Don't Blame It on the Bible

[eflatminor]

...does the Bible really condemn homosexuality? Ironically it never answers that question conclusively.

Actually, it does. Leviticus makes it clear by calling it an 'abomination' more than once.

Hey, I'm a non-Christian libertarian that couldn't give two shits who you choose to sleep with. As long as you're not hurting anyone nor taking what doesn't belong to you, have at it. But you're wrong about the Bible's condemnation of homosexuality. It's CRYSTAL clear.

Leviticus was ritual code for "The Hebrews"....not Christians.

That doesn't change the OP's claim that "the Bible" doesn't condemn homosexuality. The old testament is part of the Bible, and it clearly condemns that act.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

An opinion...neither here, nor there.

Dude do you understand that is versus in the bible?

Were you going for "verses"? An remedial English course might prove helpful.

Don't be butt hurt idiot.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

If You Know Anyone Who Is Afraid Of Gay People, Here's A Cartoon That Will Ease Them Back To Reality
Enlightenment.

Why be afraid of sick demented people?

By whose standards? Yours? LOLOLOL

It's either sick and demented or evil.
Afterall this thread is about the bible

 

[poet]

There was no word for homosexual in the Ancient Greek language.

You know this how? Got a link or other evidence?

I'm skeptical to your claim, but I'm open to consider evidence.

Sure do.
HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT: CONSERVATIVE AND LIBERAL VIEWS

Although "homosexual" is a very common translation, it is almost certain to be inaccurate:

bullet If Paul wanted to refer to homosexual behavior, he would have used the word "paiderasste." That was the standard Greek term at the time for sexual behavior between males.

bullet The second term is "arsenokoitai" in Greek. The exact meaning of this word is lost. It seems to have been a term created by Paul for this verse. "Arsen" means "man" in Greek. So there is no way that "arsenokoitai" could refer to both male and female homosexuals. It seems that the English translators gave in to the temptation to widen Paul's condemnation to include lesbians as well as gay males.


Unfortunately, the term "homosexual" is commonly defined in two different ways: as a behavior (engaging in same-sex activity) or as a sexual orientation (being sexually attracted only to members of the same sex). Most of the biblical translations appear to refer to behavior rather than orientation.


bullet male prostitutes, also described as "men kept for unnatural purposes." The term "male prostitutes" (NIV, NRSV, CSB, NLT) can be interpreted in modern times as men who are paid to have sex with men only or with women only or with men or women. Again, the original Greek appears to refer only to male-male contact.

bullet catamites, or boy prostitute. This is a young male -- often a slave -- who is kept as a sexual partner of an adult male. (Jerusalem Bible, NAB, James Moffatt). These translations provide another example of a theme that runs throughout the Bible: the transfer of guilt and punishment from guilty perpetrators to innocent persons.

bullet pederasts: male adults who sexually abuse boys; an abusive pedophile (an adult who molests young children) or abusive hebephile (an adult who molests post-pubertal teenagers).

bullet perverts: a person engaged in some undefined activity that is one of the dozens of sexual activities that some consider to be perversions. (Phillips, The Great Book: The New Testament in Plain English)

bullet sodomites: This used to refer to inhabitants of the city of Sodom which is described in Genesis 19. It is now used as a "snarl" word to refer to men who have sex with men. InGenesis 19, the men of the city appear to want to anally rape some male angels who were visitors to Sodom. Many Christians interpret this as a blanket condemnation of all homosexual behavior, whether rape or consensual; whether a one-night stand or within a committed relationship; whether manipulative or mutually agreeable; whether by two men or two women. (NRSV, NKJ, NAB).

bullet other terms:
bullet The Message refers to "Those who ... use and abuse sex," which is probably the broadest translation ever, and would include a very large percentage of the human population.


bullet BBE translates it as "or is less than a man, or makes a wrong use of men."

 

[poet]

Actually, it does. Leviticus makes it clear by calling it an 'abomination' more than once.

Hey, I'm a non-Christian libertarian that couldn't give two shits who you choose to sleep with. As long as you're not hurting anyone nor taking what doesn't belong to you, have at it. But you're wrong about the Bible's condemnation of homosexuality. It's CRYSTAL clear.

Leviticus was ritual code for "The Hebrews"....not Christians.

That doesn't change the OP's claim that "the Bible" doesn't condemn homosexuality. The old testament is part of the Bible, and it clearly condemns that act.

Yet Jesus Christ said nothing about it. That trumps the OT, and renders Paul a moot point.

 

[eflatminor]

Leviticus was ritual code for "The Hebrews"....not Christians.

That doesn't change the OP's claim that "the Bible" doesn't condemn homosexuality. The old testament is part of the Bible, and it clearly condemns that act.

Yet Jesus Christ said nothing about it. That trumps the OT, and renders Paul a moot point.

Your opinion on which part of the Bible "trumps" another part of the Bible does not change the fact that condemnation of homosexuality is found, quite clearly, in the Bible.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Leviticus was ritual code for "The Hebrews"....not Christians.

That doesn't change the OP's claim that "the Bible" doesn't condemn homosexuality. The old testament is part of the Bible, and it clearly condemns that act.

Yet Jesus Christ said nothing about it. That trumps the OT, and renders Paul a moot point.

Jesus said and I quote
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."
The law is the Old Testament.

 

[poet]

That doesn't change the OP's claim that "the Bible" doesn't condemn homosexuality. The old testament is part of the Bible, and it clearly condemns that act.

Yet Jesus Christ said nothing about it. That trumps the OT, and renders Paul a moot point.

Jesus said and I quote
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."
The law is the Old Testament.

And the Levitical Code is defunct and irrelevant today.
Leviticus was written to Old Testament Jews, NOT to New Testament Christians.

We know that by the context.


Leviticus 18:3 and 18:21 set the context for Leviticus 18:22. God warns Israel against the pagan gods and pagan practices of Egypt and Canaan, specifically mentioning Molech (which includes Molech's fertility goddess consort, Ashtoreth).

Leviticus 20:2-5 & 23 set the context for Leviticus 20:13. God makes the same warning against the pagan practices of Egypt and Canaan, specifically mentioning Molech.

The rules God gives in Leviticus specifically target the children of Israel. They are God's rules for Israel, living under the Law, in the land of Palestine, at a particular time in history.

1.We know these rules do not apply universally because God never told us they apply universally.


2.God Himself never applied these rules universally.


3.God never states in the New Testament that Christians must obey the Levitical Holiness Code to be in right relationship with Him.

God only applied these rules to Jews living in the land of Palestine, under the Law of Moses.

 

[Avatar4321]

...does the Bible really condemn homosexuality? Ironically it never answers that question conclusively.

Actually, it does. Leviticus makes it clear by calling it an 'abomination' more than once.

Hey, I'm a non-Christian libertarian that couldn't give two shits who you choose to sleep with. As long as you're not hurting anyone nor taking what doesn't belong to you, have at it. But you're wrong about the Bible's condemnation of homosexuality. It's CRYSTAL clear.

Leviticus was ritual code for "The Hebrews"....not Christians. And Paul's letters to the provinces was concerning "temple prostitution", and not outright homosexuality. He is even rumored to have been a latent homosexual and certainly a misogynist. Besides, Christ never spoke to the matter, and the buck stops with him. Must not have been that important.

Ah. I see. Don't like what the scriptures say so you conveniently ignore them.

Far cry from the Bible is unclear though.

 

[Avatar4321]

He said to "Judge not, lest ye be judged"....is what he said. You, also cannot distort, interpret, and cherry pick the parts you want implemented. I don't need to do anything but pay taxes and die. I don't subscribe to your religion. I have my own beliefs. And I have my own personal relationship with the Almighty that doesn't include you. Get the goddamn log out of your own eye before attempting to adjust the toothpick in mine. Reprobate. Hypocrite. Sinner.

He said to not judge by appearances. Ripping the verse out of context doesn't help. Because we are judged by the judgment we use.

You don't have to subscribe to my religion. You just dont have the right to claim the Bible is uncllear.

BTW I cant help but notice the only one who has cast any judgment on anyone is you.

**** you...I don't need you to discern scripture for me...I'm clearly in my right mind and there is nothing wrong with my comprehension. I said the Bible is "unclear", on many topics. That is why there is need for discernment....clearly, which you do not have.
Oh, holier than me.

You know, the only person being "holier than thou" is you. stop accusing others of your flaws.

 

[poet]

He said to not judge by appearances. Ripping the verse out of context doesn't help. Because we are judged by the judgment we use.

You don't have to subscribe to my religion. You just dont have the right to claim the Bible is uncllear.

BTW I cant help but notice the only one who has cast any judgment on anyone is you.

**** you...I don't need you to discern scripture for me...I'm clearly in my right mind and there is nothing wrong with my comprehension. I said the Bible is "unclear", on many topics. That is why there is need for discernment....clearly, which you do not have.
Oh, holier than me.

You know, the only person being "holier than thou" is you. stop accusing others of your flaws.

There you go....judging. Go read the Desiderata....which says, I don't have to live up to your expectations, and you don't have to live up to mine. My flaws, rare though they are, are few and far between. Thank you.

 

[poet]

Actually, it does. Leviticus makes it clear by calling it an 'abomination' more than once.

Hey, I'm a non-Christian libertarian that couldn't give two shits who you choose to sleep with. As long as you're not hurting anyone nor taking what doesn't belong to you, have at it. But you're wrong about the Bible's condemnation of homosexuality. It's CRYSTAL clear.

Leviticus was ritual code for "The Hebrews"....not Christians. And Paul's letters to the provinces was concerning "temple prostitution", and not outright homosexuality. He is even rumored to have been a latent homosexual and certainly a misogynist. Besides, Christ never spoke to the matter, and the buck stops with him. Must not have been that important.

Ah. I see. Don't like what the scriptures say so you conveniently ignore them.

Far cry from the Bible is unclear though.

Which edicts from the Levitical Code do we follow today? Hello? Idiot.

 

[eflatminor]

And the Levitical Code is defunct and irrelevant today.

But it's still in the Bible. Sorry man, I'd agree with you, but you're wrong.

 

[poet]

That doesn't change the OP's claim that "the Bible" doesn't condemn homosexuality. The old testament is part of the Bible, and it clearly condemns that act.

Yet Jesus Christ said nothing about it. That trumps the OT, and renders Paul a moot point.

Your opinion on which part of the Bible "trumps" another part of the Bible does not change the fact that condemnation of homosexuality is found, quite clearly, in the Bible.

Are you talking to me? Excuse me if I laugh at your commentary which has nothing, actually, to do with me. Heterosexuals are guilty of rape, incest, abuse, divorce, murder, and every sin imaginable...so, how dare you point fingers. Funny how you are so willing to shirk responsibility, yet charge gays up, as if you're above the law.

 

[poet]

And the Levitical Code is defunct and irrelevant today.

But it's still in the Bible. Sorry man, I'd agree with you, but you're wrong.

Too bad you can't prove me wrong. The Bible, if nothing else, is open to interpretation....hence, different faiths/sects, dogma, and beliefs. Back atcha.

 

[eflatminor]

Yet Jesus Christ said nothing about it. That trumps the OT, and renders Paul a moot point.

Your opinion on which part of the Bible "trumps" another part of the Bible does not change the fact that condemnation of homosexuality is found, quite clearly, in the Bible.

Are you talking to me? Excuse me if I laugh at your commentary which has nothing, actually, to do with me. Heterosexuals are guilty of rape, incest, abuse, divorce, murder, and every sin imaginable...so, how dare you point fingers. Funny how you are so willing to shirk responsibility, yet charge gays up, as if you're above the law.

What in the hell are you going on about? Nobody cares about you. We're simply countering your claim that homosexuality is not condemned in the Bible, because it is. This has nothing to do with what heterosexuals may be guilty of...and nobody pointed a finger at anyone! Responsibly? For what? And I've not "charged" anyone up, gay or otherwise.

My goodness man, are you drunk? Enjoying a bowl of paint chips?

 

[eflatminor]

And the Levitical Code is defunct and irrelevant today.

But it's still in the Bible. Sorry man, I'd agree with you, but you're wrong.

Too bad you can't prove me wrong. The Bible, if nothing else, is open to interpretation....hence, different faiths/sects, dogma, and beliefs. Back atcha.

Leviticus is in the Bible. There, you've been proven wrong.

It really doesn't matter which part of the Bible you most appreciate. The fact remains that homosexuality is condemned in the Bible. Sorry if that doesn't fit your agenda.

Best of luck with those paint chips...

 

[poet]

Your opinion on which part of the Bible "trumps" another part of the Bible does not change the fact that condemnation of homosexuality is found, quite clearly, in the Bible.

Are you talking to me? Excuse me if I laugh at your commentary which has nothing, actually, to do with me. Heterosexuals are guilty of rape, incest, abuse, divorce, murder, and every sin imaginable...so, how dare you point fingers. Funny how you are so willing to shirk responsibility, yet charge gays up, as if you're above the law.

What in the hell are you going on about? Nobody cares about you. We're simply countering your claim that homosexuality is not condemned in the Bible, because it is. This has nothing to do with what heterosexuals may be guilty of...and nobody pointed a finger at anyone! Responsibly? For what? And I've not "charged" anyone up, gay or otherwise.

My goodness man, are you drunk? Enjoying a bowl of paint chips?

And I say it isn't....by today's standards. Who is right? Pissing contest, much?
And don't ask me any questions...try looking into the nearest mirror. (in lieu of "the dozens").

 

[eflatminor]

Are you talking to me? Excuse me if I laugh at your commentary which has nothing, actually, to do with me. Heterosexuals are guilty of rape, incest, abuse, divorce, murder, and every sin imaginable...so, how dare you point fingers. Funny how you are so willing to shirk responsibility, yet charge gays up, as if you're above the law.

What in the hell are you going on about? Nobody cares about you. We're simply countering your claim that homosexuality is not condemned in the Bible, because it is. This has nothing to do with what heterosexuals may be guilty of...and nobody pointed a finger at anyone! Responsibly? For what? And I've not "charged" anyone up, gay or otherwise.

My goodness man, are you drunk? Enjoying a bowl of paint chips?

And I say it isn't....by today's standards. Who is right? Pissing contest, much?
And don't ask me any questions...try looking into the nearest mirror. (in lieu of "the dozens").

Well, you can say 2 + 2 doesn't equal 4, but you'd be wrong about that too.

"Dozens"? Come on, admit it, you're drunk.

 

[poet]

But it's still in the Bible. Sorry man, I'd agree with you, but you're wrong.

Too bad you can't prove me wrong. The Bible, if nothing else, is open to interpretation....hence, different faiths/sects, dogma, and beliefs. Back atcha.

Leviticus is in the Bible. There, you've been proven wrong.

It really doesn't matter which part of the Bible you most appreciate. The fact remains that homosexuality is condemned in the Bible. Sorry if that doesn't fit your agenda.

Best of luck with those paint chips...

Sorry, it doesn't. Pomposity (vainglory) is also condemned...you might want to check it.