Jordan I'm not sure if you were just using my post to initiate this question?? I actually wasn't referring to anything about homosexuals with this post, just pointing out to the person I was responding to, that the writers did have opinions but they didn't parade it as a commandment by God.
sherna, I have been doing some extensive research as to the origin(s) of and reference to homosexuality in the Bible since this thread started. So the answer is, yes - your post DID just initiate mine and I was not tying the 2 together. When I saw what you wrote, it made me go to my notes on Paul in particular. So,
you made me do it you know! 
What other people do to abuse God's word, I am not responsible for and I cannot answer for them, they have to answer for themselves.
Knowing you as well as I think I do from months of reading what you write and how you present things, that is a given. I would never say you are one who just plunks down in that 'comfortable chair of religion', never gets up from it, and sits there saying the standard mantra
"It's written that way, it's god's, and it's right, so don't bother me with your inane questions." You are clear on where you stand,
but you are willing to at least look at other viewpoints.As for what it says about homosexuality; in the particular scriptures you mention, (arsenokoit‘s, from ars‘n, a male, and keit‘, one who lies with) that describes the sexual act of homosexuals. Paul was referring to prostitution with (malakos)-I see this as being referred to as the active (malakoi) and passive (arsenokitai) aspects of homosexuality. And in other places in the bible it describes homosexuality as a man lying with a man and woman with woman, working that which is unseemly.
I would guess that your definition for arsenokoitai is taken from a Christian oriented site because they all tend to say that same thing. Big surprise there - not really. I have looked extensively through a minimum of 50 sites (most likely more) for a definition of arsenokoitai. They all state there is no clear, concise definition. They all state it is an ambiguous word at best - it is a compund word with multiple definitions and is thought to have been coined by Paul from Leviticus. Leviticus discussed sacred prostitution so if Paul coined the word from that, it is believed that Paul condemned sacred prostitution and
not homosexuality. I have looked at things regarding the Bible and this word written by umpteen scholars from every century, and while they all refer to the word, not one of them provides a definition either. What upsets me, actually it angers me, is what I wrote previously. One guy comes along in 1958 who is a translator for the New Amplified Bible. He alone decides to translate this mysterious Greek word into English and he decides it means 'homosexuals' - even though no such word exists in either Greek or Hebrew and even breaking it down, like you wrote it, does NOT follow any rules of translation. So now it stands, as he first wrote it, in the English-language Bible.
To me, that was a very convenient way to insert his and society's homophobia into the Bible where it would be perpetuated throughout the years. That makes me angry!The passage copied below is from 'The Christian Research Institute'. NOT from any pro-gay activist site or anything that can be construed as biased and/or favoring a homosexual lifestyle:
Theologian John H. Elliott, Professor Emeritus of Theology and Religious Studies at the University of San Francisco, has written one of the most thorough studies of 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 to date. He concludes that “nothing in 1 Corinthians, or for that matter in any other biblical writing, speaks directly of the biological or psychological condition of homosexuality or homosexual ‘orientation’ as this is understood today and as it concerns believing Christian gay persons intent on worshipping and serving God.”
He concludes from his research that the Bible in its entirety, as with 1 Corinthians specifically, offers sparse and ambiguous evidence concerning male-male sexual relationships, and is “conditioned by cultural perceptions and behavioral patterns too alien to those of modern times to provide an adequate basis for a contemporary ethic of homosexuality as homosexuality is currently understood.” If a case is to be made for or against the morality of homosexuality as it is understood in contemporary society, Elliott argues, it will have to be made on evidence other than 1 Corinthians 6:9–10
and other similar passages contained in the Bible.
Community Forum
Topic: Religion and Homosexuality (Read 80794 times)
September 19, 2009, 09:18:52 am
