Subject:
|
Saving the Xtian Church From Itself
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:41:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
199 times
|
| |
|
|
Fears of split follow gay bishop vote
http://cnn.usnews.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&expire=-1&urlID=7135785&fb=Y&partnerID=2004
The historic vote has sent shock waves through the church and the wider Anglican
community, with the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams saying Wednesday
that the church faced “difficult days” while members deal with the decision.
Steps To Recovery From Bible Abuse
http://www.truluck.com/index.htm
http://www.truluck.com/html/six_bible_passages.html
Author’s Note: “Know” simply means know! No hint at homosexuality exists in the
original Hebrew. No later Bible references to Sodom ever mention homosexuality
as the sin of Sodom. Many modern translations add words to the text to create
the lie that the people of Sodom were homosexual.
“SODOMY” is not a biblical word. Laws against sodomy not only violate the
Constitutional guarantee of separation of church and state; they also use an
incorrect and wrongly translated term for the laws. A “Sodomite” in the Bible is
simply a person who lives in Sodom, which included Lot and his family. The term
“sodomite” in the King James Version of Deuteronomy 23:17 and I Kings 14:24 is
an incorrect translation of the Hebrew word for “temple prostitute.” (See the
recent book by Mark D. Jordan: The Invention of Sodomy in Christian Theology.
University of Chicago Press, 1997.)
The average person assumes that the Bible clearly condemns male to male sexual
intercourse as “sodomy” and that the city of Sodom was destroyed because of
homosexuality, which is seen as the worst of all sins in the Bible. These
assumptions are based on no evidence at all in the Bible.
No Jewish scholars before the first Christian century taught that the sin of
Sodom was sexual. None of the biblical references to Sodom mention sexual sins
but view Sodom as an example of injustice, lack of hospitality to strangers,
idolatry and as a symbol for desolation and destruction. See Deuteronomy
29:22-28; 32:32; Ezekiel 16:49-50; Jeremiah 49:18; 50:41; Isaiah 13:19-22 and
Matthew 10:14-15. In Jude 7, the term “strange flesh” is Greek hetero sarkos
(“different flesh” and from which the word “heterosexual” comes) and refers to
foreign idols or people. It is not homo (“the same”) flesh or people. Sarkos is
never used in the New Testament as a word for “sex.”
The word “know” in Genesis 19:5 is Hebrew YADA. It is used 943 times in the Old
Testament to “know” God, good and evil, the truth, the law, people, places,
things, etc. It is a very flexible word, as are many Hebrew words. In Genesis
19:5, the word was used to express the request of the people of Sodom that Lot
should bring out the strangers in his house so that they could know who they
were. Sodom was a tiny fortress in the barren wasteland south of the Dead Sea.
The only strangers that the people of Sodom ever saw were enemy tribes who
wanted to destroy and take over their valuable fortress and the trade routes
that it protected. Lot himself was an alien in their midst.
Lot’s strange response to the request was to offer his young daughters to the
men, an offer that seems to me to be far more reprehensible than any problem of
sexual orientation. If the men were homosexual, why did Lot offer to give them
his daughters? These hostile and violent people were heterosexual, and
homosexual orientation had nothing to do with the incident.
Special note on YADA: The Hebrew word YADA “to know” is never used in the Old
Testament to mean “to have sex with”. People have been conditioned to think that
“to know someone biblically” means to have sex. The use of YADA in Genesis 4:1-2
to say that Adam knew Eve and she conceived and gave birth to Cain is followed
by saying that later she gave birth to his brother Abel without any reference to
YADA. Why? Simply because YADA does not mean to have sex. It is a general term
that describes many kinds of intimate relationships. I have studied all of the
uses of YADA in the Old Testament, and my personal conclusion is that it never
means what we mean by sexual intercourse. Just substitute a common slang
expression for sexual intercourse instead of the word “know” in Genesis 4:1 and
you will see how inappropriate the idea is. The Old Testament Hebrew writers
never thought or wrote in those terms. The Bible never gives any details about
sexual acts. The only clear Hebrew term for sexual acts is “to lie with,” which
is left without any further explanation.
SAME-SEX RELATIONSHIPS IN THE BIBLE:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bmar.htm
Bottom line 1: read and study the damned thing -- maybe it doesn’t quite say
what you may think it says!
Bottom line 2: don’t you think that the great and mystical being that created
the universe and all of the beautiful, strange, and wonderous things in it has
better things to do than to worry about the precise uses to which you put your
“private parts”? Yeah, what you are doing is the only thing of importance...
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Saving the Xtian Church From Itself
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti wrote: snip (...) Preach it, Hoppy! When the majority of the Bible, and the teachings of Jesus, our supposed role model and saviour, focuses on Social Justice, and we get hung up on a few misinterpreted (...) (21 years ago, 6-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | Re: Saving the Xtian Church From Itself
|
| One more thing: (URL) See that guy up there? He has WAY too much time on his hands. He's an incipient little J. Edgar or wannabe agent for TIA or maybe just a failed blackmailer. The main thing is: he is not a good person and he is definitely overly (...) (21 years ago, 6-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | Re: Saving the Xtian Church From Itself
|
| (...) Interesting, but perhaps you can explain some inconsistencies with that explanation. Not all Christian religions use the King James version of the bible - certainly the Catholics don't (and their views on homosexuality differ little from most (...) (21 years ago, 6-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
