Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

I don't care what you call me. I don't expect respect

I am also bisexual.

Awe Jeeez Lunacy,, did I ask?? is it any of my business! NO!

You got no class lunacy,,

im outta here

You win

- Con

Originally posted by drevill
what??? seriously??????????

Romans 1:26-27

for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.

marriage? rubbish! this is talking about men and women in general society.

what next? A talmud defense posting??????

The Epsistle to the Romans is written by Paul to a small but growing congregation of Rome. He is speeking merely to Christians telling them not to do the things common in Roman society, for instance having concubines beside marriage of both sexes. Christians should marry their sex partners, and leaving them would be adultary. The verse speeks of people within their congregation who left their spouses to have sex elsewhere. It surely is like the prophet said: They are blind and deaf and won't listen to sense.

i think there is a lot of chuch dogma placed over the scripture to its own agenda for the time.. and i think thats why the church is so divided.. we r supossed to figure out whats what.. as we can plainly see as new understanding comes we view the scripture differently, while jesus never said anything about homosexuality.. remeber he was perfect.. the church wanted to keep its control over the people and wrote a lot to suit themselves. and remember they were only human and therefore less than perfect.. misstranlations, and misunderstanding is rife umong us.. so we must be carefull not to use dogma as a basis for hate, instead of following what jesus said.. and lets face it the church has done it before.. many times.. i truly think that jesus said that he wasnt here to abolish the laws or the prophets because we r supposed to find our way thru all of this by useing our minds, god gave us one so lets use it.. hiding behind dogma is not the way to go...

Originally posted by Conspiriology
while you are busy gettng your team to hit the alerts and various other snitches and tattle tale sophistry, than be my guest.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Minus the thesaurus for a second, although we share that interest it seems, can you paraphrase it a little more "intuitively". Are you saying I got you in trouble some how?

Okay I was expecting some of the original posters to come back and help tackle this. Many posters did such a great job earlier, I was hoping they would continue (some are, but most left it seems)! But... it seems the sith outnumber the jedi at the moment

So in an effort to bring balance back to the thread, I will respond to earlier posts (that I was pending on), in which I will attempt to explore the idea of 'mistranslations' and 'historical accuracy' and my personal favorite 'things Jesus Christ actually said and didn't say'. In the meantime, I am getting my second dinner and doing housework.

I look forward to seeing how you guys develop it for and against while I am away



[edit on 033131p://17u59 by Lucid Lunacy]

The science of etymology and the semantics of words both show us what the original meaning of the quotes used to battle homophilia and sustaining hate towards gays which results in the banning and cursing of gays in the churches and congregations is. They all refer to ceremonial misconduct, sex done in an act of religious expression. Since the homophobic assertion is baseless, based on flawed translations and interpretations the Christian hate towards homosexuality in general the gay agenda of the church contains all the basics of a conspiracy.

For the bible doesn't speek about homosexuals at all, it speeks of hethen practises connected to Ba'al worship. Ba'al temples had templeservants who only worked as prostitutes. Believers came into the temple, hired a manwhore and had sex with him at the altar of the Ba'als to honor them. The bible speeks of forbidden acts having to do with unsound religious doctrine, not homosexuals.

Originally posted by drevill
King james did not change the text
1611 king James Bible
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

The Torah is translated from Hebrew, and the word translated Abomination is a word lacking in most European languages, since it has to do with ceremonial sins, not moral sins. Old Greek has this word in it's vocabulary, and the translation in the Septuagint is correct. It translates the passage using a word that means ritually/ceremonially unclean. The same word is used when dealing with laws of food hygiene, the laws concerning the work of the Levites etc. While laws dealing with moral acts, like incest, lying and killing use another word for Abominable meaning morally unsound/unclean.

1560 Geneva Bible

22 Thou shalt not lie with the male as one lieth with a woman; for it is abomination.

Why do you use an English translation of the Geneva Bible? It's in German. Still in German it doesn't translate this passage correctly, since German lacks the same word as English.

1532 Miles Coverdale Bible

22 Thou shalt not lye with mankynde as with womankynde, for yt is abhominacion.

1384 John Wycliffes Bible
22 Thou schalt not be medlid with a man bi letcherie of womman, for it is abhomynacioun.

Your way of research excludes the original MSs of the text. What you do could be compared to explaining Shakespear's impact on the English language by using only German translations. Noone would respect such a survey. If you want to explain the Torah, use Hebrew and feel free to parallell read with the Greek LXX, it's a relatively reliable source being older than most Hebrew MSs. Your effort is worthless, you only quote books based on the Latin Vulgate, with erronomous translations. Below are quotes from the Hebrew and Greek:

VaYikra 20:13 Ve'ish asher yishkav et-zachar mishkevei ishah to'evah asu shneihem mot yumatu dmeihem bam

ואיש אשר ישכב את־זכר משכבי אשה תועבה עשו שניהם מות יומתו
דמיהם בם׃

Leviticus 20:13 και ος αν κοιμηθη μετα αρσενος κοιτην γυναικος βδελυγμα εποιησαν αμφοτεροι θανατουσθωσαν ενοχοι εισιν

Now translate from that using a dictionary. You will learn that the words used discribe ceremonial sins having to do with symbolic sacrifice of a male body through having sex at the altar of Ba'al.

Why is sex between men discribed as unsound religious doctrine in Leviticus if it has to do with homosexuality? Because sex between men were part of Ba'al doctrine, what the Torah was composed to battle.

So why is sex between men described as unsound religious practise or forbidden religious doctrine then? How can homosexuality be a religious doctrine? Because it's not homosexuality which is described, but sex between men in Ba'alism, the religion that soaked the ME in the time the Torah was written. The Torah is the Law that forbids Ba'alism, therefore it also forbids the Ba'al doctrine demanding symbolic male sacrifice at the altar of Ba'al, done by the men haing sex with male prostitutes before the priests and congregation.

A more corret translation of Leviticus 20:13 would include a correct translation of "to'ebah" which means ritually, ceremonial or doctrinally unclean:

"If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have committed themselves to unclean doctrine.

or

"If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them are doctrinally unclean."

or

"If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have joined an abominable religion."

It is impossible to translate to'ebah with one word in English and most European languages, since we lack a word for to'ebah. Still most translations in European languages use a single word, abomination, instead of containing words discribing how this abominable act has to do with ceremonial or doctrinal sins.

[edit on 17/5/2008 by Neo Christian Mystic]