Why can these Bible teachings and commands be ignored while others can not?

[Aaron Lindahl]

Your recapitulation of these verses suggest they are not general condemnations. However, the most straight-forward reading of the Greek in the NT prohibitions of homosexuality are very much general prohibitions:

These verses are about as generic as they get. I will address the Greek wording in particular since I know that has been a major contention in this thread. I know that you are not interested in discussing the Greek with me, Aaron, so this is directed at others following this forum who may be confused about the actual wording in these particular verses.

In 1 Timothy 1:10, we have the phrase πόρνοις ἀρσενοκοίταις. Allow me to break down this phrase so it makes more sense. Pornois is a general word referring to sexual immorality. It where we get our word porn-ography. Porn comes from this word and ography comes from the Greek word graphe which means writing. The more important word is arsenokoitais. This is a conjunction of two words arsen - male and koites - bed. This is also one of the words used in 1 Cor. 6:9. This word is not used in Paul's day and therefore it is likely one he coined based on Leviticus 20 that declares it unlawful for a male to lie with another male in bed in place of a woman. It is completely unwarranted, in my opinion, to see these very generic prohibitions (thieves, idolatry, greed, drunkenness) and then claim that this particular word Paul coined has a very specific meaning of only one kind of homosexuality in a very limited sense. There is nothing here to indicate this. It is a very generic list of prohibitions with a coined word that specifically prohibits sexual intercourse between two men as immoral. Paul makes no effort to qualify this word which gives us a very clear picture of what he has in mind. Furthermore, the thought process of Paul seems very clear since historically both Jews and Christians all recognized any and every homosexual activity to be unlawful. We know of no ancient Jewish or Christian teaching that argued for the validity of certain forms of homosexual activity.

Out of time for this post...try to post more later

Hi Wormwood, the above has already been discussed, examined, and utterly refuted in extreme detail [SIZE=10pt]in posts #13, [/SIZE][SIZE=10pt]#20, #36, #59, and #108, so as earlier stated, we're just going to have to respectfully agree to disagree. Thank you.[/SIZE]

That said, I would like the following question addressed in honesty, which for some strange reason, no one seems able to easily address or answer, even though it's been posted here for over 4 hours. 7angels stated earlier:

[SIZE=10pt]"A taboo[/SIZE][SIZE=10pt] is a vehement prohibition of an action based on the belief that such behavior is either too [/SIZE][SIZE=10pt]sacred[/SIZE][SIZE=10pt] or too accursed for ordinary individuals to undertake, under threat of supernatural punishment. The term was translated to him as "consecrated, inviolable, forbidden, unclean or cursed." [/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]"abomination means worthy of or causing disgust or hatred." [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]Leviticus 11:10 says:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]"And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]You never addressed or answered my very simple question I asked you earlier, so I ask you again:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]Based upon your reasoning and description of abomination and taboo you listed above, does that mean you think we should feel disgust or hatred for people who eat shellfish, shrimp, or octopus since God lists those as 'abominations' as well?[/SIZE]

 

[Wormwood]

Aaron,

With all due respect, I don't think anything was refuted. I think you provided some very questionable scholarship that amounts to finding obscure meanings or very narrow definitions of words in every passage that addresses this particular issue of which you have a specific interest and predisposition. In any event, numerous books have been written that record all the specific Greek phrases the Bible has on this subject and how they are used in extra-biblical literature during this time period. In light of this and other scholarship, I don't think any of your arguments are convincing to say the least.

As far as the OT prohibitions:
As NT Christians, we understand that we are not under the OT covenant law. Many of the ceremonial laws were types and shadows to point to their fulfillment in Christ. This is seen with a host of ceremonial laws and observances such as Temple sacrifices, Sabbath observations, mandated feasts, avoiding leaven, ceremonial washings, avoiding contact with menstruating women, etc. The NT specifically addresses, on numerous occasions, the issue of unclean foods and how they relate to those under the New Covenant. While no Christian is under law, some of the OT laws point to the moral code established by God for his people while others point to various ceremonial laws that governed the activities and worship of the people under the old covenant. It is clear that there was a delineation between such moral and ceremonial commands in the NT. Not murdering was clearly a command early Christians felt was consistent with holiness, whereas circumcision no longer applied to the new covenant expectations.

In sum, I think you really need to examine your hermeneutics, Aaron. By this rationale, we can eliminate any moral command if we can find a word in it that is elsewhere associated with a ceremonial law or command in a specific context that no longer needs to be observed. I think the NT makes it very clear what commands from the OT should be observed in the NT in Acts 15. Sexual immorality is one of those areas that is specifically addressed for Gentiles seeking to be accepted into the New Covenant people. The NT is also very clear that homosexuality is considered part of the category of pornia that was to be rejected.

 

[Aaron Lindahl]

Aaron,

As far as the OT prohibitions:
As NT Christians, we understand that we are not under the OT covenant law. Many of the ceremonial laws were types and shadows to point to their fulfillment in Christ. This is seen with a host of ceremonial laws and observances such as Temple sacrifices, Sabbath observations, mandated feasts, avoiding leaven, ceremonial washings, avoiding contact with menstruating women, etc. The NT specifically addresses, on numerous occasions, the issue of unclean foods and how they relate to those under the New Covenant. While no Christian is under law, some of the OT laws point to the moral code established by God for his people while others point to various ceremonial laws that governed the activities and worship of the people under this covenant.

Hi Wormwood, that's very true as in regards that we are not under Levitical purity laws as Christians, but we'll just have to respectfully agree to disagree on which side is practicing questionable scholarship regarding this issue.

As one example, unfortunately for those who claim that [SIZE=11pt]‘arsenokoites’ [/SIZE]refers to homosexuality in general, there already is a Greek combination for sex with a male that Paul would have used instead, which is “andro·koitEs” 'having intercourse with a man'.

Instead, he created an entirely new word.

There is no example of the word arsenokoites before Paul’s two uses of it. Thereafter it is actually used fewer than 80 times.

Around 35 A.D., the Jewish philosopher Philo (an early contemporary of Paul’s) held that the Leviticus use of arsenos koiten referred to shrine prostitution (Philo, The Special Laws, III, VII, 40-42). The context suggests that Paul may have been condemning pederasty, group sexual orgies, and/or people who are not innately gay/lesbian/bisexual but who engage in homosexual acts. Philo felt that the word condemned pederasty and incest as well.

A revealing use of it appears around 575 A.D.; Joannes Jejunator (John the Faster), the Patriarch of Constantinople, used the word in a treatise that instructed confessor priests how to ask their parishioners about sexual sin. Here it appears in the context of a paragraph dealing with incestuous relations, and if translated as ‘homosexuality,’ the sentence containing it would read “In fact, many men even commit the sin of homosexuality with their wives.” (Patrologiae cursus completus, Series Graeca, 88:1893-96) Though at the time it apparently referred to anal or oral sex or to sex forced upon a woman, it pretty clearly had nothing to do with homosexuality.

And, because arsen is singular, there was a long period leading up to the Reformation in which the term was taken to refer to masturbation (i.e., involving only one male), a translation that persists in some Greek dictionaries today.

Paul’s obvious knowledge of the Jewish scriptures makes the analysis of arsenokoites as referring to shrine prostitution compelling for an 'objective' researcher.

The force of Paul’s warnings very likely were instrumental in helping eliminate temple prostitution. This left behind a word of uncertain meaning that Paul had sternly disapproved of … and audiences were left with filling in the blank. Child molestation, anal/oral intercourse with one’s wife, and masturbation were three topics that certainly, at different times, became associated with the word; the latest simply is (male) homosexuality.

That said, does that mean you disagree with 7angel's description of 'abomination' and 'taboo'?

 

[jerseygirl]

loving someone is great and should be encouraged but it seems to me by reading the above posts that you are either ignorant of what the bible says about judging or are blatantly disregarding what scripture says. we are told according to scripture to judge all things with the exception of judging people, we are told to judge actions, attitude, beliefs, and ect.

I'm guessing (big surprise) that this was meant for me. To be clear, I am neither ignorant of what the bible says nor do I blatantly disregard scripture. For example, I stated that it is justifiable for Christians to judge the sins of others and to speak to them about it in my FIRST post on this thread. Attributing false statements to someone on a public forum isn't exactly Christ-like. Please show me where I said that no one should judge the actions of another. The only comment I made about not judging was in reference to Aaron calling Jesus his Lord and Savior… I have no authority to judge Aaron's heart!

ME:
The Apostle Paul said in Galatians 6:1, “Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness, considering yourself lest you also be tempted.” James 5:19-20 says,
“Brethren, if anyone among you wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins.”
That being said, it is biblical to care about the sins of our brothers and sisters in the Lord.


@KingJ I never said that homosexuality wasn't sinful. I stated that it was. In addition, I never told anyone "not to judge"
"Those type of Christians are worse then those in the sin." I don't believe that is biblical, but how you feel personally. Are "those types of Christians" the ones who follow Paul's direction to attempt to "restore" in the spirit of "GENTLENESS"? I take the bible seriously and when Jesus Himself tells me to Love my neighbor as myself and Paul teaches me what Love is. It is PATIENT, KIND, Love does not get ANGRY, etc. I haven't and will not try to belittle or insult others as has been done to me.

@Aaron, Although I will no doubt be attacked for this as well, I just want to say that I do think you deserve to be treated in a respectful, loving manner. I said that the bible calls homosexuality a sin and as such, I cannot at the same time say that the bible is inerrant and wrong. I do not have authority to judge your heart and I can not know for certain whether you love our Lord Jesus or not, although it sounds like you do love Him to me... I can however, urge you to consider what the bible does say about homosexuality (you are already aware) and it's relationship to any unforgivable sin. I will pray for you to have wisdom and discernment in your life. It's obviously very difficult to talk about this subject when neither side is open to reconsideration. I've found that the most persuasive arguments are made in Love, with respect, intelligence and the Truth (Word of God), even with such a hot topic as this one. It's sad to me, as a Christian woman, to have been attacked as I have been because I suggested you should be treated with respect and in Love based on the fact that you are still a human being made in the image of God. Even though I can not say that I agree with your stance on this issue, based on my interpretation of the bible, I do pray that you repent of your sins just as I have repented for mine. I think, in my case, I have more compassion toward what you're going through because I know how greatly I myself have sinned against God. I forgive much because I have been forgiven much! I love because I have been loved, even though I never deserved it. God chose me as His daughter and it is a beautiful gift. I am completely undeserving of that gift. Others here can think that I am either weak, ignorant, intentionally misquoting scripture to support sin or even believe that I am somehow in league with satan. My relationship with God is not in jeopardy based on the thoughts of others… it's not man I fear, It's God. My best advice is to live in a way pleasing to God rather than for yourself, the opinions of men, the lusts of the flesh, sex, money… none of that will matter when we have to face God and give an account of what we sowed. Eternity in Heaven with God, or an eternity without Him… that's what should matter right now and our choices should reflect that. If that means celibacy, and denying the flesh.. it is still worth it to spend eternity with our Lord. We each will suffer and sacrifice, each just in our own ways. I know that God is capable of anything, and I will have hope that you will find the truth in your walk.

 

[Aaron Lindahl]

loving someone is great and should be encouraged but it seems to me by reading the above posts that you are either ignorant of what the bible says about judging or are blatantly disregarding what scripture says. we are told according to scripture to judge all things with the exception of judging people, we are told to judge actions, attitude, beliefs, and ect.

I'm guessing (big surprise) that this was meant for me. To be clear, I am neither ignorant of what the bible says nor do I blatantly disregard scripture. For example, I stated that it is justifiable for Christians to judge the sins of others and to speak to them about it in my FIRST post on this thread. Attributing false statements to someone on a public forum isn't exactly Christ-like. Please show me where I said that no one should judge the actions of another. The only comment I made about not judging was in reference to Aaron calling Jesus his Lord and Savior… I have no authority to judge Aaron's heart!

ME:
The Apostle Paul said in Galatians 6:1, “Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness, considering yourself lest you also be tempted.” James 5:19-20 says,
“Brethren, if anyone among you wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins.”
That being said, it is biblical to care about the sins of our brothers and sisters in the Lord.


@KingJ I never said that homosexuality wasn't sinful. I stated that it was. In addition, I never told anyone "not to judge"
"Those type of Christians are worse then those in the sin." I don't believe that is biblical, but how you feel personally. Are "those types of Christians" the ones who follow Paul's direction to attempt to "restore" in the spirit of "GENTLENESS"? I take the bible seriously and when Jesus Himself tells me to Love my neighbor as myself and Paul teaches me what Love is. It is PATIENT, KIND, Love does not get ANGRY, etc. I haven't and will not try to belittle or insult others as has been done to me.

@Aaron, Although I will no doubt be attacked for this as well, I just want to say that I do think you deserve to be treated in a respectful, loving manner. I said that the bible calls homosexuality a sin and as such, I cannot at the same time say that the bible is inerrant and wrong. I do not have authority to judge your heart and I can not know for certain whether you love our Lord Jesus or not, although it sounds like you do love Him to me... I can however, urge you to consider what the bible does say about homosexuality (you are already aware) and it's relationship to any unforgivable sin. I will pray for you to have wisdom and discernment in your life. It's obviously very difficult to talk about this subject when neither side is open to reconsideration. I've found that the most persuasive arguments are made in Love, with respect, intelligence and the Truth (Word of God), even with such a hot topic as this one. It's sad to me, as a Christian woman, to have been attacked as I have been because I suggested you should be treated with respect and in Love based on the fact that you are still a human being made in the image of God. Even though I can not say that I agree with your stance on this issue, based on my interpretation of the bible, I do pray that you repent of your sins just as I have repented for mine. I think, in my case, I have more compassion toward what you're going through because I know how greatly I myself have sinned against God. I forgive much because I have been forgiven much! I love because I have been loved, even though I never deserved it. God chose me as His daughter and it is a beautiful gift. I am completely undeserving of that gift. Others here can think that I am either weak, ignorant, intentionally misquoting scripture to support sin or even believe that I am somehow in league with satan. My relationship with God is not in jeopardy based on the thoughts of others… it's not man I fear, It's God. My best advice is to live in a way pleasing to God rather than for yourself, the opinions of men, the lusts of the flesh, sex, money… none of that will matter when we have to face God and give an account of what we sowed. Eternity in Heaven with God, or an eternity without Him… that's what should matter right now and our choices should reflect that. If that means celibacy, and denying the flesh.. it is still worth it to spend eternity with our Lord. We each will suffer and sacrifice, each just in our own ways. I know that God is capable of anything, and I will have hope that you will find the truth in your walk.

Thank you so very much jerseygirl! I assure you I do accept Christ Jesus as my savior and love him very much. He is with me at every moment of my life now. Although we will have to agree to disagree on the topic of homosexuality, I deeply appreciate your kindness, politeness, and love!

 

[heretoeternity]

God created man and woman, male and female to reproduce their own species and fill the earth...He commanded against perverted sex of man with man, or man with animals. He destroyed Sodom and inhabitants because of the filthy perverted sex act of anal intercourse, and the name sodomy has been attached to anal intercourse every since. The people who practice this filthy perverted sex act are not "gay" as this is a word they hijacked from the english language, which means happy..they are far from happy, they are psychologically ill , as their path leads to their destruction and destruction of the human race. The disease factor from anal intercourse if very real. They can expect a very hgh incidence of HIV/Aids which originated from homosexual activity and is still 95 percent homosexual disease, also Hep c, anal and bowel cancers, colitis, crohn's disease, irritable bowel syndrome and many others. Condoms will not protect them. The submissive male can expect to wear adult diapers early in life, and for the rest of his life, due to the associated loss of bowel control..The ingestion of feces by the other male will also result in a host of diseases such as hepititas of all varieties, and and many other associated diseases...still sound romantic boys..well bon appetite!

 

[Aaron Lindahl]

Fortunately the beauty of the joining of two souls in monogamous union and love is what all the denominations that agree with what I share with you focus on. I'm really not aware of any true Christian denomination or churches who want to know or broadcast all the many possibilities of sexual congress that a man and woman can explore within the privacy of their lives, let alone of 'any' couple's private sex lives. All men are aware that most heterosexual men engage in 'sodomy' with women if they are willing, so the hypocrisy here on the subject, besides the vulgarity, is breathtaking in its scope.

 

[jerseygirl]

I am asking this question without any desire for fighting or causing more arguing. I ask it because I am truly interested in what the bible says only and not what our emotions tell us. I have read through the NT and the Jesus I know from the scriptures was compassionate and didn't turn anyone away when they came to him to be healed, including the canaanite woman (even dogs eat the crumbs.) He told her that her faith saved her daughter… There are so many examples of Jesus healing, saving and forgiving the sins of the least in the land.

I canot argue hebrew words being translated improperly because I am not a scholar of the biblical languages.

My question comes from a modern day perspective on church doctrine. It comes from just a woman wanting to understand why the sins of one are considered different or worse than the sins of others. I say this because Jesus made it clear during his sermon on the mount, that we are all guilty of sin. One other example comes to mind when the Pharisees brought the adulterous woman to Jesus and wanted Jesus to pronounce judgement upon her. He said to the group, let he who is without sin cast the first stone. None did, obviously. In that situation, the law was set in stone for the time and the woman should have received punishment.. yet, Jesus stopped the punishment and forgave her, letting her go...


Can someone please provide NT scripture that clearly states that homosexual sin is different from any other sin? I cannot disagree with scripture and I'm aware that my bible says that a man & man relationship is sinful. As I'm aware of scripture from the NT, sin other than grieving the Holy Spirit will be forgiven. Now, I think we've had enough scripture from Leviticus to last a while and we've seen that both homosexual relations and heterosexual sin were both punishable by death. In the case of King David, He knew he was committing a sin against God when he took bathsheba and had Uriah killed. He had full knowledge that he was sinning, yet he went through with it even unto having her husband killed to protect his secret. He showed true remorse only when Nathan the prophet confronted him. Yet, we know that David was known as a man after God's own heart. This is an example only provided to show that men of God sinned knowingly and willingly before committing that sin. The remorse of David came after he was confronted.

Please do not call me any more names, as I am not asking to cause any problems. If anyone is willing to help me to understand the situation better without being disrespectful toward me, I would appreciate it very much. As Ive stated before, I am not ignorant of the NT. I have read it many times… I'm asking for sincere biblical answers as to why Jesus would choose not to forgive this type of sin.

The answer, I believe, will be related to unrepentant mindset. Do you believe in assurance of salvation?


Please only reply if you are willing to speak in Love on a serious issue., thank you in advance!

 

[Born_Again]

Aaron, you yourself have mentioned "this has been discussed". That being said, to everyone in here you say, "We'll have to agree to disagree". If that is in fact your stance, then let it go. You are poking and prodding the other members in here who have spoken their stance as have you... No one is going to change the other one's mind. This much is clear. When ever a post is made in contradiction to your FEELING on the matter you politely tell them thank you then bash their opinion and then make an abomination out of scripture.

Regardless of what you say, you are, in fact, pushing an agenda, quite arrogantly at that. You continually cut and paste the same things over and over again. Even when the thread goes dead, you wait for someone to post and then you lay into it again with the same defense that is nothing ground breaking. This in turns creates turmoil. I will clue you in on something you are either not aware of simply do not care... What is going on, in these threads, does not bring glory to God nor does it remotely represent Christ on Earth.

What men and women of God are we that we will overlook Christ's message and continue to entertain this?

So, now, Aaron, you can politely thank me for my comment, tell me disagree and then push more cut and paste till you feel you have accomplished something.

God Bless.

BA out!!!

 

[Aaron Lindahl]

Aaron, you yourself have mentioned "this has been discussed". That being said, to everyone in here you say, "We'll have to agree to disagree". If that is in fact your stance, then let it go. You are poking and prodding the other members in here who have spoken their stance as have you... No one is going to change the other one's mind. This much is clear. When ever a post is made in contradiction to your FEELING on the matter you politely tell them thank you then bash their opinion and then make an abomination out of scripture.

Regardless of what you say, you are, in fact, pushing an agenda, quite arrogantly at that. You continually cut and paste the same things over and over again. Even when the thread goes dead, you wait for someone to post and then you lay into it again with the same defense that is nothing ground breaking. This in turns creates turmoil. I will clue you in on something you are either not aware of simply do not care... What is going on, in these threads, does not bring glory to God nor does it remotely represent Christ on Earth.

What men and women of God are we that we will overlook Christ's message and continue to entertain this?

So, now, Aaron, you can politely thank me for my comment, tell me disagree and then push more cut and paste till you feel you have accomplished something.

God Bless.

BA out!!!

Hi born_again, thank you for your blessing and I wish God's blessing upon you as well. I 'do' 'let it go', until someone comes on my thread and addresses me, whereupon I will respond to them. That said, as to 'poking & prodding', it is not me venturing onto other people's threads to poke and prod my views upon them when I can see from the nature of their thread, that we will never agree, and yet some are drawn to continually do that to me. I'm totally fine with someone disagreeing with me but apparently it seems that certain others are so insecure with their beliefs that they are not okay with me disagreeing with them. If you don't like my form of Christian faith and words, then I suggest you stick to threads that are more to your liking if what I have to say upsets you. We at least can all agree that we love Jesus.

 

[Born_Again]

Do you feel this all gives glory to God? I am happy that you love Jesus, as you should, but does this bring glory to His name? Does this show His love?

 

[Aaron Lindahl]

Hi Born_Again, yes it does, in my opinion at least. For Jesus believes in Truth and Love. That said, are you somehow unaware that there are so many denominations within the Christian faith precisely because there are different interpretations of Scripture, and have been so from the earliest of times?

 

[Wormwood]

Aaron,

I would encourage you to do some more reading on that term and how it was understood. The following lexicon offers plenty of reading material that review ancient texts that tell quite a different story. Its likely that Paul's word was created based on the OT law. If he had something specific in mind, undoubtably he would have explained it since he was making up the word! It seems all your arguments are from silence and go against pretty much every accepted scholarly work on the issue.

[SIZE=medium]Paul’s strictures against same-sex activity cannot be satisfactorily explained on the basis of alleged temple prostitution (on its rarity, but w. some evidence concerning women used for sacred prostitution at Corinth s. LWoodbury, TAPA 108, ’78, 290f, esp. note 18 [lit.]), or limited to contract w. boys for homoerotic service (s. Wright, VigChr 38, ’84, 125–53). For condemnation of the practice in the Euphrates region s. the ref. to Bardesanes above.—RBurton, The Book of the Thousand Nights and a Night, 1934, vol. 6, 3748–82, lit. reff. and anthropological data relating to a variety of Mediterranean cultures; DBailey, Homosexuality and the Western Christian Tradition, ’55; KDover, Greek Homosexuality ’78; RScroggs, The NT and Homosexuality ’83; JBoswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality ’80; JBremmer, Greek Pederasty, in JBremmer, ed. From Sappho to de Sade2 ’91, 1–14; ECantarella, Bisexuality in the Ancient World ’92.—Pauly-W. 8, 1333f; 1459–68. DELG s.v. ἄρσην. M-M.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]William Arndt, Frederick W. Danker, and Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 135.[/SIZE]

I have about a dozen Greek lexicons and EVERY ONE renders this word as "homosexual." I can certainly quote them and their references if you like.

I am not sure what you are asking about 7angels statement of "taboo."

 

[Born_Again]

Hi Born_Again, yes it does, in my opinion at least. For Jesus believes in Truth and Love. That said, are you somehow unaware that there are so many denominations within the Christian faith precisely because there are different interpretations of Scripture, and have been so from the earliest of times?

Really??? I had no idea... (detect sarcasm) and in your own words "in my opinion at least". And the rest is just that...

Aaron, when you first joined this site I was compelled to show compassion in your direction. But as time has grown and as have your posts... I feel less and less inclined to do so. I mean, seriously, can you not see it? When you say, "Thank you for your post, but....." You might as well say, "That's great! Don't care!!" The only ones you agree with and respect are the comments that are very vague...

 

[Aaron Lindahl]

Aaron,

I would encourage you to do some more reading on that term and how it was understood. The following lexicon offers plenty of reading material that review ancient texts that tell quite a different story. Its likely that Paul's word was created based on the OT law. If he had something specific in mind, undoubtably he would have explained it since he was making up the word! It seems all your arguments are from silence and go against pretty much every accepted scholarly work on the issue.



I have about a dozen Greek lexicons and EVERY ONE renders this word as "homosexual." I can certainly quote them and their references if you like.

I am not sure what you are asking about 7angels statement of "taboo."

Hi Wormwood, I think my question was pretty straightforward, so if you don't understand it, I don't know how further elucidation would make any difference. That said, I wish you a great night!

Really??? I had no idea... (detect sarcasm) and in your own words "in my opinion at least". And the rest is just that...

Aaron, when you first joined this site I was compelled to show compassion in your direction. But as time has grown and as have your posts... I feel less and less inclined to do so. I mean, seriously, can you not see it? When you say, "Thank you for your post, but....." You might as well say, "That's great! Don't care!!" The only ones you agree with and respect are the comments that are very vague...

Hi Born_Again, according to Jesus' teachings, compassion is not something to put on and take off, like an article of clothing, but should be an eternal quality.

 

[Born_Again]

Hi Wormwood, I think my question was pretty straightforward, so if you don't understand it, I don't know how further elucidation would make any difference. That said, I wish you a great night!

Hi Born_Again, according to Jesus' teachings, compassion is not something to put on and take off, like an article of clothing, but should be an eternal quality to those that follow His teachings.

I said I was less compelled, not that I didn't. I will have to pray..
Wormwood provided more material for you to review, and you did what?? What you always do, blew it off because it did not fit your preconceived notion of what scripture says to justify a certain life style. You have been shown more than enough evidence in the scriptures to PROVE you are wrong.. This is almost as bad as Johnlove. For your sake, you had better hope you are right..... I walk very close with Christ and hear the Holy Spirit. My life events are proof of this. And you will never convince me that the propaganda you spit is anything other than lies from enemy. I will pray for your soul... You should most likely do the same and hope you hear the right voice this time, not the silver tongue of the enemy....

 

[Aaron Lindahl]

I said I was less compelled, not that I didn't. I will have to pray..
Wormwood provided more material for you to review, and you did what?? What you always do, blew it off because it did not fit your preconceived notion of what scripture says to justify a certain life style. You have been shown more than enough evidence in the scriptures to PROVE you are wrong.. This is almost as bad as Johnlove. For your sake, you had better hope you are right..... I walk very close with Christ and hear the Holy Spirit. My life events are proof of this. And you will never convince me that the propaganda you spit is anything other than lies from enemy. I will pray for your soul... You should most likely do the same and hope you hear the right voice this time, not the silver tongue of the enemy....

Hi Born_Again, I've provided reams of minute detail in previous posts that refute what Wormwood has shared, that Wormwood, although he said at the time, he didn't have time to address because I had given so many examples, has had time since December 22nd or so to address, and yet has not. That said, I wish Christ's blessings upon you, even though you obviously don't like me as evidenced by your words .

 

[Wormwood]

Aaron,

I said I didn't have time to review huge chunks of copy and pasted material. I am willing to discuss in detail any Greek word or particular point you want. But your method of discussion on this issue has been more of a filibuster approach with a ton of snippits of material, dozens of quotes and generic claims. When I examined quotes they were horribly out of context. When I challenged claims that the church accepted homosexuality from year 0-300 you danced around it with no material to prove your claims. I like to take things one point at a time...and not try to throw 100 things out at once to overwhelm people with information they cant process. The points I have looked into from you were non contextual and had no historical support.

 

[Born_Again]

Hi Born_Again, I've provided reams of minute detail in previous posts that refute what Wormwood has shared, that Wormwood, although he said at the time, he didn't have time to address because I had given so many examples, has had time since December 22nd or so to address, and yet has not. That said, I wish Christ's blessings upon you, even though you obviously don't like me as evidenced by your words .

Really? I call your doctrine false and you say, "You obviously don't like me". Did I say "Aaron, I don't like you"? No. Don't ever do that again. I said I do not except the lies you preach. Big difference. Feeling a little defensive? I attack your doctrine. Nothing more. If you need to clear things up with yourself, than that is on you. Like I said, I will pray for you. As for Wormwood, when you post a small novel worth of cut and paste, it is easy to get lost in it all. Maybe that's your plan... who knows. But he is answering you. You need to pay closer attention.

Aaron,

I said I didn't have time to review huge chunks of copy and pasted material. I am willing to discuss in detail any Greek word or particular point you want. But your method of discussion on this issue has been more of a filibuster approach with a ton of snippits of material, dozens of quotes and generic claims. When I examined quotes they were horribly out of context. When I challenged claims that the church accepted homosexuality from year 0-300 you danced around it with no material to prove your claims. I like to take things one point at a time...and not try to throw 100 things out at once to overwhelm people with information they cant process. The points I have looked into from you were non contextual and had no historical support.

See, exactly what I was saying... And yes, it is a filibuster approach.

 

[Aaron Lindahl]

Aaron,

I said I didn't have time to review huge chunks of copy and pasted material. I am willing to discuss in detail any Greek word or particular point you want. But your method of discussion on this issue has been more of a filibuster approach where a ton of material with dozens of quotes (generally out of context from what I looked up) and references. I like to take things one point at a time...and not try to throw 100 things out at once to overwhelm people with information they cant process.

Hi Wormwood, it's been almost a month now since my original posts that go into great detail on the original Greek words, so until you find time to address each and every example I've provided for you that refutes what you have said on this subject, maybe it would be better for us to simply agree that Christ is our saviour.