"10 Reasons God Loves Gay Christians" Time Magazine.

[Deeje]

I have never once had a Bible walk up to me and tell me homosexuality is a sin. I also don't think any of these anti-homosexual posts made on these forums are being typed out by a Bible.

I am thinking that you can't really be serious about this topic.

A Christian is one who follows the teachings of the Christ. Those teachings were expounded by himself and his apostles, and recorded in the NT so that we could know what Jesus taught. The whole Bible is an instruction manual for Christian living because it shows us what God requires of his worshippers....and how the old covenant ties in with the new.

He and his apostles taught from the OT as has been clearly outlined to you.....anyone can read their words in the OT and the NT, both of which have been shown to you....so what is your statement above supposed to mean? There is no "anti-homosexual" words in the Bible......only words that condemn sexual immorality of ANY kind, though it specifically mentions both.

Romans 1:24-27:
"Therefore, God, in keeping with the desires of their hearts, gave them up to uncleanness, so that their bodies might be dishonored among them......That is why God gave them over to uncontrolled sexual passion, for their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature;  likewise also the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full penalty, which was due for their error."

Could that be any clearer? Both male and female homosexual acts are mentioned specifically. But equally all immoral sexual conduct is condemned. (Acts 15:28, 29)

Do you understand the concept of hating the sin, but loving the sinner? God loves those who obey his word. Those who love God more than they love themselves, will obey him. No one ever died from not having sex. It is a choice made from the heart and God has promised to help all those who make such sacrifices. It is only a true sacrifice if it costs us something we want.

Jesus went to "the lost sheep of the house of Israel" because these were the ones the Pharisees refused to even acknowledge.
Being able to read hearts, he could assess a man like Matthew, a hated tax-collector and call him to be an apostle. (Matthew 19:1-10 is the account of Zacchaeus, also a tax collector)

Jesus mingled with sinners, not because he liked their company, but because he saw them as "sheep without a shepherd". Becoming a Christian was not a license to sin, thinking that Jesus would forgive anyone for anything......repentance was required. It was an obligation to give up sinning and turn their lives around to follow Christ....imitating his life course. Difficult, no doubt, but then the "road to life" was to be "cramped and narrow". Only those who sincerely love Jesus and his Father will be prepared to navigate that difficult path. (Matthew 7:13, 14)

 

[Upaava]

You didn't even read the 10 reasons did you?

I did read them, Jeremiah. My comment was an alternative view, based upon scripture, for people to consider in their deliberations.

 

[pearl]

Romans 1:24-27:
"Therefore, God, in keeping with the desires of their hearts, gave them up to uncleanness, so that their bodies might be dishonored among them......That is why God gave them over to uncontrolled sexual passion, for their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature;  likewise also the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full penalty, which was due for their error."

You need to include the whole not just cherry pick to make your point.
The wrath of God is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness. 19For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them. 20Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse; 21for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened.

22While claiming to be wise, they became fools23 and exchanged
the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes.
The abomination is the worship of idols.

 

[Furball]

Mostly the usual liberal theology. God loves everyone. He doesn't love everything we do.

If God call homosexuality a sin, and He does, it would be wrong not to tell others what he says.

Let's rephrase that. The god of the "bible" calls homosexuality a sin. Other gods from different religions outside of the abrahamic fear based religious cult don't. Sin only exists in the bible, and since the bible has been shown to be a hoax, homosexuality cannot therefore be a sin.

 

[Skwim]

They aren't 10 reasons god loves gay Christians, but merely 10 instances where Christianity references some aspect of homosexuality. The title is stupid beyond belief.

And just to be clear, Time did not write the 10 reasons or sponsor them. It's only involvement was in publishing them from a book it featured--I imagine a book review of some sort.


.

 

[Deeje]

You need to include the whole not just cherry pick to make your point.
The wrath of God is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness. 19For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them. 20Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse; 21for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened.

22While claiming to be wise, they became fools23 and exchanged
the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes.
The abomination is the worship of idols.

How was that cherry picking?

"The wrath of God is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness."
What is this telling us? Suppression of the truth is at the base of this passage of scripture. It's not as though they don't know what God's law is....but they want to suppress the truth about many things. As Paul goes on to say....."they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened."
Who can fail to see this as many try to justify their abhorrent behavior....even to God?

Paul includes homosexual activity of both sexes in verses 24-27.
One could even include the later theory of evolution in his condemnation....."For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen."

There is certainly "no excuse" for not knowing the truth about all these things.....including idolatry.

 

[pearl]

One could even include the later theory of evolution in his condemnation....."For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen."

Evolution does not contradict creation. Gen. makes no attempt to explain the how of creation. You are assuming that the God of the Bible is as ignorant and ill informed of the homosexual as the flawed humans who wrote.

 

[Deeje]

Evolution does not contradict creation. Gen. makes no attempt to explain the how of creation.

The theory of evolution does indeed contradict Genesis which says that God directly created specific creatures in a stated order in the environments that he created for them. It tells how God carefully prepared the earth for their habitation, providing food sources for them in advance. What it doesn't say is that it all happened in 7, 24 hour days. Genesis 1:1 and the rest of the creation account can be separated into different timeframes. The creation of the heavens and the earth happened "in the beginning" but there is no suggestion that preparation for habitation took place straight away. The creative "days" could well have been epochs spanning many thousands of years. The word "day" in Hebrew, (yohm) can also mean a span of time. Genesis 2:4 uses the same word for the entire creative process.
The earth itself is ancient as the geology testifies.....but there is no way that God planted an amoeba in some primordial soup and left the rest to undirected chance. Creation is just that...creation.

You are assuming that the God of the Bible is as ignorant and ill informed of the homosexual as the flawed humans who wrote.

The flawed humans who wrote the Bible were merely secretaries who took dictation from the Creator. He allowed them to pen his thoughts largely in their own words.

Homosexuality is mentioned specifically in the laws God gave to Israel, along with other aberrant sexual behavior such as bestiality. Marriage and sex were part of the original mandate given to the first humans in Eden. Sex is the means to transmit life, so it is a sacred act between a married couple, sanctified by God to carry out his instruction to fill the earth with their "kind". Families could then be produced with children who would be raised in a loving, balanced family environment. I shudder to think of the kinds of "family" environments many children are subjected to these days.

Homosexual sex is not sanctified by God because...1) Homosexual couples cannot scripturally marry. 2) it cannot naturally produce children and 3) it makes unnatural use of the human body in both sexes. Depositing the seed of life in the body's sewerage outlet (or any other unnatural place) is gross disrespect to the one who created us in his image. Without lawful marriage, all sexual activity is "sin" and therefore brings the creator's condemnation. In Israel it incurred the death penalty......it was on a par with murder under the law.

You can deny this, but this kind of sexual sin is part of what the apostle Paul restated almost 2,000 years ago. God doesn't change his standards for humans.....it is we who must change our standards to suit him.

 

[Ingledsva]

I get such a kick out of this subject every time it comes up.

1. Christians claim they are only under a few of the laws, yet try to enforce others they like.
2. Jesus, - unlike some Christians, - hob-knobbed with so-called "sinners."
3. The majority of the verses claimed to be about homosexuality - are actually about Sacred Prostitution - which was Idolatry.

For instance - these verse below are from a post above - and all are translated as sodomite - and thus get dumped into anti-homosexual posts.

However NONE of them actually says sodomite. Nor are they about homosexuals.

EVERY ONE OF THEM ACTUALLY USES THE WORDS QADASH and QADASHAH - Which mean SACRED PROSTITUTE = IDOLATRY!

Deuteronomy 23:17: " There shall be no whore (of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel."

1 Kings 14:24: "And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel."

1 Kings 15:12: "And he took away the sodomites out of the land, and removed all the idols that his fathers had made."

1 Kings 22:46: "And the remnant of the sodomites, which remained in the days of his father Asa, he took out of the land."

2 Kings 23:7: "And he brake down the houses of the sodomites, that were by the house of the LORD, where the women wove hangings for the grove."

In the two below, neither actually says - abusers of themselves with mankind. They both use arsenokoites.

Corinthian 6:9: "Know ye 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."

1 Timothy 1:9:10: "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;"

IT ACTUALLY SAYS IN 1CO 6:9 -

1 CO 6:9 Know you not that the “heathen” shall not inherit the Kingdom of God? Be not deceived: Neither prostitutes (pornos,) nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the morally weak, nor arsenokoites (rapists,)

There are no ancient Greek texts using arsenokoites or its stem as homosexuality. There are uses for both male and female as RAPE.

The Thesaurus Linguae Graecae. TLG has collected and digitized most literary texts written in Greek, from the 8th century BC to the fall of Byzantium in AD 1453. They have 73 references to the arsenokoit stem. There are NO early Greek uses of the word as “homosexual.”

There is however use of arsenokoites as RAPE.

*

 

[Deeje]

1 Corinthians 6:9-10:
" Or 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 effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God."

The Greek "malakos" is used for "effeminate".

According to Strongs....it means:

1. soft, soft to the touch
2. metaph. in a bad sense
   1. effeminate
      1. of a catamite
      2. of a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man
      3. of a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness
      4. of a male prostitute.

"Homosexual" is a separate word in this verse. In the Greek this is "arsenokoitēs" and means "one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual".

We all know what sodomy means.

We can see that both words clearly have to do with male homosexuality.

Leviticus 20:13....
" If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them."

In Hebrew to "lie with" (shakab) someone meant to have sexual intercourse. This same word is used when Potiphar's wife tried to get Joseph to have sex with her. (Genesis 39:12)

In the text of the Septuagint appear words porne and porneuon, which describe temple prostitutes. Jewish Bible translators' scholars didn't use the word arsenokoites to describe a temple prostitute. The testimony of the Bible is unambiguous that arsenokoites doesn't mean temple prostitute, but homosexual.

We can even see where portions of the word "arsenokoitēs" are used in English slang.

In the NT, homosexuality is as equally condemned as it was in the OT.....why would we expect it to be any different? God has never changed his standards.

 

[Ingledsva]

1 Corinthians 6:9-10:
" Or 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 effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God."

The Greek "malakos" is used for "effeminate".
H
According to Strongs....it means:

1. soft, soft to the touch
2. metaph. in a bad sense
   1. effeminate
      1. of a catamite
      2. of a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man
      3. of a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness
      4. of a male prostitute.

"Homosexual" is a separate word in this verse. In the Greek this is "arsenokoitēs" and means "one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual".

We all know what sodomy means.

We can see that both words clearly have to do with male homosexuality.

Leviticus 20:13....
" If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them."

In Hebrew to "lie with" (shakab) someone meant to have sexual intercourse. This same word is used when Potiphar's wife tried to get Joseph to have sex with her. (Genesis 39:12)

In the text of the Septuagint appear words porne and porneuon, which describe temple prostitutes. Jewish Bible translators' scholars didn't use the word arsenokoites to describe a temple prostitute. The testimony of the Bible is unambiguous that arsenokoites doesn't mean temple prostitute, but homosexual.

We can even see where portions of the word "arsenokoitēs" are used in English slang.

In the NT, homosexuality is as equally condemned as it was in the OT.....why would we expect it to be any different? God has never changed his standards.

Malakos is only used 4 times in the Bible - and those other verses make it plain what the meaning is. - What we would call a ne'er-do-well. An idle irresponsible person in search of riches - good food - fine clothing - excess in alcohol, etc. None of the meanings are homosexual.

Mat 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.

Luk 7:25 But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? Behold, they which are gorgeously apparelled, and live indulgently, are in kings' courts.

NOTE - NO homosexuals in these texts - anywhere.

Arsenokoites does not mean homosexual in the Bible.

I posted the Greek source for collecting ancient Greek language, TLG, and homosexuality HAS NOT been found as an ancient Greek meaning for the word, or it's base.

And who said arsenokoites means a temple prostitute?

The word had nothing to do with Temple Prostitutes, or homosexuals.

We do however find it in texts about rape of women and men.

*

 

[Deeje]

Malakos is only used 4 times in the Bible - and those other verses make it plain what the meaning is. - What we would call a ne'er-do-well. An idle irresponsible person in search of riches - good food - fine clothing - excess in alcohol, etc. None of the meanings are homosexual.

Mat 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.

Luk 7:25 But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? Behold, they which are gorgeously apparelled, and live indulgently, are in kings' courts.

NOTE - NO homosexuals in these texts - anywhere.

μαλακός malakós, mal-ak-os'; of uncertain affinity; soft, i.e. fine (clothing); figuratively, a catamite:—effeminate, soft.

According to Wiki....."In its modern usage the term catamite refers to a boy as the passive or receiving partner in anal intercourse with a man.[1]

In its ancient usage a catamite (Latin catamitus) was a pubescent boy who was the intimate companion of a young man in ancient Greece and Rome, usually in a pederastic relationship.[2]"

Arsenokoites does not mean homosexual in the Bible.

I posted the Greek source for collecting ancient Greek language, TLG, and homosexuality HAS NOT been found as an ancient Greek meaning for the word, or it's base.

I have posted my sources too. Who is to say your source is correct? Leviticus 20:13 in the Septuagint says....
"And whoever shall lie with a male as with a woman, they have both wrought abomination; let them die the death, they are guilty."

This is not ambiguous....this describes male homosexuality.

The two words used in 1 Corinthians 6:9 are......

The Greek "malakos" is used for "effeminate".
ccording to Strongs....it means:

1. soft, soft to the touch
2. metaph. in a bad sense
   1. effeminate
      1. of a catamite
      2. of a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man
      3. of a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness
      4. of a male prostitute.

"Homosexual" is a separate word in this verse. In the Greek this is "arsenokoitēs" and means "one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual".

I assume that we all know what sodomy means.

We can see that both words clearly have to do with male homosexuality.

We do however find it in texts about rape of women and men.

Are you assuming that a woman cannot be sodomized and still call it rape? How else can you rape a male? Its sodomy.

 

[Ingledsva]

μαλακός malakós, mal-ak-os'; of uncertain affinity; soft, i.e. fine (clothing); figuratively, a catamite:—effeminate, soft.

According to Wiki....."In its modern usage the term catamite refers to a boy as the passive or receiving partner in anal intercourse with a man.[1]

In its ancient usage a catamite (Latin catamitus) was a pubescent boy who was the intimate companion of a young man in ancient Greece and Rome, usually in a pederastic relationship.[2]"



I have posted my sources too. Who is to say your source is correct? Leviticus 20:13 in the Septuagint says....
"And whoever shall lie with a male as with a woman, they have both wrought abomination; let them die the death, they are guilty."

This is not ambiguous....this describes male homosexuality.

The two words used in 1 Corinthians 6:9 are......

The Greek "malakos" is used for "effeminate".
ccording to Strongs....it means:

1. soft, soft to the touch
2. metaph. in a bad sense
   1. effeminate
      1. of a catamite
      2. of a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man
      3. of a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness
      4. of a male prostitute.

"Homosexual" is a separate word in this verse. In the Greek this is "arsenokoitēs" and means "one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual".

I assume that we all know what sodomy means.

We can see that both words clearly have to do with male homosexuality.



Are you assuming that a woman cannot be sodomized and still call it rape? How else can you rape a male? Its sodomy.

Rape is rape, mutual homosexuality is not.

The extra meanings you quote were added later to malakos and arsenokoites, by CHRISTIANS .

As shown, they were not in use at the time of the writings in the Bible.

This is shown by there being no ancient writings using them as such. Not even their stems.

Or do you think in Matthew and Luke, they were asking if people going out to see John the Baptist, - were expecting to see an effeminate homosexual???

*

 

[Deeje]

Rape is rape, mutual homosexuality is not.

Sodomy is sodomy....consensual or not. You miss the point.

The extra meanings you quote were added later to malakos and arsenokoites, by CHRISTIANS .

Nonsense. In its ancient usage a catamite (Latin catamitus) was a pubescent boy who was the intimate companion of a young man in ancient Greece and Rome, usually in a pederastic relationship.[2]" (Wiki)

This is shown by there being no ancient writings using them as such. Not even their stems.

Or do you think in Matthew and Luke, they were asking if people going out to see John the Baptist, - were expecting to see an effeminate homosexual???

John the Baptist began his preaching in the Wilderness of Judea, saying: “Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens has drawn near.” (Matthew 3:1, 2) He wore clothing of camel hair and a leather girdle around his loins, similar to the dress of the prophet Elijah. John’s food consisted of insect locusts and wild honey. (2Kings 1:8; Matthew 3:4; Mark 1:6) He was a teacher and was, accordingly, called “Rabbi” by his disciples. (John 3:26)

When Jesus said "But what did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Those who wear soft clothing are in kings’ palaces!" he was contrasting John's clothing to that worn by those who lived in the king's palace.

Catamites wore soft garments too.....like a woman, hence they were called "effeminates".

 

[Ingledsva]

Sodomy is sodomy....consensual or not. You miss the point.



Nonsense. In its ancient usage a catamite (Latin catamitus) was a pubescent boy who was the intimate companion of a young man in ancient Greece and Rome, usually in a pederastic relationship.[2]" (Wiki)



John the Baptist began his preaching in the Wilderness of Judea, saying: “Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens has drawn near.” (Matthew 3:1, 2) He wore clothing of camel hair and a leather girdle around his loins, similar to the dress of the prophet Elijah. John’s food consisted of insect locusts and wild honey. (2Kings 1:8; Matthew 3:4; Mark 1:6) He was a teacher and was, accordingly, called “Rabbi” by his disciples. (John 3:26)

When Jesus said "But what did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Those who wear soft clothing are in kings’ palaces!" he was contrasting John's clothing to that worn by those who lived in the king's palace.

Catamites wore soft garments too.....like a woman, hence they were called "effeminates".

AGAIN - later additions to the meanings.

AGAIN - there are only FOUR uses of malakos in the Bible, - and the other three prove the word meant indulgent people, - not homosexuals - that idea was added by later Christians.

Saying catamite is ancient - does not make it a meaning of malakos, or arsenokoites.

The Bible gives us the meaning of malakos, and language study of arsenokoites found no homosexual use of that word or its stem in any Greek literature , writings, etc, in ancient Greece.

No matter how much you want them to mean homosexual - they don't mean that.

*

 

[Deeje]

AGAIN - later additions to the meanings.

AGAIN - there are only FOUR uses of malakos in the Bible, - and the other three prove the word meant indulgent people, - not homosexuals - that idea was added by later Christians.

Saying catamite is ancient - does not make it a meaning of malakos, or arsenokoites.

The Bible gives us the meaning of malakos, and language study of arsenokoites found no homosexual use of that word or its stem in any Greek literature , writings, etc, in ancient Greece.

No matter how much you want them to mean homosexual - they don't mean that.

*

I don't know why you continually push this point of the term not being historically recognised for its true meaning.

For a fact, the writer of Leviticus made reference to homosexual sex.....

“‘You must not lie down with a male in the same way that you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable act." (Leveticus 18:22) This was written 1500 years before the birth of Christ. All homosexual acts are a violation of God's law. Christians did not add anything.

Lucius Apuleius, (born c. 124 C.E.) Platonic philosopher, rhetorician, referred to catamite (effeminate) priests.

"Apuleius’ discussion of the catamite priests in Book 8 is noteworthy for its treatment of homosexuality as a traditionally male gender role violation. Through the author’s descriptions of the events that take place and the characteristics of the priests, one gets a sense of the scorn the author feels toward the effeminate homosexual men who eventually were "deservedly hated and loathed by all." (Apuleius 8:30)....The term catamite derives from the Greek term for Ganymede (Catamus), and refers to a the myth of Zeus and Ganymede, a young boy that he fell in love with and kept for sexual purposes. For the purposes of this essay, catamite is treated as a synonym for homosexual, through reading homosexuality as antimasculine in its passive sex role identification (Montserrat 156).....The priests in the cult are seen and described as being "girls," their voices girlish and cracked, their homosexual intentions derided and demeaned. Apuleius takes great care to note his disgust at being in their care; he is concerned not only about their sexuality and its violation of gender norms....Apuleius also speaks derisively of the make up that the catamitic priests wear when they go out (8:27); such a feminine pursuit is at odds with what a typical Roman male should be concerned with. Rather, this feminizing action is also looked down upon for violating typical gender norms of the Roman male; women wear make up, men (unless acting possibly) do not. Though still biologically men, wearing make up seems to make these catamites less masculine in terms of gender roles."

Catamites

 

[Ingledsva]

I don't know why you continually push this point of the term not being historically recognised for its true meaning.

For a fact, the writer of Leviticus made reference to homosexual sex.....

“‘You must not lie down with a male in the same way that you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable act." (Leveticus 18:22) This was written 1500 years before the birth of Christ. All homosexual acts are a violation of God's law. Christians did not add anything.

Lucius Apuleius, (born c. 124 C.E.) Platonic philosopher, rhetorician, referred to catamite (effeminate) priests.

"Apuleius’ discussion of the catamite priests in Book 8 is noteworthy for its treatment of homosexuality as a traditionally male gender role violation. Through the author’s descriptions of the events that take place and the characteristics of the priests, one gets a sense of the scorn the author feels toward the effeminate homosexual men who eventually were "deservedly hated and loathed by all." (Apuleius 8:30)....The term catamite derives from the Greek term for Ganymede (Catamus), and refers to a the myth of Zeus and Ganymede, a young boy that he fell in love with and kept for sexual purposes. For the purposes of this essay, catamite is treated as a synonym for homosexual, through reading homosexuality as antimasculine in its passive sex role identification (Montserrat 156).....The priests in the cult are seen and described as being "girls," their voices girlish and cracked, their homosexual intentions derided and demeaned. Apuleius takes great care to note his disgust at being in their care; he is concerned not only about their sexuality and its violation of gender norms....Apuleius also speaks derisively of the make up that the catamitic priests wear when they go out (8:27); such a feminine pursuit is at odds with what a typical Roman male should be concerned with. Rather, this feminizing action is also looked down upon for violating typical gender norms of the Roman male; women wear make up, men (unless acting possibly) do not. Though still biologically men, wearing make up seems to make these catamites less masculine in terms of gender roles."

Catamites

You continue to try to put the word catamite into out discussion of malakos and arsenokoites.

Catamite is NOT one of the definitions of either word.

And Leviticus 18 changes to Sacred Sex = Molech Worship - at 21.

Lev 18:21 And your semen don't give in copulation to MOLECH, and don't desecrate/prostitute yourself, honor Elohiym, I am YHVH!

Lev 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Lev 18:23 And hence/also with any beasts don't lay carnally, defiling yourself. As/thus also woman shall not be employed to serve beasts in copulation. Unnatural/Bestiality it is!

I left 18:21 as translated even though - as you know - it is in contention, - and there is no (As with a) in the sentence.

Romans 1 which you mention above is also Sacred Sex - as shown by the text.

Rom 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and serpents.

Rom 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

~~ ~ NOTE: the people in 24 that dishonor their bodies, are the people WHO worship the Act of Creation in 25! Religious Sexuality! ~~~

Rom 1:25 Who changed the truth of Deity into a lie, and worship and render religious homage to the "Act of Creation" more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Since when do homosexual folk worship GOD as a serpent or other beast, with Sacred SEX????

It is talking about Sacred Sex = Qadash. They had sex with men, women, animals, etc.

Lev 20:3 And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people; because he hath given of his seed unto Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name.

Lev 20:4 And if the people of the land do any ways hide their eyes from the man, when he giveth of his seed unto Molech, and kill him not:

Lev 20:5 Then I will set my face against that man, and against his family, and will cut him off, and all that go a whoring after him, to commit whoredom with Molech, from among their people.


For instance Eli’s sons with the Temple Prostitutes at Shiloh.

1 Sa 2:22 Now Eli was very old, and heard all that his sons did unto Israel; and how they had sex with the women that waited at the entrance of the Tabernacle of the congregation.

If you have read your Bible – then you know these foreign Gods such as Molech were brought into the Jewish Temple, along with his Qadesh, the Sacred Prostitutes.

*

 

[Deeje]

You continue to try to put the word catamite into out discussion of malakos and arsenokoites.

Catamite is NOT one of the definitions of either word.

And Leviticus 18 changes to Sacred Sex = Molech Worship - at 21.

Lev 18:21 And your semen don't give in copulation to MOLECH, and don't desecrate/prostitute yourself, honor Elohiym, I am YHVH!

Lev 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Lev 18:23 And hence/also with any beasts don't lay carnally, defiling yourself. As/thus also woman shall not be employed to serve beasts in copulation. Unnatural/Bestiality it is!

I left 18:21 as translated even though - as you know - it is in contention, - and there is no (As with a) in the sentence.

Romans 1 which you mention above is also Sacred Sex - as shown by the text.

Rom 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and serpents.

Rom 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

~~ ~ NOTE: the people in 24 that dishonor their bodies, are the people WHO worship the Act of Creation in 25! Religious Sexuality! ~~~

Rom 1:25 Who changed the truth of Deity into a lie, and worship and render religious homage to the "Act of Creation" more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Since when do homosexual folk worship GOD as a serpent or other beast, with Sacred SEX????

It is talking about Sacred Sex = Qadash. They had sex with men, women, animals, etc.

Lev 20:3 And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people; because he hath given of his seed unto Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name.

Lev 20:4 And if the people of the land do any ways hide their eyes from the man, when he giveth of his seed unto Molech, and kill him not:

Lev 20:5 Then I will set my face against that man, and against his family, and will cut him off, and all that go a whoring after him, to commit whoredom with Molech, from among their people.


For instance Eli’s sons with the Temple Prostitutes at Shiloh.

1 Sa 2:22 Now Eli was very old, and heard all that his sons did unto Israel; and how they had sex with the women that waited at the entrance of the Tabernacle of the congregation.

If you have read your Bible – then you know these foreign Gods such as Molech were brought into the Jewish Temple, along with his Qadesh, the Sacred Prostitutes.

*

Where on earth are you getting this stuff? Its complete nonsense. Are you gay by any chance? You seem to have a very strong agenda to make God out to be a liar in connection with this topic.

 

[Ingledsva]

Where on earth are you getting this stuff? Its complete nonsense. Are you gay by any chance? You seem to have a very strong agenda to make God out to be a liar in connection with this topic.

1. Not nonsense in the slightest, - as shown.
2. I am in a long term loving threesome with two men.
3. How does God become a liar, - when it is man's later misunderstandings and translations that are corrupt???

*