburger (17:10)
Eaten pork (11:7)
Stolen anything at anytime in your life (19:13)
Worked on a Saturday (19:3)
Talked back to your parents (19:3)
Said “I hate you” to a parent or sibling (19:17)
Kept something you found without trying to find the owner (6:3)
Trimmed your beard or the hair around your temples (19:27)
Gotten out of bed later than either parents or grandparents (19:32)
And these are possibles:
badwhippet wrote:
Touched a woman while she was menstruating (19:19)
Planted 2 different kinds of seeds in the same pot/garden bed (20:19)
Worn a cotton/wool fibre mix (20:19)
Planted 2 different kinds of seeds in the same pot/garden bed (20:19)
Worn a cotton/wool fibre mix (20:19)
Well, see you in Hell.
Xenon wrote:
Me, I am still waiting for someone to come up with a logical, reasoned response to the question "How does allowing gay people to marry each other infringe upon your own freedom?".
There is none, though homophobes will dance around endlessly trying to deny this point with various sophistries (or claims of a Marxist conspiracy, in a current Philosphy forum thread). They're also quite fond of claiming oppression when someone calls them on their bigotry.
30 Apr 2007, 5:36 pm
Raz wrote:
Quote:
Seems peculiar that there are still people who will state "in God's name" that being in a committed gay relationship is so evil (when in fact this is not mentioned in the original scrolls at all)
The Bible actually states that gays should be stoned to death, so I presume that includes gay marriage as it is a further stage in a relationship. Well, there are several New Testament references that are debated... The most well-known reference is found in Romans. No-one has any clear idea what Paul was really thinking about (was he thinking about homosexual acts by heterosexual people, was he voicing an outright condemnation of gay sex acts, or was he giving warning that God would turn the world gay if they didn't stop their evil ways?) and so all discussion seems to be more speculation than fact, but more recent experts state that emphasis is on heterosexual people indulging in gay sex acts. John Boswell, professor of history at Yale, writes in "Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality":
Boswell wrote:
The persons Paul condemns are manifestly not homosexual: what he derogates are homosexual acts committed by apparently heterosexual persons....It is not clear that Paul distinguished in his thoughts or writings between gay persons (in the sense of permanent sexual preference) and heterosexuals who simply engaged in periodic homosexual behavior. It is in fact unlikely that many Jews of his day recognized such a distinction, but it is quite apparent that--whether or not he was aware of their existence--Paul did not discuss gay persons but only homosexual acts committed by heterosexual persons.
There are, of course, plenty of arguments for and against this interpretation, and I suspect the Romans passage will never be resolved fully. However, Paul did make later references that are clearer in meaning, but these (in 1 Corinthians and Timothy) don't translate to 'homosexual' in the original Greek text at all. Again, as with Leviticus, it was English translators who chose the word 'homosexual'; it never existed in the original Greek text. The Greek words used at the time of Paul would have most likely meant 'temple prostitutes' and again there might be an allusion towards anal sex (that's less certain though - could equally be a reference to weakness or cowardice). So, more of the same really: at most, a condemnation of anal sex or under-age gay sex (possibly), but likely as not, more along the lines of male prostitution - nothing at all in connection with a committed gay relationship (something that might not even have been known about at that time).
Lots of commentaries about the New Testament references (I've pasted a few below - they waffle on a lot less than I do!).
Helminiak wrote:
1 Corinthians 6:9-10, 1 Timothy 1:8-10
Two Indeterminate Texts
By Fr. Daniel Helminiak, Dignity/Houston BBS
The meaning of these texts, said to exclude homosexual people from the Kingdom of God, hinges on the meaning of two Greek Terms, `malakoi' and `arsenokotai.' Throughout history these terms have been translated variably (masturbatory, practicers of heterosexual anal sex, sodomites, catamites and the like). Suggested translations today still vary (morally loose, masturbators who waste their property, boys and their pederast partners, temple prostitutes serving men and women, gold-digging gay hustlers who pursue the elderly). No one really knows what these terms mean. There is no good reason to suppose they apply to consensual, respectful, homosexual acts per se, especially since such an interpretation would be in conflict with all the rest of the Bible.
Two Indeterminate Texts
By Fr. Daniel Helminiak, Dignity/Houston BBS
The meaning of these texts, said to exclude homosexual people from the Kingdom of God, hinges on the meaning of two Greek Terms, `malakoi' and `arsenokotai.' Throughout history these terms have been translated variably (masturbatory, practicers of heterosexual anal sex, sodomites, catamites and the like). Suggested translations today still vary (morally loose, masturbators who waste their property, boys and their pederast partners, temple prostitutes serving men and women, gold-digging gay hustlers who pursue the elderly). No one really knows what these terms mean. There is no good reason to suppose they apply to consensual, respectful, homosexual acts per se, especially since such an interpretation would be in conflict with all the rest of the Bible.
Sklar wrote:
I CORINTHIANS 6:9-10 and I TIMOTHY 1:10
by Bill Sklar
"References on Homosexuality and the Bible"
I CORINTHIANS 6:9-10 reads:
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate [malakoi], nor homosexual offenders [arsenokoites], nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.
I placed two words in brackets. The first one, "malakoi", Scroggs (p. 14) says "literally means 'soft' and is no technical term for a homosexual." It apparently refers to young boys who would take the "recepient" position in anal sex, often for money. It's also translated in some Bibles as "morally weak".
"Aresenokoitai", on the other hand, is clearly a sexual term but, according to Scroggs:
Since... the New Testament occurrences are the earliest appearances of the word, it is not easy for us to be sure what it means. John Boswell in his recent study denies that it refers to a homosexual person in general but rather specifically to the male prostitute who could serve heterosexual or homosexual clients. At any rate, the sin is prostitution, not homosexuality in itself. (p. 14)
These words are the words used both in Corinthians and in I Timothy 1:10 which are commonly translated into modern bibles as "homosexual", "effeminate," and "self-indulgent." In these enlightened times, however,there is no indication that such terms are in any way connected to homosexuality in itself.
In fact, according to Is the Homosexual my Neighbor by Letha Scanzoni and Virginia Ramey Mollenkott:
The idea of a lifelong homosexual orientation or "condition" is never mentioned in the Bible... Bible writers assumed that everyone was heterosexual and that in times of moral decay, some heterosexuals peopled did some strange and unnatural things with each other. Since the Bible is silent about the homosexual condition, those who want to understand it must rely on the findings of modern behavorial science research... (p. 71)
In summary, despite common interpretations of the words "malakoi" and "aresenokoitai" in modern times, there is no clear evidence which links them unquestionably to homosexuality in itself. Instead, in every case in which they are used, there is an implied connection with either prostitution or child molestation. Modern research shows us, however, that such connections are fallacious. There is no research which clearly demonstrates that there is any correlation between homosexuality and the "sins" referenced alongside it in Corinthians and Timothy.
by Bill Sklar
"References on Homosexuality and the Bible"
I CORINTHIANS 6:9-10 reads:
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate [malakoi], nor homosexual offenders [arsenokoites], nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.
I placed two words in brackets. The first one, "malakoi", Scroggs (p. 14) says "literally means 'soft' and is no technical term for a homosexual." It apparently refers to young boys who would take the "recepient" position in anal sex, often for money. It's also translated in some Bibles as "morally weak".
"Aresenokoitai", on the other hand, is clearly a sexual term but, according to Scroggs:
Since... the New Testament occurrences are the earliest appearances of the word, it is not easy for us to be sure what it means. John Boswell in his recent study denies that it refers to a homosexual person in general but rather specifically to the male prostitute who could serve heterosexual or homosexual clients. At any rate, the sin is prostitution, not homosexuality in itself. (p. 14)
These words are the words used both in Corinthians and in I Timothy 1:10 which are commonly translated into modern bibles as "homosexual", "effeminate," and "self-indulgent." In these enlightened times, however,there is no indication that such terms are in any way connected to homosexuality in itself.
In fact, according to Is the Homosexual my Neighbor by Letha Scanzoni and Virginia Ramey Mollenkott:
The idea of a lifelong homosexual orientation or "condition" is never mentioned in the Bible... Bible writers assumed that everyone was heterosexual and that in times of moral decay, some heterosexuals peopled did some strange and unnatural things with each other. Since the Bible is silent about the homosexual condition, those who want to understand it must rely on the findings of modern behavorial science research... (p. 71)
In summary, despite common interpretations of the words "malakoi" and "aresenokoitai" in modern times, there is no clear evidence which links them unquestionably to homosexuality in itself. Instead, in every case in which they are used, there is an implied connection with either prostitution or child molestation. Modern research shows us, however, that such connections are fallacious. There is no research which clearly demonstrates that there is any correlation between homosexuality and the "sins" referenced alongside it in Corinthians and Timothy.
James Alan Hall wrote:
Lexicography and St Paul
by James Alan Hall [email protected]
"Biblical arguments and homosexuality"
(most of argument, and some text, taken from chapter four of John Boswell Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, confirmed by Hall in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible)
I Corinthians 6:9-10 reads, "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolators, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." "Effeminate" is a poor translation of the Greek word "malakos" which means "soft". The word is not translated as "effeminate" anywhere else in the Bible. It is the same word that is translated as "soft" in Matthew 11:8 ("But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft clothing are in kings' houses"; similarly Luke 7:25). In a moral sense, "malakos" just means "licentious"; Aristotle in the _Nicomachean Ethics_ (7.4.4) says specifically that "malakos" refers to unrestraint in respect to bodily pleasures. The translation as "effeminate" seems awfully gratuitous. "Abuser of himself with mankind" is a translation of the Greek word "arsenokoites"; this word has changed meaning several times over the centuries, so it's perhaps understandable how it got translated as it did; but in Paul's time, and in fact until well into the fourth century, it seems to have simply meant a temple prostitute. (Corroborating this indirectly is the fact that a great deal of contemporary homoerotic Greek writing has survived and not once in any of it does the word "arsenokoites" appear.)
I Timothy 1:10 refers to "them that defile themselves with mankind"; this is a translation of the same Greek word "arsenokoites" as appears in I Corinthians.
by James Alan Hall [email protected]
"Biblical arguments and homosexuality"
(most of argument, and some text, taken from chapter four of John Boswell Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, confirmed by Hall in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible)
I Corinthians 6:9-10 reads, "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolators, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." "Effeminate" is a poor translation of the Greek word "malakos" which means "soft". The word is not translated as "effeminate" anywhere else in the Bible. It is the same word that is translated as "soft" in Matthew 11:8 ("But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft clothing are in kings' houses"; similarly Luke 7:25). In a moral sense, "malakos" just means "licentious"; Aristotle in the _Nicomachean Ethics_ (7.4.4) says specifically that "malakos" refers to unrestraint in respect to bodily pleasures. The translation as "effeminate" seems awfully gratuitous. "Abuser of himself with mankind" is a translation of the Greek word "arsenokoites"; this word has changed meaning several times over the centuries, so it's perhaps understandable how it got translated as it did; but in Paul's time, and in fact until well into the fourth century, it seems to have simply meant a temple prostitute. (Corroborating this indirectly is the fact that a great deal of contemporary homoerotic Greek writing has survived and not once in any of it does the word "arsenokoites" appear.)
I Timothy 1:10 refers to "them that defile themselves with mankind"; this is a translation of the same Greek word "arsenokoites" as appears in I Corinthians.
Koponen wrote:
from WHAT DOES THE BIBLE SAY ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY
by Wilfrid R. Koponen, Ph.D., M.B.A., M.A.R., M.A.)
1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:10. The key words are translated differently in different versions: from 1 Cor.: "catamites, sodomites" (Moffat); "effeminate, homosexuals" (ASV); "homosexual perversion: (New English Bible); "Male prostitutes, homosexual offenders" (New International Version) etc.; 1 Timothy is also variously translated. However, there was no noun in Greek for homosexual; apparently the translations condemning homosexuals are inaccurate. The Greek words suggest not "homosexual" but "effeminate" or "morally weak or soft" or "cowardly."
by Wilfrid R. Koponen, Ph.D., M.B.A., M.A.R., M.A.)
1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:10. The key words are translated differently in different versions: from 1 Cor.: "catamites, sodomites" (Moffat); "effeminate, homosexuals" (ASV); "homosexual perversion: (New English Bible); "Male prostitutes, homosexual offenders" (New International Version) etc.; 1 Timothy is also variously translated. However, there was no noun in Greek for homosexual; apparently the translations condemning homosexuals are inaccurate. The Greek words suggest not "homosexual" but "effeminate" or "morally weak or soft" or "cowardly."
Last edited by badwhippet on 30 Apr 2007, 6:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.
30 Apr 2007, 5:57 pm
Elemental wrote:
Let's see what my score on the Leviticus test is....
And these are possibles:
Well, see you in Hell.
badwhippet wrote:
Consulting with a psychic or medium or had a tarot card reading (20:6)
Had a juicy steak or hamburger (17:10)
Eaten pork (11:7)
Stolen anything at anytime in your life (19:13)
Worked on a Saturday (19:3)
Talked back to your parents (19:3)
Said “I hate you” to a parent or sibling (19:17)
Kept something you found without trying to find the owner (6:3)
Trimmed your beard or the hair around your temples (19:27)
Gotten out of bed later than either parents or grandparents (19:32)
Had a juicy steak or hamburger (17:10)
Eaten pork (11:7)
Stolen anything at anytime in your life (19:13)
Worked on a Saturday (19:3)
Talked back to your parents (19:3)
Said “I hate you” to a parent or sibling (19:17)
Kept something you found without trying to find the owner (6:3)
Trimmed your beard or the hair around your temples (19:27)
Gotten out of bed later than either parents or grandparents (19:32)
And these are possibles:
badwhippet wrote:
Touched a woman while she was menstruating (19:19)
Planted 2 different kinds of seeds in the same pot/garden bed (20:19)
Worn a cotton/wool fibre mix (20:19)
Planted 2 different kinds of seeds in the same pot/garden bed (20:19)
Worn a cotton/wool fibre mix (20:19)
Well, see you in Hell.
Elemental - you are surely DOOMED!! !
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Sharing my thoughts on the US presidential election |
16 Oct 2024, 3:04 pm |
| Share your deepest thoughts in the subject of Society. |
21 Aug 2024, 7:55 pm |
| Nixon's thoughts on the Israeli lobby and Jews |
14 Aug 2024, 10:10 pm |
| Marriage or my brother...which one to choose?!? |
20 Aug 2024, 5:26 am |
