Homosexuality Found not to be forbidden in The Bible

[poet]

http://unicornbooty.com/blog/2011/11...dden-in-bible/



Apostle Paul: I've got no beef with the gays!
We don’t necessarily run in cryptography circles here at UB, but even we have to admit that “internationally acclaimed cryptographer” Michael Wood’s publishing on the Apostle Paul’s teachings on homosexuality piqued our attention.

Apparently Paul’s paradoxes laid out in the book of Romans in the Bible have plagued theologians and historians for thousands of years. A classic argument against cultural permissiveness toward homosexuality stems from Romans, in which Paul appears to say homosexuals need not apply for an all-inclusive pass to Heaven – because they will be denied.

But Wood’s discovery has turned the entire scripture upside down, and it appears that the Bible has had a welcome mat out for the gays all along.

“Michael Wood’s discovery is remarkable because it solves a colossal paradox regarding Paul’s Greek that has baffled scholars for 2,000 years,” says Dr. William Berg, who taught Greek and Roman Classics at Stanford University.

Paul’s only unequivocal reference to homosexuality is found within Romans 1:18-3:20, a Biblical passage that has mystified scholars for two millennia. “The interpretation of Romans1:18-3:20 has been notoriously difficult for almost every commentator,” Richard Longenecker, the Distinguished New Testament Scholar at Wheaton College, writes in his book Studies in Paul. “Earlier interpreters such as Origen, Jerome, Augustine, and Erasmus wrestled with this issue and it continues to plague commentators today.”

The passage is riddled with paradoxes. It says that “only the doers of the law will be vindicated by God,” and “by the works of the law no one will be vindicated.” The passage also mysteriously separates idolatrous, homosexual orgy fests from transgressions worthy of spiritual death. “In finding the definitive solution to Paul’s legal paradox, I inadvertently discovered why he separated the idolatrous, same-sex orgies from the things he considered worthy of spiritual death,” said Wood.

Wood’s solution is definitive, elegant, and verifiable. Romans 2:13-26 teaches: Only the doers of the “Justices of the Torah” will be vindicated before God. Romans 3:20 says, “By the ‘Jobs of the Torah’ no one will be vindicated.” Not only is there no contradiction, but the two teachings have always been simple restatements of each other; the “Great Paradox” is no paradox at all!

This legal solution fully explains Paul’s treatment of homosexuality. Paul’s passage excludes idolatrous, homosexual orgy fests from things which he considered worthy of spiritual death, things such as “bad-mouthing others,” “deceiving,” and “inflicting pain.” Those engaged in idolatrous, homosexual orgies weren’t violating the Justices. (They weren’t violating the precept “Love your neighbor as yourself.”) Therefore, Paul was obliged to separate this from his list of things which did violate the Justices.

The finding is significant because it documents that Paul purposefully separated the same-sex acts; it was a conscious, deliberate decision consistent with the rest of the passage. In fact, it was demanded by the rest of the passage. The resolution of the paradox empirically proves that Paul’s view on homosexuality was very different from what Christians had thought for 2,000 years.

Although Romans 1 contains the only unequivocal reference to homosexuality, anti-homosexual statements have been introduced into other passages in newer versions of the English Bible. As for these modern changes to the Biblical text: “Michael Wood has gone the extra mile in being faithful to Paul’s Greek,” said Dr. Berg. “He shows, time and again, that the words traditionally mistranslated as ‘homosexual,’ ‘effeminate,’ ‘impure,’ and so forth, are really targeting selfish, unloving, unjust activity and have nothing to do with sexual orientation. He shows that once again Paul was condemning those who violate the Justices of the Torah, and nothing more.”

Wordy, we know. But how about them apples? Real talk, we’re full grown, non-robotic, autonomous adults capable of making our own decisions regarding morality here at UB, thankyouverymuch – but it’s always nice to hear that those who promote the idea of an all-loving God that hates some of the things He created have been reading their Bibles the wrong way all this time.

[Damocles]

I wonder how Fred Phelps feels now?

[poet]

I wonder how Fred Phelps feels now?

I really don't care. Hypocrites always get their just karma. Sooner or later.

[cancel2 2022]

I wonder how Fred Phelps feels now?

I'm sure that he will immediately repent, move to Houston and become a poet.

[poet]

I'm sure that he will immediately repent, move to Houston and become a poet.

Non sequitur. Keep your day job, Tom. People are born poets...they don't become them.

[DamnYankee]

1 Timothy 1:8-10

English Standard Version (ESV)

8Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers,[a] liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound[b] doctrine,...

Oops.

[Rationalist]

1 Timothy 1:8-10

English Standard Version (ESV)

8Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers,[a] liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound[b] doctrine,...

Oops.

Did you read the article? I think Michael Wood would argue that this is a mistranslation, too. Which it may be...but even if he is correct, I cannot believe that God would find an orgy of any nature morally acceptable, homosexual or otherwise. Numerous verses throughout the NT condemn sexual immorality and encourage monogamy.

[DamnYankee]

Did you read the article? I think Michael Wood would argue that this is a mistranslation, too. Which it may be...but even if he is correct, I cannot believe that God would find an orgy of any nature morally acceptable, homosexual or otherwise. Numerous verses throughout the NT condemn sexual immorality and encourage monogamy.

I did read the article as posted. It's really amazing the spin and denial some will go to justify poor choices that they make. I've read a similar article attempting to justify oral sex. I'm sure there's one written for prostitution, theft, perhaps even child molestation.

The story of Sodom and Gomorrah is pretty straight-forward. They were orgy-fests and God sent his wrath upon them.

[poet]

1 Timothy 1:8-10

English Standard Version (ESV)

8Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers,[a] liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound[b] doctrine,...

Oops.

"...Although Romans 1 contains the only unequivocal reference to homosexuality, anti-homosexual statements have been introduced into other passages in newer versions of the English Bible. As for these modern changes to the Biblical text: “Michael Wood has gone the extra mile in being faithful to Paul’s Greek,” said Dr. Berg. “He shows, time and again, that the words traditionally mistranslated as ‘homosexual,’ ‘effeminate,’ ‘impure,’ and so forth, are really targeting selfish, unloving, unjust activity and have nothing to do with sexual orientation. He shows that once again Paul was condemning those who violate the Justices of the Torah, and nothing more.”



Double Oops.

[DamnYankee]

I don't see any spin by this guy on 1 Timothy. And earlier you claimed that Paul was a queer.

Oops.

[Alias]

The wolves in sheep's clothing have been looking for loopholes in the scriptures and liars to interpret them since they were written. Nothing new here. Just another queer who is trying to twist scripture to validate his perverted sick lifestyle.

[poet]

I did read the article as posted. It's really amazing the spin and denial some will go to justify poor choices that they make. I've read a similar article attempting to justify oral sex. I'm sure there's one written for prostitution, theft, perhaps even child molestation.

The story of Sodom and Gomorrah is pretty straight-forward. They were orgy-fests and God sent his wrath upon them.

Spin and denial. Practices that have been going on since the Dead Sea Scrolls were found. The Council of Nicea. More spin and denial with politics and power struggles added.
The corruption within the papacy of the Roman Catholic Church. Spin and denial. The Crusades. More spin and denial with widespread murder.
Key word: "Story", in Sodom and Gomorrah. Did you understand the sin and the error? In all likelihood, it may not have been homosexuality, at all. In any event, there is doubt, as to a definitive conclusion.


http://www.religioustolerance.org/hombibg193.htm
Opinion among most liberal and mainline Christian and Jewish theologians has now reverted to the original Christian belief that Genesis 19 refers to a lack of charity and to ill treatment of strangers. Consider:

In ancient Jewish literature, such as the Ethics of the Fathers and the Talmud, there are many references to Sodom. The phrase "middat Sdom" was used. It may be translated as "the way the people of Sodom thought". It meant a lack of charity and hospitality towards others; ignoring the needs of the poor, etc. In the Middle East, a person's survival could depend upon the charity of strangers. To help strangers was a solemn religious duty of paramount importance. See Leviticus 19:33-34 and Matthew 25:35, 38 and 43.

Isaiah 1; The entire first chapter is an utter condemnation of Judah. They are repeatedly compared with Sodom and Gomorrah in their evildoing and depravity. Throughout the chapter, the Prophet lists many sins of the people: rebelling against God, lacking in knowledge, deserting the Lord, idolatry, engaging in meaningless religious ritual, being unjust and oppressive to others, being insensitive to the needs of widows and orphans, committing murder, accepting bribes, etc. There is no reference to homosexuality or to any other sexual activities at all.

Jeremiah 23:14:"...among the prophets of Jerusalem I have seen something horrible: They commit adultery and live a lie. They strengthen the hands of evildoers, so that no one turns from his wickedness. They are all like Sodom to me; the people of Jerusalem are like Gomorrah." Jeremiah compares the actions of the prophets with the adultery, lying and evil of the people of Sodom. Homosexual activity is not mentioned.

Ezekeiel 16:49-50:"Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen." God states clearly that he destroyed Sodom's sins because of their pride, their excess of food while the poor and needy suffered; sexual activity is not even mentioned.

Matthew 10:14-15: Jesus implied that the sin of the people of Sodom was to be inhospitable to strangers.

Luke 10:7-16: This is parallel passage to the verses from Matthew.

2 Peter 6-8: Peter mentions that God destroyed the adults and children of Sodom because the former were ungodly, unprincipled and lawless.

Jude, Verse 7: Jude disagreed with Jesus and Ezekeiel; he wrote that Sodom's sins were sexual in nature. Various biblical translations of this passage in Jude describe the sin as: fornication, going after strange flesh, sexual immorality, perverted sensuality, homosexuality, lust of every kind, immoral acts and unnatural lust. It looks as if the translators were unclear of the meaning of the verse in its original Greek, and simply selected their favorite sin to attack. The original Greek is transliterated as: "sarkos heteras." This can be translated as "other flesh". Ironically, our English word "heterosexual" comes from "heteras."

A likely interpretation is that the author of Jude 4 criticized the men of Sodom for wanting to engage in sexual activities with angels. Angels are described in the Bible as a species of created beings who were different from humans. The sin of the people of Sodom would be that of bestiality. Another possibility is that the "other flesh" refers to cannibalism, which was a practice associated with early Canaanite culture.

[Alias]

This is the publication the article was posted in. Whadya think? Gay propaganda? Naw.

Posted by Kevin Farrell on Nov 29, 2011 in "Separation of Church & Prostate"

http://unicornbooty.com/news-2/polit...-and-prostate/

[poet]

I don't see any spin by this guy on 1 Timothy. And earlier you claimed that Paul was a queer.

Oops.

The word frequently used and interpreted as meaning "homosexual" has been found to be in error, and out of line with the Greek intention and meaning. Period. There is a theory, widely accepted that, Paul was a repressed homosexual, which would explain his zeal and misogynistic views. And why do you use the pejorative of the word "gay"? Is that your homophobia or your contempt for gays shining through? Was your daddy a "queer"? That would account for your over-compensation.

[poet]

Hypocrites are going to be hypocrites. The self -righteous don't believe they are sinners. I guess it'll be sorted out on Judgment Day.