Did David and Johnathan Have a Gay Relationship?

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]It is very much possible that David and Johnathon had a gay relationship.[/SIZE]

Totally IMPOSSIBLE, here is how the Jewish scholars interpreted the scripture. The Word of God condemns ALL homosexual acts; by ALL people, male or female, at ALL times, in ALL places, under ALL circumstances.

And if David and Jonathan did have a homosexual relationship as much as he came to hate David, Saul would have had him stoned.

And OBTW I thought the ancient Jews could not possibly, ever have conceived of a *cough cough* "loving, monogamous relationship," which is supposedly so clearly described in the passages about Jonathan and David.

[Note: All upper case in this citation appears in the original]
Talmud -- Sanhedrin 54a

MISHNAH. HE WHO COMMITS SODOMY WITH A MALE OR A BEAST, AND A WOMAN THAT COMMITS BESTIALITY ARE STONED. . . . Our Rabbis taught: If a man lieth also with mankind, as the lyings of a woman,29 both of them have committed on abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them,]. . .

Sanhedrin 54b

This teaches the punishment: whence do we derive the formal prohibition? — From the verse, Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.1 . . . whence do we know a formal prohibition for the person who permits himself thus to be abused? — Scripture saith: There shall be no sodomite of the sons of Israel:2 and it is further said, . . .

Now, he who [actively] commits pederasty, and also [passively] permits himself to be thus abused — R. Abbahu said: On R. Ishmael's view, he is liable to two penalties, one [for the injunction] derived from thou shalt not lie with mankind, and the other for [violating the prohibition,] There shall not be a Sodomite of the sons of Israel. . . .

for there shall be no Sodomite applies to sodomy with mankind. [sup]13[/sup] . . .

<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><

Jewish Encyclopedia - Dog

The shamelessness of the dog in regard to sexual life gave rise to the name ("dog") for the class of priests in the service of Astarte who practised sodomy ("kedeshim," called also by the Greeks &#954;&#965;&#957;&#945;&#943;&#948;&#959;&#953;, Deut. xxiii. 19 [A. V. 18]; compare ib. 18 [17] and Rev. xxii. 15; see Driver ad loc.), . . .(see "C. I. S." i., No. 86).

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=415&letter=D

Jewish Encyclopedia - Chastity

(e) The unnatural crimes against chastity, sodomy and pederasty, prevalent in heathendom, were strictly prohibited (Lev. xviii. 22, 23; xx. 13, 15, 16; Deut. xxvii. 21).

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=386&letter=C

Jewish Encyclopedia - DIDACHE -

Dependence upon Jewish Custom.

2: "Thou shalt not commit adultery" (Ex. xx. 14). (This includes: "Thou shalt not commit sodomy nor fornication.") "Thou shalt not steal" (Ex. xx. 15). . . .

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=341&letter=D

Jewish Encyclopedia - Crime

In three cases the person on the point of committing a crime may be killed: where he pursues a neighbor in order to kill him; where he pursues a male to commit sodomy;

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=301&letter=L

Jewish Encyclopedia - The 613 Commandments,: 3347-53.

Adultery, sodomy, etc. Lev. Xviii. 7, 14, 20, 22, 23.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=689&letter=C​

"We Can't Legitimate Homosexuality Halakhically" (USCJ Review, Spring 2004): Joel Roth

The two verses in the book of (Leviticus (18:22 and 20:13) which deal with homosexuality are really quite clear, despite the efforts of some to call their clarity into question. (Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 absolutely forbid homosexual intercourse between males. The Rabbis, in the Sifra (Aharei Mot 9:8), also understand the Torah to forbid lesbianism. The Torah’s prohibitions, let it be clear, are against actions, like male homosexual intercourse, not against fantasies or attractions.

The Torah and the Rabbis do not distinguish between types of homosexuals in any way... The Rabbis were well able to conceive of monogamous and loving relationships between members of the same sex, and I quote in my paper the texts that prove this beyond reasonable question. But their words cannot possibly be read to imply that such monogamous or loving gay relationships are in a different halakhic [Jewish legal] category than any other relationships between members of the same sex. The prohibition is clear and total.”​

http://www.uscj.org/POINTRoth6331.html

Naomi Grossman, freelance journalist, states in her April 2001 article in Moment Magazine, "The Gay Orthodox Undergound":

"The Torah strictly forbids homosexual sex, and rabbis have consistently upheld that prohibition through the ages... The prohibition against homosexual sex comes from Leviticus: 'Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence' (18:22). In biblical times, the punishment for violating that code was clear. 'If a man lies with a male as one lies with a woman, the two of them have done an abhorrent thing; they shall be put to death -— their bloodguilt is upon them' (Leviticus 20:13). The Talmud extends the prohibition to lesbian sex [Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 21:8]."

Official Orthodoxy makes no distinction between the sex act, which the Torah flatly prohibits, and homosexuality as a sexual identity. "Homosexuality is not a state of being in traditional Judaism; it's an act," Freundel says. "Desires are … not relevant."​

http://members.aol.com/gayjews/moment.html​

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]Of what relevance is a book of writings compiled many centuries after the story of David & Johnathan was written down, by people who had no access to modern historiography and had their own axes to grind?[/SIZE]

Of what relevance is your uniformed, misinformed opinion of the Talmud or any other ancient writing which you probably have never seen or read? Your opinion as to "historiography" is equally irrelevant as is your ad hominem references to imagined "axes to grind."

Guess you can just make a few unsupported ad hom references and blow off anything.

If you think you have any credible, verifiable, historical evidence to back up anything please do post it here.

 

[artybloke]

Again, you have given me no reason to trust the word of a bunch of long-dead rabbis over what seems to me to be a perfectly logical reading of the text. That same bunch managed to reinterpret the balatently erotic content of the Song of songs as being about God's relationship to Isreal. Well, that's one way of reading "you're breasts are like two does" but not one that would occur to anyone who was reading naturally.

You keep thinking that somehow the opinions of a bunch of long-dead men are important if you wish; that's your prerorgative.

Me, I think I'll stick to the real world.

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]Again, you have given me no reason to trust the word of a bunch of long-dead rabbis over what seems to me to be a perfectly logical reading of the text. That same bunch managed to reinterpret the balatently erotic content of the Song of songs as being about God's relationship to Isreal. Well, that's one way of reading "you're breasts are like two does" but not one that would occur to anyone who was reading naturally.

You keep thinking that somehow the opinions of a bunch of long-dead men are important if you wish; that's your prerorgative.

Me, I think I'll stick to the real world.[/SIZE]

And you keep thinking that your unsupported, unsubstantiated opinions about anything are meaningful to anyone but yourself. You keep tossing out ad hominems as if merely making wild accusations against something somehow disproves it.

You have confirmed my suspicion you are unable to provide any credible, verifiable, historical evidence for anything. You have certainly given me no reason to believe any of the same old, lame old copy paste, if it supports homosexuality it must be true stuff endlessly posted here.

And OBTW I have 2 copies of the Talmud please tell me where I can find "reinterpret the balatently [sic] erotic content of the Song of songs as being about God's relationship to Isreal?"

 

[Ave Maria]

Totally IMPOSSIBLE, here is how the Jewish scholars interpreted the scripture. The Word of God condemns ALL homosexual acts; by ALL people, male or female, at ALL times, in ALL places, under ALL circumstances.

And if David and Jonathan did have a homosexual relationship as much as he came to hate David, Saul would have had him stoned.

And OBTW I thought the ancient Jews could not possibly, ever have conceived of a *cough cough* "loving, monogamous relationship," which is supposedly so clearly described in the passages about Jonathan and David.

[Note: All upper case in this citation appears in the original]
Talmud -- Sanhedrin 54a

MISHNAH. HE WHO COMMITS SODOMY WITH A MALE OR A BEAST, AND A WOMAN THAT COMMITS BESTIALITY ARE STONED. . . . Our Rabbis taught: If a man lieth also with mankind, as the lyings of a woman,29 both of them have committed on abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them,]. . .

Sanhedrin 54b

This teaches the punishment: whence do we derive the formal prohibition? — From the verse, Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.1 . . . whence do we know a formal prohibition for the person who permits himself thus to be abused? — Scripture saith: There shall be no sodomite of the sons of Israel:2 and it is further said, . . .

Now, he who [actively] commits pederasty, and also [passively] permits himself to be thus abused — R. Abbahu said: On R. Ishmael's view, he is liable to two penalties, one [for the injunction] derived from thou shalt not lie with mankind, and the other for [violating the prohibition,] There shall not be a Sodomite of the sons of Israel. . . .

for there shall be no Sodomite applies to sodomy with mankind. [sup]13[/sup] . . .

<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><

Jewish Encyclopedia - Dog

The shamelessness of the dog in regard to sexual life gave rise to the name ("dog") for the class of priests in the service of Astarte who practised sodomy ("kedeshim," called also by the Greeks &#954;&#965;&#957;&#945;&#943;&#948;&#959;&#953;, Deut. xxiii. 19 [A. V. 18]; compare ib. 18 [17] and Rev. xxii. 15; see Driver ad loc.), . . .(see "C. I. S." i., No. 86).

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=415&letter=D

Jewish Encyclopedia - Chastity

(e) The unnatural crimes against chastity, sodomy and pederasty, prevalent in heathendom, were strictly prohibited (Lev. xviii. 22, 23; xx. 13, 15, 16; Deut. xxvii. 21).

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=386&letter=C

Jewish Encyclopedia - DIDACHE -

Dependence upon Jewish Custom.

2: "Thou shalt not commit adultery" (Ex. xx. 14). (This includes: "Thou shalt not commit sodomy nor fornication.") "Thou shalt not steal" (Ex. xx. 15). . . .

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=341&letter=D

Jewish Encyclopedia - Crime

In three cases the person on the point of committing a crime may be killed: where he pursues a neighbor in order to kill him; where he pursues a male to commit sodomy;

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=301&letter=L

Jewish Encyclopedia - The 613 Commandments,: 3347-53.

Adultery, sodomy, etc. Lev. Xviii. 7, 14, 20, 22, 23.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=689&letter=C​

"We Can't Legitimate Homosexuality Halakhically" (USCJ Review, Spring 2004): Joel Roth

The two verses in the book of (Leviticus (18:22 and 20:13) which deal with homosexuality are really quite clear, despite the efforts of some to call their clarity into question. (Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 absolutely forbid homosexual intercourse between males. The Rabbis, in the Sifra (Aharei Mot 9:8), also understand the Torah to forbid lesbianism. The Torah’s prohibitions, let it be clear, are against actions, like male homosexual intercourse, not against fantasies or attractions.

The Torah and the Rabbis do not distinguish between types of homosexuals in any way... The Rabbis were well able to conceive of monogamous and loving relationships between members of the same sex, and I quote in my paper the texts that prove this beyond reasonable question. But their words cannot possibly be read to imply that such monogamous or loving gay relationships are in a different halakhic [Jewish legal] category than any other relationships between members of the same sex. The prohibition is clear and total.”​

http://www.uscj.org/POINTRoth6331.html

Naomi Grossman, freelance journalist, states in her April 2001 article in Moment Magazine, "The Gay Orthodox Undergound":

"The Torah strictly forbids homosexual sex, and rabbis have consistently upheld that prohibition through the ages... The prohibition against homosexual sex comes from Leviticus: 'Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence' (18:22). In biblical times, the punishment for violating that code was clear. 'If a man lies with a male as one lies with a woman, the two of them have done an abhorrent thing; they shall be put to death -— their bloodguilt is upon them' (Leviticus 20:13). The Talmud extends the prohibition to lesbian sex [Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 21:8]."

Official Orthodoxy makes no distinction between the sex act, which the Torah flatly prohibits, and homosexuality as a sexual identity. "Homosexuality is not a state of being in traditional Judaism; it's an act," Freundel says. "Desires are … not relevant."​

http://members.aol.com/gayjews/moment.html​

Actually it doesn't. It condemns homosexual rape, temple prostitution, and other similar things but it does not condemn homosexuality in all circumstances.

 

[UberLutheran]

Say what, Der Alter?

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]Actually it doesn't. It condemns homosexual rape, temple prostitution, and other similar things but it does not condemn homosexuality in all circumstances[/SIZE].

Let me get this straight I just posted IRREFUTABLE credible, verifiable historical information, quoting Jewish scholars from the time of Moses to the present, and you, someone who could not locate a Hebrew verb if your life depended on it, are going to blow off all that scholarship with a reply about on the level of a playground argument, "Did too!" Did not! Nuh uh! Nuh huh!"

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

Totally IMPOSSIBLE, here is how the Jewish scholars interpreted the scripture. The Word of God condemns ALL homosexual acts; by ALL people, male or female, at ALL times, in ALL places, under ALL circumstances.

And if David and Jonathan did have a homosexual relationship as much as he came to hate David, Saul would have had him stoned.

And OBTW I thought the ancient Jews could not possibly, ever have conceived of a *cough cough* "loving, monogamous relationship," which is supposedly so clearly described in the passages about Jonathan and David.

[Note: All upper case in this citation appears in the original]​

Talmud -- Sanhedrin 54a ​

MISHNAH. HE WHO COMMITS SODOMY WITH A MALE OR A BEAST, AND A WOMAN THAT COMMITS BESTIALITY ARE STONED. . . . Our Rabbis taught: If a man lieth also with mankind, as the lyings of a woman,29 both of them have committed on abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them,]. . .​

Sanhedrin 54b​

This teaches the punishment: whence do we derive the formal prohibition? — From the verse, Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.1 . . . whence do we know a formal prohibition for the person who permits himself thus to be abused? — Scripture saith: There shall be no sodomite of the sons of Israel:2 and it is further said, . . .​

Now, he who [actively] commits pederasty, and also [passively] permits himself to be thus abused — R. Abbahu said: On R. Ishmael's view, he is liable to two penalties, one [for the injunction] derived from thou shalt not lie with mankind, and the other for [violating the prohibition,] There shall not be a Sodomite of the sons of Israel. . . .​

for there shall be no Sodomite applies to sodomy with mankind. [sup]13[/sup] . . .​

<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><​

Jewish Encyclopedia - Dog​

The shamelessness of the dog in regard to sexual life gave rise to the name ("dog") for the class of priests in the service of Astarte who practised sodomy ("kedeshim," called also by the Greeks &#954;&#965;&#957;&#945;&#943;&#948;&#959;&#953;, Deut. xxiii. 19 [A. V. 18]; compare ib. 18 [17] and Rev. xxii. 15; see Driver ad loc.), . . .(see "C. I. S." i., No. 86).​

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=415&letter=D​

Jewish Encyclopedia - Chastity​

(e) The unnatural crimes against chastity, sodomy and pederasty, prevalent in heathendom, were strictly prohibited (Lev. xviii. 22, 23; xx. 13, 15, 16; Deut. xxvii. 21).​

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=386&letter=C​

Jewish Encyclopedia - DIDACHE - ​

Dependence upon Jewish Custom.​

2: "Thou shalt not commit adultery" (Ex. xx. 14). (This includes: "Thou shalt not commit sodomy nor fornication.") "Thou shalt not steal" (Ex. xx. 15). . . .​

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=341&letter=D​

Jewish Encyclopedia - Crime​

In three cases the person on the point of committing a crime may be killed: where he pursues a neighbor in order to kill him; where he pursues a male to commit sodomy;​

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=301&letter=L​

Jewish Encyclopedia - The 613 Commandments,: 3347-53.​

Adultery, sodomy, etc. Lev. Xviii. 7, 14, 20, 22, 23.​

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=689&letter=C​

"We Can't Legitimate Homosexuality Halakhically" (USCJ Review, Spring 2004): Joel Roth​

The two verses in the book of (Leviticus (18:22 and 20:13) which deal with homosexuality are really quite clear, despite the efforts of some to call their clarity into question. (Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 absolutely forbid homosexual intercourse between males. The Rabbis, in the Sifra (Aharei Mot 9:8), also understand the Torah to forbid lesbianism. The Torah’s prohibitions, let it be clear, are against actions, like male homosexual intercourse, not against fantasies or attractions.​

The Torah and the Rabbis do not distinguish between types of homosexuals in any way... The Rabbis were well able to conceive of monogamous and loving relationships between members of the same sex, and I quote in my paper the texts that prove this beyond reasonable question. But their words cannot possibly be read to imply that such monogamous or loving gay relationships are in a different halakhic [Jewish legal] category than any other relationships between members of the same sex. The prohibition is clear and total.”​

http://www.uscj.org/POINTRoth6331.html

Naomi Grossman, freelance journalist, states in her April 2001 article in Moment Magazine, "The Gay Orthodox Undergound":

"The Torah strictly forbids homosexual sex, and rabbis have consistently upheld that prohibition through the ages... The prohibition against homosexual sex comes from Leviticus: 'Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence' (18:22). In biblical times, the punishment for violating that code was clear. 'If a man lies with a male as one lies with a woman, the two of them have done an abhorrent thing; they shall be put to death -— their bloodguilt is upon them' (Leviticus 20:13). The Talmud extends the prohibition to lesbian sex [Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 21:8]."​

Official Orthodoxy makes no distinction between the sex act, which the Torah flatly prohibits, and homosexuality as a sexual identity. "Homosexuality is not a state of being in traditional Judaism; it's an act," Freundel says. "Desires are … not relevant."​

http://members.aol.com/gayjews/moment.html
​

Just because you continuously quote a Jewish encyclopedia, Conservative Jewish Website and an AOL group does not mean that it is the definitive answer. Are we supposed to somehow be impressed?

 

[BAFRIEND]

Just because you continuously quote a Jewish encyclopedia, Conservative Jewish Website and an AOL group does not mean that it is the definitive answer.

Seeing as to how the Jewish wrote and were the original safeguarders of the OT and the Catholic/EO Church cannonized the NT, and both hold that homsexual relations and lifestyles are sinful, I would consider their interpretations authoritive.

Who am I to argue against the oldest and most traditional monotheistic and Christian clergy/institutions in the world ?

Relativism and the historically recent phenomenon of personal interpretation has made 21st century sages of us all, now hasn't it ?

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]Just because you continuously quote a Jewish encyclopedia, Conservative Jewish Website and an AOL group does not mean that it is the definitive answer. Are we supposed to somehow be impressed?[/SIZE]

You forgot to mention the Talmud, in orthodox Judaism, second in authority only to the Torah, itself.

I have always found it very helpful to actually read a post before replying. Were one to do that one might find that I quoted THE Jewish Encyclopedia, the first and, for about 8 decades, the ONLY encyclopedia on Judaism recognized by orthodox Judaism. Were one to actually read the articles one would find extensive citations of the Talmud and other ancient Jewish writings. And in response I have seen ZERO, NONE, NADA, evidence in response.

The other citations that you blew off also cited ancient Jewish writings. And your only response is a handful of ad hom attacks on my citations.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Some excellent posts. David's relationship is pronounced from the start as spiritual.
The Hebrews and the Jews throughout the Bible knew same-sex sex was a sin, secular history tells us that, its no good doubting it now.
But for Christians please remember that Paul grew up in Tarsus, knew Greek culture, was a Roman citizen and knew Roman law and culture as well.. but most significantly he was an expert in Jewish law having studied under the 'raban' Gamaliel He writes that same-sex sex is error. Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 5-7 and 1 Timothy 1.

 

[artybloke]

The other citations that you blew off also cited ancient Jewish writings.

So just why do we have to take the opinions of a bunch of dead men who lived in an age before proper biblical scholarship as anything more than opinions formed out of ignorance?

And I very much doubt that any of your "scholars" come from the time of Moses. Think post-exilic at the very least. Think mostly post-1st century AD,

As most of the Talmud was written by Pharisees and their followers, why should we be following the advice of Pharisees when Jesus has some pretty choice words to say about Pharisees?

Again, a very good example of the blatent legalism and Phariseeism that infects fundamentalism. Christians are saved by grace, not by law.

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]So just why do we have to take the opinions of a bunch of dead men who lived in an age before proper biblical scholarship as anything more than opinions formed out of ignorance? [size=+1][Since you know ZERO Hebrew, ZERO Greek, ZERO Bible history, why should we take your biased opinion about things you have shown ZERO evidence for i.e. "proper biblical scholarship," "ignorance," etc.?][/size]

And I very much doubt that any of your "scholars" come from the time of Moses. Think post-exilic at the very least. Think mostly post-1st century AD, [size=+1][I doubt very much that you even read anything I posted and you have shown ZERO evidence for all these wild assertions!][/size]

As most of the Talmud was written by Pharisees and their followers, [size=+1][Evidence, documentation, substantiation?][/size] why should we be following the advice of Pharisees when Jesus has some pretty choice words to say about Pharisees?

Again, a very good example of the blatent legalism and Phariseeism that infects fundamentalism. [size=+1][Your assumptions and presuppositions mean abso-diddly squat to me!][/size] Christians are saved by grace, not by law.[size=+1][Irrelevant to my argument. Perhaps if you actually read what I posted you might be better able to respond!][/size][/SIZE]

Choice words that Jesus said about the Pharisees.

Mat 23:3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.​

So after about 2 days you show you are real good at bad mouthing my evidence, anything that proves you wrong, but you don't seem capable of presenting one shred of historical, grammatical, or lexical evidence in support of anything.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Again, a very good example of the blatent legalism and Phariseeism that infects fundamentalism. Christians are saved by grace, not by law.

No I dont think Christians think that, Christians see God's grace is that all may be saved by Jesus Christ.
Grace doesnt save us, the blood of Christ saves us which is by the grace of God.

 

[BAFRIEND]

No I dont think Christians think that, Christians see God's grace is that all may be saved by Jesus Christ.
Grace doesnt save us, the blood of Christ saves us which is by the grace of God.

Jesus said to walk the narrow path. Paul said not to be of the flesh or the world. Jesus said something about the eye of a needle.

Does any of that ring a bell ?

Fuzzy wuzzies don't get you saved senior.

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]So just why do we have to take the opinions of a bunch of dead men who lived in an age before proper biblical scholarship as anything more than opinions formed out of ignorance?. . . [/SIZE]

I have been thinking about this, and I decided, in all fairness, for the sake of a reasoned rational discussion to temporarily set aside the references, I have quoted, that you refered to as, "the opinions of a bunch of dead men" and get down to the absolute basics.

Here is a passage of scripture in the original Hebrew

[size=+1]&#1500;&#1502;&#1504;&#1510;&#1495; &#1500;&#1491;&#1493;&#1491; &#1488;&#1502;&#1512; &#1504;&#1489;&#1500; &#1489;&#1500;&#1489;&#1493; &#1488;&#1497;&#1503; &#1488;&#1500;&#1492;&#1497;&#1501; &#1492;&#1513;&#1495;&#1497;&#1514;&#1493; &#1492;&#1514;&#1506;&#1497;&#1489;&#1493; &#1506;&#1500;&#1497;&#1500;&#1492; &#1488;&#1497;&#1503; &#1506;&#1513;&#1492;&#1470;&#1496;&#1493;&#1489;[/size]

Let us discuss this verse. What does this say to you? How does it affect your faith and practice? Why did God say this?

I would suggest that you consult any of the standard Hebrew resources, such as BDB, TWOT, NIDOTT, but they were written by a bunch of dead men and I know how you feel about that.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Jesus said to walk the narrow path. Paul said not to be of the flesh or the world. Jesus said something about the eye of a needle.

Does any of that ring a bell ?

It more than rings a bell, I am well familiar with these passages of Jesus NT teaching.

Did you understand what I wrote?

 

[artybloke]

Choice words that Jesus said about the Pharisees.

Mat 23:3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.​

So after about 2 days you show you are real good at bad mouthing my evidence, anything that proves you wrong, but you don't seem capable of presenting one shred of historical, grammatical, or lexical evidence in support of anything.

Why should i take the word of aqnyone who knows ZERO about about what I think or know?

I DON'T CARE what a bunch of ancient Pharisees said.

You have no authority over me.

I follow Christ, not the law.

 

[Ave Maria]

Some excellent posts. David's relationship is pronounced from the start as spiritual.
The Hebrews and the Jews throughout the Bible knew same-sex sex was a sin, secular history tells us that, its no good doubting it now.
But for Christians please remember that Paul grew up in Tarsus, knew Greek culture, was a Roman citizen and knew Roman law and culture as well.. but most significantly he was an expert in Jewish law having studied under the 'raban' Gamaliel He writes that same-sex sex is error. Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 5-7 and 1 Timothy 1.

The only same-sex sex that the Bible condemns is homosexual rape and temple prostitution.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Dear Peacelover02
That looks 100% wrong. Got any evidence?

The passages I cited mention same-sex sex, there is no mention of 'homosexual rape' or 'temple prostitution'
In fact none of the 7 passages that condemn same sex sex mention these, some do mention idolatry as well though.