arsenokoités

[MrPirate]

Dear MrPirate,
That’s because it condemns same-sex sex.

Well that is the point of the OP isn’t it? to give those of you who claim to know that the word arsenokites translates as ‘homosexual’ an opportunity to provide evidence to back up this translation and to back up your interpretation of this verse.

I cannot help but notice that you fail completely to provide any evidence to back up the notion that arsenokites means ‘homosexual’ (I’m not surprised about that)

Without evidence to back hat translation up we have no choice but to reject your claims about what is “condemned”

NT Passages which countenance same-sex sex haven’t been brought up because there aren’t any !!

Don’t change the topic. We are here to discuss evidence (or lack thereof ) that arsenokites translates as ‘homosexual’.

To know the word of God one be seeking what God is imparting, not what God doesn’t say.

And that is exactly what all those researchers, theologians, historians, linguists and the like have and are doing they are seeking the truth of God’s word by examining the word arsenokites.
Why do you not wish to know what God said?

To try and prove the Bible doesn’t say something is evidence that one has their own ideas and want God to agree J

And this is what you are doing. You are attempting to say, without any support, that arsenokites does not nor can it possibly translates as anything but ‘homosexual’ Showing that you have ideas of your own what God’s word should be and are now demanding that God agree with you.

I have just looked through a dozen translations and only one says homosexuals. I believe the translation ‘homosexuals’ is only partly right as the definition of this modern word is having a same-sex attraction and not always but sometimes behaviour.

Argument from authority coupled with an appeal to anonymous authority.
Your “look through” provides no support for your claims at all.

Well firstly would you believe the evidence?

I note nothing but a continuing lack of evidence

Secondly the evidence has been shown to you, considerable evidence, 18 or so chapters yet you still don’t believe.

And where in this thread is this? If you cannot provide any evidence to back up your claim then simply say so.

The fact is. God is love, love is mentioned more than anything else in the Bible but if I don’t accept the translation you cant prove to me God is love, especially if I chose to believe the bit in John 3:16 which suggests that without Jesus we will perish.

Non sequitor
Changing the topic
Pious fraud

Is the translation of the word “love” in question? No… if it were would that somehow prevent you form providing evidence to support your claims? No.

God’s purpose is man and woman, there is no other relationship countenanced, the only alternative mentioned and countenanced is celibacy.

And the evidence that arsenokites translates as ‘homosexual’…well you have yet to provide any at all

 

[MrPirate]

Right .. because the OP defends your erroneous position and claims.

And exactly what error are you speaking of?

Now your just sticking your fingers in your ears an chanting "arsenokoités", "arsenokoités", "arsenokoités",

What an interesting claim.

Can you explain just how asking that those who claim to know that arsenokites translates as ‘homosexual’ to back up their claim with actual evidence is equivalent to “sticking fingers in ears”????

"Everyone look away from all the other evidence in the bible and stay focused only on what we present in light of our pro-gay agenda!".

Flaming is not a response to anything much less the OP

Now whos being scripturally and intellectually dishonest?

Nice try.

Those who claim that arsenokoties means ‘homosexual’ but cannot provide real evidence to back that claim up

 

[Zaac]

Saying a site is "almost laughable" does not discredit it in anyway. What is laughable and probably, more so, sad is translating a word to "homosexual" while simultaneously breaking every rule of Biblical Exegesis to do it. It is also laughable that this word has been so inconsistent in translation by the translators, yet of course, you fail to see that. You want it to mean "homosexual" as it supports your anti-gay Fundamental argument. YOU are clearly dodging the point I made.

Most of the problems you anti-gay arguers in this forum have, is that you have been caught in numerous hole-filled arguments. Newguy101 said that "it's based upon the early tradition of the word "Arsenokoitai" being homosexual," and that we are "arguing with tradition", and yet it wasn't translated as "homosexual" in it's earliest forms, and I proved that.

You said all that and homosexual fornication is STILL no less sinful.

 

[davedjy]

You said all that and homosexual fornication is STILL no less sinful.

Homosexuality was not considered "fornication" back in Biblical times, and you have YET to prove that it is "sinful".

You can keep calling it sin all you want, but it isn't a credible debate point. IT also shows you lack credibility when you include homosexual fornication together.

 

[]RiSeN[]

And exactly what error are you speaking of?
[/size]

That homosexuality is not condemned in the bible as sinful and against nature and unlawful.

What an interesting claim.

Can you explain just how asking that those who claim to know that arsenokites translates as ‘homosexual’ to back up their claim with actual evidence is equivalent to “sticking fingers in ears”????

Why would I defend someone elses position? I havent said squat about "arsenokoités".

Flaming is not a response to anything much less the OP

Where did I flame?

Those who claim that arsenokoties means ‘homosexual’ but cannot provide real evidence to back that claim up

You , for avoiding the fact that homosexuality falls under fornication and is therefore an affront to God's perfect creation.

 

[Zaac]

Homosexuality was not considered "fornication" back in Biblical times, and you have YET to prove that it is "sinful".

Homosexuality isn't considered fornication in modern times either.

But having sex with someone of the same-sex was fornication and still is.

I don't have to prove it. God says it. It is what it is

If you want to commit homosexual fornication, by all means do so. Just don't think that I'm here to convince you that it is a sin.

The truth has been given. If you choose to reject it for whatever reason, oh well.

You can keep calling it sin all you want, but it isn't a credible debate point. .

That's good because I don't debate God's Truth. It is what it is, so go debate with someone who thinks they have to convince you that what God says is sin is.

IT also shows you lack credibility when you include homosexual fornication together

I don't need credibility with folks who reject God's Word.

 

[davedjy]

Homosexuality isn't considered fornication in modern times either.

But having sex with someone of the same-sex was fornication and still is.

I don't have to prove it. God says it. It is what it is

If you want to commit homosexual fornication, by all means do so. Just don't think that I'm here to convince you that it is a sin.

The truth has been given. If you choose to reject it for whatever reason, oh well.



That's good because I don't debate God's Truth. It is what it is, so go debate with someone who thinks they have to convince you that what God says is sin is.



I don't need credibility with folks who reject God's Word.

Nothing has been rejected, we have rejected a translation, and I have brought the proof here that you keep dodging.

Again, the truth does not equate a "false translation", and God's Word is not a false translation.

 

[Zaac]

Nothing has been rejected, we have rejected a translation, and I have brought the proof here that you keep dodging.

You have rejected God's Word in lieu of man's commentary. I'm a grown man. What you call dodging I call rejection of the false teachings of a false teacher.

Again, the truth does not equate a "false translation", and God's Word is not a false translation.

Truth also does not equate to the biased commentary of a bunch of homosexuals who aren't looking for truth but rather affirmation of their sin.

 

[davedjy]

You have rejected God's Word in lieu of man's commentary. I'm a grown man. What you call dodging I call rejection of the false teachings of a false teacher.



Truth also does not equate to the biased commentary of a bunch of homosexuals who aren't looking for truth but rather affirmation of their sin.

You have yet to prove either point, and prove that it is commentary. As I proved, the translations of arsenokoitai have been extremely inconsistent to start.

Your commentary isn't biased? right! lol

The inconsistencies have been proven from that translation alone, and AGAIN, you dodge that point, and ignore it altogether.
If I was to go by "God's Word" according to you on 1 Cor. 6:9, had multiple translations, they all wouldn't agree with each other, either.
Talk about uneducated bias coming from you.

 

[Zaac]

You have yet to prove either point, and prove that it is commentary. As I proved, the translations of arsenokoitai have been extremely inconsistent to start.

Again, I don't have to. God says what He says and if you don't want to accept it, don't look for me to convince ya.

Your commentary isn't biased? right! lol

What commentary? I quote SCripture, not commentary.

The inconsistencies have been proven from that translation alone, and AGAIN, you dodge that point, and ignore it altogether.

If I was to go by "God's Word" according to you on 1 Cor. 6:9, had multiple translations, they all wouldn't agree with each other, either.
Talk about uneducated bias coming from you.

Keep playing the translation word study game. God's Word still says what it says, and homosexual fornication is still sin.

 

[Zaac]

You have yet to prove either point, and prove that it is commentary. As I proved, the translations of arsenokoitai have been extremely inconsistent to start.

Again, I don't have to. God says what He says and if you don't want to accept it, don't look for me to convince ya.

Your commentary isn't biased? right! lol

What commentary? I quote SCripture, not commentary.

The inconsistencies have been proven from that translation alone, and AGAIN, you dodge that point, and ignore it altogether.

If I was to go by "God's Word" according to you on 1 Cor. 6:9, had multiple translations, they all wouldn't agree with each other, either.
Talk about uneducated bias coming from you.

Keep playing the translation word study game. God's Word still says what it says, and homosexual fornication is still sin.

 

[davedjy]

Again, I don't have to. God says what He says and if you don't want to accept it, don't look for me to convince ya.

Once again: GOD DID NOT SAY IT. The true translation of Arsenokoitai is "unknown". If God did say it, then YOU are calling God a liar because translation to translation that word alone has been translated as: a male pimp, those who touch, male prostitute, and the vague term "sodomite" (which was an inhabitant of Sodom).

What commentary? I quote SCripture, not commentary.

You quote a translation of the Bible, you are not quoting Scripture.

That sleep icon represents how credible your debate points, and how lazy they are.

Keep playing the translation word study game. God's Word still says what it says, and homosexual fornication is still sin.

Again, homosexuality was not considered "fornication" back in Biblical times. Keep misrepresenting God's Word, saying "it is still sin", but your arguments are as circular as they get. Until you realize that God's Word, and a false translation are not one and the same, you STILL cannot properly debate here, until you can prove the translation is the accurate one. "God's Word" has MULTIPLE translations of the word Arsenokoitai from translation to translation, SO WHO'S VERSION IS REALLY GOD'S WORD????????? LOL

 

[OllieFranz]

If you are going to criticize a post, you should at least read it. You make yourself look foolish when you criticize someone for something he did not say.

"In reply he said: “Did YOU not read that he who created them from [the] beginning made them male and female". -Matt 19:4

???
That has nothing to do with your question about fornication. Although there is an interesting passage a few lines later I'd like to discuss with you later, but it is diversion from my reply to your post, so it can wait.

Its immoral because it is fornication. A sexual act(of whatever kind) outside of the God given bond and institution of marriage(Matt 19:6) is a sin.

I agree. That is what I said. The English word "fornication" means all immoral extra-marital sex that is not adultery.

And Matthew 19:9 makes your claim that fornication is simply meant as prostitution only is quite bogus IMO.

I never claimed that fornication is only prostitution. I said the word is derived from the Greek word "pornos" which means prostitute, but that the English word has a broader meaning.

 

[Zaac]

Once again: GOD DID NOT SAY IT. The true translation of Arsenokoitai is "unknown". If God did say it, then YOU are calling God a liar because translation to translation that word alone has been translated as: a male pimp, those who touch, male prostitute, and the vague term "sodomite" (which was an inhabitant of Sodom).

Once again, your biased commentary and word studies from equally biased gay researchers and homosexual sympathizers does not carry any weight where God has spoken.

You quote a translation of the Bible, you are not quoting Scripture.

It is what it is. You don'thave to think so.

That sleep icon represents how credible your debate points, and how lazy they are.

Boy you still think somebody trying to debate you? It's not lazy. I just don't play childish games. There's no need for me to convince you or anyone else that sin is sin.

If you don't accept what God says, oh well.

Again, homosexuality was not considered "fornication" back in Biblical times.

Again, homosexuality was not identified by God as fornication in modern times either. But those same-sex fornicative acts sure were.

Keep misrepresenting God's Word, saying "it is still sin", but your arguments are as circular as they get.

I will gladly keep representing God's Word the very way that it says.

Until you realize that God's Word, and a false translation are not one and the same, you STILL cannot properly debate here, until you can prove the translation is the accurate one.

Until you realize that when it comes to God's Word, I don't debate, you're gonna keep banging your head side the wall.

"God's Word" has MULTIPLE translations of the word Arsenokoitai from translation to translation, SO WHO'S VERSION IS REALLY GOD'S WORD????????? LOL

God's version is His Word. And homosexual sex is still fornication.

 

[davedjy]

If you don't accept what God says, oh well.

I'm not even going to respond to the rest of your post.

GOD DID NOT SAY IT -- A TRANSLATOR PUT THAT IN THE BIBLE, THE BIBLE WAS NOT WRITTEN IN ENGLISH - IT WAS WRITTEN IN HEBREW AND GREEK.

 

[OllieFranz]

"Everyone look away from all the other evidence in the bible and stay focused only on what we present in light of our pro-gay agenda!".

All of what other evidence in the Bible? There are only two passages in the Bible that specifically address same-sex sexual activity (Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13) and only two other passages (1 Cor 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:8-11) that probably point back to those two. All other passages used to condemn homosexuality only do so if you bring into them a prior understanding that homosexuality is a sin.

The problem is that Leviticus does not call "man-lying" (mishkav zakur = arsenos koiten) immoral wickedness (zimmah), but only a ritual taboo (toevah). Both verses talking about it are in the middle of the Holiness Code commanding the Jews to be separate. The Holiness Code includes bans on eating certain foods, wearing certain garments, etc. All of which were never binding on even the "righteous Gentile" and from which Christians are specifically released in Acts 11 and Acts 15.

The point of concentrating on the word arsenokoitai in the letters in Paul is that he deliberately chose to use a new compound word rather than use a word that the Greeks would be familiar with. Our best guess is that Paul was referring back to Leviticus, but even the early Christians did not know that for sure.

None of the Church Fathers commenting on Paul's letters (not even those of Clement of Alexandria who was the main force in establishing the official Church "line" on the subjects of homosexuality and effeminancy) use the word. There are only six or eight documents that use the word, and they all only include it in lists of sins. So the only contextual clue as to the meaning is how the sins in the lists were grouped. In two of the documents, that grouping suggests that the authors may have associated the word with heterosexual prostitution.

 

[Zaac]

I'm not even going to respond to the rest of your post.

Good for you.

GOD DID NOT SAY IT -- A TRANSLATOR PUT THAT IN THE BIBLE, THE BIBLE WAS NOT WRITTEN IN ENGLISH - IT WAS WRITTEN IN HEBREW AND GREEK.

GOD'S WORD is STILL HIS WORD

 

[davedjy]

GOD'S WORD is STILL HIS WORD

Yes, and you have YET to prove a translation IS God's Word, which is why you really don't have any leg to stand upon in a debate here.

Are you and Floatingaxe the same person?

 

[Zaac]

Yes, and you have YET to prove a translation IS God's Word, which is why you really don't have any leg to stand upon in a debate here.

Don't digress. You were making progress and realizing that I'm not here to prove anything to ya. But there you go again thinking that I'm so 12 year old debate middle schooler trying to convince the audience of a point.

Are you and Floatingaxe the same person?

 

[]RiSeN[]

If you are going to criticize a post, you should at least read it. You make yourself look foolish when you criticize someone for something he did not say.

poor attempt at ad hominem

That has nothing to do with your question about fornication. Although there is an interesting passage a few lines later I'd like to discuss with you later, but it is diversion from my reply to your post, so it can wait.

Go on.....

I agree. That is what I said. The English word "fornication" means all immoral extra-marital sex that is not adultery.

Good.

I never claimed that fornication is only prostitution. I said the word is derived from the Greek word "pornos" which means prostitute, but that the English word has a broader meaning.

The greek word pornos has more than one meaning. This is what you have purposefully fail to acknowledge . I have already quoted some of the meanings. The greek definitions or meanings are the same as the english definition.