Fear of homosexuality

[shmogie]

Not at all. You have to read beneath the text, delving into language, translation, culture, scientific knowledge of the writers, etc.

Please, it says what it was meant to say. It says the exact same thing in the original Koine Greek. It says the same thing in a whole variety of translations. Letters of the church Fathers show it meant what it says in the culture in which it was written.

Perfectly clear

 

[sojourner]

When was your translation done? Because the older the translation the closer to the truth you get. The bible translation of today even add that homosexuality act is ok, because the gay community want them to add it, then it is no longer Gods words
By the way, Being prostitute is also a sin acording to christianity, but because Jesus did not scold a prostitute people today take that as a sign it is ok

Uh, no. That’s not How It Works. The NRSV is one of the most accurate English translations, precisely because it uses source material that, say, the KJV did have available. It’s a misunderstanding that newer translations are worse. Newer translations are almost always better. Otherwise, why undertake them? To purposely make the Bible worse?

 

[Subduction Zone]

We have not had sex for the last 3 years so it would not be a problem to continue not having sex. We do not plane to have children.

Some people have a very low sex drive. You should not mistake your lack of a need for a lack by everyone.

By the way you appear to be misinterpreting Buddhist attitudes towards sex. From what I have seen they only oppose "sexual misconduct". Consensual sex between loving couples that do not have other obligations is not misconduct regardless of gender.

 

[sojourner]

There's this phenomena where people try to Greek-away the bible.
They read someone who claims that the Greek word means this
or that. And reading them you can overthrow the whole bible. This
is the purpose of the Greek-ifying, It lifts the supposedly ancient
Greek translator into a higher authority.
The OT wasn't written in Greek. Homosexuality was a sin punished
by death. I am not sure why homosexual prostitutes would want to
have sex with Lot's visitors - did these visitors show they had money?
I am always offended that Lot offered his daughters - this suggests
these Sodomites were bi-sexual. And this is something that Lot's
uncle Abraham would not have done.
You will note the real part of the Genesis account is this "You judge
us? We will deal worse with you than with them." And that's many
homosexual supporting people say today. We are almost at the
point in our society that Sodom was at.

First of all, translators translate from the languages of the earliest known texts. If translators do,it, interpreters should do it. And so they do! Any worthwhile exegetical treatment refers to the original languages.

Second, the passage in question is from the NT, not the OT.

Your post is an epic fail.

 

[shmogie]

No, I suspect it probably means Christian. If you were someone else, it might mean Muslim or Jewish.

But do you know what? I have felt the brunt of Christian hate. I have written about it on RF before. I bear personal witness to the very prominent Canadian pastor, "Reverend Paul D. Smith" of the "People's Church" in Canada who, before his entire congregation and on national media, called for the execution of people like me...homosexuals. This was back in the early 1970s (yes, I'm old). I have had the (dis)pleasure of hearing many other Christians...and Jews and Muslims...spew hate towards me and the love that I bear for my life partner. How many times, in this thread alone, let alone many, many others right here in RF, have the words "abomination" and "their blood shall be upon them" been repeated? Sound like "Christian love" to you? You might be surprised to learn that it doesn't sound like it to me, and is basically indistinguishable from those great lights of Christianity at Westboro Baptist. Just some of you learn to wrap your hate in softer words. No competent reader is fooled by that ruse.

Do you really think, reading the responses of all the Christians in this thread alone, that Christian hatred has really evaporated, and you're all about "true love" now? Fatuous nonsense, because you're own words give that the lie.

Now, how can the clown you identify as a pastor possibly be a Christian ? Just because he says he is ? A man can call himself a fence post, but that doesn´t make him one.

The principles and teachings of Christianity are perfectly clear in the New Testament. Perversions of those into hate, incitement and evil are an abomination to God.

Christ said ¨ by their fruit you will know them ". Producing evil fruit makes it clear that they are not in fact Christians, just nefarious impersonators.

So, my words are based in hatred ? You better be able to prove that, ace.

I have repeated a hundred times that the only action authorized regarding homosexuals is their removal from the church rolls. I have at the same time that they are no different than any other person in how they should be treated otherwise. That isn´t hate, and I have never seen it done. It is following the rules of an organization, rules that the removed swore they would keep, thatś it.

In your lashing out, you must find a target for your own apparent hate. It seems to be the filter you primarily use for any discussion with Christians. If they agree with you, fine, if they follow the precepts that they must, they are drowning in hate toward you, and you reciprocate like a dog whose tail is pulled.

Perhaps, you simply don´t like people who speak in a direct manner, and don´t try to elicit your approval, or patronize you. You confuse that with hate. Too bad.

It is amusing that you rightfully decry people judging homosexuals as a group, then you do the exact same thing regarding Christians.

Can you spell hypocrisy ?

 

[sojourner]

Please, it says what it was meant to say. It says the exact same thing in the original Koine Greek. It says the same thing in a whole variety of translations. Letters of the church Fathers show it meant what it says in the culture in which it was written.

Perfectly clear

The Greek says “arsenokite.” That word does not translate “homosexual,” because homosexuality was an unknown thing when the text was written. It means “male prostitute,” which WAS a thing when the text was written.

It only says what it was meant to say, but being removed by language, culture and centuries, we need to research “what it says,” or else these barriers get in the way. This is the very same process the translators use so that you can have a Bible in English. Problem is, some translations are more theologically biased than others — as in the ones that read “homosexual.”

 

[shmogie]

The Greek says “arsenokite.” That word does not translate “homosexual,” because homosexuality was an unknown thing when the text was written. It means “male prostitute,” which WAS a thing when the text was written.

It only says what it was meant to say, but being removed by language, culture and centuries, we need to research “what it says,” or else these barriers get in the way. This is the very same process the translators use so that you can have a Bible in English. Problem is, some translations are more theologically biased than others — as in the ones that read “homosexual.”

Heard the same thing many times before, and it is wrong. It is virtually unknown word in Koine Greek, and itś definition depends upon itś use.

That is why exegesis is used in scripture. Paul is clearly referring to homosexuals. Those who spoke and read Koine Greek in the geographical location within 50 years of the death of Paul knew it meant homosexual.

Homosexuality was an unknown thing ? You are joking, right ?

Paul had been a pharisee, trained in the Torah by a premier Rabbi. All of the Apostles were Jews.

The Torah, first 5 books of the old Testament, the book of the law, was written almost 2,000 years before Christ.

Read what it says about homosexuality, and tell me then if it was ¨unknown¨ at the time Paul wrote his Epistles.

 

[Spartan]

Jesus never uttered one thing regarding sexual preference.

Yeah, he did, but he didn't really have to. It was all spelled out in the Old Testament.

What's more, Jesus is God in scripture (numerous scriptures). As God, Jesus is the one who gave Moses the Leviticus law against gay sexual relations to begin with; and he’s the one who inspires all Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16), including prohibitions against gay sexual relations in Romans 1:26-27 and I Corinthians 6:9-10, etc.

It’s also worth noting that one could say Jesus didn’t mention wife beating or other sins such as pedophilia either, and there are not many folks who would argue he approved of those behaviors. So Jesus was under no obligation to reiterate the moral laws against homosexual sin that already existed, unless there were clarifications to be made.

 

[Spartan]

The Greek says “arsenokite.” That word does not translate “homosexual,” because homosexuality was an unknown thing when the text was written. It means “male prostitute,” which WAS a thing when the text was written.

No, it doesn't mean prostitute.

"Paul coined 179 terms in the New Testament. The terms do not, because they are original, significantly change the context of the verses they appear in.

Nor is it remarkable he would have coined this one, considering he derived it directly from the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint):

meta arsenos ou koimethese koiten gyniakos (Lev 18:22)

hos an koimethe meta arsenos koiten gynaikos (Lev 20:13)

In other words, when Paul adopted the term arsenokoite, he took it directly from the Levitical passages-in the Greek translation - forbidding homosexual behavior. The meaning, then, could not be clearer: Though the term is unique to Paul, it refers specifically to homosexual behavior.

As for the inference that it applies to male prostitution, a breakdown of the word shows it implies nothing of the sort. 'Arsene,' as mentioned earlier, appears few times in the New Testament, always referring to "male." 'Koite' appears only twice in the New Testament, and means "bed," used in a sexual connotation:

Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality [koite] and debauchery... (Rom 13:13)

Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed [koite] kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral. (Heb 13:4)

The two words combined, as Paul used them, put "male" and "bed" together in a sexual sense. There is no hint of prostitution in the meaning of either of the words combined to make arsenokoite."

Responding to Pro-Gay Theology, Part III

 

[Etritonakin]

Why are some of those who believe homosexuality is a sin so afraid of it?

Homosexuality in itself isn't a sin according to - as far as I am aware - any religion, so if we just think about homosexuality in general as a topic or homosexuals as a topic, why does it terrify some people so much?

It isn't the biggest sin, the most harmful sin, the most likely sin... It's one among others.

Where does the extreme fear come from and how could it be reduced among people who belive homosexuality is a sin, if we exclude the idea that the sin could be removed from the list or the people could become less religious on that issue.

It is possible to consider it a sin and even condemn it without feeling extreme fear, discomfort, frustration or anger when the topic is approached.

Biblically, homosexuality is definitely a sin. Sin is the transgression of the law, and homosexuality falls under the commandment concerning adultery/fornication. Adultery/fornication is essentially any sex outside of marriage, and marriage is a male and female becoming one flesh (at its core, you have sex and you are married!).

The only gray area would be if someone were ACTUALLY not completely male or female. This is certainly not always the case -though being of mixed gender might possibly happen physiologically in ways not easily seen.
Homosexuality is between people of the same gender -and distinctly so.
Certainly, not every homosexual act is because people were "born that way" -and only being born somehow truly of mixed gender would allow for any necessity for a judgment to be made concerning how to apply the law based on the situation.

As for fear, I would imagine homosexuality is just a target for a certain type of fearful and hateful person. They may use God or religion as an excuse, but the problem is with them -and would remain if not religious, etc.

Followers of God and Christ are to seek out their own salvation, not use the law as a weapon or excuse to treat others badly.
Fearful and hateful people have their own issues to work out, and are definitely not acting in accordance with God's will -or on his behalf.

 

[sojourner]

Heard the same thing many times before, and it is wrong. It is virtually unknown word in Koine Greek, and itś definition depends upon itś use.

That is why exegesis is used in scripture. Paul is clearly referring to homosexuals. Those who spoke and read Koine Greek in the geographical location within 50 years of the death of Paul knew it meant homosexual.

Homosexuality was an unknown thing ? You are joking, right ?

Paul had been a pharisee, trained in the Torah by a premier Rabbi. All of the Apostles were Jews.

The Torah, first 5 books of the old Testament, the book of the law, was written almost 2,000 years before Christ.

Read what it says about homosexuality, and tell me then if it was ¨unknown¨ at the time Paul wrote his Epistles.

Sure, homosexual acts were known, but homosexual orientation was unknown. In that time and culture, one was not identified as either “gay” or “straight.” That’s one reason why homosexual acts were thought to be “perverse.” Why would you have sex with a man when you could have sex with a woman?

If the exegesis is done properly, one won’t read “homosexual” into the text (that would be eisegesis), and one won’t assume that the Greek term means “homosexual.”

 

[sojourner]

Yeah, he did, but he didn't really have to. It was all spelled out in the Old Testament.

What's more, Jesus is God in scripture (numerous scriptures). As God, Jesus is the one who gave Moses the Leviticus law against gay sexual relations to begin with; and he’s the one who inspires all Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16), including prohibitions against gay sexual relations in Romans 1:26-27 and I Corinthians 6:9-10, etc.

It’s also worth noting that one could say Jesus didn’t mention wife beating or other sins such as pedophilia either, and there are not many folks who would argue he approved of those behaviors. So Jesus was under no obligation to reiterate the moral laws against homosexual sin that already existed, unless there were clarifications to be made.[/

Show me the quotations where Jesus spoke out against homosexuality.

No, Jesus didn’t give the Mosaic Law; ask any Jew.

Your arguments are typically weak and boring.

 

[sojourner]

No, it doesn't mean prostitute.

"Paul coined 179 terms in the New Testament. The terms do not, because they are original, significantly change the context of the verses they appear in.

Nor is it remarkable he would have coined this one, considering he derived it directly from the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint):

meta arsenos ou koimethese koiten gyniakos (Lev 18:22)

hos an koimethe meta arsenos koiten gynaikos (Lev 20:13)

In other words, when Paul adopted the term arsenokoite, he took it directly from the Levitical passages-in the Greek translation - forbidding homosexual behavior. The meaning, then, could not be clearer: Though the term is unique to Paul, it refers specifically to homosexual behavior.

As for the inference that it applies to male prostitution, a breakdown of the word shows it implies nothing of the sort. 'Arsene,' as mentioned earlier, appears few times in the New Testament, always referring to "male." 'Koite' appears only twice in the New Testament, and means "bed," used in a sexual connotation:

Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality [koite] and debauchery... (Rom 13:13)

Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed [koite] kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral. (Heb 13:4)

The two words combined, as Paul used them, put "male" and "bed" together in a sexual sense. There is no hint of prostitution in the meaning of either of the words combined to make arsenokoite."

Responding to Pro-Gay Theology, Part III

Gee... wonder, then, why the most accurate English translation uses the English term “male prostitute?” I guess you’re right and all the best translators are wrong.

 

[shmogie]

Sure, homosexual acts were known, but homosexual orientation was unknown. In that time and culture, one was not identified as either “gay” or “straight.” That’s one reason why homosexual acts were thought to be “perverse.” Why would you have sex with a man when you could have sex with a woman?

If the exegesis is done properly, one won’t read “homosexual” into the text (that would be eisegesis), and one won’t assume that the Greek term means “homosexual.”

I don´t assume what the word means, I have two thousand years of translators who say that is what it means. I know those who read and write Koine Greek who say that is what it means. Except few scholars in the last couple of decades, most say it means homosexuals.

What do you mean by homosexual orientation was unknown ? It is scientifically unknown today. It is a social and psychological construct that cannot be confirmed by physiology.

At that time, in the Jewish culture you were identified as normal or sinfully abnormal. if you were a homosexual. It was the same for Christianity, though tempered.

Homosexual apologetics attempting to twist what was written simply doesn´t work.

 

[PruePhillip]

First of all, translators translate from the languages of the earliest known texts. If translators do,it, interpreters should do it. And so they do! Any worthwhile exegetical treatment refers to the original languages.

Second, the passage in question is from the NT, not the OT.

Your post is an epic fail.

Here is an example I did for a web site 20 years ago.
re people "translating" the Greek of the bible for revisionist purposes....

An example is the way that biblical characters are undergoing role reversals. Mary the Mother of Jesus
and Judas the betrayer of Jesus, for example, are having a liberal makeover. For Mary the word "virgin"
(“Alma” - Greek) in "translated" into one of its multiple meanings, ie “young girl.” But Mary stated, "How
can this be, I do not know a man?" The "translator" then takes the Greek word for "man" into its original
"anthropos," which also means "husband." That is, there is a human father, but it is not Joseph. And to
further strip Mary of virtue, even her song is reinterpreted. Mary says "God has lifted up his humble
maidservant;" so the Greek word "humble" is connected to the old Greek version of the Hebrew Bible which
was used to describe the rape of Dinah in Genesis, and other incidents of sexual violation. Thus Mary’s
"humility" could be "humiliation" from a sexual assault.
Judas' new spin is just as clever: The Greek word for "betray" is re-interpreted as "giving over" as in Judas
"gave over" Jesus in the time-honored way of presenting someone so their ideas could be officially tested.
But Peter is portrayed as the real traitor for denying and abandoning Jesus.

This is intellectual effrontery and mockery of the bible.

Many words have multiple meanings. Add to this the problem of translation and the bible appears an easy
target.

Spirit. Prove that the spirit is just a man (Muslims take this one step further and reckon this man must be
Mohammed!) “Spirit” is Greek for pneuma, meaning “breath.” Thus, the spirit is merely human.

Hell: The Greek words Sheol and Gehenna are used in the New Testament. Sheol means "grave" and
Gehenna refers to the Valley of Hinnom, near Jerusalem, where rubbish and sometime bodies were thrown.
Claim that biblical authors did not believe in hell - they were speaking of the here and now. Translators try to
bypass Jesus' explicit imagery of the nature of a lost eternity (Lazarus and the rich man; thrust out of the
kingdom; separating sheep from goats; closed door; outer darkness, gnashing of teeth etc..)

 

[PruePhillip]

Gee... wonder, then, why the most accurate English translation uses the English term “male prostitute?” I guess you’re right and all the best translators are wrong.

So those "male prostitutes" weren't at Lot's house to rape the
two strangers but to offer their services?

And Mary wasn't a "virgin" but a young girl, despite the fact
that the two words were synonymous in Jewish society?
And "hell" meant the grave or a rubbish tip, therefor there is
no traditional view of hell in the bible?
And the "spirit" was "wind" in the bible, therefore those who
spoke of God's spirit were talking about the wind?

Methinks this is a way to make the bible politically correct.
Jews in the BC era understood Sodom to be a place of
homosexuality.

 

[PruePhillip]

Show me the quotations where Jesus spoke out against homosexuality.

No, Jesus didn’t give the Mosaic Law; ask any Jew.

Your arguments are typically weak and boring.

Jesus didn't speak out against child abuse, alcohol abuse, polygamy
and a host of other moral issues. His message wasn't about cataloging
human sins but bringing a message of hope. It was understood to all
Israeli society what was a sin and what was not.
We know about many sins through the Old Testament and the writings
of Jesus' own disciples and his brother.

And if Jesus DID condemn homosexuality specifically then the verse
would simply be ignored.
In Australia a football player quoted the bible about a litany of sins,
including homosexuality. He was stripped of his contracts and the case
is in the courts now. It seems that religious beliefs are now under attack.

 

[sojourner]

I don´t assume what the word means, I have two thousand years of translators who say that is what it means. I know those who read and write Koine Greek who say that is what it means. Except few scholars in the last couple of decades, most say it means homosexuals.

What do you mean by homosexual orientation was unknown ? It is scientifically unknown today. It is a social and psychological construct that cannot be confirmed by physiology.

At that time, in the Jewish culture you were identified as normal or sinfully abnormal. if you were a homosexual. It was the same for Christianity, though tempered.

Homosexual apologetics attempting to twist what was written simply doesn´t work.

Useless rantings of one who does not know what he’s talking about.

 

[sojourner]

Here is an example I did for a web site 20 years ago.
re people "translating" the Greek of the bible for revisionist purposes....

An example is the way that biblical characters are undergoing role reversals. Mary the Mother of Jesus
and Judas the betrayer of Jesus, for example, are having a liberal makeover. For Mary the word "virgin"
(“Alma” - Greek) in "translated" into one of its multiple meanings, ie “young girl.” But Mary stated, "How
can this be, I do not know a man?" The "translator" then takes the Greek word for "man" into its original
"anthropos," which also means "husband." That is, there is a human father, but it is not Joseph. And to
further strip Mary of virtue, even her song is reinterpreted. Mary says "God has lifted up his humble
maidservant;" so the Greek word "humble" is connected to the old Greek version of the Hebrew Bible which
was used to describe the rape of Dinah in Genesis, and other incidents of sexual violation. Thus Mary’s
"humility" could be "humiliation" from a sexual assault.
Judas' new spin is just as clever: The Greek word for "betray" is re-interpreted as "giving over" as in Judas
"gave over" Jesus in the time-honored way of presenting someone so their ideas could be officially tested.
But Peter is portrayed as the real traitor for denying and abandoning Jesus.

This is intellectual effrontery and mockery of the bible.

Many words have multiple meanings. Add to this the problem of translation and the bible appears an easy
target.

Spirit. Prove that the spirit is just a man (Muslims take this one step further and reckon this man must be
Mohammed!) “Spirit” is Greek for pneuma, meaning “breath.” Thus, the spirit is merely human.

Hell: The Greek words Sheol and Gehenna are used in the New Testament. Sheol means "grave" and
Gehenna refers to the Valley of Hinnom, near Jerusalem, where rubbish and sometime bodies were thrown.
Claim that biblical authors did not believe in hell - they were speaking of the here and now. Translators try to
bypass Jesus' explicit imagery of the nature of a lost eternity (Lazarus and the rich man; thrust out of the
kingdom; separating sheep from goats; closed door; outer darkness, gnashing of teeth etc..)

Gee, like the texts have never, ever been revised since day one...

 

[sojourner]

So those "male prostitutes" weren't at Lot's house to rape the
two strangers but to offer their services?

And Mary wasn't a "virgin" but a young girl, despite the fact
that the two words were synonymous in Jewish society?
And "hell" meant the grave or a rubbish tip, therefor there is
no traditional view of hell in the bible?
And the "spirit" was "wind" in the bible, therefore those who
spoke of God's spirit were talking about the wind?

Methinks this is a way to make the bible politically correct.
Jews in the BC era understood Sodom to be a place of
homosexuality.

Methinks you don’t think, which is why your post here is drivel.