A question for gays

[DarkLegend28]

With the premarital pregnancy, and the current divorce rates, even within the church, people would have to look in the mirror first...

Not something many who are sitting in judgement and handing down condemnation are willing to do

So in otherwords, its okay to condemn as long as it does not apply to you.

 

[CriticalMassKitten]

How can you reconcile homosexual behavior when scripture clearly condemns it and with serious consequences?

Because not everyone believes the bible to be the word of God. But looking at it from a religious viewpoint, my answer is I've seen other translations, as seen in this thread. Also, the bible is an interpretation of the one reading it, so people could take it however they want.

 

[Polycarp1]

A few points on language:

1. I believe nobody is saying that Paul did not condemn the malakoi nor the arsenokaites; the question is if the words used to translate them into English properly convey the meaning Paul intended and have connotations in modern culture that Paul did not intend. To give a comparison from the Old Testament that has nothing to do with homosexuality but should clarify the point, I think most of us are familiar with the KJV translation of the verse, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." However, what the Law meant by this was not a dabbler in hocus-pocus spells and most emphatically not a Wiccan; culturally, the word translated "witch" refers to a maker of potions -- and not merely (actually ineffective) love potions; a "witch" in ancient Israel would derive much of her livelihood by the sale of poisons, suitable for subtly killing an enemy. Now, everyone knows that in popular lore, a witch makes potions; "eye of newt and toe of frog" is from Macbeth. So the translation is not strictly in error -- but the connotation is so very wrong that it's considered a mistranslation.

Now, to our words from I Corinthians:

Malakos (singular; -oi is the plural) means "soft." It's the proper term for the feel of a sheep's fleece or a feather-stuffed pillow or cushion. But when used in a moral or ethical sense, as it often was by Greek secular writers, it means "lacking in constancy or fortitude, bending to whim." As such, it might describe the effete. Alcibiades might be described as malakos, for he was fond of luxury and changeable, in addition to being gay in the modern sense. But Epimondas of Thebes, leader of the Sacred Band of warriors, despite having a male lover would never be termed malakos -- the term had a specific meaning not accurately matched by any English word.

Arsenokaites (the word appears in several variations in the manuscripts) is the really interesting one. To the best of my knowledge, it never appears before Paul, who seems to have coined it, and (again TTBOMK) all subsequent uses are quotations or allusions to Paul's use of it. From the elements, we get the general literalistic sense "maleness-bedder" or "one who lies in some way related to maleness," but anyone who's ever shot an arrow at a bullseye knows the need to be cautious about literal meanings. Indeed, Paul's usage, when there were perfectly good Greek words to describe men who enjoyed sex with other men (as most people are aware, a commonplace of ancient Greek culture), suggests that we should shop around for the significance of why Paul felt called to coin a new term. And interestingly, the choice of terms echoes the Greek rendering of Leviticus 18:22, which uses the same odd construction. And it is included in a list of Canaanite sexual and fertility-idolatry practices that the Israelites were enjoined from engaging in.

Now, it's very interesting, in this regard, that Corinth was "sin city" to the ancient world. Fertility cults abounded, and there was a thriving prostitution industry, largely founded on slaves, including enslaved boy prostitutes. It takes very little imagination to picture how Paul must have reacted to this.

Consider the following parallel: "All sex is evil. We know this, because the Bible condemns fornication and lust, and fornication is nothing but sexual intercourse while lust is sexual desire." It's illogical to conclude this, because the terms are not synonymous ... but many a boy or girl at puberty has had pangs of guilt because he or she has felt the normal healthy sexual desire God created us with, and mistook it for the sins which Scripture condemns.

There is no doubt in my mind that the malakoi and the arsenokaites were sinners whom Paul excluded from the kingdom. There is a great deal of doubt in my mind whether he meant people in loving homosexual relationships when he wrote that.

And in any case, for the rest of us to be condemning gay people is far from what Jesus Christ Himself commands. It is, perhaps, akin to the person for whom alcohol has no temptation casting His wrath upon the alcoholic. (Not the world's best parallel, but it does have its virtues, notably that whether we will become alcoholics if we dare to imbibe is evidently genetic or congenital, not a matter of choice.)

 

[Gwenyfur]

So in otherwords, its okay to condemn as long as it does not apply to you.

Whoa! Where'd that leap come from?

My post only meant to point out the same parallel our Savior did...
remove the beam from your own eye before trying to get the mote in your brother's.

People don't want to see their own faults....they'd rather point out their brothers'...which is why they bash on gays more than on divorce and premarital sex...

 

[DarkLegend28]

Whoa! Where'd that leap come from?

My post only meant to point out the same parallel our Savior did...
remove the beam from your own eye before trying to get the mote in your brother's.

People don't want to see their own faults....they'd rather point out their brothers'...which is why they bash on gays more than on divorce and premarital sex...

Oh no, I wasn't criticizing you, I was just seeking clarification... sorry. I didn't mean it that way.

 

[Gwenyfur]

Oh no, I wasn't criticizing you, I was just seeking clarification... sorry. I didn't mean it that way.

Okies so long as we're all good here

 

[Chaplain David]

Whoa! Where'd that leap come from?

My post only meant to point out the same parallel our Savior did...
remove the beam from your own eye before trying to get the mote in your brother's.

People don't want to see their own faults....they'd rather point out their brothers'...which is why they bash on gays more than on divorce and premarital sex...

We shouldn't bash anyone. I used to have gay friends but they've disowned me since I became ordained because they know the Christian stance on homosexual behavior. So out went this baby with the bathwater. They made fun of me for trying to explain it to them, mimicing (sp) condemn the sin, not the sinner and until this thread, can't say I've had any positive experiences with Christian homosexuals. I realize that everyone who participated today is not a Christian but they were nice too. If we can set positive examples for others, then maybe something we say or do will rub off and help them. Taking a proactive stance in helping others is what ministry is all about. So God bless. I think I've used my clicks for the day. Talk to you all later.

David

 

[Gwenyfur]

I completely agree David...no one shoudl be doing any bashing...but sadly it does happen...all too frequently...

Shalom

 

[Brieuse]

First I'd like to thank all those who are participating in this discussion. I feel like I should be commenting on all your posts. Just know I appreciate it. To the previous one I say the following. I am not an expert in Greek and cannot debate Greek grammar. I can however list the following from "The Bible Knowledge Commentary" by Walvoord and Zuck, "The word adikoi (the wicked) in 1 Cor 6:9 was used in verse 1 there translated "the ungodly." The verb form adikeite "do wrong" however was used in verse 8 to describe the Corinthian's behavior. Their future role should have radically affected their practice in the present (cf. 1 John 3:3. If they thought otherwise, Paul warned, they were deceived (cf 1 Cor 5:11; Rev. 21:7-8; 22:14-15.

The list of offenders was similiar to that noted earlier (1 Cor 5:10-11 which no doubt corresponded to problems in Corinth and in other large cities of the day (cf Eph 5:3-6).

Homosexuality and male prostitution, for example, were especially characteristic of Greco-Roman society. Plato lauded homosexual love in The Symposium (181B). Nero, emperor at the time Paul wrote this letter, was about to marry the boy Sporus (Suetonius Lives of the Caesars 6. 28), an incident bizarre only in it's formality, since 14 of the first 15 Roman emperors were homosexual or bisexual."

Actually, the Greek were known for their pedastry. Homosexuality, Heterosexuality and the prostitution that went with it was prevalent in all the societies.

Plato lauded love in general, in the Symposium

 

[Brieuse]

So in otherwords, its okay to condemn as long as it does not apply to you.

Sorry, in the hope of maintaining mature debates, can we refrain from these kinds of posts. Please.

 

[Ohioprof]

We shouldn't bash anyone. I used to have gay friends but they've disowned me since I became ordained because they know the Christian stance on homosexual behavior. So out went this baby with the bathwater. They made fun of me for trying to explain it to them, mimicing (sp) condemn the sin, not the sinner and until this thread, can't say I've had any positive experiences with Christian homosexuals. I realize that everyone who participated today is not a Christian but they were nice too. If we can set positive examples for others, then maybe something we say or do will rub off and help them. Taking a proactive stance in helping others is what ministry is all about. So God bless. I think I've used my clicks for the day. Talk to you all later.

David

There are different Christian stances on "homosexual behavior" not just one stance. There are Christian denominations that accept gay people and ordain gay people. I know many gay people who are themselves ordained; being ordained is not something in itself to prompt the gay people I know to reject a friend. Perhaps you might ask your former friends to explain why they have rejected you, so you know for sure. Just a suggestion.

 

[BigBadWlf]

First I'd like to thank all those who are participating in this discussion. I feel like I should be commenting on all your posts. Just know I appreciate it. To the previous one I say the following. I am not an expert in Greek and cannot debate Greek grammar. I can however list the following from "The Bible Knowledge Commentary" by Walvoord and Zuck, "The word adikoi (the wicked) in 1 Cor 6:9 was used in verse 1 there translated "the ungodly." The verb form adikeite "do wrong" however was used in verse 8 to describe the Corinthian's behavior. Their future role should have radically affected their practice in the present (cf. 1 John 3:3. If they thought otherwise, Paul warned, they were deceived (cf 1 Cor 5:11; Rev. 21:7-8; 22:14-15.

The list of offenders was similiar to that noted earlier (1 Cor 5:10-11 which no doubt corresponded to problems in Corinth and in other large cities of the day (cf Eph 5:3-6).

Homosexuality and male prostitution, for example, were especially characteristic of Greco-Roman society. Plato lauded homosexual love in The Symposium (181B). Nero, emperor at the time Paul wrote this letter, was about to marry the boy Sporus (Suetonius Lives of the Caesars 6. 28), an incident bizarre only in it's formality, since 14 of the first 15 Roman emperors were homosexual or bisexual."

You did ask about translations. And the condemnation of homosexuals in Corinthians depends entirely on the translation of the word arsenokoites. As noted there is no evidence to show that this word does or did mean homosexual

I would also love to see evidence backing up the claimed sexual oriention of the various Roman Emperors

 

[BigBadWlf]

Double post

 

[BigBadWlf]

We shouldn't bash anyone. I used to have gay friends but they've disowned me since I became ordained because they know the Christian stance on homosexual behavior. So out went this baby with the bathwater. They made fun of me for trying to explain it to them, mimicing (sp) condemn the sin, not the sinner and until this thread, can't say I've had any positive experiences with Christian homosexuals. I realize that everyone who participated today is not a Christian but they were nice too. If we can set positive examples for others, then maybe something we say or do will rub off and help them. Taking a proactive stance in helping others is what ministry is all about. So God bless. I think I've used my clicks for the day. Talk to you all later.

David

That seems…odd. Especially when one considerers that there is no unified Christian response to anything.

You may want to reassess your part in these dissolved friendships. some of the phrases you use lean to the caustic side of things. You might also look at what you were “explaining” and try walking for a time in their shoes and ask yourself just how you were coming across

 

[Chaplain David]

That seems…odd. Especially when one considerers that there is no unified Christian response to anything.

You may want to reassess your part in these dissolved friendships. some of the phrases you use lean to the caustic side of things. You might also look at what you were “explaining” and try walking for a time in their shoes and ask yourself just how you were coming across

I have almost exclusively used scripture for my support. If it seems caustic then I believe that is in the interpretation. I don't accept that my Bible is mistranslated or any of the other's that I quoted and we use in the USA. I do believe that much support and explanation can be added to the Bible by good commentaries, bible dictionaries and theological writings. God's word is perfect and without error.

It is interesting how you zero in on there possibly being something wrong with my role in my gay friends leaving rather than theirs. Maybe it's nothing.

Their leaving probably had to do more with running from Christ as neither are believers.

I have a learned friend and pastor who reads all the ancient languages and has access to various old scrolls, older bibles, and is very familiar with some of the original churches such as the ones in Etheopia and Antioch. I will write and get her take on this topic and bring it back to the forum when I do. God bless you there Big Bear.

 

[savedandhappy1]

With the premarital pregnancy, and the current divorce rates, even within the church, people would have to look in the mirror first...

Not something many who are sitting in judgement and handing down condemnation are willing to do

I'm sorry, but I am not sure I understand your post.

Are you saying that if I believe that the bible says that homosexuality is a sin, that I am denying that I am a sinner?

 

[savedandhappy1]

Whoa! Where'd that leap come from?

My post only meant to point out the same parallel our Savior did...
remove the beam from your own eye before trying to get the mote in your brother's.

People don't want to see their own faults....they'd rather point out their brothers'...which is why they bash on gays more than on divorce and premarital sex...

This is a section set aside to debate homosexuality, so why would we be talking about divorce and premarital sex?

 

[Chaplain David]

...I would also love to see evidence backing up the claimed sexual oriention of the various Roman Emperors

OK, this is the reference I quoted. It is written by Dallas Theological Seminary faculty members which I believe makes it as a good and trustworthy reference. The book is titled, "The Bible Knowledge Commentary" for the new testament. The ISBN # is 0-88207-812-7. It is published by Cook Communications. If you contact the publisher I'm sure they will forward any questions you have about the Roman Emperors to the authors or editors for comment.

There are several reviews on the first page. One I like is from Dr. David Jeremiah, Senior Pastor, Shadow Mountain Community Church, San Diego, CA which states,

"At last...a commentary we can all believe in. Sunday School teachers and many others at our church will find The Bible Knowledge commentary extremely helpful!"

 

[notmyown123]

I didnt read all 4 pages so this might have gotten cleared up already but I see that people are already attacking the word used for homosexuals so I say we forget about that verse and just use the other verse given... it is pretty well laid out what he is speaking of huh?? I dont see where there could be a translation error in the other verse.

 

[Chaplain David]

I didnt read all 4 pages so this might have gotten cleared up already but I see that people are already attacking the word used for homosexuals so I say we forget about that verse and just use the other verse given... it is pretty well laid out what he is speaking of huh?? I dont see where there could be a translation error in the other verse.

I have pretty much read the whole thing and haven't seen any attacking. Everyone's been gracious, kind and has largely debated the topic. Where is someone making fun of as you say, "the word used for homosexuals?"

Gracia,