Because your post is worthless drivel without any evidence to support it. Arsenokoites has never in 1900 years referred to homosexuals. Not a single use in classical literature after Paul invented it, did it refer to that. It has always been listed as an economic crime. It was altered in 1948 by Conservative Bible publishers. We know for a fact it's a biased translation, since "homosexuals" includes lesbians, and Arsenokoites cannot refer to women. We also know during the entire reformation, it condemned masturbation and is still listed that way in the German Bible and Greek dictionaries.
Sexual orientation was not even discovered until the late 19th Century. Prostitution in the temples of the Canaanite or Greco-Roman gods is not homosexuality.
|
-
01-19-2013, 08:40 AM #121
Last edited by Fiyero; 01-19-2013 at 08:45 AM.
-
01-19-2013, 08:53 AM #122
-
01-19-2013, 08:56 AM #123
-
01-19-2013, 10:00 AM #124
- Join Date: Dec 2010
- Location: New York, United States
- Age: 44
- Posts: 2,607
- Rep Power: 808
Sure, but people who own a tractor are astronomically more likely to be against same-sex marriage as well. That doesn't mean the tractor is the cause. People aren't going to base their actual feelings on the matter on religion. Rather, they're basing their relationship with religion on their own beliefs. I've heard plenty of anti-gay explanations that I have completely understood and saw the logic in but simply didn't feel the same way the people giving those explanations did. So even if the Bible does substantiate the notion that gay is bad, you have to already think it's a bad thing on your own account. Not only that, but you also have to believe that you have some obligation to CARE what other people are doing. It's one thing to leave things be and just wait for them to go to hell; it's quite another to have the drive to actually treat these people poorly, which isn't Christian either way.
America spoke and it chose 16 years of Bush.
-
-
01-19-2013, 10:08 AM #125
Of course, that's the point of the post. If you are going to say gay is bad because the Bible said so... man up and do some killing, because the Bible says so.
Be lets not ignore the fact that if the Bible said to embrace homosex, the opposition of it would look much different than it does today. There are plenty or retards out that they take the interpretation of the Bible they choose and live by it.12-5-23
-
01-19-2013, 10:19 AM #126
- Join Date: Dec 2010
- Location: New York, United States
- Age: 44
- Posts: 2,607
- Rep Power: 808
But it doesn't say so. The Old Testament does. Jesus contradicted much of what was practiced before his arrival so if there's something in the OT that seems to contradict Jesus, then that's old Jewish stuff, which is very preoccupied with revenge, racial superiority and other un-Christian stuff. I don't think it really matters what one religion or another says about homosexuality; people would always have disliked people different from themselves and most of the homosexuality that existed at the time consisted of married men going to the gym to bugger their pals. It wasn't like now where two guys want to marry each other and adopt a kid from China or something and live like a normal married couple. There was virtually nothing back then in the realm of homosexuality that was worth defending.
America spoke and it chose 16 years of Bush.
-
01-19-2013, 12:17 PM #127
I'm not sure about that. I think the Bible has influenced society to view gays negatively. Why do you think same-sex behavior/affection was so tolerated in Greek or Roman society? They didn't have the negative influence that Judeo-Christian cultures have on the subject. Plenty of pastors tell people gays are evil, because they think the Bible says so, and their congregation believes it, despite the fact that they know nothing about gays and have likely never met one. There is also a lot of anti-gay propaganda from Evangelical organizations out there that spreads lies about gays to further demonize them.
The larger the religiously conservative population a country has, the more likely it is to be anti-gay. That's why Western Europe is far more accepting of gays than the US, or the Middle East. They aren't as influenced by religious conservatism and literalistic holy book interpretations.
-
01-19-2013, 03:32 PM #128
At this point I am unsure whether or not you are protecting a pet cause or are simply grossly uneducated about Greek and the Bible. This is not intended as a jab, but you are showing zero knowledge of the Greek New Testament, Vulgar Greek vocabulary, and the Hebrew to Greek Septuagint translation.
First the word Arsenokoites refers to sexual activity because it is literally referring to sexual activity. If you know Greek, you would understand this. Arsenokoites is a compound word. In Greek, arseno means "male." Koites (from which the English word "coitus" is derived from) always refers to sexual activity. This compound word literally refers to sexual activity performed upon males. You may not take my word for it, but be aware that every single Greek-English lexicon lists Arsenokoites as referring to homosexuals. (Check "A Greek-English Lexicon" by Scott Liddell, page is like 240ish, if you're serious about sourcing me.) It is a clear reference to non-typical sexual activity.
Your second point asserts that Arsenokoites was never used referring to homosexual activity until fairly recent. This is an outright lie. (I just thought I'd let you know that I'm in school for an advanced theology degree lol... your bullchit isn't going to convince me.) The Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures outdated Jesus and the New Testament writers. In reference to the Leviticus ban on homosexual activity, it uses the same root words for that behavior: arseno and koites. Paul's condemnation against arsenokoites and the Leviticus ban on aresnokoites match each other.
Also, homosexuality was a much a hot topic during the Reformation as it is today. You should see the Puritan polemic leveled at King James, whom was snidely called Queen James because he was either homosexual or bisexual."I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven one like a Son of Man was coming, and He came up to the Ancient of Days and was presented before Him. And to Him was given dominion, glory and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations and men of every language might serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion which will not pass away; and His kingdom is one which will not be destroyed."
-
-
01-19-2013, 04:08 PM #129'On many levels, mathematics itself operates as Whiteness. Who gets credit for doing and developing mathematics, who is capable in mathematics, and who is seen as part of the mathematical community is generally viewed as White' - Rochelle Gutierrez, Professor of Mathematics at the University of Illinois.
-
01-19-2013, 07:07 PM #130
-
01-19-2013, 08:05 PM #131
-
01-20-2013, 08:21 AM #132
I hear this sentiment a lot among Christians about the Hebrew Scriptures. It is downright false that the Old Testament is not relevant to New Testament faith. There are multiple theological threads I could go down, some of them more complex than others. There is no sound Biblical teaching that divorces the New Testament scriptures from the Hebrew Scriptures. The Gospels themselves either quote a significant amount of Hebrew Scripture, or make reference to them. (You'd be surprised at how much Jewish Oral Law and makes its way in there as well.) Christians should accept the Hebrew Scriptures as equally authoritative as the New Testament, although within a New Covenant context.
I could discuss the Biblical reasoning as well as the pertinent theology, but only if you or someone else is interested. Some of it is quite tedious. This is not to say that Gentiles are responsible to keep the breadth of Torah; even the Jerusalem Council disagreed in Acts 15."I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven one like a Son of Man was coming, and He came up to the Ancient of Days and was presented before Him. And to Him was given dominion, glory and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations and men of every language might serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion which will not pass away; and His kingdom is one which will not be destroyed."
-
-
01-20-2013, 08:23 AM #133
-
01-20-2013, 08:35 AM #134
You are either retarded or live in a different world than I do. 9 out of 10 Christians I know or see in the news are against gay marriage because the "The Bible says so"...... but this is typical, religious folk denying the reality of the world they live in, hey it is the basis of the belief. Ignore logic, believe in the make believe. Carry on.12-5-23
-
01-20-2013, 08:38 AM #135
I kind of agree with this. Isn't a large amount of the New Testament based of the Old Testament stuff?
Just want to make myself more knowledgeable in this area as an atheist. Just confused with what everyone says both atheists and theists.
A lot Christians say Jesus Abolished the laws of the Old Testament and that is why it isn't followed and the OT is disregarded.
A lot of the usual counters to this for atheists is that the 10 commandments originated in the Old Testament (So why do Christians don't disregard this? Matt Dillahunty said this).
Looking for some perspective and arguments for this if anyone is willing to share! Always wondered about this.https://bandcamp.com/singularity7 - Music collection. Recommend albums. Always looking for more.
-
01-20-2013, 09:10 AM #136
-
-
01-20-2013, 09:22 AM #137
Jesus' fulfilled prophecies are contained within the Hebrew Scripts, often called "Old" Testament. The scribe that asked Jesus, "which is the first commandment of all?" was answered with Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18. Interestingly, Deuteronomy 6:4 begins a sung prayer incorporated into the Jewish synagogue order since the conception of the synagogue. It's something that children learn to sing, and the scribe would have certainly been familiar with it. It seems Jesus was rebutting the scribe's theologically loaded (perhaps underhanded as well as it seems in the Greek) question with the simplest prayer in Judaism! Jesus also took the commands of Moses and said "You have heard to said, but I tell you... ." In this manner Jesus made Himself out to be the prophet like Moses that Moses himself prophesied; Moses, unlike any other prophet, gave Law. Jesus, unlike any prophet before Him except for Moses, took the Law and expanded it. The Gospel of John makes frequent paraphrase and quotation of Genesis in regard to Jesus' divinity and humanity. I could go on; entire books have been written about this. The Gospel of Matthew goes through the gamut of Hebrew messianic prophecy to build the case of Jesus as the Jewish messiah. You should see how much the epistles quote Jewish Oral Law! The New Testament is rife with theology with its origin in the Hebrew Scriptures. To divorce the two from each other is usually done in ignorance.
There are also the (often tedious) details of Covenant Theology. Specifically, "What is the New Covenant," and "What 'Old' Covenant is it replacing?" Christians all around the world share a belief of inclusion into the New Covenant that God made with Israel, specifically mentioned in Jeremiah 31:31. Looking in retrospect from a time where salvation is in Jesus, theologians realize that Jesus is the necessary fulfillment of what was prophesied in Jeremiah 31. However, a funny thing happened when the Church found itself led by Greeks and Romans instead of Jews; the New Covenant's Jewish character and its community's Jewish heritage was largely discarded, and there is now this artificial theological barrier between Old and New Covenants, Jew and Gentile. The Mosaic ("Old") Covenant was made with Israel at Mount Sinai, and it was actually done on a literary form that was common, even universal, in the Middle East of that time. The form of the covenant was 1) history 2) textual agreement 3) witnesses and 4) Blessing and curses for covenant keeping or transgression. This form was held true for the Mosaic covenant. When we come to the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31, we again see the Covenant literary form. However, the only part that was included was part 2) textual agreement. The implication here is that the New Covenant order has the same history, witnesses, and blessings and curses of the Mosaic covenant.
The conclusion is that the New Covenant is not a replacement separating a Jewish covenant from a Christian covenant. Rather, the New Covenant is an evolution of the Mosaic Covenant, a Renewed Covenant if you will. There is no separation between Old and New, the "Old" was simply brought into its truest and fullest form by the New, namely Jesus. Hence Matthew 5:17, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." (Emphasis mine)"I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven one like a Son of Man was coming, and He came up to the Ancient of Days and was presented before Him. And to Him was given dominion, glory and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations and men of every language might serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion which will not pass away; and His kingdom is one which will not be destroyed."
-
01-20-2013, 08:07 PM #138
Hmm interesting, i thought that was the case.
Matthew 5:17, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
Yeah i saw this quote being posted a lot. Just wondered if it had any other meaning to it.
Thankshttps://bandcamp.com/singularity7 - Music collection. Recommend albums. Always looking for more.
-
01-20-2013, 09:53 PM #139
Gay marriage doesn't rustle my jimmies because "The Bible says so". Its not the rule breaking that frustrates me, because as a human I break rules every day, for me to say gays shouldn't be doing this and that while I'm still sinning is hypocritical. The reason I'm against gay marriage is because it redefines the meaning of marriage. Don't get me wrong I'm fine with civil unions and what ever, that's up to them, if its two consenting adults its none of my business what they do at night. It just rustles my jimmies when the redefine the meaning of marriage from a man and a women to a man and a man. To me, redefining marriage is as, the misc puts it, beta feminism.
-
01-20-2013, 10:05 PM #140
Sorry I wasn't meaning the OT isn't relevant at all. On the contrary. The old testament is for us, but not to us if you get what I'm saying. The laws in it were written to the Jewish people, not Christians. Sure a lot of its teaching are still relevant, but my point was its a massive mistake to believe we must follow all of the OT laws. We are no longer under a law based system, but under grace. For example we no longer burn offering in the Temple to pay for our sins, because Jesus has paid for them fully. The OPs whole argument was based on a Jewish law, I was merely pointing out that certainly doesn't mean Christians should follow that law and kill homosexuals.
-
-
01-21-2013, 03:47 AM #141
-
01-22-2013, 05:42 PM #142
- Join Date: Dec 2010
- Location: New York, United States
- Age: 44
- Posts: 2,607
- Rep Power: 808
Latent locker-room homosexuality is what it was (nothing gay about a bunch of men enjoying each other's body's, bro), mainly, and it wasn't something for the peasants. Why? I don't know, but those cultures are the anomaly in the context of the rest of the world. If you closed your eyes and put your finger on a spinning globe, you'd find people who were ready to attack such behavior and use whatever the region's religion was as an excuse.
I'm neither. If you read a book where someone who appears to be a villain and is described as such turns out to be a good guy in the end, does that mean he must always be perceived as a villain? Similarly, if every stupid thing in the OT were okay, why did we even have Christianity? I'm not going to speak for the 9 out of 10 halfwits you know or see in the news, but they're wanking to an arbitrary scripture analysis I don't agree with.America spoke and it chose 16 years of Bush.
-
01-22-2013, 06:29 PM #143
I have a clear theological opinion about what you have said here, but I'd rather see your stance.
You say that the Old Testament Law is for the Jews and not for Christians. God expressed in Leviticus that homosexual activity is abhorrent to Him. In light of this, do you find homosexual activity acceptable because the Old Testament Law was not given to Gentiles? (Never mind the passage in 1 Corinthians that is clearly a New Testament condemnation of homosexual activity for the time being, I'd rather read your response for this.)"I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven one like a Son of Man was coming, and He came up to the Ancient of Days and was presented before Him. And to Him was given dominion, glory and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations and men of every language might serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion which will not pass away; and His kingdom is one which will not be destroyed."
-
01-23-2013, 07:58 AM #144
-
-
01-23-2013, 08:03 AM #145
You must be new here.
No one is interested in hearing what Christian theology actually says about anything. The preferred method of debate is to take single verses out of context and then claim "gotcha" to all theists. Oh, meme's with pictures are also highly effective rhetorical strategies. Oh, and resurrecting dead arguments from the 19th century seems to be popular as well. Along with school yard gotcha questions like "Oh yea, well who made God then hurr durr" and "LOL can god make a burrito so hot he can't hold it?!"'On many levels, mathematics itself operates as Whiteness. Who gets credit for doing and developing mathematics, who is capable in mathematics, and who is seen as part of the mathematical community is generally viewed as White' - Rochelle Gutierrez, Professor of Mathematics at the University of Illinois.
-
01-23-2013, 08:05 AM #146
-
01-23-2013, 08:06 AM #147'On many levels, mathematics itself operates as Whiteness. Who gets credit for doing and developing mathematics, who is capable in mathematics, and who is seen as part of the mathematical community is generally viewed as White' - Rochelle Gutierrez, Professor of Mathematics at the University of Illinois.
-
01-23-2013, 08:25 AM #148
Let's be honest though; the 'who made God' reply is no more problematic than postulating a god in the first place--much less a specific God!
These forums are not the locus of expert exchange, and viewed from a different angle I think we should be happy that arguments that don't hold up under scrutiny are exposed as such. That's all part of educating the discourse!
I know I'm no expert. But I've taken it as accepted--canonical even--that homosexuality is condemned under Christianity. If I'm not right in this regard, I should love to get straightened out!My recommended reading
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/ - great research review /w practical considerations!
http://www.biolayne.com.com/ - natural bodybuilder Layne Norton!
http:://www.bodyrecomposition.com - Lyle McDonald's site - tons of great articles!
-
-
01-23-2013, 09:55 AM #149
Well, seeing as there are only 2 verses in the entire New Testament that people even quote to condemn homosexuality, and when looked it from a scholarly perspective without the bias of Conservative For-Profit English translations, it's pretty hard to put so much condemnation on something so vaguely mentioned. Considering homosexuality is considered the biggest sin among modern day Christianity, you would think it would be mentioned a lot, specifically, and by Jesus himself. How often do you hear Fundies condemning divorce or adultery? Why aren't US laws being pushed to make those illegal? Why are divorcers being denied equal protection under the law?
It's pretty obvious homosexuality is targeted for more complex reasons, and religion is the cheap justification.
-
01-23-2013, 01:47 PM #150
Similar Threads
-
Burqa Blowout
By mehdi84 in forum Religion and PoliticsReplies: 154Last Post: 07-28-2010, 09:53 AM
Bookmarks