A question for gays

[narnia59]

Well, to be fair I'm bi. But I think that's gay enough for the purposes of the discussion. Yes, the Bible condones homosexuality - in fact you should kill a gay guy, (Leviticus 20:13 NAB) you should also kill people who disagree with a priest/minister (Deuteronomy 17:12), you should also kill someone for striking a parent, (Exodus 21:15)

My point being, there are very many outdated or archaic portions of the Bible, and homosexuality is just one people like to pick apart. Why doesn't pre-marital sex or divorce get this much attention?

Because they're the sins of the majority.

 

[Ohioprof]

Because they're the sins of the majority.

Good point. Very astute observation.

 

[Chaplain David]

People certainly had intimate relationships with people of the same sex, which has been true as long as humans existed. But people did not regard someone as a gay person or as a homosexual person, as we do now. The understanding that there are "homosexual" or a gay people is relatively new, dating back to just the 19th century. Prior to this, people were regarded as engaging in sexual acts with someone of the same sex, but there was not a wide recognition that there were people who were inherently oriented toward partners of the same sex.

There was certainly cultural variation in how people have regarded "homosexuality" over time. But the recognition that some people are simply oriented to be gay is a relatively modern recognition by the medical community and by researchers.

Hello OhioProf,

How are you this evening?

As you say, in days of old, particularly the Greek times of Plato's era and during numerous Roman rules, the habit of practicing bi-sexuality was common. I am still not convinced that there was no word for homosexual relations but again, I do not have a Koite dialect dictionary. I bought a new reference today titled, "The New Daily Study Bible, the Letters to the Corinthians" by William Barclay. Among other endeavors, he was Professor of Divinity and Biblical Criticism at Glasgow University and the author of many Biblical commentaries and books, including a translation of the New Testament, "Barclay New Testament," and "The Daily Study Bible Series."

It is interesting in that William Barclay in some areas was quite liberal. He was a universalist and one of his papers titled, "I am a convinced Universalist" is located here: http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/barclay1.html

In his Bible studies which are quite exhaustive, William Barclay uses a translation I do not have but that says essentially what mine says about the sin of homosexuality. He uses a Bible called The New Revised Standard Version of the Bible, Anglicized Edition. Part of his commentary on 1 Cor 6:9 states:

Despite what I see as a liberal theology, particularly for the times, he agrees with my Bibles (NIV or NKJV) and understanding of scripture when he writes the following about 1 Cor 6:9:

"...Finally, Paul mentions homosexuality. In ancient Greece and Rome, few people were exclusively homosexual; but it was a period of great sexual experimentation, and the bisexual lifestyle was considerably more common than most people today would imagine.

Socrates had sexual relations with other males, as also did Plato, whose dialogue, The Symposium - often regarded as one of the greatest of all literary works on love - was based on his own sexual encounters with boys.

Fourteen out of the first fifteen Roman emperors had relationships with other men (usually as well as women), at least on a temporary basis. At the time when Paul was writing, Nero was emperor, and though he too had relationships with women, he also embarked on a blatant search for sexual pleasure with several male partners.

On one occasion, he took a young boy named Spores, had him castrated, and then 'married' him in an elaborate ceremony before taking him home in procession to the imperial palace, where he would serve the emperor's pleasure.

After this dreadful catalogue comes Paul's shout of triumph: 'and such were some of you'. The proof of Christianity lay in its power. It could take the dregs of humanity and make them into new people. It could take those lost to shame and make them children of God. There were, in Corinth and all over the world, men and women who were living proof of the re-creating power of Christ.

The power of Christ is still the same. People cannot change themselves, but Christ can change them. There is the most amazing contrast between the Greek and Roman writings and the Christian literature of the day.

Seneca, a contemporary of Paul, cried out that what people want is 'a hand let down to lift them up'. Men, he declared, are overwhelmingly conscious of their weakness in necessary things. Men love their vices, he said with a kind of despair, and hate them at one and the same time. He called himself a homo non tolerabilis, a man not to be tolerated.

Into this world, conscious of a tide of decadence that nothing would stop, there came the radiant power of Christianity, which was triumphantly able to make all things new."

Now, the world seems to once again have wandered into lifestyles of extreme decadence, sin, with an attitude of "if it feels good, do it and damn the consequences." I say, the answers to all of our questions lay in our relationship with God, through His son Jesus Christ, and the living Word of the Holy Bible. And the previous write was right about sin, homosexuality get's a lot of bandwidth but pre-marital sex, adultery, etc., all need to be looked at. I've enjoyed this debate. If any of my references have offended I did not mean to and did not write them. Gays and straights are brothers and sisters in Christ. We just don't agree on certain aspects of sin.

Did I ask you what Bible you use?

(Afterthought, what do you teach?)

Faithfully,

 

[Criada]

Just one thing... being homosexual does not necessarily equate to 'a lifestyle of extreme decadence and sin'.
Some are celebate, or living a life contrary to our inclinations due to having been brought up in that mindset!

 

[Chaplain David]

Just one thing... being homosexual does not necessarily equate to 'a lifestyle of extreme decadence and sin'.
Some are celebate, or living a life contrary to our inclinations due to having been brought up in that mindset!

Exactly. That's why we're not debating about being homosexual (having a homosexual orientation). We're discussing the practice of homosexuality as is referenced in scripture. We all submit to a higher authority and in many of our cases, it's the Christian Triune God and well used translations of the Holy Bible.

In any case being gay does not define a person's character any more than being straight. Sexual orientation is but a small part of our total makeup.

 

[FaithLikeARock]

Would you list the Bible translations that in your opinion contain erroneous translations of the word as you suggest?

For example, most English translations say Christ was born in an inn when the Greek is more LITERALLY translated to "house". Only one I can think of, but I also haven't studied the Hebrew/Greek Biblical texts. In Luke (the only book which plays out Christ's birth), Luke uses the word "kataluma" to describe his birthplace. However in the more DIRECT parable of the Good Samaritan he uses the word "pandeion". The world "kataluma" more closely means "house" or "guest room", while "pandeion" means inn.

 

[Ohioprof]

Hello OhioProf,

How are you this evening?

As you say, in days of old, particularly the Greek times of Plato's era and during numerous Roman rules, the habit of practicing bi-sexuality was common. I am still not convinced that there was no word for homosexual relations but again, I do not have a Koite dialect dictionary. I bought a new reference today titled, "The New Daily Study Bible, the Letters to the Corinthians" by William Barclay. Among other endeavors, he was Professor of Divinity and Biblical Criticism at Glasgow University and the author of many Biblical commentaries and books, including a translation of the New Testament, "Barclay New Testament," and "The Daily Study Bible Series."

It is interesting in that William Barclay in some areas was quite liberal. He was a universalist and one of his papers titled, "I am a convinced Universalist" is located here: http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/barclay1.html

In his Bible studies which are quite exhaustive, William Barclay uses a translation I do not have but that says essentially what mine says about the sin of homosexuality. He uses a Bible called The New Revised Standard Version of the Bible, Anglicized Edition. Part of his commentary on 1 Cor 6:9 states:

Despite what I see as a liberal theology, particularly for the times, he agrees with my Bibles (NIV or NKJV) and understanding of scripture when he writes the following about 1 Cor 6:9:

"...Finally, Paul mentions homosexuality. In ancient Greece and Rome, few people were exclusively homosexual; but it was a period of great sexual experimentation, and the bisexual lifestyle was considerably more common than most people today would imagine.

Socrates had sexual relations with other males, as also did Plato, whose dialogue, The Symposium - often regarded as one of the greatest of all literary works on love - was based on his own sexual encounters with boys.

Fourteen out of the first fifteen Roman emperors had relationships with other men (usually as well as women), at least on a temporary basis. At the time when Paul was writing, Nero was emperor, and though he too had relationships with women, he also embarked on a blatant search for sexual pleasure with several male partners.

On one occasion, he took a young boy named Spores, had him castrated, and then 'married' him in an elaborate ceremony before taking him home in procession to the imperial palace, where he would serve the emperor's pleasure.

After this dreadful catalogue comes Paul's shout of triumph: 'and such were some of you'. The proof of Christianity lay in its power. It could take the dregs of humanity and make them into new people. It could take those lost to shame and make them children of God. There were, in Corinth and all over the world, men and women who were living proof of the re-creating power of Christ.

The power of Christ is still the same. People cannot change themselves, but Christ can change them. There is the most amazing contrast between the Greek and Roman writings and the Christian literature of the day.

Seneca, a contemporary of Paul, cried out that what people want is 'a hand let down to lift them up'. Men, he declared, are overwhelmingly conscious of their weakness in necessary things. Men love their vices, he said with a kind of despair, and hate them at one and the same time. He called himself a homo non tolerabilis, a man not to be tolerated.

Into this world, conscious of a tide of decadence that nothing would stop, there came the radiant power of Christianity, which was triumphantly able to make all things new."

Now, the world seems to once again have wandered into lifestyles of extreme decadence, sin, with an attitude of "if it feels good, do it and damn the consequences." I say, the answers to all of our questions lay in our relationship with God, through His son Jesus Christ, and the living Word of the Holy Bible. And the previous write was right about sin, homosexuality get's a lot of bandwidth but pre-marital sex, adultery, etc., all need to be looked at. I've enjoyed this debate. If any of my references have offended I did not mean to and did not write them. Gays and straights are brothers and sisters in Christ. We just don't agree on certain aspects of sin.

Did I ask you what Bible you use?

(Afterthought, what do you teach?)

Faithfully,

I did not say there was no word for same-sex relations. I said there was no word for a gay person, or a homosexual person.

Oh, and I teach U.S. history.

 

[Chaplain David]

I did not say there was no word for same-sex relations. I said there was no word for a gay person, or a homosexual person.

Oh, and I teach U.S. history.

I really liked the days when I was studying history rather than living it. Always enjoyed the classes. Oh, to be a student again.

 

[Brieuse]

Hello OhioProf,

How are you this evening?

As you say, in days of old, particularly the Greek times of Plato's era and during numerous Roman rules, the habit of practicing bi-sexuality was common. I am still not convinced that there was no word for homosexual relations but again, I do not have a Koite dialect dictionary. I bought a new reference today titled, "The New Daily Study Bible, the Letters to the Corinthians" by William Barclay. Among other endeavors, he was Professor of Divinity and Biblical Criticism at Glasgow University and the author of many Biblical commentaries and books, including a translation of the New Testament, "Barclay New Testament," and "The Daily Study Bible Series."

It is interesting in that William Barclay in some areas was quite liberal. He was a universalist and one of his papers titled, "I am a convinced Universalist" is located here: http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/barclay1.html

In his Bible studies which are quite exhaustive, William Barclay uses a translation I do not have but that says essentially what mine says about the sin of homosexuality. He uses a Bible called The New Revised Standard Version of the Bible, Anglicized Edition. Part of his commentary on 1 Cor 6:9 states:

Despite what I see as a liberal theology, particularly for the times, he agrees with my Bibles (NIV or NKJV) and understanding of scripture when he writes the following about 1 Cor 6:9:

"...Finally, Paul mentions homosexuality. In ancient Greece and Rome, few people were exclusively homosexual; but it was a period of great sexual experimentation, and the bisexual lifestyle was considerably more common than most people today would imagine.

Socrates had sexual relations with other males, as also did Plato, whose dialogue, The Symposium - often regarded as one of the greatest of all literary works on love - was based on his own sexual encounters with boys.

Fourteen out of the first fifteen Roman emperors had relationships with other men (usually as well as women), at least on a temporary basis. At the time when Paul was writing, Nero was emperor, and though he too had relationships with women, he also embarked on a blatant search for sexual pleasure with several male partners.

On one occasion, he took a young boy named Spores, had him castrated, and then 'married' him in an elaborate ceremony before taking him home in procession to the imperial palace, where he would serve the emperor's pleasure.

After this dreadful catalogue comes Paul's shout of triumph: 'and such were some of you'. The proof of Christianity lay in its power. It could take the dregs of humanity and make them into new people. It could take those lost to shame and make them children of God. There were, in Corinth and all over the world, men and women who were living proof of the re-creating power of Christ.

The power of Christ is still the same. People cannot change themselves, but Christ can change them. There is the most amazing contrast between the Greek and Roman writings and the Christian literature of the day.

Seneca, a contemporary of Paul, cried out that what people want is 'a hand let down to lift them up'. Men, he declared, are overwhelmingly conscious of their weakness in necessary things. Men love their vices, he said with a kind of despair, and hate them at one and the same time. He called himself a homo non tolerabilis, a man not to be tolerated.

Into this world, conscious of a tide of decadence that nothing would stop, there came the radiant power of Christianity, which was triumphantly able to make all things new."

Now, the world seems to once again have wandered into lifestyles of extreme decadence, sin, with an attitude of "if it feels good, do it and damn the consequences." I say, the answers to all of our questions lay in our relationship with God, through His son Jesus Christ, and the living Word of the Holy Bible. And the previous write was right about sin, homosexuality get's a lot of bandwidth but pre-marital sex, adultery, etc., all need to be looked at. I've enjoyed this debate. If any of my references have offended I did not mean to and did not write them. Gays and straights are brothers and sisters in Christ. We just don't agree on certain aspects of sin.

Did I ask you what Bible you use?

(Afterthought, what do you teach?)

Faithfully,

Hi there,

I believe from your post that there is some confusion between homosexuality/ bisexuality and pedophilia.

Pedastry was a common occurance in the Biblical times, and I believe it was the issue being addressed by Paul.

I think that the word Sodomites, from which Sodomy was somehow derived should be addressed. I believe that our modern day understanding of the word Sodomy has absolutely nothing in common with the word Sodomite used by some Bible translations.

The story of Sodom does not refer to consensual homosexual relations. From face value it refers to homosexual rape, however I believe that the true story of Sodom has been lost over time.

 

[Chaplain David]

Hi there,

I believe from your post that there is some confusion between homosexuality/ bisexuality and pedophilia.

Pedastry was a common occurance in the Biblical times, and I believe it was the issue being addressed by Paul.

I think that the word Sodomites, from which Sodomy was somehow derived should be addressed. I believe that our modern day understanding of the word Sodomy has absolutely nothing in common with the word Sodomite used by some Bible translations.

The story of Sodom does not refer to consensual homosexual relations. From face value it refers to homosexual rape, however I believe that the true story of Sodom has been lost over time.

Hi Briuse,

I think I understand the behaviors you listed in your first sentence. But agree that the meanings of words change over time.

After these sixty seven or eight threads I would like to just say something simple. When a person finally hears Jesus and goes to Him, some decisions follow. Should I go to church and if so which one? Do I listen to my pastor or not? Should I get a Bible and if so which one?

Then this new creation thing starts up. We start evolving into new creatures because of being made new again, born again, and the influence of the Triune God.

If we are diligent, most of us will find a church, go as regularly as we can, maybe get involved in a little ministry, make some Christian friends and our lives take at least a spiritual turn for the better.

Now the Bible is not easy to read and everyone admits not understanding everything it says. Billy Graham suggests accepting it by faith just as we do Jesus, particularly the parts that we don't understand or that seem unclear. I agree.

But we have what we have. My Bible works for me. It's the best thing going and I bet your Bible works for you to, giving you God's written word. My Bible even seems to speak to me when I read it sometimes and I bet yours does too. The insight it provides can not be gleaned from any other place.

What we have done here is talked about issues of sin. There have been varying viewpoints. But committed Christians talk about sin because it can either propel us forward by our relinquishing it or cause us to backslide if we let it.

And committed Christians do something about the sin in their lives because the more we evolve, the greater burden it becomes.

I have really appreciated participating in this thread with everyone and hope I have been of some help. I know I have learned a lot.

God bless you and everyone here.

 

[davedjy]

Hi there,

I believe from your post that there is some confusion between homosexuality/ bisexuality and pedophilia.

Pedastry was a common occurance in the Biblical times, and I believe it was the issue being addressed by Paul.

I think that the word Sodomites, from which Sodomy was somehow derived should be addressed. I believe that our modern day understanding of the word Sodomy has absolutely nothing in common with the word Sodomite used by some Bible translations.

The story of Sodom does not refer to consensual homosexual relations. From face value it refers to homosexual rape, however I believe that the true story of Sodom has been lost over time.

True, a Sodomite is a very vague term. When the term "Sodomite" was used, sodomy was not implied, it was an inhabitant of Sodom.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

True, a Sodomite is a very vague term. When the term "Sodomite" was used, sodomy was not implied, it was an inhabitant of Sodom.

It seems like the biblical usage of the term seems to imply a culmination of unrighteousness, whether in actions or manner.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

Because they're the sins of the majority.

It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that people aren't making lots of threads stating that premarital sex/divorce are blessed by God, would it?

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

I did not say there was no word for same-sex relations. I said there was no word for a gay person, or a homosexual person.

Oh, and I teach U.S. history.

Of course not, because people did not define themselves based upon their sexual orientation until recently in history. It's no mystery that some men of ancient times were attracted to other men, but they still took a wife (married), since a same-sex sexual relationship does not carry on the blood line.

 

[Ohioprof]

Of course not, because people did not define themselves based upon their sexual orientation until recently in history. It's no mystery that some men of ancient times were attracted to other men, but they still took a wife (married), since a same-sex sexual relationship does not carry on the blood line.

Right. And my point to a previous poster was that you cannot translate the Bible as saying "homosexuals" because the term did not exist when the Bible was written, as the concept of a person being a "homosexual" did not exist.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

Right. And my point to a previous poster was that you cannot translate the Bible as saying "homosexuals" because the term did not exist when the Bible was written, as the concept of a person being a "homosexual" did not exist.

I can partially agree with that. I do not think the concept of people being strictly homosexual was around, but there are various references to same-sex behavior. The reason for that is explained in my previous post.

 

[Chaplain David]

It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that people aren't making lots of threads stating that premarital sex/divorce are blessed by God, would it?

These sins should be brought up although you might get some argument about divorce being a sin. PreMarital Sex, Adultery, Lusting, Porno Addiction and other sin should be brought out into the light, our various views shared and scripture and other learned references used to help illuminate the issues. Sin has a way of sneaking in and hiding sometimes. Other times it can slowly become a part of a person's life a little at a time.

I wonder what forum should be used?

 

[Gwenyfur]

These sins should be brought up although you might get some argument about divorce being a sin. PreMarital Sex, Adultery, Lusting, Porno Addiction and other sin should be brought out into the light, our various views shared and scripture and other learned references used to help illuminate the issues. Sin has a way of sneaking in and hiding sometimes. Other times it can slowly become a part of a person's life a little at a time.

I wonder what forum should be used?

That would be Christian Philosophy & Ethics...

 

[Chaplain David]

That would be Christian Philosophy & Ethics...

Now that you've revealed your expertise many more people will be coming to your for direction. Or at least I will

God bless.

 

[Gwenyfur]

ROFL

I have only 1 flash of brilliance a week...I'm fresh out