 |
I'm interested in a discussion (a calm one) about the Bible and homosexuality. Not whether the condition/preference/whatever is inborn or chosen, but what the Bible says about it.
I have read with great interest - creative and maybe accurate comments - about deconstructing Paul's words on the issue, but what about other parts of the Bible? Does not the Old Testament clearly condemn homosexuality?
According to religioustolerance.org, "There was no Hebrew word that meant 'homosexual.' Thus, whenever the word is seen in an English translation of the Bible, one should be wary that the translators might be inserting their own prejudices into the text."
Is religioustolerance an objective source?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
There may not have been a word for "homosexuality", but that word may be more modern than the words used in the Old Testament. The OT may have described homosexuality without using the modern word. "Wary" is a two-edged sword.
Here's another site's explanation --
VERSES FROM THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES (OLD TESTAMENT) ON HOMOSEXUALITY
About the ReligiousTolerance.org web site and its staffQuote:
Originally Posted by Athos
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
When you c/p from sites that go on endlessly, I tend to lose interest. I don't have the time to follow every reference, most of which have little or nothing to do with the question.
Rather than my quoting piecemeal and losing some of the Biblical references, word translations and interpretations, and historical allusions, I posted the link to the site. Sorry. I won't do it again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
I forgive you. Say 3 Hail Marys and go and sin no more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Only 3 Hail Marys this time? Why so few?Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
I'm in a forgiving mood. Now, please get back to the question and stop your interminable going off on a tangent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Are we risking an anachronistic introduction of a contemporary construction of sexuality that's foreign to Bible times? The term ‘homosexuality’ was coined only recently in the late 19th century by German psychologist Karoly Maria Benkert. In addition, the Christian Church has always smiled upon procreative sex within marriage, while every other expression of sexuality has been condemned as sinful (cf. St. Augustine).Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
The anachronism is all yours. That is the very thing I am trying to avoid. Homosexuality, while the word may be new, is hardly a "contemporary construction of sexuality foreign to Bible times". The very notion is absurd. Unless you believe homosexuality began after the Bible era. I'm sure you don't believe that.
As to the Christian Church "smiling upon procreative sex within marriage", that has nothing to do with the question. The question is What does the Bible say about homosexuality - in the Old Testamant.
Please stay on topic.
Since homosexuality is an orientation, we should be looking at what an orientation is and see what scripture says about orientation in general. In the last thread, it was impossible to get those who do not think homosexuality is a sin to do so. They wanted to jump the gun, as though homosexuality and homosexual activity were special sins entirely different from all other sins. This is one point where I have found common ground in these debates with homosexuals who have participated in these debates. They question why Christians put such emphasis on homosexuality. And I agree that it is wrong to do so. Some Christians make it a special sin in that it is somehow worse than all others, and other Christians say that it is special because it is the one where the orientation is not a sin, only the act. And yet I can find no Christians on any side of the fence who can show me a verse that says that homoswexuality or homosexual activity differs from other sins.
Jesus was very clear in Matthew 5 that the sin does not occur just when the act takes place, but takes place in the mind ahead of time. If an activity is sinful, how can the orientation towards an activity not be sinful in light of Matthew 5 (and others)?
As for Hebrew, the Old Testament is very clear that homosexual activity is sinful, whether there is a sin word for it. We can look at Leviticus and we can look at Sodom and Gomorrah for examples.
But we should not restrict ourselves to the OT - the whole of scripture is God's word. If we want to understand one part of His word, we need to consider it in the context of the whole. In the NT we do have specific references to homosexuality:
1 Cor 6:9-11
9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.
NKJV
This also shows that some were homosexuals and were changed when saved.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
I was hoping for specific verse references in the OT. The translation of the word "homosexual" in Corinthians has been put in doubt, according to other posters. I don't want to rehash that in this thread.
I see no doubt in the translation except for those that wish not to accept it, You can call a fish a cow but it is still a fish.
This issue has been reahashed time and time again
Those that are pro homoseuxal will not accept what the bible says, those that follow and believe in the bible have no doubt in what it says.
The OT was written in a very patriarchal society. Homosexuality or anything that smacked of male-to-male sexual relations, at least among OT males, posed a serious threat to patriarchy. One of the partners would have to assume a passive, female role and that would threaten the dignity not only of that man but also of all men by inference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
There is no mention in the OT of lesbianism. Marriage was obligatory for women, meaning that their sex role was tightly controlled. If there were lesbian dalliances, they were not a threat to the patriarchal order.
That being said, there's a verse in the OT: "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable" (Lev. 20:13). Obviously this was said to the majority heterosexual population. If the author was speaking about homosexuals in that verse, he would be referring to homosexuals lying also with a woman, which would not be something they would do. The verse is warning heterosexual Hebrew males not to imitate or embrace Canaanite sex rituals that were performed by Molech's male priests and/or prostitutes who dressed up as women, as pagan goddesses, i.e. lying with a male as though with a female.
Wondergirl,
First that was written for EVERYONE to read AND it was written directly to the Jewish people of the day NOT just heterosexuals. NEXT, the verse is clear... the writer is giving you an example of exactly what you are NOT suppose to do. When you see the words LIKE or AS in scripture the Lord is going to paint a picture for you so you can understand it. ( Like and AS in scripture are extremely important words... I always take special note because the Lord is showing us something and he is going to compare it to something we understand.) Sorry but way you twist scripture to fit your agenda would be comical if it weren't so scary.
My only agenda is to figure out the truth of what the words "homosexual" and "homosexuality" mean as per the Bible use of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by classyT
Have you ever taken any undergrad or grad school Bible history courses?
Old Testament society was a patriarchy. True or False.
Levitical law (part of the Jewish Halakha, ritual laws given to the Jewish people) is not a cafeteria and is not part of the Ten Commandments. Those acts described as abominations (Hebrew "toevah"), ritually impure but not moral sins, included eating pork and shellfish, wearing clothing made of more than one fiber, planting two different kinds of seed in a field, and tattoos. Let's pretend Leviticus also speaks against homosexuality (as we define it in 2009) as one of these ritually impure sins. Why do we now feel free to eat at Red Lobster, enjoy pork roast, wear cotton/poly blends, and allow tattoo parlors, but retain that one Levitical holiness law against "homosexuality" (Lev. 20:13) because it suits our prejudice? In fact, Chapter 20 begins with a prohibition of sexual idolatry, and the chapter continues on to describe the ways in which Jews can maintain ritual cleanliness by not consorting with male temple prostitutes so the Jews will be seen as separate from pagan neighbors.
Just because some people have rejected what the Greek experts say is no reason to doubt what God's words actually says.Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
Wondergirl,
Sorry had to watch american idol.
The Lord Jesus followed the Law... not just the ten commandments.. and he fulfilled ALL of the law not just the ten commandments. We are living under GRACE... we are no longer under law as Paul teaches. We eat pork and red lobster because the Lord himself told Peter in Acts to arise and eat the unclean food that had been forbidden under the law. Honestly, you can go around it, over look it, override it, over analysis it, ignore it , or change it to fit an agenda. But God is NOT the author of confusion... He says what he means and he means what he says. It is in black and white and you want to discuss if it really applies or actually says it?errrr frustrating... but I'm not going to change your mind. Homosexuality according to the Bible is wrong. But I have YET to be on this site discussing biblical doctrine where the other person concedes that they are wrong and I am right. So I reckon we will have to agree to disagree.
(but you are so wrong)
I think that you hit the nail right on the head. This is why this keep going around and around in circles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
You have got to be kidding. You are now going to divide up the population into straight males, homosexual males and straights males who have sex with men?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Are you serious??
I cannot believe this verse could be considered anything else, It is obvious the meaning and the warnig
Lev. 20:13 = Hebrew toe'vah (and Greek bdelygma) = "abomination" meaning "ritual impurity" and "ethnic contamination" and "foreign religious cult practice"
Another translation of Lev. 20:13, into modern English, is "It is an abomination for two men to have sex on a woman's bed. They are to be executed; it is their own fault." The interpretation is that this was another abomination in Leviticus that lists improper mixing of things that should be kept separate. A woman's bed was her own. Only her husband was permitted there, and then only under certain circumstances. Any other use of her bed would be a defilement.
That's what we have in the world now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
I always find it interesting when someone says "another translation" without saying what translation they are using. I looked it up - it is the National Gay Pentecostal Alliance (NGPA) interpretation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
That speaks for itself. I have found no other translation which makes that claim.
I would not have believed it unless I had seen it myself that anyone could have made such a claim seriously.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Straight males who have sex with men - prison populations?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
And you don't think that is homosexual activity? Do you know what the word homosexual means? "homo" = "same", "sex" - well, you get the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
And your interpretation is fundamentalist Christian.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
No. Straight males do have sex with straight males in prison.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
If what you mean by fundametalist Christian is a person who reads the word and believes it without putting any spin on it... hey, count me IN!Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
No, read ANY credible translation. Look at the original language.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
What about this:
Lev. 20:13 = Hebrew toe'vah (and Greek bdelygma) = "abomination" meaning "ritual impurity" and "ethnic contamination" and "foreign religious cult practice"
If two men have sex together, whatever possesses you to say that they are straight. At best, an argument could be made for bi-sexual, which is a variant on homosexuality, but straight? Hardly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Strong's concordance suggests that you left something out:Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tow` ebah (to-ay-baw'); or to` ebah (to-ay-baw'); feminine active participle of OT:8581; properly, something disgusting (morally), i.e. (as noun) an abhorrence; especially idolatry or (concretely) an idol:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BTW, the OT was written in Hebrew, not Greek.
Actually, we don't have the original language. We don't have the original writings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
But not a sin. Only an offense that requires ritual cleansing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
We don't have Hebrew?? Tell that to any Jew and see what they say.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
We do have the original content - perhaps the original autograph, but we have the content.Quote:
We don't have the original writings.
Or you are now going further and denying that the whole Bible can be trusted?
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:56 PM. |