reply to post by dr_strangecraft
Leviticus 18:22 is part of the Levitical law that was abolished by Christ.
Romans 1:24 doesn't even mention homosexuality.
I think you meant to quote Romans 1: 26-27
26 - Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.
27 - In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with
other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
My answer to Roman 1:26-27 is that lust is considered a sin even for heterosexuals. The last sentence is separate form the one preceding it and we
cannot assume the indecent acts were sexual in nature. The passage does not expound upon what indecent acts/perversions were performed until you get
to verses 28-32:
28 - Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to
be done.
29 - They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They
are gossips,
30 - slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;
31 - they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.
32 - Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also
approve of those who practice them.
Again, where does it say the perversions were homosexual in nature or even sexual for that matter? If you look back at verses 18-23 you will see this
behavior was God's punishment for idolatry and turning away from God. I do not worship idols and I have not turned my back on God. In my opinion
these verses do not apply to me or my lifestyle.
And sorry, but no, I was not quoting anyone when I mentioned the words used in the old testament - I went to seminary school, I grew up in the church,
I am capable of drawing my own conclusions from the Bible.
How does an ancient word "Malchoi" that means "plush" have anything to do with me, my lifestyle and homosexuality? As for the second word
"arsenokoitai" (to quote you) "man-effers", how does that include lesbianism which, BTW, is a form of homosexuality? So you see, it's not a real
accurate translation to the modern word homosexuality. My statement holds true to me, the words Malchoi and arsenokoitai do not accurately translate,
they are simply not one-for-one. It's a loose translation at best and simply not enough to convince me that God condemns homosexuals.
The translation of text IS what's causing all the fuss for me because you are attempting to discount my lifestyle on nothing more than semantics!
[edit on 23-12-2008 by archetype_one]