Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Because they're the sins of the majority.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My point being, there are very many outdated or archaic portions of the Bible, and homosexuality is just one people like to pick apart.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?
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.
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!
Would you list the Bible translations that in your opinion contain erroneous translations of the word as you suggest?
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.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.
Hi there,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.
True, a Sodomite is a very vague term. When the term "Sodomite" was used, sodomy was not implied, it was an inhabitant of Sodom.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.
Because they're the sins of the majority.
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.
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.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.
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?
That would be Christian Philosophy & Ethics...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...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?