| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
14 Apr 2005 04:06:35 AM |
| Object: |
Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
Leviticus 18: 19-30
1 Timothy 1: 10-11
Genesis 19: 1-14
There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
.
|
|
| User: "ZenIsWhen" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 04:42:24 AM |
|
|
<vivapadrepio@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1113449987.959191.316800@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
Leviticus 18: 19-30
1 Timothy 1: 10-11
Genesis 19: 1-14
There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
Bwahahhaaaaaa.......
Claiming that YOUR bible MUST be the rule that ALL live by is the epitome of
ignorance.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The other Donald" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 04:31:29 AM |
|
|
<vivapadrepio@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1113449987.959191.316800@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
Leviticus 18: 19-30
1 Timothy 1: 10-11
Genesis 19: 1-14
There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
First, your Bible(tm) is just a bunch of fairy tales to keep dumbasses like
you from being *completely* worthless,
Second, that same Book O' ***** also advocates slavery, women as
property, killing children, killing people that work on the Sabbath
(Saturday or Sunday, depending on your personal flavor of *****), killing
first-born, killing Pagans, mass slaughter of immense proportions,
fornication, rape, harems, etc, ad nauseum.
And third, your Great Sky Pixie doesn't mean jack-***** to anyone with
reasoning skills greater than those of a gerbil.
--
-Donald in Austin
AA #2104
Apatriot #22
Atheist FF/EMT
.....and ordained minister
Stork Pin recipient: May 1, 2003 -Madelyn
(tm) 2004 G.O.P. All names used without permission from the copyright
holder. ***** 'em.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Voice of Truth International Church" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 06:48:19 AM |
|
|
<vivapadrepio@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1113449987.959191.316800@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
Leviticus 18: 19-30
1 Timothy 1: 10-11
Genesis 19: 1-14
There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
There are also these:
Romans 1:26-27:
"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women
did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise
also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one
toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving
in themselves that recompence [sic] of their error which was meet."
Jude1:7
"as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to
these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after
strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of
eternal fire."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ninure Saunders" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 01:34:19 PM |
|
|
In article <6uednUXfmKuvj8PfRVnyig@giganews.com>, "Voice of Truth
International Church" <news@votic.org> wrote:
-<vivapadrepio@aol.com> wrote in message
-news:1113449987.959191.316800@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
->1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
->
-> Leviticus 18: 19-30
->
-> 1 Timothy 1: 10-11
->
-> Genesis 19: 1-14
->
->
-> There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
->
-
-There are also these:
-
- Romans 1:26-27:
-"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women
-did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise
-also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one
-toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving
-in themselves that recompence [sic] of their error which was meet."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
(The follwing was written by Greg Gadow)
So let us put Paul's speech in context, shall we? I refer you to Romans
1:18-24a (sections in [] are
added by me to give clarity)
"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and
wickedness of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth. For what can
be known about God is plain to them [men who by their wickedness suppress
the truth], because God has shown it to them [men who by their wickedness
suppress the truth]. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible
nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in
the things that have been made. So they [men who by their wickedness
suppress the truth] are without excuse; for although they [men who by
their wickedness suppress the truth] knew God they did not honor him as
God or give thanks to him, but they [men who by their wickedness suppress
the truth] became futile in their thinking and their [men who by their
wickedness suppress the truth] senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to
be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God
for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles.
Therefore God gave them [men who by their wickedness suppress the truth]
up...."
Now maybe it is just my public education, but it seems to me that the
'they' whom God gave up refers to the undodliness and wickedness of men
who by their wickedness suppress the truth. That is the last object given
before Paul switches over to the third person plural pronoun, so by the
rules of the English language, that *must* be the "them" he is refering
to. And lets see... "men who by their wickedness suppress the truth",
could that also include men who by their wickedness (fear, hatred,
jealously and plain maliciousness) suppress the truth about God's
boundless love for His creation?
And how do we know that they are "men who by their wickedness suppress the
truth"? Very simply: They neither honor God as God or give thanks to him,
but instead are futile in their thinking, who have senseless, darkened
minds. They claim to be wise even though they are fools, and they have
exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man
or birds or animals or reptiles... or, may I add, flags and "holy" books.
And what else does God do to them? If we read AFTER your favorite quote, we see
"They were filled with all manner of wickedness, evil, covetousness,
malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity, they are gossips,
slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil,
disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though
they know God's decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they
not only do them but approve those who practice them. (Romans 1: 29-32)"
So we can know who are the "men who by their wickedness suppress the
truth" (yes,, we are still using THAT "they") because they are gossips,
slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil,
disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless.
That's a later stage of things. The fall of the Gentiles in Romans 1 is a
drama in four acts:
(1) When they knew God, they glorified him not as God.
(2) As a result, their minds were darkened, and they exchanged
worship of the Creator for worshipping statues of corruptible
things.
(3) The punishment for that exchange of worship was another
exchange: of natural desires for unnatural lusts. This is
spelled out quite specifically by "for this cause" in verse
26.
(4) The punishment for the original sin (for which there was
less excuse, since it occurred before "their minds were
darkened") comes next and is worse. Verse 28 spells out the
distinct charge against them, and the distinct punishment:
"Even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge"
- the sin of vv. 19-21 - "God gave them over to a reprobate
mind."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
-
-Jude1:7
-"as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to
-these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after
-strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of
-eternal fire."
This verse comes SO close to mentioning homosexuality, but sorry no cigar;
the Greek word translated here as "fornication" is "porneia" and had a
distinctly heterosexual connotation; and the "strange
flesh" was a reference to angels, or "sons of God," that WOMEN had sex
with [see Genesis 6:1-4] according to Jewish tradition; no mention of
homosexuality.
Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
The Lord is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
http://Ninure-Saunders.tk
Take my polls
http://ninure.100megsfree5.com
My Yahoo Group
http://Ninure.tk
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.MCCchurch.org
The Bible Site - help provide free scripture
http://www.thebiblesite.org
To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mephisto" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 12:38:58 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 07:48:19 +0100, "Voice of Truth International
Church" <news@votic.org> wrote:
Jude1:7
"as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to
these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after
strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of
eternal fire."
Strange flesh? That sounds more like a reference to fucking goats than
homosexuality.
Mephisto
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ash" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 09:27:06 AM |
|
|
Voice of Truth International Church wrote:
<vivapadrepio@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1113449987.959191.316800@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
Leviticus 18: 19-30
1 Timothy 1: 10-11
Genesis 19: 1-14
There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
There are also these:
Romans 1:26-27:
"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women
did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise
also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one
toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving
in themselves that recompence [sic] of their error which was meet."
God makeing people gay because he was annoyed with them? Whatever
happened to free will
Jude1:7
"as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to
these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after
strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of
eternal fire."
Yep, gang rape of strangers is immoral
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 07:11:48 AM |
|
|
Voice of Truth International Church wrote:
<vivapadrepio@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1113449987.959191.316800@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
Leviticus 18: 19-30
1 Timothy 1: 10-11
Genesis 19: 1-14
There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
There are also these:
Romans 1:26-27:
"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women
did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise
also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one
toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving
in themselves that recompence [sic] of their error which was meet."
This passage starts out with "For this..." What is "this"? You omitted
a *KEY* line before verse 26. This is called a "lie by omission".
Starting at around verse 18, God began to get ***** that man was
beginning to worship graven images.
"Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the
glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and
birds and animals and reptiles." (Romans 1:22-23)
Since they began worshipping graven images, verses 24 and 25 relate to
God giving over of sexual desires of Man so their bodies would become
"unclean".
The overaching theme of Romans 1:18-32 shows that because they turned
away from God, God allowed them to give into their carnal desires, and
they began to rape one another, and turn into slovenly beasts.
Apparently, the writers of Romans 1 believed that, without God, we'd
turn into sexually deviant assholes who'd rape anyone at the drop of the
hat.
We see it here today on alt.atheism. "How can an atheist be moral
without God's teachings?"
This is what Romans 1 was trying to say, and this, I cannot believe, is
still going on today!
Jude1:7
"as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to
these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after
strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of
eternal fire."
This, too, is another lie by omission.
Jude 1 talks about Jude lying under the stars, contemplating God.
Jude knew that, because the lands of Sodom and Gomorrah turned away from
God, the people of Sodom and Gomorroah because sexually deviant assholes
who'd rape anyone at the drop of a hat.
None of these passages, (Jude, Romans, Leviticus, Genesis, Corinthians,
or any passage you can yank out of the Bible and *TWIST* to make it say
what you want it to say) however, say ANYTHING about consensual
homosexual love.
Do you know what the Book of Revelation says about people who twist the
Bible to suit their agenda?
Revelation 22:18-19
"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of
this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto
him the plagues that are written in this book:
"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this
prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out
of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."
Are you prepared?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "torch" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 06:05:49 AM |
|
|
<vivapadrepio@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1113449987.959191.316800@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
Leviticus 18: 19-30
1 Timothy 1: 10-11
Genesis 19: 1-14
There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
You are right - if you use any of this ***** to inform your moral outlook,
ignorance is no longer your companion - its just become you master
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "kathryn" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 06:16:16 AM |
|
|
<vivapadrepio@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1113449987.959191.316800@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
Leviticus 18: 19-30
1 Timothy 1: 10-11
Genesis 19: 1-14
There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
It is yours apparently
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Elf M. Sternberg" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 04:12:23 PM |
|
|
"vivapadrepio@aol.com" <vivapadrepio@aol.com> writes:
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
Leviticus 18: 19-30
1 Timothy 1: 10-11
Genesis 19: 1-14
The Bill of Rights, Article 9.
Compared to the ineffable elegance of the Constitution of the
United States, is there any reason whatsoever that I should consider
implementing the strictures in your violent and depraved book?
Elf
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 04:57:50 AM |
|
|
wrote:
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
Leviticus 18: 19-30
1 Timothy 1: 10-11
Genesis 19: 1-14
There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
Most of are aware of those passages as well as the passages you ignore that
talk about other things that are widely accepted today.
In Genesis we have the hero offering his virgin daughters to the crowd and a
bit farther in Genesis and we have incest glorified.
It's not ignorance we fight, so much as blind thoughtless bigots.
Do you let your wife talk in church?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 01:05:28 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 04:57:50 GMT, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
vivapadrepio@aol.com wrote:
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
Leviticus 18: 19-30
1 Timothy 1: 10-11
Genesis 19: 1-14
There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
Most of are aware of those passages as well as the passages you ignore that
talk about other things that are widely accepted today.
In Genesis we have the hero offering his virgin daughters to the crowd and a
bit farther in Genesis and we have incest glorified.
Then there is this: LUKE 11:7 And he from within shall answer and say, Trouble
me not: the door is
now shut, and my children are with me in bed; I cannot rise and give thee.
I mean: Is the pun, intended? (:-)
--
Puck Greenman
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
is purely my own
#162 BAAWA Knight.
Plonked by Rob Duncan
Na bister 500,000
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 05:58:44 AM |
|
|
wrote:
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
Leviticus 18: 19-30
1 Timothy 1: 10-11
Genesis 19: 1-14
There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
Xtians are not homosexuals, they are pedophiles. A difference that was
not lost on the bible authors.
--
Olrik
aa #1981
Qualified SMASH member
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 04:59:21 AM |
|
|
wrote:
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
"Don't you realize that this is not the way to live? Unjust people who
don't care about God will not be joining in his kingdom. Those who use
and abuse each other, use and abuse sex, use and abuse the earth and
everything in it, don't qualify as citizens in God's kingdom."
Leviticus 18: 19-30
These passages denote sexual practices that do not produce offspring,
practices outlawed by Leviticus 18:2.
"Speak unto the children of Israel and say unto them: 'I am the LORD
your God...'"
See? He's speaking to the "Children of Israel". No one else.
Do you lie by omission often or is this your first time?
1 Timothy 1: 10-11
Read from the beginning of that sentence (1 Timothy 1:9-11)
We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers
and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for
those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for adulterers
and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers–and for whatever
else is contrary to the sound doctrine that conforms to the glorious
gospel of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.
This speaks to lawbreakers, not those that conform to the law. This
"perverts" they're referring to above is simply the act of frivolous
sex; that which does not produce offspring.
Please stop lying. It's unbecoming and is contrary to the above
mentioned verse.
Genesis 19: 1-14
This is the story of Sodom. The two angels noted in the beginning of
Genesis 19 were coming to warn the residents of Sodom to stop their evil
ways (especially after the conflict in Genesis 14). However, a posse of
"Sodomites" came to rape the two angels. Lot tried to appease them with
offering his two daughters, but the posse declined and attempted to
break down the door. The angels blinded some of the posse and escaped,
trying to bring the "righteous" residents of Sodom with them. They
refused to go. So, God destroyed Sodom (He was going to do it anyway,
whether the apparent homosexual gangrape happened or not).
However, there is NOTHING in Genesis 19 to suggest that consensual
homosexual sex was outlawed.
There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
No, but it is yours.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Buck" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
15 Apr 2005 03:12:24 AM |
|
|
Because if everybody became queer, the world couldn't _handle_ that
much *style*...
--
L8r,
Uncle Buck
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ninure Saunders" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 01:30:36 PM |
|
|
In article <1113449987.959191.316800@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"vivapadrepio@aol.com" <vivapadrepio@aol.com> wrote:
-1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
-
-Leviticus 18: 19-30
-
-1 Timothy 1: 10-11
-
-Genesis 19: 1-14
-
-
-There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
BUT IT DOES SEEM TO BE YOURS.......
And yeah, I did mean to shout!!
THE SCRIPTURES ON SAME GENDER SEXUAL BEHAVIOR
Contrary to what many people have been taught there is nothing in the
Bible which condemns people with a homosexual orientation having
homosexual relationships. In fact, did you know the word "homosexual", as
we understand it today, does not occur in the Bible at all in the original
languages it was written in!
Let's take a look at the passages which have often been use to oppress the
homosexual people:
GENESIS 18-19
the story of Sodom and Gomorrah actually condemns inhospitality and
idolatry, not homosexuality. Read the Scriptural cross-references:
Deuteronomy 29:23, Isaiah 1:9, Jeremiah 23:14, Lamentations 4:6, Ezekiel
16:49-50, Amos 4:11, Zephaniah 2:9, Matthew 10:15 / Luke 10:12, Luke
17:29, Romans 9:29, Jude v.7, Revelation 11:8
NOWHERE in the Scriptures does it say that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah
was homosexual sex. Even if the specific point of the story was concerning
a sexual matter, rather than hospitality, the issue is rape not
homosexuality. Jesus claimed the issue was simply one of showing
hospitality to strangers (Luke 10:12). How ironic that those who
discriminate against homosexuals seem to be the true practitioners of the
sin of Sodom.
JUDGES 19
Here is a story which parallels the Sodom account. The Sodom account
showed the inhospitality of a Gentile city-state but in Judges 19 we see
an example of extreme inhospitality among the "children of Israel"
themselves. As in the Genesis account the house is surrounded by men and
the host of the house offers women in the place of his guest and says
"HUMBLE THEM..." (v. 19). This clearly shows the purpose of the attack was
to humiliate and most probably to kill the stranger, not to satisfy
homosexual "lust". (20:5)
The guest finally puts his concubine outside and they humiliate him by
raping and abusing her all night until she died. This act was an extreme
violation of the Hebrew people's sacred code of hospitality. This act of
INHOSPITALITY by people of the tribe of Benjamin so enraged the other
Hebrew tribes that they went to war with them.
When interpreting the Genesis 18-19 account fear and prejudice toward
homosexuality cause some people to focus on the fact that the rape would
have been homosexual rape and they then condemn all homosexual sex acts.
Judges 19 is an almost identical account depicting a group of men raping a
woman. Should we therefore conclude that the story was a condemnation of
all heterosexual sex acts?
After careful study it seems obvious that neither Genesis 18-19 nor Judges
19 were written as tools for condemnation toward homosexuals. The major
focus of these stories was the issue of hospitality.
DEUTERONOMY 23:17-18, I KINGS 14:24 AND I KINGS 15:12
These passages are often translated as if they refer to homosexuals,
however the actual word that is being translated is "qadesh" which means
"holy one" or "someone set apart for a holy purpose." In this case the
word is referring to people who commit ritual acts of prostitution in
order to honor their deity. The clearest translation of this concept would
simply be "temple or ritual prostitute".
For example, Deuteronomy 23:17 should be translated thusly: "There shall
be no ritual prostitute of the daughters of Israel, or a ritual prostitute
of the sons of Israel". Any translation which translates qadesh as pervert
or sodomite is blatantly mistranslating. An example which shows this
clearly is found in the New King James version which translates qadesh in
its male form as 'perverted one' but translates qadesh in its female form
as 'ritual harlot', both should be 'ritual harlot or prostitute!' Another
example of this kind of biased translation can be found in the King James
version which translates the word for male ritual prostitute as
"sodomite". The fact of the matter is that (as far as I can ascertain) in
the original languages of the Bible there isn't such a word as sodomite".
These passages do not condemn homosexuality, for that matter they don't
even condemn prostitution. Instead, they condemn the practice of religious
prostitution connected with the worship of a foreign god.
At this point the reader should be able to see a pattern developing. In
the Genesis and Judges accounts some people choose to ignore the actual
issue of hospitality and construe the accounts to condemn homosexuality.
In the Deuteronomy and 1st Kings passages the actual issue of idolatry is
ignored in favor of construing them as passages condemning homosexuality.
LEVITICUS 18:22 AND 20:13-14
It is likely that the prohibition thou shall not lie with a male as with a
woman came about for one of the following reasons:
a) Only sexual acts which could lead to procreation were valued as the
tribes needed to grow in numbers in order to survive.
b) Male homosexual sex may have been connected in the Hebrew mind with
idolatry. Notice that Lev. 18:2 deals with idolatry. In fact many of the
prohibitions in the Holiness Code were probably connected with idolatrous
practices, see 19:26-29.
c)Women were second class citizens in the Hebrew culture and were
generally treated as property. If a man was penetrated in sexual
intercourse he was being treated like a woman and so was degraded in the
Hebrew mind. The offense was not that this was a homosexual act, the
offense was that a MAN was treated like a WOMAN. If this line of thinking
is correct it would serve to explain why there is no prohibition against
female homosexual acts in the Old Testament. Women could not be degraded
by such an act as they were already not held in high esteem.
d) there is a theory that the Hebrew people believed in a perfect order of
creation and anything that violated that order was considered unclean or
an abomination. A probable example would be that fish were considered the
perfect sea animal, hence anything in the sea that did not have scales and
fins was unclean. (Lev. 11:9-10) Cattle were the perfect cud chewing
animal, hence anything that chewed cud, but didn't have hooves was
unclean. (Lev. 11:6). If this theory is correct then the prohibition
against male sex acts would be violating the role of the perfect ideal
human: man. It would seem to mix the sex role of the imperfect woman with
the ideal role of the man.
Even if the reader disagrees with the theories stated above they should
take note that these verses are a part of the Hebrew scriptures often
called the 'Holiness Code'. This 'code' is no longer followed by the
Christian church.
In Leviticus 18:19 (which is just a few verses before the prohibition
'thou shall not lie with a man as with a woman') having sexual relations
with a woman during her period is forbidden yet this is not proclaimed as
a binding rule for today.
Also, 18:8 and 18:18 show that this code allows for polygamy yet this is
now considered immoral.
19:28 prohibits tattoos yet they are not proclaimed as sinful by the
Christian church.
19:19 forbids crossbreeding of livestock yet the church allows, farmers
who do this very thing to worship in church.
19:19 forbids sowing a field with mixed feed, yet farmers are not
condemned who plant hay and alfalfa.
11:7 forbids the eating of pigs, yet people unashamedly have a side of
bacon with their eggs!
11:6 forbids the eating of rabbits (hares) because they don't have cloven
hooves but they chew cud, yet some Christians love to eat rabbit. 11:9-10
forbids the eating of any seafood that doesn't have fins and scales, yet
shrimp and lobster lovers are not told to repent by Christians, nor is Red
Lobster picketed!
23:3 instructs that the seventh day of the week is to be the Sabbath, not
Sunday, yet the Christian church disregards this.
Deut 22 states that a woman is not telling the truth if she says she was
raped but no one heard her scream.
It is clear that the Christian church does not abide by the Holiness Code.
It was a set of regulations which governed the Hebrew tribes but is not
considered binding on the Christian church because there is now a NEW
COVENANT IN JESUS CHRIST! The following verses talk about this New
Covenant:
Colossians 2:16-17 "Therefore let no one judge you in food or in drink, or
regarding a festival or a new moon or Sabbaths, which are a shadow of
things to come, but the substance is Christ."
Hebrews 8:18 "For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former
commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness, for the law made
nothing perfect."
Hebrews 8:13 "In that Christ says 'a new covenant,' Christ has made the
first obsolete."
Hebrews 9:9-10 The Old Covenant "was symbolic...concerned only with foods
and drink, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time
of reformation."
There are those who recognize that Christians are under a New Covenant and
yet state that the Old Covenant was divided into three parts, civil,
ceremonial and moral. They then insist that the moral part of the Old
Covenant remain in force. This distinction can nowhere be found in the Old
Covenant itself. In fact, many guidelines clearly have both a
civil/ceremonial use AND a moral one (See Leviticus 19:13). Who, then, has
the authority to decide "this is morality, but this is civil procedure and
this is ceremonial..."?
since the Christian church does not follow the Holiness Code it has no
right to arbitrarily pick Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13-14 as still binding
just because it seems to support a particular prejudice.
At this point the reader may be thinking, "Well that may be true about the
Old Covenant but there are New Testament verses which forbid homosexual
acts." Well, let's take a look at those passages.
ROMANS 1:24-27
This passage has been used by some Christians to make an issue over how
"unrighteous" and sinful homosexuals are. In fact, it has been used to
support the view that AIDS is the "penalty of their error which was due".
What is fascinating about this kind of application is that it is totally
at odds with what, I believe, Paul was really saying. IN ORDER TO
UNDERSTAND THE POINT OF ROMANS CHAPTER ONE YOU MUST READ ROMANS CHAPTERS
ONE THROUGH THREE. The outline is as follows:
I. The Gospel is for EVERYONE, Jews and Gentiles. (1:16)
II. Why? Because God's wrath is against ALL unrighteousness. (verse 18).
II. The Gentiles need the Gospel. (1:28-32) The examples of their
"uncleanness" include idolatry and homosexual acts which are either
connected to or resulting from idolatry.
III. But the Jews are just as unrighteous as the Gentiles. (2:3)
IV. "All have sinned" and are "justified (made right with God) FREELY by
God's grace (unearned love) through the redemption that is in Jesus
Christ." (3:23-24)
While Paul is certainly not favorable toward the homosexual acts that he
is writing about it is interesting to note that Paul classifies them
"unclean" which is not necessarily a "moral" precept. (According to the
Holiness Code lobsters and shrimp are "unclean" also.) He may be pointing
out that though the Jews are different than the Gentiles in that they are
ritually "clean" (according to the Old Covenant) they are still just as
much in need of the grace of the New Covenant.
Let's look at some of the verses in this section:
Verse 27b "And receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which
was due". Is Paul here saying that those who committed homosexual acts
were punished in some physical way...as in venereal disease? Or could
"uncleanness", being cut off from the Old Hebrew Covenant, be the penalty
of the Gentile's error?
28 "And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God
gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not
fitting..." People often take this to mean one of the following things:
a) Since homosexuals didn't retain God in their knowledge, God gave them
over to a debased mind.
b) Since the Gentiles were idolatrous God gave them over to a debased mind
of homosexuality.
However, I believe that Paul was saying the following:
c) "Since the Gentiles did not retain God in their knowledge God gave them
over to a debased mind. The debased mind is NOT homosexuality but a mind
that is centered on unrighteousness, hence the listing of what the Gentile
mind is full of in verse 29.
29-32 This list of "unrighteousness" is being applied to all Gentiles, not
Gentiles that commit homosexual sex acts. It is the Gentiles "who are
worthy of death". These verses are really just an exposition of verse 18.
26-27 Another interesting point to consider is that people often use
verses 26-27 to prove that Paul used an argument from "nature" to prove
that homosexual activity was wrong. However that kind of usage of the word
"nature" is highly unlikely as Paul usually uses the word "nature" or
"natural" to mean not what "Mother Nature" does but instead he means "the
previously accepted common usage". Nature is not a great teacher about
ethics and humans are nowhere called in scripture to emulate it. What is
more, homosexual activity DOES go on in the animal world.
It must be remembered also that Paul was referring to homosexual ACTS, not
homosexuals. AND NO ONE KNOWS WHAT HOMOSEXUAL ACTS PAUL WAS TALKING
ABOUT... NO ONE KNOWS THE BACKGROUND... We must ask ourselves "what type
of homosexual acts was Paul talking about?" Was he talking exclusively
about homosexual acts connected with idolatry? (Perhaps that was the only
kind of homosexual activity he was familiar with.) Was he talking about
pederasty? Was he talking about homosexual acts committed with slaves? Was
he talking about people of heterosexual orientation committing homosexual
acts? Just exactly what type of homosexual acts was he concerned with? Do
people have the Right to just ASSUME that these verses were a blanket
condemnation of homosexual sex in every context?
In my personal opinion Paul was referring to same sex sexual acts
committed in idolatrous worship by people he regarded as heterosexual.
Even the most conservative theologian can only give their opinion as to
what type of same sex acts Paul was referring to. No one can state that
God clearly condemns all homosexuality activity based upon these verses.
It is just too vague.
As for me, based on the context of Paul's writing in Romans chapters 1-3 I
choose to believe that God's New Covenant of grace embraces those who
believe in Jesus; being a Jew doesn't make you better than a Gentile;
being a heterosexual doesn't make you any better than a homosexual. Romans
chapters one through three strike at the very heart of self-righteous
pride. It is amazing that some Christians continue to lord their own sense
of righteousness over gays and lesbians as if their heterosexual sex acts
make them somehow better, or less in need of grace. We are all in need of
grace and we ALL have that grace in Jesus Christ.
I CORINTHIANS 6:910
It is amazing the number of times that you will see the word "sodomite" or
"homosexual" or "pervert" in different translations concerning this text.
It is amazing because no one knows exactly what the words of the original
text mean! The layperson, unfortunately, has no way of knowing that
interpreters are guessing as to the exact meaning of these words. Pastors
and laypersons often have to rely upon the authority of those who have
written lexicons (dictionaries explaining the meaning of words) of Greek,
Hebrew and Aramaic words. The authors of scriptural lexicons search for
the meaning of the word within the scriptures themselves and also go
outside of scripture and research literature written around the same time
the scriptures were written. If the interpreter is already prejudiced
against homosexuality they can translate these words as condemning
homosexual sex even based upon little usage of that word in the Scriptures
and little if any contemporaneous usage of that word.
The truth is that the word some translators "transform" into
"sodomite/homosexual/pervert" in I Corinthians 6:9-10 is actually TWO
words. Some translators combine them because they "think" they go together
but they DO NOT KNOW. This uncertainty is reflected in the fact that other
translators keep the words separate and translate them "effeminate" and
"abusers of themselves with mankind".
The two words in the original Greek are "malakoi" and "arsenokoitai".
Malakoi is a very common Greek word. It literally means "soft". It is used
in Matthew 11:7-18 and Luke 7:24-25 in reference to soft clothing.
Scholars have to look at material outside of the Bible in order to try and
figure out just what this means. The early church Fathers used the word to
mean someone who was "weak" or "soft" in their morals and from the time of
the reformation to the 20th century it was usually interpreted as
masturbation. In Greek this word never is applied to gay people or
homosexual acts in general. "No new textual data effected the
twentieth-century change in translation of this word: only a shift in
popular morality. Since few people any longer regard masturbation as the
sort of activity which would preclude entrance to heaven, the condemnation
has simply been transferred to a group still so widely despised that their
exclusion does not trouble translators or theologians." (See Christianity,
Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, John Boswell, University of Chicago
Press, 1980, page 105-107) "Arsenokoitai" is discussed in the next section
as it is found here and in I Timothy 1:8-11.
Note: Greek contained no word which compares to the English noun
"homosexual" meaning someone of homosexual orientation. In fact the word
"homosexual" (meaning someone of homosexual orientation) was not even
coined until the late 1800'S by German psychologists, and introduced into
English only at the beginning of the 1900's. (See Christianity, Social
Tolerance, and homosexuality, John Boswell, University of Chicago Press,
1980, page 42) However, during scriptural times there were a number of
Greek words to describe homosexual sex acts and the two words "malakois"
and "arsenokoitai" do not appear among them (on "arsenokoitai" see
Boswell, pp 345-346.)
I TIMOTHY 1: 8-11
The word "arsenokoitai" (sometimes translated "abusers of themselves with
mankind") literally means male-bed. "Bed" is a euphemism for copulating.
This word is extremely rare in Greek. Paul was apparently the first author
to use this word. The word taken literally (male-copulator) is very
ambiguous. Take, for example, the word "lady-killer". Does it mean "a lady
who kills" or "someone who kills ladies"? In our language it means the
latter, but even then it is not clear because we do not mean that someone
literally kills ladies but that their charm "kills" them. So taking the
word "arsenokoitai" or "male-copulator", does it mean "a male who
copulates men"; does it mean "a man who copulates with women"; does it
mean "a man who is copulated"?
The Bible does not clarify. These are the only two passages in the whole
Bible where this word is used... Apparently there is no known
contemporaneous literature in which this word is used. However, relatively
close to the time Paul wrote it was used to refer to a male copulator
connected with temple prostitution. It probably had this meaning until the
late fourth century after which it came to mean a lot of different things,
including homosexual activity. (See The Bible and Homosexuality, Michael
England and Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, John
Boswell, University of Chicago Press, 1980, page 42)
Even IF the words "malakoi" and "arsenokoitai" COULD be connected with a
male homosexual sex acts it STILL would not tell us WHAT KIND OF
HOMOSEXUAL SEX ACT IS BEING CONDEMNED. They could refer to sex practices
connected with the worship of idols, pederasty or some other sexual act
which is exploitive.
It is clear that the translation of these two words as "sodomite",
"pervert" or "homosexual" has very little, if any, sound basis and is a
result of homophobia.
JUDE VERSE 7
Some people ASSUME that this verse refers to the account of what happened
in Genesis chapters 18 and 19. However this verse says that people in
Sodom and Gomorrah went after "strange flesh". It does NOT say that they
are talking about the account in Genesis 18-19. Some scholars believe that
this passage actually refers to a Jewish legend, as contained in the
apocryphal Naphtali 3.3.4-5 in The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs,
that the WOMEN of Sodom had intercourse with angels. (Christianity, Social
Tolerance, and Homosexuality, p. 97, Professor John Boswell and
Homosexuality and the Western Christian Tradition, Derrick Sherwin Bailey,
pp 11-16). It would not be unprecedented to believe that the author of
Jude would refer to extrabiblical stories as he does so in Jude 6
(referring to a passage in the apocryphal Enoch 1:6-8) and in Jude 9
(referring to a Jewish tradition that the archangel Michael argued with
Satan over the body of Moses). Even if one chooses to believe that this
passage DOES refer to Genesis 18-19 one can not ASSUME that "strange
flesh" means a "man going after a man", after all Lot's guests were NOT
MEN but ANGELS, "strange flesh" indeed. The context of this passage is
condemning a new teaching which did not honor angels (see Jude verse 8) an
example of people attempting to dishonor angels is simply brought up here
to illustrate the point.
IN CONCLUSION:
There is an extreme amount of prejudice and hatred directed toward gay
people. In my opinion this bias has had an influence in the translations
of the Bible. Words with uncertain meaning are translated as if there is
no doubt that they refer to homosexuals. Words that quite obviously do not
mean "homosexual" are blatantly mistranslated, as in the transformation of
"male temple prostitute" into "sodomite" or "perverted one". Even the New
Covenant of grace in Jesus Christ is ignored in favor of being
condemnatory through the use of the Old Covenant.
It would seem to me to be a violation of the basic beliefs of
"conservative" theology or "fundamentalism" to use verses or words as
blanket condemnations without regard as to why the verses/words were
written in the FIRST place; or without accurately reflecting the meaning
of a word; or without admitting when they don't know or are unsure of the
meaning of a word.
The fact of the matter is that there is no clear condemnation of people of
homosexual orientation living out their lives fully expressing their
orientation, sexually or otherwise, anywhere in the Scriptures. The most
that can be said is that there are some verses which seem to condemn some
homosexual acts under circumstances that we are not aware of. This extreme
ambiguity on the part of the few Scriptures concerned, coupled with the
clear proclamation of the Gospel for all people leads me to believe that
gay people are affirmed by God in their orientation and in their living
out that orientation. Please take a moment and read the following section
talking about God's...
GOOD NEWS FOR ALL PEOPLE!
You, and all people, are created in God's image! (Gen. 1:27) You are
special! (Ps 8:4-5) There is NOTHING that can separate you from the love
of God. (Romans 8:39) WHOSOEVER believes has eternal life. (John 3:16,
6:51, Romans 1:16-17, 10:13) God is with you-challenging oppression and
injustice! (Isaiah 42: 6-7, 58:6, Amos 5:24, Micah 6:8, Luke 4:18-22) You
are a part of the New Covenant! The New Covenant is one of grace (which
means unearned love) in Jesus Christ. It is not concerned with gender
roles or sexual orientation for in Christ there is "neither male nor
female". (Gal. 3:28) In fact, do you know what Jesus had to say about
homosexuality? NOTHING! - not one word! It was a non-issue not even worth
mentioning!
The New Covenant accepts even those who had formerly not been acceptable
because of their sexual or reproductive status. You do not have to bear
children in order to be included in God's family! (Isaiah 56:1-5, Matt
19:12) The Old Covenant was very concerned about such things. Deuteronomy
23:1 would not allow castrated men to be a part of the Old Covenant yet in
Acts 8 we are shown that the New Covenant sets that prohibition aside. The
Ethiopian Eunuch was baptized, accepted into the New Covenant, while still
being a foreigner and a eunuch! God didn't have to change this person in
order to love and accept this person fully!
The New Covenant did away with distinctions of clean and unclean, which
opened the door for ALL people to be a part of the New Covenant. (Acts 10)
The Gentiles were treated by the Jews the way that many Christians of
today treat homosexuals, yet God revealed to Peter that he had to set
aside his prejudice and could no longer condemn and exclude others because
they didn't fit into the rules of the Old Covenant.
God loves you and affirms the love of heterosexual and same-gender
relationships! The same-gender relationships of Ruth and Naomi (Ruth 1:16)
and of David and Jonathan (II Samuel 1:26 -
"Jonathan... your love for me was wonderful, surpassing the love of
women.") are respected and honored.
God tells all people who have felt alienated because of the pain of
prejudice and hatred, "in Christ Jesus, you who once were far away have
been brought near... You are no longer strangers, foreigners or aliens,
but fellow citizens with all God's people." (Ephesians 2:11-22)
Finally, God reminds us that no matter what our orientation is, or what
our beliefs are on homosexuality, we need to remember that "God is love".
(I John 4). We need to follow the law of love: "LOVE GOD, LOVE YOUR
NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF, LOVE ONE ANOTHER!" (Lev. 19:18, Matt 19:19, Mark
12:31, 33, Luke 10:27, John 15:12, 17, Romans 12:9-10, Galatians 5:14,
James 2:8)
==============================================================
This brochure has been provided for you as a service of the Metropolitan
Community Church of Manhattan, Kansas, which worships the second and
fourth Sunday of every month in Manhattan. Please call +1.913.271.8432 for
more information.
Authors: Rev. L. Jonathan Loppnow; "Good News" section derived from a
paper by Rev. Paul C. Evans of the Metropolitan Community Church, Topeka
Kansas USA
REPRINTED WITH PERMISSION - PLEASE REPRINT FREELY AS LONG AS THIS DOCUMENT
IS LEFT INTACT, INCLUDING THESE ATTRIBUTIONS.
Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
The Lord is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
http://Ninure-Saunders.tk
Take my polls
http://ninure.100megsfree5.com
My Yahoo Group
http://Ninure.tk
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.MCCchurch.org
The Bible Site - help provide free scripture
http://www.thebiblesite.org
To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Theism |
14 Apr 2005 05:52:33 PM |
|
|
In article <1113449987.959191.316800@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
vivapadrepio@aol.com says...
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
The translation of arsenokoit and malakos are problematic at best.
However, the very next verse says, "And that is what some of you
were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified
in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God"
So that implies that jesus belief can make up for those behaviors.
In the same way, eating pork is toevah or forbidden under torah.
But Paul says that xians don't have to keep torah.
Leviticus 18: 19-30
Do you keep all 613 commands of torah? If not then what standard do
you use to pick and choose certain parts of torah, but not others?
1 Timothy 1: 10-11
This actually says nothing directly about homosexuals. It says,
"for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and
perjurers=3Fand for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine
11that conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which he
entrusted to me." The first part of it actually says that these
laws don't apply to the "righteous". Paradoxically, Paul seems to
think that laws only apply to people who would have a tendancy to
break them anyway. By Paul's logic, you could murder someone, so
long as you convince yourself that you didn't want to do it first.
Genesis 19: 1-14
You can't possibly believe that sodom and gomorrah was anything but
a natural disaster that the hebrews attempted to callously blame on
the people after the fact. Genesis is such a sad bunch of "just
so" stories.
There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
He's still your companion though. His name is God. Atheists don't
need imaginary friends like you mental midgets.
--
"Faith, indeed, has up to the present not been
able to move real mountains ... But it can put
mountains where there are none." -- Nietzsche
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 01:30:22 PM |
|
|
In our last episode
<1113449987.959191.316800@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
vivapadrepio@aol.com pirouetted gracefully and with great fanfare
proclaimed:
There now. Ignorance is no longer your companion!
But remains yours...
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Group website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
-- Seneca the Younger
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Conspiracy of Doves" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 04:18:21 AM |
|
|
Ok, so the bible says that homosexuality is wrong. Why is that a reason
to think that homosexuality is wrong?
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
14 Apr 2005 05:43:55 AM |
|
|
"Conspiracy of Doves" <mark_dp73@yahoo.com> wrote
Ok, so the bible says that homosexuality is wrong.
But it doesn't.
Not one of the references he offered were citing
homosexuality. The closest he came was with
Leviticus, which is interpreted as a reference
to anal sex.
Not that the bible doesn't offer references to
homosexuality, it does. There's the relationship
between David & Jonathan that would require
sex scenes to be more graphic than it already is.
And then there's Luke 17:34, which in the King
James version states:
"I tell you, in that night there shall be two
men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the
other shall be left."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Barry OGrady" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
15 Apr 2005 12:37:03 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 01:43:55 -0400, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Conspiracy of Doves" <mark_dp73@yahoo.com> wrote
Ok, so the bible says that homosexuality is wrong.
But it doesn't.
Yes it does,
If a man lieth with another man.....................death.
Barry
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
15 Apr 2005 11:49:20 AM |
|
|
"Barry OGrady" <not@this.add> wrote
Yes it does,
Wrong.
If a man lieth with another man.....................death.
The claim here isn't that the men are lying down, and
that's bad, but that the men are engaged in sexual
intercourse... anal sex.
"Anal sex" isn't "Homosexuality." So even going by
your interpretation of the passage, as long as the men
stick to oral sex & mutual masturbation they're okay.
But your interpretation doesn't even require that much.
You see, Leviticus isn't the word of God. Not according
to Christians. Leviticus is Jewish cultural law, and
applies only to Jews.
Again, this is according to Christianity.
So the passage only condemns anal sex, and doesn't
apply to anyone but Jews... according to all of
Christianity.
Because, you see, Leviticus also condemns the eating
of pork (ham, bacon, pork sausage) & shellfish. If
Leviticus weren't Jewish cultural laws, Christians
would be required to to eat only Kosher foods themselves,
just like Jews, and any Christian who ever hasn't is
definitely going to Hell with the homosexuals.
So either it condemns everybody, or Christians
are right when they say that Leviticus is null & void,
because it's cultural law that only applies to Jews.
You're welcome.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Barry OGrady" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
15 Apr 2005 01:35:40 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 07:49:20 -0400, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Barry OGrady" <not@this.add> wrote
Yes it does,
Wrong.
If a man lieth with another man.....................death.
The claim here isn't that the men are lying down, and
that's bad, but that the men are engaged in sexual
intercourse... anal sex.
How far are you prepared to go to defend your God?
"Anal sex" isn't "Homosexuality." So even going by
your interpretation of the passage, as long as the men
stick to oral sex & mutual masturbation they're okay.
That's your interpretation. Try to stay focused.
But your interpretation doesn't even require that much.
True.
The commonly accepted interpretation is that homosexual acts are worthy
of death.
You see, Leviticus isn't the word of God. Not according
to Christians. Leviticus is Jewish cultural law, and
applies only to Jews.
Again, this is according to Christianity.
So the passage only condemns anal sex, and doesn't
apply to anyone but Jews... according to all of
Christianity.
According to your desperately warped view.
Why are you so desperate to make Christianity seem acceptable?
Just get out of Christianity.
Because, you see, Leviticus also condemns the eating
of pork (ham, bacon, pork sausage) & shellfish. If
Leviticus weren't Jewish cultural laws, Christians
would be required to to eat only Kosher foods themselves,
just like Jews, and any Christian who ever hasn't is
definitely going to Hell with the homosexuals.
So they should.
So either it condemns everybody, or Christians
are right when they say that Leviticus is null & void,
because it's cultural law that only applies to Jews.
It condemns everybody. The Christian God is big on condemning.
You're welcome.
I hope I have been of some help.
Barry
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
16 Apr 2005 08:07:41 PM |
|
|
"Barry OGrady" <not@this.add> wrote
"Anal sex" isn't "Homosexuality." So even going by
your interpretation of the passage, as long as the men
stick to oral sex & mutual masturbation they're okay.
That's your interpretation.
No it isn't. It's a fact. Gay men can (and do) engage in
more than just anal sex. Some gay men *Never*
engage in anal sex.
Try to stay focused.
Irony. Got to love it.
You see, Leviticus isn't the word of God. Not according
to Christians. Leviticus is Jewish cultural law, and
applies only to Jews.
According to your desperately warped view.
No. According to Christianity. And this is easily proven,
even to you.
Are Christians allowed to eat pork (ham, bacom & pork
sausage) and shellfish?
Yes.
Does Leviticus prohibit the eating of pork & shellfish?
Yes.
There. We've just proven that Christianity dismissed
Leviticus.
You're welcome.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Barry OGrady" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
18 Apr 2005 01:43:39 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:07:41 -0400, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Barry OGrady" <not@this.add> wrote
"Anal sex" isn't "Homosexuality." So even going by
your interpretation of the passage, as long as the men
stick to oral sex & mutual masturbation they're okay.
That's your interpretation.
No it isn't. It's a fact. Gay men can (and do) engage in
more than just anal sex. Some gay men *Never*
engage in anal sex.
Irrelevant to the fact that homosexuality is condemned in the Bible.
Try to stay focused.
Irony. Got to love it.
Why claim that I said something which I didn't say?
You see, Leviticus isn't the word of God. Not according
to Christians. Leviticus is Jewish cultural law, and
applies only to Jews.
According to your desperately warped view.
No. According to Christianity. And this is easily proven,
even to you.
Are Christians allowed to eat pork (ham, bacom & pork
sausage) and shellfish?
Yes.
Does Leviticus prohibit the eating of pork & shellfish?
Yes.
There. We've just proven that Christianity dismissed
Leviticus.
And yet the Biblical prohibition remains, which is all I am saying.
You're welcome.
Barry
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ash" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
18 Apr 2005 02:16:28 PM |
|
|
Barry OGrady wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:07:41 -0400, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Barry OGrady" <not@this.add> wrote
"Anal sex" isn't "Homosexuality." So even going by
your interpretation of the passage, as long as the men
stick to oral sex & mutual masturbation they're okay.
That's your interpretation.
No it isn't. It's a fact. Gay men can (and do) engage in
more than just anal sex. Some gay men *Never*
engage in anal sex.
Irrelevant to the fact that homosexuality is condemned in the Bible.
Yet you haven't been able to provide any examples
.
|
|
|
| User: "Barry OGrady" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
20 Apr 2005 12:47:44 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:16:28 +0100, Ash <ashamanic@winterfell73.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
Barry OGrady wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:07:41 -0400, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Barry OGrady" <not@this.add> wrote
"Anal sex" isn't "Homosexuality." So even going by
your interpretation of the passage, as long as the men
stick to oral sex & mutual masturbation they're okay.
That's your interpretation.
No it isn't. It's a fact. Gay men can (and do) engage in
more than just anal sex. Some gay men *Never*
engage in anal sex.
Irrelevant to the fact that homosexuality is condemned in the Bible.
Yet you haven't been able to provide any examples
If a man lieth with a man...............death.
<long list> shall not enter the kingdom of heaven.
Barry
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
20 Apr 2005 01:01:06 PM |
|
|
Barry OGrady wrote:
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:16:28 +0100, Ash <ashamanic@winterfell73.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
Barry OGrady wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:07:41 -0400, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Barry OGrady" <not@this.add> wrote
"Anal sex" isn't "Homosexuality." So even going by
your interpretation of the passage, as long as the men
stick to oral sex & mutual masturbation they're okay.
That's your interpretation.
No it isn't. It's a fact. Gay men can (and do) engage in
more than just anal sex. Some gay men *Never*
engage in anal sex.
Irrelevant to the fact that homosexuality is condemned in the Bible.
Yet you haven't been able to provide any examples
If a man lieth with a man...............death.
<long list> shall not enter the kingdom of heaven.
Sorry, but the Bible doesn't say that. Give some verses. Which
translation you looking at? King James? Darby? Amplified?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Barry OGrady" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
24 Apr 2005 10:15:05 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 06:01:06 -0700, DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote:
Barry OGrady wrote:
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:16:28 +0100, Ash <ashamanic@winterfell73.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
Barry OGrady wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:07:41 -0400, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Barry OGrady" <not@this.add> wrote
"Anal sex" isn't "Homosexuality." So even going by
your interpretation of the passage, as long as the men
stick to oral sex & mutual masturbation they're okay.
That's your interpretation.
No it isn't. It's a fact. Gay men can (and do) engage in
more than just anal sex. Some gay men *Never*
engage in anal sex.
Irrelevant to the fact that homosexuality is condemned in the Bible.
Yet you haven't been able to provide any examples
If a man lieth with a man...............death.
<long list> shall not enter the kingdom of heaven.
Sorry, but the Bible doesn't say that. Give some verses. Which
translation you looking at? King James? Darby? Amplified?
+----------------------------- 1 Corinthians 6:9 ----------------------
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,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor
extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
Barry
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Stahl" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Should One Fight Against Homosexuality? |
15 Apr 2005 10:40:43 PM |
|
|
"Barry OGrady" <not@this.add> wrote in message
news:b4fv511ajself4ha2hr2p2b175r6437ov2@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 07:49:20 -0400, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Barry OGrady" <not@this.add> wrote
Yes it does,
Wrong.
If a man lieth with another man.....................death.
The claim here isn't that the men are lying down, and
that's bad, but that the men are engaged in sexual
intercourse... anal sex.
How far are you prepared to go to defend your God?
Ummm... he's an atheist.
"Anal sex" isn't "Homosexuality." So even going by
your interpretation of the passage, as long as the men
stick to oral sex & mutual masturbation they're okay.
That's your interpretation. Try to stay focused.
His interpretation, Jerry Fallwell's... whose do you like better?
But your interpretation doesn't even require that much.
True.
The commonly accepted interpretation is that homosexual acts are worthy
of death.
Commonly accepted by whom?
You see, Leviticus isn't the word of God. Not according
to Christians. Leviticus is Jewish cultural law, and
applies only to Jews.
Again, this is according to Christianity.
So the passage only condemns anal sex, and doesn't
apply to anyone but Jews... according to all of
Christianity.
According to your desperately warped view.
Why are you so desperate to make Christianity seem acceptable?
He's not, merely pointing out that even Christians aren't condemned to be
bigotted homophobes.
Just get out of Christianity.
I'm quite sure he is.
Because, you see, Leviticus also condemns the eating
of pork (ham, bacon, pork sausage) & shellfish. If
Leviticus weren't Jewish cultural laws, Christians
would be required to to eat only Kosher foods themselves,
just like Jews, and any Christian who ever hasn't is
definitely going to Hell with the homosexuals.
So they should.
But the Christians do not believe this.
So either it condemns everybody, or Christians
are right when they say that Leviticus is null & void,
because it's cultural law that only applies to Jews.
It condemns everybody. The Christian God is big on condemning.
But this is not Christian doctrine, is it?
You're welcome.
I hope I have been of some help.
Not that much, really.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
