Why?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
S

Seedz

Guest
#21
You think those fews words that we have assumed a particular modern context to is enough to be sure about the true meaning? Is it enough to lead people to dedicate whole movements and websites to it?

http://www.godhatesfags.com/

If one of the major points of Christianity is to be fishermen of men, do you really think that is going to help and convince those that we think are in sin?

Please!!!
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
689
113
#22
There was no sexual orientation in those days (2000 years ago or more). What we think of as straight and gay today, only makes sense in today's culture. These modern ideas of sexual orientation were developed by western thinkers in the 19th and 20th centuries.
Right. That's why Paul said sodomites wouldn't enter the kingdom.
 
S

Seedz

Guest
#25
Yeah. What do you think sodomite means?
You probably also think that "The Kingdom" is heaven right?

This excerpt might convey what I'trying to communicate in a clearer way:

"Technically, Merriam-Webster defines sodomy as “anal or oral copulation with a member of the same or opposite sex.” But for many, like Jeb Bush, sodomy is basically a synonym for gay sex.

The term comes from Ecclesiastical Latin peccatum Sodomiticum or “sin of Sodom,” referring to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis. And the “sin of Sodom” must have been pretty serious, considering that, in Genesis 19:24-25, “the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the Lord out of heaven; and he overthrew those cities, and all the Plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground.” It seems clear that God wasn’t happy with them. For some, the sin of Sodom was clearly homosexuality.

In 1986, for example, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI) wrote, “There can be no doubt of the moral judgment made there [in Genesis 19:1-11] against homosexual relations.” But the Bible never explicitly identifies homosexuality as the sin that did Sodom and Gomorrah in. In fact, if we look at the text critically, it’s difficult to conclude that the story is a condemnation of consensual, monogamous, same-sex relationships. In Genesis 19:1-11, two angels came to Sodom and were staying with a man named Lot. The men of Sodom “both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house,” and called to Lot asking to “know” the two angels — basically, the men of Sodom were trying to gang-rape two angels. Lot then went outside and begged them to “not act so wickedly”; instead, Lot tells the men that he has two virgin daughters and that the men could “do to them as you please.” The men then try to break into the house, before the angels “struck with blindness the men who were at the door of the house, both small and great, so that they were unable to find the door.”

It’s important to note that, unlike Pope Benedict XVI, many scholars disagree that it was the homosexual actions that led to the cities’ downfall. Some, such as Jennifer Wright Knust, claim that the intended homosexual gang rape was only one of Sodom’s many sins — such as pride, hatred, injustice, oppression, and inhospitality. In March 2003, Andrew Sullivan explained: Most modern scholars believe the original sin of Sodom was a refusal to be accommodating to travelers. Others believe it might have been the sin of rape. The Book of Ezekiel explains that Sodom and “her daughters had pride, overabundance of bread, abundance, and leisure, but they did not extend their hand to the poor. They were raised up and committed abominations before me.” Even in the New Testament, Sodom is condemned in terms of its connection with “uncleanness” and “adultery.” When the Book of Leviticus condemns men who lie with men, no reference is made to Sodom itself. Furthermore, even if you believe that God condemned the cities because of homosexual activity, it’s important to understand that their actions are not the way we understand homosexuality today. In contrast with today’s world, sex in biblical times was usually for procreation or to show dominance over another person. Far from looking for a consensual and meaningful relationship that happens to be between two people of the same sex, homosexual acts in parts of the ancient world, such as the intended gang rape in the biblical story of Sodom, were often intended as a way to humiliate and dominate other men."

The problem is that everyone takes what they think they know, from the people that thought what they knew they were teaching, and they just ignorantly regurgitate it as a definitive fact. This is very dangerous and will not lead anyone to truth."

It's ok to educate yourself.
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
689
113
#26
You probably also think that "The Kingdom" is heaven right?

This excerpt might convey what I'trying to communicate in a clearer way:

"Technically, Merriam-Webster defines sodomy as “anal or oral copulation with a member of the same or opposite sex.” But for many, like Jeb Bush, sodomy is basically a synonym for gay sex.

The term comes from Ecclesiastical Latin peccatum Sodomiticum or “sin of Sodom,” referring to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis. And the “sin of Sodom” must have been pretty serious, considering that, in Genesis 19:24-25, “the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the Lord out of heaven; and he overthrew those cities, and all the Plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground.” It seems clear that God wasn’t happy with them. For some, the sin of Sodom was clearly homosexuality.

In 1986, for example, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI) wrote, “There can be no doubt of the moral judgment made there [in Genesis 19:1-11] against homosexual relations.” But the Bible never explicitly identifies homosexuality as the sin that did Sodom and Gomorrah in. In fact, if we look at the text critically, it’s difficult to conclude that the story is a condemnation of consensual, monogamous, same-sex relationships. In Genesis 19:1-11, two angels came to Sodom and were staying with a man named Lot. The men of Sodom “both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house,” and called to Lot asking to “know” the two angels — basically, the men of Sodom were trying to gang-rape two angels. Lot then went outside and begged them to “not act so wickedly”; instead, Lot tells the men that he has two virgin daughters and that the men could “do to them as you please.” The men then try to break into the house, before the angels “struck with blindness the men who were at the door of the house, both small and great, so that they were unable to find the door.”

It’s important to note that, unlike Pope Benedict XVI, many scholars disagree that it was the homosexual actions that led to the cities’ downfall. Some, such as Jennifer Wright Knust, claim that the intended homosexual gang rape was only one of Sodom’s many sins — such as pride, hatred, injustice, oppression, and inhospitality. In March 2003, Andrew Sullivan explained: Most modern scholars believe the original sin of Sodom was a refusal to be accommodating to travelers. Others believe it might have been the sin of rape. The Book of Ezekiel explains that Sodom and “her daughters had pride, overabundance of bread, abundance, and leisure, but they did not extend their hand to the poor. They were raised up and committed abominations before me.” Even in the New Testament, Sodom is condemned in terms of its connection with “uncleanness” and “adultery.” When the Book of Leviticus condemns men who lie with men, no reference is made to Sodom itself. Furthermore, even if you believe that God condemned the cities because of homosexual activity, it’s important to understand that their actions are not the way we understand homosexuality today. In contrast with today’s world, sex in biblical times was usually for procreation or to show dominance over another person. Far from looking for a consensual and meaningful relationship that happens to be between two people of the same sex, homosexual acts in parts of the ancient world, such as the intended gang rape in the biblical story of Sodom, were often intended as a way to humiliate and dominate other men."

The problem is that everyone takes what they think they know, from the people that thought what they knew they were teaching, and they just ignorantly regurgitate it as a definitive fact. This is very dangerous and will not lead anyone to truth."

It's ok to educate yourself.
What are you trying to say? Paul was very clear that neither μαλακός (catamites) nor ἀρσενοκοίτης (homosexuals) would inherit the kingdom of GOD.

Do you agree with Paul or not?
 
S

Seedz

Guest
#27
What are you trying to say? Paul was very clear that neither μαλακός (catamites) nor ἀρσενοκοίτης (homosexuals) would inherit the kingdom of GOD.

Do you agree with Paul or not?
Haha... Oh boy...

ἀρσενοκοίτης does not mean homosexual, it is more of a modern transliteration. not to mention that it only appears twice in the whole bible, and that one version you showed appears only once, in 1 Corinthians 6:9.



You probably also think that all of Paul's letters were written by Paul right?

There was no term for homosexual. Try reading those passages in the KJV and tell me if you think it says "homosexuals".

These are all modern adaptations and assumptions that became true through interpretations becoming tradition. In turn, Christians assume traditions as truth.

I am not saying that Being Gay is right or wrong according to Paul.

All I am saying is that we like to think we know what the bible says when we are deeply ignorant on many levels when it comes to recognizing contemporary contexts, language etymology and basic concepts. We then blindly condemn people or their actions on very little basis for objectivity.

Christianity is not a simple concept.
 

Tommy379

Notorious Member
Jan 12, 2016
7,589
1,151
113
#28
That's a terrible analogy, you're assuming that the lamp comes on when plugging the male connector into the female outlet. The fallacy is that the connection does not guarantee the light to come on; it is the electricity that makes the filament burn, and shine.
More likely to work than two men trying to make babies come out their butt.
 
S

Seedz

Guest
#29
More likely to work than two men trying to make babies come out their butt.
But Gay people don't have sex with the purpose of procreating. I still don't understand.
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
689
113
#31
ἀρσενοκοίτης does not mean homosexual, it is more of a modern transliteration. not to mention that it only appears twice in the whole bible, and that one version you showed appears only once, in 1 Corinthians 6:9.
Right, because you say so.

G733 ἀρσενοκοίτης arsenokoites (ar-sen-ok-oy'-tace) n.
1. a male homosexual, sodomite
[from G730 and G2845]

Comes from these two words which together basically mean male coitus. (κοίτη is probably where the word coitus comes from through Latin)

G730 ἄρῥην arrhen (ar'-rhayn) (or arsen ar'-sayn) n.
1. male (as stronger for lifting)

G2845 κοίτη koite (koy'-tay) n.
1. a couch
2. (by extension) cohabitation
3. (figuratively) marriage bed, sexual intercourse
4. (by implication) the male sperm, conception

Dictionary of Biblical Languages With Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament)
780 ἀρσενοκοίτης (arsenokoitēs), ου (ou), ὁ (ho): n.masc.; ≡ Str 733—LN 88.280 male homosexual, one who takes the active male role in homosexual intercourse (1Co 6:9), specifically interpreted as male homosexual paedophilia (NAB footnote); possibly a more generic term in first Timothy; sodomites (RSV, NRSV, NKJV), perverts (NIV, NEB, REB), practicing homosexuals (NAB), homosexual (NJB), (1Ti 1:10+), note: translations possibly use certain specific terms to infer or allow certain theologies

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament
ἀρσενοκοίτης, -ον, ὁ, (ἄρσην a male; κοίτη a bed), one who lies with a male as with a female, a sodomite: 1 Co. 6:9; 1 Tim. 1:10. (Anthol. 9, 686, 5; eccl. writ.)*

Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains,
88.280 ἀρσενοκοίτης, ου m: a male partner in homosexual intercourse—‘homosexual.’ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι … οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται … βασιλείαν θεοῦ κληρονομήσουσιν ‘don’t you know that … no adulterers or homosexuals … will receive the kingdom of God’ 1 Cor 6:9–10. It is possible that ἀρσενοκοίτης in certain contexts refers to the active male partner in homosexual intercourse in contrast with μαλακόςb, the passive male partner (88.281).
 
S

Seedz

Guest
#32
You're right. Homosexuals are intent on rebelling against God.
My point is that people are going to do what they want, whether it is "sin" or not.

It is impossible to control what you want, let alone what someone else wants.

Condemning the people and calling them names is not going to change them, it is only going to make them resent Christianity more.

Last time I checked the golden rule includes gay people, not just fellow "believers".
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
689
113
#34
My point is that people are going to do what they want, whether it is "sin" or not.
It is impossible to control what you want, let alone what someone else wants.
Condemning the people and calling them names is not going to change them, it is only going to make them resent Christianity more.
Last time I checked the golden rule includes gay people, not just fellow "believers".
If I was living in sin, I would want someone to tell me so. That's the golden rule at work.

Also, we can control our own sinful behavior via the holy spirit. Everyone will have to answer for what they do.
 
S

Seedz

Guest
#35
Right, because you say so.

G733 ἀρσενοκοίτης arsenokoites (ar-sen-ok-oy'-tace) n.
1. a male homosexual, sodomite
[from G730 and G2845]

Comes from these two words which together basically mean male coitus. (κοίτη is probably where the word coitus comes from through Latin)

G730 ἄρῥην arrhen (ar'-rhayn) (or arsen ar'-sayn) n.
1. male (as stronger for lifting)

G2845 κοίτη koite (koy'-tay) n.
1. a couch
2. (by extension) cohabitation
3. (figuratively) marriage bed, sexual intercourse
4. (by implication) the male sperm, conception

Dictionary of Biblical Languages With Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament)
780 ἀρσενοκοίτης (arsenokoitēs), ου (ou), ὁ (ho): n.masc.; ≡ Str 733—LN 88.280 male homosexual, one who takes the active male role in homosexual intercourse (1Co 6:9), specifically interpreted as male homosexual paedophilia (NAB footnote); possibly a more generic term in first Timothy; sodomites (RSV, NRSV, NKJV), perverts (NIV, NEB, REB), practicing homosexuals (NAB), homosexual (NJB), (1Ti 1:10+), note: translations possibly use certain specific terms to infer or allow certain theologies

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament
ἀρσενοκοίτης, -ον, ὁ, (ἄρσην a male; κοίτη a bed), one who lies with a male as with a female, a sodomite: 1 Co. 6:9; 1 Tim. 1:10. (Anthol. 9, 686, 5; eccl. writ.)*

Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains,
88.280 ἀρσενοκοίτης, ου m: a male partner in homosexual intercourse—‘homosexual.’ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι … οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται … βασιλείαν θεοῦ κληρονομήσουσιν ‘don’t you know that … no adulterers or homosexuals … will receive the kingdom of God’ 1 Cor 6:9–10. It is possible that ἀρσενοκοίτης in certain contexts refers to the active male partner in homosexual intercourse in contrast with μαλακόςb, the passive male partner (88.281).

Part of my statement about modern Christian bias in language is included in my statement of "interpretation validation through tradition."

Gay people, are people, you nor I nor anyone else is "Holier" than them.

I would say that a deep study of the language, history and evolution of etymology would yield results in favor of determining that a lot of what we think the Bible says became true because it was interpreted in a particular way and became the Status Quo over time.
 
S

Seedz

Guest
#36
If I was living in sin, I would want someone to tell me so. That's the golden rule at work.

Also, we can control our own sinful behavior via the holy spirit. Everyone will have to answer for what they do.
Oh so you are living a sinless life? My bad, it all makes sense now. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
 

Tommy379

Notorious Member
Jan 12, 2016
7,589
1,151
113
#37
My point is that people are going to do what they want, whether it is "sin" or not.

It is impossible to control what you want, let alone what someone else wants.

Condemning the people and calling them names is not going to change them, it is only going to make them resent Christianity more.

Last time I checked the golden rule includes gay people, not just fellow "believers".
No, your point is to normalize homosexuality among the Christians.
 
S

Seedz

Guest
#38
Actually I do. Let me guess... You're pro-homosexuality and will do whatever it takes to normalize it.
I am pro treating people kindly and not attaching any type of stigma based on vain issues.

No matter what Christians do, people are still going to be Gay. Just like porn is still going to be on the internet, and just like men and women will continue to cheat on their spouses. Christianity has not and will never change this.

However, if you keep poking the beehive with a stick, you will make matters worse i.e. making them more angry and resentful.

Have you any idea how dangerous it is to kick people while they are down? That is what you are doing, except that instead of being fair and consistent, you probably forget about the countless other sins that "Paul" mentions.

Are you telling me that singling out a particular "sin" that people commit will eradicate it?

After all, didn't Jesus come to heal the sick, not the healthy?
 
S

Seedz

Guest
#39
No, your point is to normalize homosexuality among the Christians.
Normalize? What is normal? Are all Christians normal? Sin is sin at the end of the day ain't it?

If same sex attraction is a "sin", so is over eating, or telling a "white" lie, etc.

All I'm saying is that no Christian is consistent when it comes to condemning sin.
 

Tommy379

Notorious Member
Jan 12, 2016
7,589
1,151
113
#40
I am pro treating people kindly and not attaching any type of stigma based on vain issues.

No matter what Christians do, people are still going to be Gay. Just like porn is still going to be on the internet, and just like men and women will continue to cheat on their spouses. Christianity has not and will never change this.

However, if you keep poking the beehive with a stick, you will make matters worse i.e. making them more angry and resentful.

Have you any idea how dangerous it is to kick people while they are down? That is what you are doing, except that instead of being fair and consistent, you probably forget about the countless other sins that "Paul" mentions.

Are you telling me that singling out a particular "sin" that people commit will eradicate it?

After all, didn't Jesus come to heal the sick, not the healthy?
So you are saying that belief in the bible as the word of God, is wrong, because an extremely small portion of the population may take offense, by the shame they feel for knowingly engaging in an activity that God forbids?