-
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.
Homosexuallity is the same as polygamy
- Thread starter BigChrisfilm
- Start date
davedjy
Well-Known Member
- Dec 11, 2006
- 2,184
- 1,080
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
5. Temple Prostitution in Canaan (Leviticus 18:22)
Temple prostitution played also a vital role in the Canaanite religion of worshipping Molech in the OT. In the Canaanite religion, the fertility of the land depended upon Molech having sex with the love goddess Astoroth. The Canaanites, imitated this through prostitution in their worship rituals. The prostitute would play the part of Astoroth, while the customer/worshipper played the part of Molech.
However, the prostitutes playing Astoroth's role were not females, but instead were males... they would dress up as women, wearing elaborate Goddess vestments and Goddess masks on their faces. The customers/ worshippers were also males- Those males would lie with a male as if a female.
It seems almost too simple. For those who wish for further proof that Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 forbid lying with one of Molech's temple prostitutes I have put together the following arguments:
A. CONEXT: Leviticus 18:2-5 says that practices following, including obviously the "homosexual" acts in 18:22, were part of "the doings... of Canaan". Also see 19:26-29.
So the "homosexual" acts in Leviticus 18:22. 20:13 were part of Canaanite rituals. Funny thing is, the only form of homosexuality used by the Canaanites in their rituals was that of transvestitic temple prostitution.
The end of chapter 20 says that those practices were labeled as "abomination" because they were the idolatrous practices of the Canaanites.
B. THE DEATH PENALTY AND DEUTERONOMY: If you make a list of crimes in Leviticus in which the punishment is death, you will notice that all the death penalty crimes are repeated once again in the Old Testament, especially in Deuteronomy.
But homosexuality is not repeated there (nor anywhere else in the Old Testament), even though ALL of the other death penalty crimes are. However, Deuteronomy does mention male temple prostitution, and calls it toevah.
Here is the list:
Leviticus 20:3-5: Child sacrifice. This is repeated in 2Kings 16:3 and Deuteronomy 12:31.
Leviticus 20:6: Mediums and wizards. This is included in Deuteronomy's 'no other gods', 5:7 et al.
Leviticus 20:9: Cursing one's parents. This is repeated in Deuteronomy 27:16.
Leviticus 20:10: Adultery. Repeated in Deuteronomy 5:18, 22:22.
Leviticus 20:11: Incest with father's wife. Repeated in Deuteronomy 20:20.
Leviticus 20:12 Incest with child's spouse. Repeated in Deuteronomy 20:23.
Leviticus 20:13: Allegedly homosexuality in general. Not repeated anywhere else in the Old Testament.
Leviticus 20:14: Incest: both daughter and mother. Repeated in Deuteronomy 20:23.
Leviticus 20:15: Man committing bestiality. Repeated in Deuteronomy 20:21.
Leviticus 20:16: woman commiting bestiality. Repeated in Deuteronomy 20:21
"Seven out of nine are repeated precisely in Deuteronomy - down to the details of which degree of consanguinity is involved in acts of incest. 20:12 (incest with a daughter-in-law) is not repeated precisely, but the same degree of consanguinity is forbidden in Deut. 20:23. Necromancy is not specifically forbidden again in Deuteronomy, but it is attested in a number of places outside of Leviticus 18/20, notably in I Samuel 14:32-35, which refers to the death penalty associated with the practice." -- Royce Beuhler
C. LESBIANS: If the author was referring to homosexuality in general, then why isn't there a mention of lesbians? The transvestitic temple prostitution rituals did NOT involve females, so it would make sense for him not to mention lesbians if he did have [Molech's] temple prostitution in mind.
When the author prohibited bestiality he said "if a woman lies down with a beast" AND ALSO SAYS "if a man lies down with a beast". When the author mentioned bestiality he mentioned both human genders... why wouldn't he do the same in 18:22/20:13 if he meant homosexuality in general?
Furthermore, "Both men and women are forbidden to commit adultery, or incest with a parent, or incest with a parent-in-law. But, at least if the prosecution's theory is true, only males are forbidden to have sex with their own gender. If we assume the traditional theory, both of these silences are unexpected, and both break the pattern of the way the Bible treats equally serious sins. The silences present a puzzle.
On the defense theory, however, there are no curious silences to be explained. If what Leviticus 18/20 forbids is a specific idolatrous practice, then:
1. it is a practice which is also specifically forbidden in Deuteronomy, just like all the other capital crimes, and
2. the cult which indulged in the practice had males coupling with males, but not males coupling with females.
The data fit the defense theory like a glove; try to slip the same data onto the prosecution's theory, and these two unseemly holes, these two embarrassing silences, stick out like missing thumbs." -- Royce Buehler
Oh boy it certainly doesn't look good for the anti-homosexual crowd right now, but there is still one more argument:
D. ECHOES: "For they [Judah] also built for themselves high places, and pillars, and Asherim on every high hill and under every green tree; and there were also male cult prostitutes [qadeshim] in the land. They did according to all the abominations [plural of toevah] of the nations which the LORD drove out before the people of Israel." -- 1 Kings 14:23-24
According to fundamentalists, Leviticus 18:22/20:13 prohibit homosexuality in general. If that were the case then one would expect the author of Kings to echo the themes of Deuteronomy 23 when the topic of temple prostitution came up.
But that isn't what happens. Instead, when the subject of temple prostitution comes up, the author of Kings echoes the specific themes of Leviticus 18:27-28: he calls the practices toevah and echoes the phrase "did all of the abominations/toevah", and said those practices were the practices of the former inhabitants who were driven out of the land for engaging in them.
The fact that temple prostitution made the author of Kings allude to Leviticus INSTEAD of Deuteronomy is quite strange, UNLESS he viewed the Leviticus passages as also referring to cult prostitution.
So Leviticus 18:22/ 20:13 are talking about a specific form of prostitution which involves males lying with males as if they are females. This fits in perfectly with the Canaanite prostitution rituals.
Temple prostitution played also a vital role in the Canaanite religion of worshipping Molech in the OT. In the Canaanite religion, the fertility of the land depended upon Molech having sex with the love goddess Astoroth. The Canaanites, imitated this through prostitution in their worship rituals. The prostitute would play the part of Astoroth, while the customer/worshipper played the part of Molech.
However, the prostitutes playing Astoroth's role were not females, but instead were males... they would dress up as women, wearing elaborate Goddess vestments and Goddess masks on their faces. The customers/ worshippers were also males- Those males would lie with a male as if a female.
It seems almost too simple. For those who wish for further proof that Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 forbid lying with one of Molech's temple prostitutes I have put together the following arguments:
A. CONEXT: Leviticus 18:2-5 says that practices following, including obviously the "homosexual" acts in 18:22, were part of "the doings... of Canaan". Also see 19:26-29.
So the "homosexual" acts in Leviticus 18:22. 20:13 were part of Canaanite rituals. Funny thing is, the only form of homosexuality used by the Canaanites in their rituals was that of transvestitic temple prostitution.
The end of chapter 20 says that those practices were labeled as "abomination" because they were the idolatrous practices of the Canaanites.
B. THE DEATH PENALTY AND DEUTERONOMY: If you make a list of crimes in Leviticus in which the punishment is death, you will notice that all the death penalty crimes are repeated once again in the Old Testament, especially in Deuteronomy.
But homosexuality is not repeated there (nor anywhere else in the Old Testament), even though ALL of the other death penalty crimes are. However, Deuteronomy does mention male temple prostitution, and calls it toevah.
Here is the list:
Leviticus 20:3-5: Child sacrifice. This is repeated in 2Kings 16:3 and Deuteronomy 12:31.
Leviticus 20:6: Mediums and wizards. This is included in Deuteronomy's 'no other gods', 5:7 et al.
Leviticus 20:9: Cursing one's parents. This is repeated in Deuteronomy 27:16.
Leviticus 20:10: Adultery. Repeated in Deuteronomy 5:18, 22:22.
Leviticus 20:11: Incest with father's wife. Repeated in Deuteronomy 20:20.
Leviticus 20:12 Incest with child's spouse. Repeated in Deuteronomy 20:23.
Leviticus 20:13: Allegedly homosexuality in general. Not repeated anywhere else in the Old Testament.
Leviticus 20:14: Incest: both daughter and mother. Repeated in Deuteronomy 20:23.
Leviticus 20:15: Man committing bestiality. Repeated in Deuteronomy 20:21.
Leviticus 20:16: woman commiting bestiality. Repeated in Deuteronomy 20:21
"Seven out of nine are repeated precisely in Deuteronomy - down to the details of which degree of consanguinity is involved in acts of incest. 20:12 (incest with a daughter-in-law) is not repeated precisely, but the same degree of consanguinity is forbidden in Deut. 20:23. Necromancy is not specifically forbidden again in Deuteronomy, but it is attested in a number of places outside of Leviticus 18/20, notably in I Samuel 14:32-35, which refers to the death penalty associated with the practice." -- Royce Beuhler
C. LESBIANS: If the author was referring to homosexuality in general, then why isn't there a mention of lesbians? The transvestitic temple prostitution rituals did NOT involve females, so it would make sense for him not to mention lesbians if he did have [Molech's] temple prostitution in mind.
When the author prohibited bestiality he said "if a woman lies down with a beast" AND ALSO SAYS "if a man lies down with a beast". When the author mentioned bestiality he mentioned both human genders... why wouldn't he do the same in 18:22/20:13 if he meant homosexuality in general?
Furthermore, "Both men and women are forbidden to commit adultery, or incest with a parent, or incest with a parent-in-law. But, at least if the prosecution's theory is true, only males are forbidden to have sex with their own gender. If we assume the traditional theory, both of these silences are unexpected, and both break the pattern of the way the Bible treats equally serious sins. The silences present a puzzle.
On the defense theory, however, there are no curious silences to be explained. If what Leviticus 18/20 forbids is a specific idolatrous practice, then:
1. it is a practice which is also specifically forbidden in Deuteronomy, just like all the other capital crimes, and
2. the cult which indulged in the practice had males coupling with males, but not males coupling with females.
The data fit the defense theory like a glove; try to slip the same data onto the prosecution's theory, and these two unseemly holes, these two embarrassing silences, stick out like missing thumbs." -- Royce Buehler
Oh boy it certainly doesn't look good for the anti-homosexual crowd right now, but there is still one more argument:
D. ECHOES: "For they [Judah] also built for themselves high places, and pillars, and Asherim on every high hill and under every green tree; and there were also male cult prostitutes [qadeshim] in the land. They did according to all the abominations [plural of toevah] of the nations which the LORD drove out before the people of Israel." -- 1 Kings 14:23-24
According to fundamentalists, Leviticus 18:22/20:13 prohibit homosexuality in general. If that were the case then one would expect the author of Kings to echo the themes of Deuteronomy 23 when the topic of temple prostitution came up.
But that isn't what happens. Instead, when the subject of temple prostitution comes up, the author of Kings echoes the specific themes of Leviticus 18:27-28: he calls the practices toevah and echoes the phrase "did all of the abominations/toevah", and said those practices were the practices of the former inhabitants who were driven out of the land for engaging in them.
The fact that temple prostitution made the author of Kings allude to Leviticus INSTEAD of Deuteronomy is quite strange, UNLESS he viewed the Leviticus passages as also referring to cult prostitution.
So Leviticus 18:22/ 20:13 are talking about a specific form of prostitution which involves males lying with males as if they are females. This fits in perfectly with the Canaanite prostitution rituals.
Upvote
0
hi,
we are CHRISTIANS therefore we believe in the good news and Christ, I believe that we should live by the NT for it is the absolute truth and its message is of love which Jesus commanded us to do.
I saw a vid on youtube of some Christians in the US who were holding up signs saying "I hate [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]", and "[wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] burn in hell" - this is NOT christian. Even if you do not agree with homosexuality dont start hating homosexual, Jesus didnt cast away tax collectors and sinners, no he turned away the Pharisees.
we are CHRISTIANS therefore we believe in the good news and Christ, I believe that we should live by the NT for it is the absolute truth and its message is of love which Jesus commanded us to do.
I saw a vid on youtube of some Christians in the US who were holding up signs saying "I hate [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]", and "[wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] burn in hell" - this is NOT christian. Even if you do not agree with homosexuality dont start hating homosexual, Jesus didnt cast away tax collectors and sinners, no he turned away the Pharisees.
Upvote
0
- Aug 21, 2003
- 29,117
- 6,145
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
This is the Bible?!?
OBTW this is the same cut/paste you have posted many times before and you have not identified the source. That is called plagiarism.
I have asked you before to give me credible, verifiable, historical evidence for the 7 points enumerated above, that you postred? Without such evidence they are nothing more than scribbles.
Upvote
0
davedjy
Well-Known Member
- Dec 11, 2006
- 2,184
- 1,080
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
What? I gave you the link to that like 20 timesThis is the Bible?!?
OBTW this is the same cut/paste you have posted many times before and you have not identified the source. That is called plagiarism.
I have asked you before to give me credible, verifiable, historical evidence for the 7 points enumerated above, that you postred? Without such evidence they are nothing more than scribbles.
http://home.wanadoo.nl/inspiritus/The%20Mystery.htm
I then gave you the temple prostitution of the Caanites.
read this too:
http://www.abu.nb.ca/ecm/topics/books3.htm"]http://www.abu.nb.ca/ecm/topics/books3.htm[/URL]
http://www.religioustolerance.org/miles01.htm
Upvote
0
- Aug 21, 2003
- 29,117
- 6,145
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
What? I gave you the link to that like 20 times
http://home.wanadoo.nl/inspiritus/The%20Mystery.htm
I then gave you the temple prostitution of the Caanites.
read this too:
http://www.abu.nb.ca/ecm/topics/books3.htm"]http://www.abu.nb.ca/ecm/topics/books3.htm[/URL]
http://www.religioustolerance.org/miles01.htm
Read them and they are all rubbish. Just a bunch of guys saying, "This happened." and "That happened." and "They did this." and "They did that." No evidence of any kind whatsoever. Try quoting some of the historians that lived at the time such as Tacitus, Josephus, etc.
Upvote
0
david_x
I So Hate Consequences!!!!
It is not so much that scripture changed so much as society did, in a country were women are equal to men there is no reason for them to be submisive. It is somthing most Christian women do anyway. I'm not really here to debate if that is right or wrong since it has been a while since I disscussed that topic in a group.
A weaker vessel??? do you have proof of which you are talking about. Something tells me you don't.
That is a biblical reference, and thank you for not throwing insults.
Upvote
0
davedjy
Well-Known Member
- Dec 11, 2006
- 2,184
- 1,080
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
Yeah, I have more claims that homosexuality did exist back then, and the Earliest of Churches freely accepted them. The writings for those people from the Church were locked away by homophobic Christians.
Sounds so familiar to our time now!
Your Arsenokoitai study is USELESS, I will make photo copies and scan and give you from the Book I'm getting Sunday from my Pastor.
He has full knowledge of the way that word changed over the years! He is equipping me with all kinds of resources!
Upvote
0
Similar threads
