Cuddles333I see no difficulty understanding the cosmos obeying the laws (ordinances) of God, nor understanding the Levitical ordinances as being Deuteronomic (reiterated) later on to the Israelites before entering Canaan, with some Sundry ordinances added.
I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. You said that
huqqah always refers to religious customs. I demonstrated that it does not always refer to religious customs and so might not refer to religious customs in the Leviticus passages concerning homosexual behavior.
Moving on to the New Testament, I think it imperative that we understand what the word fornicate meant in the 1st century. The word has it's origin in the Latin language and meant (fornix) 'arch' where prostitutes made their living. In the Koine Greek it was known as the involvement of, and with, pagan temple prostitution. A 'fornicator' would have been either of these. This was the shock the disciples of Jesus experienced when He said that the only grounds for divorcing their wife was her being a participant in one these temples, instead of just burning the toast (so to speak). They said that if this was the case then it's better for a man not to marry then.
The word
fornication is not the subject of debate here. In the NT passages that I've cited it's not used in relation to homosexual behavior. While I still disagree with your conclusions about the nature of this word, they are entirely immaterial since the word is not used in reference to homosexual behavior.
Now to the word Arsenokoites. Without an understanding of the pagan temple prostitutes and the social damage those temples brought about as described in 1Corinthians chapters 5 and 6, and the end of Romans chapter 1, it is very difficult to give a good definition of this word. Summing up the type of social damage and the placement of this word in 2 New Testament passages (1Cor.6:9,10) & (1Tim.1:10) and a very good non-New Testament passage: Acts of John 36, the most accurate definition would be rip-off artists. (1Cor.6:9,10) "....Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor morally weak, nor rip-off artists, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards,...." (1Tim.1:10) "For fornicators, for rip-off artists, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjured persons...." (Acts of John 36) "....Likewise also thou poisoner, sorcerer, robber, defrauder, rip-off artist, thief..."
You'll need to cite some source material in order to establish this point. I don't see why it should be translated as "rip off artist". Here's a few Greek dictionaries on the word:
780 ἀρσενοκοίτης (
arsenokoitēs), ου (
ou), ὁ (
ho): n.masc.; ≡ Str 733—LN 88.280
male homosexual, one who takes the active male role in homosexual intercourse (1Co 6:9), specifically interpreted as male homosexual paedophilia (nab footnote); possibly a more generic term in first Timothy; sodomites (rsv, nrsv, nkjv), perverts (niv, neb, reb), practicing homosexuals (nab), homosexual (njb), (1Ti 1:10+), note: translations possibly use certain specific terms to infer or allow certain theologies
Swanson, J. (1997).
Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament) (electronic ed.). Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
ἀρσενοκοίτης (arsenokoitēs),
sodomite. A compound of ἄρσην and κεῖμαι. Cognate words: ἀνάκειμαι, ἀντίκειμαι, ἀπόκειμαι, ἄρσην, ἐπίκειμαι, κατάκειμαι, κεῖμαι, κοιμάομαι, κοιμάω, κοίμησις, κοίτη, κοιτών, παράκειμαι, περίκειμαι, πρόκειμαι, συνανάκειμαι
(2011).
The Lexham Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament. Logos Bible Software.
You can see from the above article that the word is a compound of
arsen (male) and
keimai (to lie with). Literally - one who lies with a male.
Please cite some source material in defense of your translation.
The next word that has not properly been defined is malakos. This word was understood to mean that a male had been exposed to much perfume, many baths much shade and gentle music. They were made to be overly sensitive for being males and instead of being warriors they were more intellectuals and had an appetite for easy money and pleasures. (see today's career politician). We can see how defining it as 'effeminate' is incorrect. Clement, The Instructor, Book III, chapters2-3 On Drinking & On Costly Vessels. Plato The Republic, 360 B.C. Book III. Dionysius of Halicarnassus 60-07 B.C. Roman Antiquities.
The A.D. 1st century church understood arrenomanes to mean mad after or boy crazy, or, paiderasste meaning sexual behavior towards males.
The A.D. 1st century church understood pathikos to mean the passive penetrated partner in a male couple.
Malakos simple means "soft" or "luxurious" but it appears to refer to homosexual activity within the NT contexts we're looking at. Here's some dictionary articles on this word:
3434 μαλακός (
malakos), ή (
ē), όν (
on): adj.; ≡ Str 3120—
1. LN 79.100
soft, fine, clothing delicate to the touch (Mt 11:8; Lk 7:25+);
2. LN 88.281
homosexual, passive partner in male-to-male sex act.: male prostitute (niv), effeminate (nasb, asv, kjv), homosexual (nkjv), (homo)sexual pervert (rsv, reb, neb conflated translation), self indulgent (njb!), boy prostitute,
i.e., a catamite (nab see ftnt), (1Co 6:9+)
Swanson, J. (1997).
Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament) (electronic ed.). Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
μαλακός, -ή, -όν,
soft; soft to the touch: ἱμάτια, Mt. 11:8 R G L br.; Lk. 7:25, (ἱματίων πολυτελῶν κ. μαλακῶν, Artem. oneir. 1, 78; ἐσθής, Hom. Od. 23, 290; Artem. oneir. 2, 3; χιτών, Hom. Il. 2, 42); and simply τὰ μαλακά, soft raiment (see λευκός, 1): Mt. 11:8 T Tr WH. Like the Lat.
mollis, metaph. and in a bad sense:
effeminate, of a catamite, a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness, 1 Co. 6:9 (Dion. Hal. antt. 7, 2 sub fin.; [Diog. Laërt. 7, 173 fin.]).*
Thayer, J. H. (1889).
A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: being Grimm’s Wilke's Clavis Novi Testamenti (p. 387). New York: Harper & Brothers.
Now to Romans 1:24-28
The ancient pagan Roman orgies of the cult Cybele, the Apostle Paul said that it was even a shame to speak of the things done in them. (Eph.5:12) Though they did change the use of their bodies to that which was 'against nature' this was not sin....the sin was their mind turning against God. It was written by the ancients that women would often turn to anal sex to prevent pregnancy. They wrote that this practice was 'against nature'. Male-male intercourse is also 'against nature' and has been around as long as recorded history. To 95% to 98% of the heterosexual world (and even the homosexual world) this would be considered a natural aberration, not a sin. The mental/spiritual state of the participants of these orgies produced a very negative social problem as is confirmed in (1Cor.5 and 6). Paul gave us an even deeper look in (Romans 1:28-32).
It sounds to me here like you're agreeing that Romans 1 refers to homosexual activity and condemns it, but I'm not sure.
