Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Page 3 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by victorismyhero on Mon Oct 24, 2011 8:57 pm

elektrafied wrote:

common sense rules... Very Happy

such as????
avatar
victorismyhero
sael curunithron
sael curunithron

Posts : 2603
Join date : 2011-02-15
Location : cheshire

Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:00 pm

victorismyhero wrote:

As to why? you mean why hunman sacrifice. Well now thats a good question...how DO we look into the mind, and thus the motivation, of societies and individuals thousands or even hundreds of years ago.
There are theories of course, and I recon the lead one atm is the one about votive offerings....throwing something precious to the gods...like a coin, weapon, etc...well human sacrifice it is thought was the extreme edge of this....what MORE precious to offer the gods than a human life.....Bear in mind too that the VALUE of human life was different then...and perhaps viewed differently too....

Interesting, was reading in regards to the Icene and other tribes in Brition, where they were big on collecting the heads of those they had slain. Just was wondering if there was anything you had read in regards to the druids of the past, but thanks!
You are right things were much different then!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:00 pm

Phildidge wrote:

Are you saying historical documents don't count? Oh my!

Anyway the verse you provided is stating something of the past, no command not to, so I suggest you try again, it states:

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. 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. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

So no command for women, try again.

No verse on homosexuals not being allowed to paradise, again not doing so well.

Again what was the age Girls were allowed to marry in the time of Jesus, may help you understand Mary's age at conception? Very Happy

you have no scripture stating the age of mary...lol

1 corinthians chapter 6 vs 9-10 inclusive... Very Happy

combined with God's original plan of one man and one woman given to each other, i think it's quite clear what God intended.... Very Happy

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:13 pm

So we have:

King James 2000 Bible (©️2003)
Know you not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

Nothing about homosexuality there, must be some ridiculas incorrect translation you are using, whoops, not doing to well again! Very Happy

Oh so you know God's plan that is interesting when nobody does, you should be loaded knowing that! Very Happy

So again no proof of any scripture on homsexuals not going to heaven or anything on women being with women, ignoring David and Jonathan being In a gay relationship and Ruth and Naomi and yet you have failed to provide an answer that is valid.

How old were girls allowed to marry in the time of jesus? If you knew this you would know that in keeping with Jewish custom, the betrothal would have taken place when she was around 12, and the birth of Jesus about a year later.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:17 pm

Phildidge wrote:So we have:

King James 2000 Bible (©️2003)
Know you not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

Nothing about homosexuality there, must be some ridiculas incorrect translation you are using, whoops, not doing to well again! Very Happy

Oh so you know God's plan that is interesting when nobody does, you should be loaded knowing that! Very Happy

So again no proof of any scripture on homsexuals not going to heaven or anything on women being with women, ignoring David and Jonathan being In a gay relationship and Ruth and Naomi and yet you have failed to provide an answer that is valid.

How old were girls allowed to marry in the time of jesus? If you knew this you would know that in keeping with Jewish custom, the betrothal would have taken place when she was around 12, and the birth of Jesus about a year later.


oops nkj 9Do 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, 10nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. Very Happy

lol...again show me scripture that shows the age of mary, oh I forgot you cannot, can you explain what marys age has to do with homosexuals repenting, please stick to topic.... Very Happy

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:19 pm

YLT...9have ye not known that the unrighteous the reign of God shall not inherit? be not led astray; neither whoremongers, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor sodomites, 10nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, the reign of God shall inherit.
Very Happy

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by victorismyhero on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:20 pm

Phildidge wrote:

Interesting, was reading in regards to the Icene and other tribes in Brition, where they were big on collecting the heads of those they had slain. Just was wondering if there was anything you had read in regards to the druids of the past, but thanks!
You are right things were much different then!

Ahhhh...that is a different matter.......collecting "trophy heads" (or other bits...apparantly penises were quite popular in some places) is a different matter to human sacrifice....Thats a "bragging" thing...I got 5 more heads thatn you so nahhhhhhh and may also have gaind monetary recognition (piece rate warfare?)
avatar
victorismyhero
sael curunithron
sael curunithron

Posts : 2603
Join date : 2011-02-15
Location : cheshire

Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:22 pm

I take it this forum doesn't have rules about keeping to the topic at hand, which is the need for homosexuals to repent.... Very Happy

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:24 pm

elektrafied wrote:


oops nkj 9Do 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, 10nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. Very Happy
That is a made up translation, oh my, no such word for homosexual at the time for jesus, the greek word was Arsenokoites
This word DID NOT refer to homosexuals in ancient usage, so well done for showing you have not looked into the translations, whoops!


lol...again show me scripture that shows the age of mary, oh I forgot you cannot, can you explain what marys age has to do with homosexuals repenting, please stick to topic.... Very Happy

You made the point on ypung sex, seems this God did with Mary or the fact they were allowed to marry at 12 and still are in the vatican, both allow under age sex, is quite awful really:

Anyway still no proof for the following of any scripture on homsexuals not going to heaven or anything on women being with women, ignoring David and Jonathan being In a gay relationship and Ruth and Naomi and yet you have failed to provide an answer that is valid.

Try again, this is fun, especially when a God squad knows little of the bible hee hee!


Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:25 pm

victorismyhero wrote:

Ahhhh...that is a different matter.......collecting "trophy heads" (or other bits...apparantly penises were quite popular in some places) is a different matter to human sacrifice....Thats a "bragging" thing...I got 5 more heads thatn you so nahhhhhhh and may also have gaind monetary recognition (piece rate warfare?)

I see, was wondering if there was any connection to any custom within any druid rituals, as i say am learning and have to have you as my guide on this! Very Happy

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by victorismyhero on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:26 pm

elektrafied wrote:I take it this forum doesn't have rules about keeping to the topic at hand, which is the need for homosexuals to repent.... Very Happy

Since they have actually done nothing wrong....what is there for them to "repent"........
avatar
victorismyhero
sael curunithron
sael curunithron

Posts : 2603
Join date : 2011-02-15
Location : cheshire

Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:28 pm

Phildidge wrote:

You made the point on ypung sex, seems this God did with Mary or the fact they were allowed to marry at 12 and still are in the vatican, both allow under age sex, is quite awful really:

Anyway still no proof for the following of any scripture on homsexuals not going to heaven or anything on women being with women, ignoring David and Jonathan being In a gay relationship and Ruth and Naomi and yet you have failed to provide an answer that is valid.

Try again, this is fun, especially when a God squad knows little of the bible hee hee!


I made no point at all about young sex, you have no scripture to back up marys age, which is fine as it doesn't matter to this discussion...

9have ye not known that the unrighteous the reign of God shall not inherit? be not led astray; neither whoremongers, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor sodomites, 10nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, the reign of God shall inherit.
i posted this once it is from the YLT...

show me in scripture where any sex happened between daniel and jonathan or ruth and naomi.... Very Happy

it appears the little I know about scripture far outstrips your years of research... Very Happy

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:36 pm

victorismyhero wrote:

Since they have actually done nothing wrong....what is there for them to "repent"........

according to the bible they have sinned, so they must repent if they want to be saved... Very Happy

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by victorismyhero on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:40 pm

elektrafied wrote:

according to the bible they have sinned, so they must repent if they want to be saved... Very Happy

BUT...the bible is a load of old cobblers....made up by some dude with a power complex, called Abraham......Doesnt seem much of an authority on ANY issue really.......
avatar
victorismyhero
sael curunithron
sael curunithron

Posts : 2603
Join date : 2011-02-15
Location : cheshire

Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:42 pm

victorismyhero wrote:

BUT...the bible is a load of old cobblers....made up by some dude with a power complex, called Abraham......Doesnt seem much of an authority on ANY issue really.......

well may I suggest you leave the debate as it this debate is clearly based on biblical principals.... Very Happy

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:46 pm

elektrafied wrote:

I made no point at all about young sex, you have no scripture to back up marys age, which is fine as it doesn't matter to this discussion...

9have ye not known that the unrighteous the reign of God shall not inherit? be not led astray; neither whoremongers, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor sodomites, 10nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, the reign of God shall inherit.
i posted this once it is from the YLT...

show me in scripture where any sex happened between daniel and jonathan or ruth and naomi.... Very Happy

it appears the little I know about scripture far outstrips your years of research... Very Happy

Oh my goodness, do you know what language the new testament texts were translated from? Ancient Greek

The word translated is arsenokoites which means either one who anally penetrates another, a rapist, a murderer or an extortionist.
It does not mean homosexual or sodomite, so I suggest you may want to get a bible that has all the right translations, in fact like I siad there is no word to denote as we know the word homosexual from greek, hence why you really need to look at studying the bible it will save you endless embarressment in debates like this.
I have told you already that David states that he loved Jonathan more than women, also look at King Saul in 1 Samuel 20:30),
The evidence is damning I am afraid as well as Ruth, so unlucky, suggest you spend less time at sunday school and actually study the works properly? Very Happy

As to Mary, you made the silly claim if a father loved his son he would be incestious or a child offender, just showing this was endemic in the time of jesus with young sexual relations!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by victorismyhero on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:48 pm

elektrafied wrote:

well may I suggest you leave the debate as it this debate is clearly based on biblical principals.... Very Happy

The bible HAS no principles, nor do a good proportion of its adherents....particularly the born agains......and no I wont since the relevance isssue is part of the debate....a homosexual has no need to repent anything...because the bible is irrelevant.......
avatar
victorismyhero
sael curunithron
sael curunithron

Posts : 2603
Join date : 2011-02-15
Location : cheshire

Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:49 pm

Phildidge wrote:

Oh my goodness, do you know what language the new testament texts were translated from? Ancient Greek

The word translated is arsenokoites which means either one who anally penetrates another, a rapist, a murderer or an extortionist.
It does not mean homosexual or sodomite, so I suggest you may want to get a bible that has all the right translations, in fact like I siad there is no word to denote as we know the word homosexual from greek, hence why you really need to look at studying the bible it will save you endless embarressment in debates like this.
I have told you already that David states that he loved Jonathan more than women, also look at King Saul in 1 Samuel 20:30),
The evidence is damning I am afraid as well as Ruth, so unlucky, suggest you spend less time at sunday school and actually study the works properly? Very Happy

As to Mary, you made the silly claim if a father loved his son he would be incestious or a child offender, just showing this was endemic in the time of jesus with young sexual relations!

ha ha ha it is that damning you cannot produce a single scripture to support any sexual activity...lol... Very Happy

it states sodomite...lol... Very Happy

hilarious .... Very Happy

26Because of this did God give them up to dishonourable affections, for even their females did change the natural use into that against nature; 27and in like manner also the males having left the natural use of the female, did burn in their longing toward one another; males with males working shame, and the recompense of their error that was fit, in themselves receiving.

this one explains gays and lesbians.... Very Happy

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:53 pm

your knowledge of greek is on par with your knowledge of the bible...

G733

ἀρσενοκοίτης

arsenokoitēs

ar-sen-ok-oy'-tace

From G730 and G2845; a sodomite:—abuser of (that defile) self with mankind.

Very Happy

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:54 pm

elektrafied wrote:

ha ha ha it is that damning you cannot produce a single scripture to support any sexual activity...lol... Very Happy

it states sodomite...lol... Very Happy

hilarious .... Very Happy

26Because of this did God give them up to dishonourable affections, for even their females did change the natural use into that against nature; 27and in like manner also the males having left the natural use of the female, did burn in their longing toward one another; males with males working shame, and the recompense of their error that was fit, in themselves receiving.

this one explains gays and lesbians.... Very Happy

Could I ask, do you go by any other names?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:56 pm

sassy1261 wrote:

Could I ask, do you go by any other names?

of course you can ask but is it relevant to the topic??

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:56 pm

elektrafied wrote:

ha ha ha it is that damning you cannot produce a single scripture to support any sexual activity...lol... Very Happy

it states sodomite...lol... Very Happy


hilarious .... Very Happy

26Because of this did God give them up to dishonourable affections, for even their females did change the natural use into that against nature; 27and in like manner also the males having left the natural use of the female, did burn in their longing toward one another; males with males working shame, and the recompense of their error that was fit, in themselves receiving.

this one explains gays and lesbians.... Very Happy

OMG it is hilarious, i suggest you go to learn ancient greek before engaging in debate, you know nothing of translations and know this is wholelotta, so is funny usual denial of the facts.
You are like a broken pencil, look up the proper translation and its context before debating! Very Happy

Oh dear lesson 1:

Arsenokoités

From the earliest English translations of the Bible, arsenokoités has suffered confusing treatment. Wyclif (in 1380) translated it as "thei that don leccherie with men" and until the twentieth century similar translations prevailed, primarily "abusars of them selves with the mankynde" (Tyndale 1534; see also Coverdale 1535, Cranmer 1539, Geneva Bible 1557, KJV 1611, ASV 1901; the Douai-Rheims version of 1582 was a bit clearer: "the liers vvith mankinde"). A curious shift in translation occurred in the mid-twentieth century. Suddenly, the language of psychology and "normalcy" creeps into English versions. Although some still use archaic terms, like "sodomite" OB 1966, NAB 1970, NRSV 1989), several influential versions substitute more modem concepts like "sexual perverts" (RSV 1946, REB 1992) or terms that reflect the nineteenth century's invention of the category of the "homosexual," such as the NIV's (1973) "homosexual offenders." Some translations even go so far as to collapse arsenokoités and malakos together into one term: "homosexual perverts" or "homosexual perversion" (TEV 1966, NEB 1970). Modem commentators also offer a variety of interpretations. Some explain that malakos refers to the "passive" partner in male-male anal intercourse and arsenokoités the "active" partner, thus the two disputable terms being taken care of mutually.2 Some simply import wholesale the modem category and translate arsenokoités as "male homosexual."3 Others, in an attempt, I suppose, to separate the "sin" from the "sinner," have suggested "practicing homosexuals."4

Between the end of the nineteenth and the middle of the twentieth century, therefore, the translation of arsenokoités shifted from being the reference to an action that any man might well perform, regardless of orientation or disorientation, to refer to a "perversion," either an action or a propensity taken to be self-evidently abnormal and diseased. The shift in translation, that is, reflected the invention of the category of "homosexuality" as an abnormal orientation, an invention that occurred in the nineteenth century but gained popular currency only gradually in the twentieth.5 Furthermore, whereas earlier translations had all taken the term (correctly) to refer to men, the newer translations broadened the reference to include people of either sex who could be diagnosed as suffering from the new modem neurosis of homosexuality. Thorough historical or philological evidence was never adduced to support this shift in translation. The interpretations were prompted not by criteria of historical criticism but by shifts in modem sexual ideology.

As the debate over homosexuality and the Bible has become more explicit, various attempts have been made to defend the interpretation of arsenokoités as a reference to male-male or homosexual sex in general. A common error made in such attempts is to point to its two parts, arsLn and koitLs, and say that "obviously" the word refers to men who have sex with men.6 Scholars sometimes support this reading by pointing out that the two words occur together, though not joined, in Greek translations of the Hebrew Bible and in Philo in a context in which he condemns male homosexual sex.7 Either Paul, it is suggested, or someone before him simply combined the two words together to form a new term for men who have sex with men.

This approach is linguistically invalid. It is highly precarious to try to ascertain the meaning of a word by taking it apart, getting the meanings of its component parts, and then assuming, with no supporting evidence, that the meaning of the longer word is a simple combination of its component parts. To "understand" does not mean to "stand under." In fact, nothing about the basic meanings of either "stand" or "under" has any direct bearing on the meaning of "understand." This phenomenon of language is sometimes even more obvious with terms that designate social roles, since the nature of the roles themselves often changes over time and becomes separated from any original reference. None of us, for example, takes the word "chairman" to have any necessary reference to a chair, even if it originally did. Thus, all definitions of arsenokoités that derive its meaning from its components are naive and indefensible. Furthermore, the claim that arsenokoités came from a combination of these two words and therefore means "men who have sex with men" makes the additional error of defining a word by its (assumed) etymology. The etymology of a word is its history, not its meaning.8

The only reliable way to define a word is to analyze its use in as many different contexts as possible. The word "means" according to its function, according to how particular people use the word in different situations. Unfortunately, we have very few uses of arsenokoités and most of those occur in simple lists of sins, mostly in quotations of the biblical lists, thus pro- viding no explanation of the term, no independent usage, and few clues from the context about the term's meaning. But having analyzed these different occurrences of arsenokoités, especially cases where it occurs in vice lists that do not merely quote 1 Cor. 6:9 or 1 Tim. 1:10, I am convinced that we can make some guarded statements.

As others have noted, vice lists are sometimes organized into groups of "sins," with sins put together that have something to do with one another.9 First are listed, say, vices of sex, then those of violence, then others related to economics or injustice. Analyzing the occurrence of arsenokoités in different vice lists, I noticed that it often occurs not where we would expect to find reference to homosexual intercourse — that is, along with adultery (moicheia) and prostitution or illicit sex (porneia) — but among vices related to economic injustice or exploitation. Though this provides little to go on, I suggest that a careful analysis of the actual context of the use of arsenokoités, free from linguistically specious arguments from etymology or the word's separate parts, indicates that arsenokoités had a more specific meaning in Greco-Roman culture than homosexual penetration in general, a meaning that is now lost to us. It seems to have referred to some kind of economic exploitation by means of sex, perhaps but not necessarily homosexual sex.

One of the earliest appearances of the word (here the verb) occurs in Sibylline Oracle 2.70-77.10 Although the date of this section of the oracle — indeed, of the finished oracle itself — is uncertain, there is no reason to take the text as dependent on Paul or the New Testament. The oracle probably provides an independent use of the word. It occurs in a section listing acts of economic injustice and exploitation; in fact, the editors of the English translation here quoted (J. J. Collins) label the section "On Justice":

(Never accept in your hand a gift which derives from unjust deeds.)

Do not steal seeds. Whoever takes for himself is accursed (to generations of generations, to the scattering of life.

Do not arsenokoitein, do not betray information, do not murder.) Give one who has labored his wage. Do not oppress a poor man. Take heed of your speech. Keep a secret matter in your heart. (Make provision for orphans and widows and those in need.)

Do not be willing to act unjustly, and therefore do not give leave to one who is acting unjustly.

The term occurs in a list of what we might call "economic sins," actions related to economic injustice or exploitation: accepting gifts from unjust sources, extortion, withholding wages, oppressing the poor. "Stealing seeds" probably refers to the hoarding of grain; in the ancient world, the poor often accused the rich of withholding grain from the market as a price-fixing strategy.11 I would argue that other sins here mentioned that have no necessary economic connotation probably do here. Thus the references to speech and keeping secrets may connote the use of information for unjust gain, like fraud, extortion, or blackmail; and "murder" here may hint at motivations of economic gain, recalling, for example, the murder of Naboth by Jezebel (1 Kings 21). In any case, no other term in the section refers to sex. Indeed, nothing in the context (including what precedes and follows this quotation) suggests that a sexual action in general is being referred to at all. If we take the context as indicating the meaning, we should assume that arsenokoitein here refers to some kind of economic exploitation, probably by sexual means: rape or sex by economic coercion, prostitution, pimping, or something of the sort.

This suggestion is supported by the fact that a list of sexual sins does occur elsewhere in the same oracle, which is where we might expect to find a reference to male-male sex (2.279-82). The author condemns "defiling the flesh by licentiousness," "undoing the girdle of virginity by secret intercourse," abortion, and exposure of infants (the last two often taken to be means of birth control used by people enslaved to sex; such people proved by these deeds that they had sex purely out of lust rather than from the "nobler" motive of procreation). If the prohibition against arsenokoitein was taken to condemn homosexual intercourse in general, one would expect the term to occur here, rather than among the terms condemning unjust exploitation.12

A similar case exists in the second-century Acts of John. "John" is condemning the rich men of Ephesus:

You who delight in gold and ivory and jewels, do you see your loved (possessions) when night comes on? And you who give way to soft clothing, and then depart from life, will these things be useful in the place where you are going? And let the murderer know that the punishment he has earned awaits him in double measure after he leaves this (world). So also the poisoner, sorcerer, robber, swindler, and arsenokoités, the thief and all of this band. ...So, men of Ephesus, change your ways; for you know this also, that kings, rulers, tyrants, boasters, and warmongers shall go naked from this world and come to eternal misery and torment (section 36; Hennecke-Schneemelcher).

Here also, arsenokoités occurs in a list of sins related to economics and injustice: delighting in wealth, robbery, swindling, thievery. Note also the list of those who prosper by their power over others: kings, rulers, tyrants, boasters, warmongers. The emphasis throughout the section is on power, money, and unjust exploitation, not sex.

As was the case in the Sybilline Oracle, "John" does denounce sexual sins elsewhere in the text, and the word arsenokoités is absent (section 35). If this author took arsenokoités to refer generally to homosexual sex or penetration, we would expect him to mention it among the other sexual sins, rather than in the section condemning the rich for economic exploitation. Thus, here also arsenokoités probably refers to some kind of economic exploitation, again perhaps by sexual means.

Another second-century Christian document offers corroborative, though a bit less obvious, evidence. Theophilus of Antioch, in his treatise addressed To Autolychus, provides a vice list.13 First come the two sexual sins of adultery and fornication or prostitution.14 Next come three economic sinners: thief, plunderer, and defrauder (or robber). Sixth is arsenokoités. The next group includes savagery, abusive behavior, wrath, and jealousy or envy, all of which the ancients would recognize as sins of "passion": that is, uncontrolled emotion. Next come instances of pride: boastfulness and conceit or haughtiness. I take the next term, pléktés ("striker") to denote someone who thinks he can go around hitting people as if they were his slaves. Then occurs the term "avaricious," or "greedy." Finally are two phrases related to the family: disobedience to parents and selling one's children. These last three may all have been taken as belonging to the category of greed, surely in the case of selling one's children and also perhaps in the reference to parents, if the particular action is understood as a refusal to support one's parents in their old age.



Last edited by Phildidge on Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:07 pm; edited 1 time in total

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:01 pm

Phildidge wrote:

OMG it is hilarious, i suggest you go to learn ancient greek before engaging in debate, you know nothing of translations and know this is wholelotta, so is funny usual denial of the facts.
You are like a broken pencil, look up the proper translation and its context before debating! Very Happy

ha ha ha are you claiming greater knowledge than a greek concordance...lol... Very Happy

would you like to comment on romans chapter 1 vs 26-27 or do you want to invent some more ancient greek first... Very Happy

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:07 pm

1 timothy chapter 1

9knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine.

the greek word used again for sodomite is the same as the last time... Very Happy

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:09 pm

elektrafied wrote:1 timothy chapter 1

9knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine.

the greek word used again for sodomite is the same as the last time... Very Happy

whoops:

Arsenokoités

From the earliest English translations of the Bible, arsenokoités has suffered confusing treatment. Wyclif (in 1380) translated it as "thei that don leccherie with men" and until the twentieth century similar translations prevailed, primarily "abusars of them selves with the mankynde" (Tyndale 1534; see also Coverdale 1535, Cranmer 1539, Geneva Bible 1557, KJV 1611, ASV 1901; the Douai-Rheims version of 1582 was a bit clearer: "the liers vvith mankinde"). A curious shift in translation occurred in the mid-twentieth century. Suddenly, the language of psychology and "normalcy" creeps into English versions. Although some still use archaic terms, like "sodomite" OB 1966, NAB 1970, NRSV 1989), several influential versions substitute more modem concepts like "sexual perverts" (RSV 1946, REB 1992) or terms that reflect the nineteenth century's invention of the category of the "homosexual," such as the NIV's (1973) "homosexual offenders." Some translations even go so far as to collapse arsenokoités and malakos together into one term: "homosexual perverts" or "homosexual perversion" (TEV 1966, NEB 1970). Modem commentators also offer a variety of interpretations. Some explain that malakos refers to the "passive" partner in male-male anal intercourse and arsenokoités the "active" partner, thus the two disputable terms being taken care of mutually.2 Some simply import wholesale the modem category and translate arsenokoités as "male homosexual."3 Others, in an attempt, I suppose, to separate the "sin" from the "sinner," have suggested "practicing homosexuals."4

Between the end of the nineteenth and the middle of the twentieth century, therefore, the translation of arsenokoités shifted from being the reference to an action that any man might well perform, regardless of orientation or disorientation, to refer to a "perversion," either an action or a propensity taken to be self-evidently abnormal and diseased. The shift in translation, that is, reflected the invention of the category of "homosexuality" as an abnormal orientation, an invention that occurred in the nineteenth century but gained popular currency only gradually in the twentieth.5 Furthermore, whereas earlier translations had all taken the term (correctly) to refer to men, the newer translations broadened the reference to include people of either sex who could be diagnosed as suffering from the new modem neurosis of homosexuality. Thorough historical or philological evidence was never adduced to support this shift in translation. The interpretations were prompted not by criteria of historical criticism but by shifts in modem sexual ideology.

As the debate over homosexuality and the Bible has become more explicit, various attempts have been made to defend the interpretation of arsenokoités as a reference to male-male or homosexual sex in general. A common error made in such attempts is to point to its two parts, arsLn and koitLs, and say that "obviously" the word refers to men who have sex with men.6 Scholars sometimes support this reading by pointing out that the two words occur together, though not joined, in Greek translations of the Hebrew Bible and in Philo in a context in which he condemns male homosexual sex.7 Either Paul, it is suggested, or someone before him simply combined the two words together to form a new term for men who have sex with men.

This approach is linguistically invalid. It is highly precarious to try to ascertain the meaning of a word by taking it apart, getting the meanings of its component parts, and then assuming, with no supporting evidence, that the meaning of the longer word is a simple combination of its component parts. To "understand" does not mean to "stand under." In fact, nothing about the basic meanings of either "stand" or "under" has any direct bearing on the meaning of "understand." This phenomenon of language is sometimes even more obvious with terms that designate social roles, since the nature of the roles themselves often changes over time and becomes separated from any original reference. None of us, for example, takes the word "chairman" to have any necessary reference to a chair, even if it originally did. Thus, all definitions of arsenokoités that derive its meaning from its components are naive and indefensible. Furthermore, the claim that arsenokoités came from a combination of these two words and therefore means "men who have sex with men" makes the additional error of defining a word by its (assumed) etymology. The etymology of a word is its history, not its meaning.8

The only reliable way to define a word is to analyze its use in as many different contexts as possible. The word "means" according to its function, according to how particular people use the word in different situations. Unfortunately, we have very few uses of arsenokoités and most of those occur in simple lists of sins, mostly in quotations of the biblical lists, thus pro- viding no explanation of the term, no independent usage, and few clues from the context about the term's meaning. But having analyzed these different occurrences of arsenokoités, especially cases where it occurs in vice lists that do not merely quote 1 Cor. 6:9 or 1 Tim. 1:10, I am convinced that we can make some guarded statements.

As others have noted, vice lists are sometimes organized into groups of "sins," with sins put together that have something to do with one another.9 First are listed, say, vices of sex, then those of violence, then others related to economics or injustice. Analyzing the occurrence of arsenokoités in different vice lists, I noticed that it often occurs not where we would expect to find reference to homosexual intercourse — that is, along with adultery (moicheia) and prostitution or illicit sex (porneia) — but among vices related to economic injustice or exploitation. Though this provides little to go on, I suggest that a careful analysis of the actual context of the use of arsenokoités, free from linguistically specious arguments from etymology or the word's separate parts, indicates that arsenokoités had a more specific meaning in Greco-Roman culture than homosexual penetration in general, a meaning that is now lost to us. It seems to have referred to some kind of economic exploitation by means of sex, perhaps but not necessarily homosexual sex.

One of the earliest appearances of the word (here the verb) occurs in Sibylline Oracle 2.70-77.10 Although the date of this section of the oracle — indeed, of the finished oracle itself — is uncertain, there is no reason to take the text as dependent on Paul or the New Testament. The oracle probably provides an independent use of the word. It occurs in a section listing acts of economic injustice and exploitation; in fact, the editors of the English translation here quoted (J. J. Collins) label the section "On Justice":

(Never accept in your hand a gift which derives from unjust deeds.)

Do not steal seeds. Whoever takes for himself is accursed (to generations of generations, to the scattering of life.

Do not arsenokoitein, do not betray information, do not murder.) Give one who has labored his wage. Do not oppress a poor man. Take heed of your speech. Keep a secret matter in your heart. (Make provision for orphans and widows and those in need.)

Do not be willing to act unjustly, and therefore do not give leave to one who is acting unjustly.

The term occurs in a list of what we might call "economic sins," actions related to economic injustice or exploitation: accepting gifts from unjust sources, extortion, withholding wages, oppressing the poor. "Stealing seeds" probably refers to the hoarding of grain; in the ancient world, the poor often accused the rich of withholding grain from the market as a price-fixing strategy.11 I would argue that other sins here mentioned that have no necessary economic connotation probably do here. Thus the references to speech and keeping secrets may connote the use of information for unjust gain, like fraud, extortion, or blackmail; and "murder" here may hint at motivations of economic gain, recalling, for example, the murder of Naboth by Jezebel (1 Kings 21). In any case, no other term in the section refers to sex. Indeed, nothing in the context (including what precedes and follows this quotation) suggests that a sexual action in general is being referred to at all. If we take the context as indicating the meaning, we should assume that arsenokoitein here refers to some kind of economic exploitation, probably by sexual means: rape or sex by economic coercion, prostitution, pimping, or something of the sort.

This suggestion is supported by the fact that a list of sexual sins does occur elsewhere in the same oracle, which is where we might expect to find a reference to male-male sex (2.279-82). The author condemns "defiling the flesh by licentiousness," "undoing the girdle of virginity by secret intercourse," abortion, and exposure of infants (the last two often taken to be means of birth control used by people enslaved to sex; such people proved by these deeds that they had sex purely out of lust rather than from the "nobler" motive of procreation). If the prohibition against arsenokoitein was taken to condemn homosexual intercourse in general, one would expect the term to occur here, rather than among the terms condemning unjust exploitation.12

A similar case exists in the second-century Acts of John. "John" is condemning the rich men of Ephesus:

You who delight in gold and ivory and jewels, do you see your loved (possessions) when night comes on? And you who give way to soft clothing, and then depart from life, will these things be useful in the place where you are going? And let the murderer know that the punishment he has earned awaits him in double measure after he leaves this (world). So also the poisoner, sorcerer, robber, swindler, and arsenokoités, the thief and all of this band. ...So, men of Ephesus, change your ways; for you know this also, that kings, rulers, tyrants, boasters, and warmongers shall go naked from this world and come to eternal misery and torment (section 36; Hennecke-Schneemelcher).

Here also, arsenokoités occurs in a list of sins related to economics and injustice: delighting in wealth, robbery, swindling, thievery. Note also the list of those who prosper by their power over others: kings, rulers, tyrants, boasters, warmongers. The emphasis throughout the section is on power, money, and unjust exploitation, not sex.

As was the case in the Sybilline Oracle, "John" does denounce sexual sins elsewhere in the text, and the word arsenokoités is absent (section 35). If this author took arsenokoités to refer generally to homosexual sex or penetration, we would expect him to mention it among the other sexual sins, rather than in the section condemning the rich for economic exploitation. Thus, here also arsenokoités probably refers to some kind of economic exploitation, again perhaps by sexual means.

Another second-century Christian document offers corroborative, though a bit less obvious, evidence. Theophilus of Antioch, in his treatise addressed To Autolychus, provides a vice list.13 First come the two sexual sins of adultery and fornication or prostitution.14 Next come three economic sinners: thief, plunderer, and defrauder (or robber). Sixth is arsenokoités. The next group includes savagery, abusive behavior, wrath, and jealousy or envy, all of which the ancients would recognize as sins of "passion": that is, uncontrolled emotion. Next come instances of pride: boastfulness and conceit or haughtiness. I take the next term, pléktés ("striker") to denote someone who thinks he can go around hitting people as if they were his slaves. Then occurs the term "avaricious," or "greedy." Finally are two phrases related to the family: disobedience to parents and selling one's children. These last three may all have been taken as belonging to the category of greed, surely in the case of selling one's children and also perhaps in the reference to parents, if the particular action is understood as a refusal to support one's parents in their old age.


Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Does the bible class homosexuality as sin?

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum