B
BigBadWlf
Guest
It may come as a shock to you but not everyone who rejects anti-gay prejudice is not gay themselves
Upvote
0
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.
It may come as a shock to you but not everyone who rejects anti-gay prejudice is not gay themselvesHahaha. I'm the one misusing christianity? Altering language? All I did was a breakdown of the words, and their definitions, and now I'm being called a homophobic hater who has fear and contempt of homosexuals.
I actually responded to your other post before I read this reply. Since you are being a child, and obviously violating forum rules, I'm done talking to you. If you can be mature enough to have an adult discussion then we'll talk again later.
And good luck with looking at Christianity through the lens of your sexual drive.
Well claiming that it is undefinable is just as good as throwing it out, since either way it is a 'get out of sin free' card.No one has thrown anything out. claiming so is dishonest on your part
and again I'm called dishonest. Based on the definitions given for those words, it clearly states that malakos can easily mean passive sexual partner. I cannot argue with you the veracity of the definitions, since I'm not a greek literary historian or whatever. But I can take the sources that cite these definitions and use them as fact, since they are reputable and you are not.Please stop trying to twist words and play word games. It is remarkably dishonest of you. There is no evidence that Malakos ever mean homosexual passive partner or otherwise.
I was just pointing out that effeminate can mean a homosexual (granted in this example, in a derogatory way).What does the N word mean?
And many (not all) heterosexual men I know have feminine tendencies. It all depends on how you define feminine.
Do you just copy and paste every paragraph that I write, then add your own twists to it? "Give me back, give me back my brackets! (parenthesis (sp) brackets that is, to the tune of an old lynrd skynrd record)Again there is no female person in a gay male relationship. If there was a female person then it would be a heterosexual relationship.
what is that, prejudice against your viewpoint?Prejudice is part of your OP
Prejudice is part of your OP
It fits in quite well as a man who employs a prostitute may not be welcome in heaven.
and that is assuming that the only definition of koites is bed. But then again, you are the one who brought up compound words so why did you even go there?And BTW she is implicit in arsenokoites. Arsenokoites is a plural first declension noun. The word koitai, without the arseno- prefix, is feminine. Thus referring to a man and a womans bed, not in the bed of another man
I am sure many racists are proud too.I am a homophobe and I am proud of it.
Did God make David Duke a racist?God made me one and I was born that way.
No we dont. but lets pretend we did. does that make hatred acceptable today?We all know that in the thousands of years of Christianity and Judaism homosexuality has always been condemned as an evil abomination against God and nature.
That can be arguedNowhere in the Bible is there is a single example of a gay marriage or any sort of acceptance of homosexuality.
So the only translation of certain passages is that they condemn homosexuality are the only ones that make sense.
Where in the bible does it state that prejudice and discrimination in the name of god is acceptable?Where in the Bible does it state that only homosexuals are exempt from adultery, fornication, or sodomy ?
You already discriminateDo you want me to discriminate against homosexuals and state the Ten Commandments and Paul's teachings against sexual immorality only apply to heterosexuals ?
Im sure there are plenty of homophobes in hellDo you want me to say that hell is only for heterosexuals ?
you cannot defend prejudice and discrimination within the context of Christian morality, so you must attack people who argues within the framework of Christianity and scholarship and try to claim that prejudice and discrimination against minorities you have chosen to oppress is somehow moral.This is how it works: you cannot defend gay sex within the context of Christian morality, so you must attack an OP that argues within the framework of Christianity and scripture that homosexual practices are immoral.
Well nothing besides truthYou have nothing else. There is no foundation within the context of Christianity for you to defend or gain approval of the gay lifestyle.
Presenting factual evidence that counters an individuals claims is now a personal attack?So, instead of following the forum guidelines that say debate within the context if Christianity, you attack the poster on a personal level.
Any Christian who debates from scripture or theology is a homophobe, racist, guilty of discrimination.
Because you have nothing else.
I usually stop reading your posts after you start calling people prejudiced and bigots. http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=42908925&postcount=17I don't know if you used the term bigot in specific, and I don't feel like looking. I meant in general that you constantly throw out these derogatory comments to anyone who is on the other side of the debate. Oh and also the comparisons to racists, thats another one.BigBadWlf said:Please cite the posts where I specifically called you or anyone a bigot
I said "usually", since this is a thread that i started, I'm inclined to respond. Would you like it better if I said "comparing people to bigots" instead? Are you going to dwell on this now, and try to make me out to be some kind of liar who is out to get you? I'm still not seeing any evidence that the dictionary definitions of these words that I stated in my OP are incorrect.I usually stop reading your posts after you start calling people prejudiced and bigots. http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=42908925&postcount=17
Clearly stating that I do this .but now you are backing away from your original claim.
So when you made this claim were you lying about me and my posts?
Are you telling me that homosexuals do not act in a feminine manner?
But you didnt say "comparing people to bigots" you lied and said I call and have called People bigots and racists.I said "usually", since this is a thread that i started, I'm inclined to respond. Would you like it better if I said "comparing people to bigots" instead? Are you going to dwell on this now, and try to make me out to be some kind of liar who is out to get you? I'm still not seeing any evidence that the dictionary definitions of these words that I stated in my OP are incorrect.
1. Your conclusion of Malakos.So I've spent some time studying the corinthians passage. I would like to know the pro-gay argument against my conclusion.
(Please note: I'm not quoting from a propaganda site, unless you count bible.org as one)
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders
Here we have the issue of the definitions of the greek malakos and arsenokoites. malakos is translated here as male prostitutes and arsenokoites as homosexual offenders.
Malakos:
Reference rtSpch:adjectiveIn Greek:In NET:In AV:soft 3, effeminate 1Definition:1) soft, soft to the touch
2) metaph. in a bad sense
2a) effeminate
2a1) of a catamite
2a2) of a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man
2a3) of a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness
2a4) of a male prostitute of uncertain affinity; soft, i.e. fine (clothing); figuratively, a
catamite:-effeminate, soft.
So this basically tells me that this word means effeminate. In this context, it is meant as the "female"/submissive one of the same-sex sexual action.
arsenokoites
Pronunciation:ar-sen-ok-oy'-tace Origin:from 730 and 2845 Reference:
PrtSpch:noun masculine In Greek:
In NET:
In AV:abuser of (one's) self with mankind 1,abuser of (one's) self with mankind 1, defile (one's) self with mankind 1 Count:2 Definition:1) one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual from 730 and 2845; a sodomite:-abuser of (that defile) self with
mankind.
see GREEK for 730
see GREEK for 2845
Here is the breakdown of the word, since it is not defined previous to paul's writings.
arsen
Pronunciation:ar'-hrane ar'-sane Originrobably from 142 Reference:
PrtSpch:adjective In Greek:arsen 4 In NET:male 4 In AV:male 4, man 3, man child 1, man child + 5207 1 Count:9 Definition:1) a male probably from 142; male (as stronger for lifting):-male, man.
see GREEK for 142
koite
Pronunciation:koy'-tay Origin:from 2749
Reference:
PrtSpch:noun feminime In Greek:koithn 2 In NET:bed 1, conceived 1 In AV:bed 2, conceive 1, chambering 1 Count:4 Definition:1) a place for laying down, resting, sleeping in
1a) a bed, couch
2) the marriage bed
2a) of adultery
3) cohabitation, whether lawful or unlawful
3a) sexual intercourse from 2749; a couch; by extension, cohabitation; by implication, the
male sperm:-bed, chambering, X conceive.
So we have man(arsen) bed/adultery/cohabitation/sexual intercourse(koite).
I understand now why the term "homosexual offenders (or more politically correct, those who practice same-sex sex), was used here.
The first part "malakos" refers to the feminine part of the same-sex action, while the arsenkoites refers to the male part. This being said, it is a complete condemnation for both parties involved.
4
Now what I want to know is why you believe this conclusion is incorrect?
It is a very simple conclusion and did not take any special effort to come to.
Bottom line: the definition of Arsenokoitai IS unknown. No amount of refuting Boswell, Scroggs, or any other pro-gay Scholar will buy you a "homosexual" translation.A waste of time. The debates have raged on this endlessly. Even on this the Biblical position remains the same while being attacked by gay and lesbian thinking with all kinds of different arguments. Take the arguments of Boswell and Scroggs, they suggest arsenokoites relates to same-sex activity that is merely temple prostitution, yet we see over and over again people arguing that arsenokoites has nothing to do with same-sex sex. But rather than dispute the Boswell and Scroggs argument they just want to dispute what the Bible actually says. Its one of the reasons we can see that the pro-same-sex argument is not interested in the truth, its interested in same sex sex and is fundamentally therefore not only a major deparparture from the Bible foundation for God's creation but also a decieving spirit.
Once all the arguments have been dicussed on 1 Cor 6:9, the pro-same-sex people then turn to another of the dozen or so passages they dispute... which just show the level of unbelief.
BigBadWlf said:Polycarp1 debates scripture or theology and is not a homophobe or a racist nor one who discriminates
Ohioprof debates scripture or theology and is not a homophobe or a racist nor one who discriminates
Criada debates scripture or theology and is not a homophobe or a racist nor one who discriminates
Tulc debates scripture or theology and is not a homophobe or a racist nor one who discriminates
Naotoa debates scripture or theology and is not a homophobe or a racist nor one who discriminates
Briuse debates scripture or theology and is not a homophobe or a racist nor one who discriminates
Wednesday debates scripture or theology and is not a homophobe or a racist nor one who discriminates
Kiwimac debates scripture or theology and is not a homophobe or a racist nor one who discriminates
CaDan debates scripture or theology and is not a homophobe or a racist nor one who discriminates
CrazyLiz debates scripture or theology and is not a homophobe or a racist nor one who discriminates
ChaliceThunder debates scripture or theology and is not a homophobe or a racist nor one who discriminates
actually, I just vocalized (or wrote down in this case) the way I feel you are coming off at me. Most of your replies either compare my side of this issue as racists, or some other derogatory manner. If you want to make me out as a liar for trying to get that across, then fine, think I am a liar.But you didnt say "comparing people to bigots" you lied and said I call and have called People bigots and racists.
As for dwelling on it. are you suggesting I or anyone should just ignore it when you bare false witness against them.
I don't feel the need to compare same-sex sex with AIDs, I could reply in every post that there are gay people with aids, and it'd be true and factual. It however does not state that there are hetero's with aids also.Your pet theory didnt hold up to scrutiny or the facts, but that fact does not excuse you flaming people just because they present facts you dont like
I've given the link many times...
Arsen simply means "man", and koitai means "beds". The translation IS unknown. For further proof of just how "unknown" it is, you can see just SOME of the ways it has been translated.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/homarsen.htm
Bottom line: the definition of Arsenokoitai IS unknown. No amount of refuting Boswell, Scroggs, or any other pro-gay Scholar will buy you a "homosexual" translation.
Well, no amount of quoting Boswell, Scroggs, or any other pro-gay Scholar will buy you a 'get out of sin free' card, either.
It's too common that we tend to turn a blind eye to that which affects us personally, I know I'm guilty of it.
koitai means more than just beds, but even if it does mean beds, then the translation would be more like man-beds= manwhore. , then explain how the flow between the word 'porno' and 'arsenkoites' in 1tim1:10 goes, since it could be construed as redundant.
its okay, this is in DoH, where apparently anything goesWe aren't discussing sin though, are we? I don't believe it's sin, but aren't you derailing your own OP, Jet?
We are discussing a specific passage of Scripture, and it's meaning.
Since you agree there are specifics within porneia, why do you not agree there are specifics within koitai? You claim the 'bed' translation only, and fail to mention all others listed.You can't really use that as a debate point. Have you read 1 Cor. 6:9? same thing. Is a sexually immoral person different than an adulterer? yet they are listed as 2 different things, there are specifics within Porneia.
Do you know what this thread is about????????????????????Im not pro or anti Gay....because I know that to be either means I will be Judged....and found wanting....by God in return.
Note all those who have condemed themselves to a future Judging by God... and found wanting themselves because of threads such as these.
Did i mention salvation (or lack thereof)?Scripture tells us, that Salvation is by Grace through Faith and not of yourselves lest any man should boast.
Perhaps those self opinionated types on Sexuality who start threads like these would be better served keeping their opinions to themselves.....and even then they are not safe....because God sees into each heart....there is no deception with him....
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?