Being a christian and gay

http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/biblical_evidence/no_fems_no_fairies.html


?

 

Thanks. I couldn't complete the original post because the computer froze up, so see above. By the way, I couldn't open this.

 

It's basically the same. But more points on what 'effeminate' means.

 

Paul is relatively straight forward and does not beat around the bush, if he wanted to talk about "domination, male prostitution, pederasty, and/or homosexual lust" that is what he would said but nice try at rationalizing what Paul said to try and make it fit what you believe.

 

No. He just talked about malakoi and arsenokoitai, which you interpret in your "straightforward" way to mean what your English biblical translation tells you. Paul was writing letters to particular groups of people in particular contexts. They apparently understood what he meant. You think it was a general condemnation of homosexuality, but he didn't say that. Most likely, he coined the word arsenokoitaifrom the Greek translation of Leviticus: arsenos koiten. Philo makes the explicit connection between arsenos koiten and the galli.The cult of Cybele and Atis was something his audience would surely have known about. Even in the Roman world, not known for its prudery, it was shocking. The Senate had to decriminalize a lot of its "liturgical" activity, but traditionalists, especially Christians and Jews, were horrified. But it's certainly not typical of homosexual behavior in general. If you choose to interpret the Bible in terms of English translations, and to assume that words can be understood out of their historical context, suit yourself. But I don't think you can understand Scripture that way. I'd call it rationalizing the words to make them say what you think they should say on the basis of your preconceptions.

 

Well let's see how biblical scholars have translated 1 Corinthians 6:9-10:
effeminate (KJ21)
effeminate (ASV)
those who participate in homosexuality (AMP)
participants in same-sex intercourse (CEB)
engage in active or passive homosexuality (CJB)
behaves like a homosexual (CEV)
abuse themselves with men (DARBY)
the effeminate (DRA)
men who let other men use them for sex or who have sex with other men (ERV)
men who practice homosexuality (ESV)
men who practise homosexuality (ESVUK)
those who are ·male prostitutes [or passive homosexual partners], or ·men who have sexual relations with other men [or active homosexual partners] (EXB)
buggerers (GNV)
homosexuals (GW)
homosexual perverts (GNT)
anyone practicing homosexuality (HCSB)
the effeminate (PHILLIPS)
effeminate, abusers of themselves with mankind (KJV)
the effeminate, the sinners against nature (KNOX)
passive homosexual partners, dominant homosexual partners (LEB)
Those who use and abuse each other, use and abuse sex (MSG)
homosexuals (MOUNCE)
effeminate, nor homosexuals (NASB)
men who have sexual relations with other men (NCV)
passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals (NET)
who commit homosexual acts (NIRV)
men who have sex with men[a]
[a]1 Corinthians 6:9 The words men who have sex with men translate two Greek words that refer to the passive and active participants in homosexual acts. (NIV)
men who have sex with men (NIVUK)
homosexuals (NKJV)
people who do sex sins with their own sex (NLV)
practice homosexuality (NLT)
sodomites (NRSV)
homosexuals (OJB)
sexual perverts (RSV)
sexual deviancy (VOICE)
homosexuals (WEB)
they that do lechery with men (WYC)
sodomites (YLT)

How could I ever have gotten the impression that malakoi and arsenokoitai could simply be translated as homosexuality, maybe my "preconceptions" got in the way?

Honestly, who is doing the rationalizing here, the grasping at straws?

 

Its been two years since I first posted in this thread, in that time in real life, things have just gotten more ridiculous.

Are you kidding me with this stuff?

Doesnt register that the majority will see a post like that and think wow, he's a little bit obsessed with all the naughty stuff guys do to each other, and just think you are in the closet


Seriously, what happens to all of you?, the older you get the longer you've been married the angrier you get about this kind of stuff. Posts like this on the internet, or someone might make a speech on TV, but in real life if you get within 10 feet of one your eyes pop out of your head and you scamper away.

And your wife doesnt have a choice with some guys, she has to scamper away before her panties get soaked, and yes they all end up like that for what seems to be almost every guy, every guy that is except the husband.

So you cant really go near anyone, cant really make new friends, so theres no one around to really listen to all this anyway. Not that you are ever going to be able to say out loud what actually gets you angry, so its all this gobbildy gook that doesnt make sense to anyone

Men that act effeminate? Theres nothing more emasculating than getting whipped by a chic..

None of them marry a guy all the other girls want to beep beep, none of them would be secure enough to do that.

Do all heterosexuals end up going looney tunes?

 

Yes, it's sad. No basis for any one of them. It's obviously not just your preconceptions that have been the problem. Malakoi was once translated as "masturbator". The Good News Bible just comes right out and says "homosexual perverts". Sloppy,sloppy, sloppy! But the Greek texts are there and the history is there. Do you notice any variation among all of these translations? For example, what is a proscription against "effeminacy" telling us? No swishy behavior?

 

Of course you know that is not true most of the translations quoted were done by Biblical scholars or groups of Biblical scholars and they did their due diligence, they didn't just say I don't know what this word means, I think I'll just translate it as homosexual. In fact the footnote from the NIV [a]1 Corinthians 6:9 The words men who have sex with men translate two Greek words that refer to the passive and active participants in homosexual acts., shows that they did more than just guess at the words meanings.

Thanks, I guess.

The Good News Bible is generally considered "not well done" and is more of a paraphrase than a translation and I probably should left it out but I was trying to include as many as I could without being selective. I just went down the the list at http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/.

Do you really believe that none of all these Biblical scholars, that did these various translations, knew about this?

Yep, no swishy behavior.

 

That's a nice symmetrical solution--"arsenoikotai" means top and "malakoi" means "bottom". But there's no basis for it, and it's noteworthy that other translations don't follow that line. While I don't think the translators were just making it up, I do think they were just giving a rendering that incorporated their cultural biases. There are no ancient sources to support these usages. If you can show me what led them to those conclusions, I'd be more impressed. Certainly other "diligent" groups of translators have come to different conclusions. John Wesley, for example, thought malakoi meant morally weak, which it does. No indication in any usage at the time that it had anything to do with gay sex. And none of your Bible buffs address the issue whether or not the term arsenokoitai describes all same sex relations or just the ones Paul was familiar with. The term did not have general applicability to homosexuals during the period in which Paul used it. Eusebius, Christian historian of the 5ht century, uses it with reference to homosexual pederasty and rape. John the Faster in the 6th century tells us that a man can commit arsenokoitia with his wife. No ancient sources (including Paul) use it to refer to men in faithful partnerships. Did your translators (or Paul) even consider the possibility that there could be such partnerships.

That interpretation is really out there. Do you see how casual word choice could lead to stigmatizing people who have done nothing harmful to anyone? This reminds me more of the Pharisees than of Jesus. Explain to me why "swishy behavior" would be wrong--or any worse than nose picking. Fundie efforts to defend genocide, homophobia, slavery, and male domination in the name of Jesus are an example of the "bitter fruit" He associated with false prophets. (And I don't think He was talking about gays). BTW, what did Jesus have to say on this important subject?

 

Can you even hear yourself? Causally dismissing thousands of years of Bible scholarship and why, just because you want homosexuality to be something good? (Isaiah 5:20)

(Matthew 19:4-5)“Did YOU not read that he who created them from [the] beginning made them male and female and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh’?

So I guess even Jesus was a Pharisee in your eyes.

 

Thousands of years? And I'm not "dismissing" them. There's been quite a lot of variation in that scholarship over the centuries, as your quotations bear witness. I've explained the basis for my conclusion. The scholars concerned simply didn't have the benefit of a modern understanding of the phenomenon of homosexuality. As for "wanting" homosexuality to be something good, I think you insult me. I think homosexuality can be something good in committed, loving relations of trust. I don't think any of the various contexts in which the issue is dealt with in the Bible get at that kind of relationship.

Was Jesus talking about homosexuality, or are you perhaps taking the quotation out of context? I believe he was talking about divorce, which was an issue that greatly concerned him. I have no problem with the statement quoted. I'm married (to a woman) myself and have two kids. It's a great institution!

And BTW, Jesus might have been a Pharisee, whose views on love of neighbor match those of the Hillel school, while his views on divorce are more like the Shammai school. No known views on homosexuality.
Of course he's not the bad kind of Pharisee, the kind with which he was always disputing about the oral Torah.
Of course, there are males and females (I learned that in sex ed) and their unions are essential to propagate the species.

 

Variation? Actually, NO. We are not talking about the wide variations you are implying but about very narrow variations that can be argued all have the same or similar meanings.

Sorry, there is nothing new or "modern" about the "phenomenon of homosexuality". The Greeks of the first century were quite familiar homosexuality, even the "modern understanding of the phenomenon of homosexuality" and long term "partners".

No insult intended, did I mistakenly assume that you think that long term partner homosexuality can be a good thing?

Oh, I guess I didn't mistakenly assume that.

Like God is unaware the various forms of homosexuality and had no idea that homosexuality in "committed, loving relations of trust" would ever exist?

No, I'm not taking it out of context. Yes, Jesus was not directly speaking about homosexuality but he was talking about the natural way of things, a man and woman and not any two people regardless of gender.

Yes, Jesus was talking about divorce but he was also referencing the natural order of things and quoting from Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 5:2 which has nothing to do with divorce.

I'm happy to hear you are married (to a woman) and have two kids.

I have also heard that marriage is a great institution but then who wants to be institutionalized.

Doubtful.

Although Jesus may not have directly said much about homosexuality, he agreed with all of what the Bible said and that would include those parts of the Bible that you consider "homophobic".

Of course.

Phew, I'm glad to know that you know that.

 

Once again I think I should clarify my stand on this subject.

What I am discussing here is my view of what I believe the Bible and thus God, has to say on the subject of homosexuality.

If a person wants to engage in homosexuality or "marry" someone of the same gender, that is their personal decision and I have no desire interfere or to stand in their way.

But if someone asks, like in this thread, what the Bible says about marriage and homosexuality, I will tell them that the Bible does not seem to hold homosexuality in a particularly good light and will point out Scriptures that seem to show that.

 

For another view, see:
http://gaychristians.2freedom.com/ ( http://turn.to/gaychristians is no longer active) The word " homosexuality" was not in any Bible before 1946. So what ...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBJ8CNIlAGI - Cached

.Play Video

 

Not in any Bible before 1946? Interestingly Merriam-Webster says the first known use of the word homosexual was 1892, so it is easy to see why it wasn't used in the Bible before that and its use in 1946, 54 years later is about how long it would take to enter common usage and so translators could begin to use it. As you say; "So what ..."

 

My boss is leader of a Gay Church.
The answer is yes, being Gay Christian is okay. It's fine. It's good.

 

I just received a rep from someone for a post I made in this thread, and I just wanted to make it clear that my beliefs have changed a lot with the passage of time.

In short, this is what I now believe:

1. Homosexuality is not a sin. Engaging in homosexual acts is not a sin, either, especially if your intentions align with your higher self. Period.

2. Making love outside marriage is most definitely not a sin. Period.

3. I don't even believe in sin anymore. Well, I guess it depends on the definition. Such as, I don't believe it's right to hurt other beings and to destroy our natural resources. Self-responsibility and the law of oneness perhaps are better ways to define what I now believe in. Fear is an illusion, love is real.

4. Jesus and Mary Magdalene are a twin flame couple.

5. Jesus is a son of God, and an Ascended Master. We are all sons of God, as we are all part of God, and the kingdom of Heaven lies within us. (the pineal gland) Salvation is a choice defined by action.

My previous posts reflect an understanding of reality based on Biblical Christianity. Since then, I have been delving deeper and deeper down the rabbit hole, and believe there is more to reality than what the religious establishment has set forth for humanity. I believe that when the walls of hierarchy and duality crumble, only then can one have true freedom.

Humanity is evolving, and there are vast truths that lie beyond this physical 3D plane. And I'm not just talking about tripping, mind you. Though with the desired intent, that can certainly play a significant role as well.

You create your own reality. Hence, I'm not trying to change anyone's beliefs here. I just wanted to make things clear about where I stand for anyone who's been digging through my older posts. Believe what you want. I didn't come here to hate or judge.

Personally, I'm a heterosexual, so I'm not even sure why I commented here in the first place. I guess I was trying to be reassuring. Well, I can assure you that as long as you follow your heart's desire, and follow your excitement, you can't go wrong. <3

Jesus loves ya! Namaste! :daisy: