Mistranslations of the Bible re: Homosexuality

Page 1 of 3 [ 46 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

richardbenson
Xfractor Card #351
Xfractor Card #351

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,553
Location: Leave only a footprint behind

25 Nov 2008, 12:41 pm

Hurricane_Delta wrote:
richardbenson wrote:
Hurricane_Delta wrote:
I got two things to say to you. One: You seem to have some very bizarre ideas for someone with AS. I doubt you have it. Two: You seem to be very self-righteous. Like Ted Haggard.
son what is your problem? bizzare ideas? right. its infact the right idea! an alien made you boy so stop crying. and you doubt i have aspergers? oh please, not another one of you. its always fashionable to question someones elses diagnosis when your feeling are hurt, wahwah :roll:

Not you. The guy the guy who pissed me off. The guy who you wanted a summary of.
I'm talking about the fruitcake, not you. Sorry about the misunderstanding. Should have made it more clear who yanked my chain.
oh my bad. sorry for getting my verbal gangser on with ya :wink: :)


_________________
Winds of clarity. a universal understanding come and go, I've seen though the Darkness to understand the bounty of Light


Greyhound
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,191
Location: Birmingham, UK

25 Nov 2008, 12:57 pm

Hurricane_Delta wrote:
You seem to have some very bizarre ideas for someone with AS. I doubt you have it.

This is unreasonable. Asperger syndrome is first and foremost a disorder of social functioning. You can't tell from a post on a forum whether or not someone has AS.

Hurricane_Delta wrote:
Two: You seem to be very self-righteous. Like Ted Haggard.

From what I read of the post, assuming we are talking about the same post, all I could see were facts, whether correct or incorrect. How is that being self-righteous?


_________________
I don't have Aspergers, I'm just socially inept

Dodgy circuitry! Diagnosed: Tourette syndrome. Suspected: auditory processing disorder, synaesthesia. Also: social and organisation problems. Heteroromantic asexual (though still exploring)


flutter
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 575

25 Nov 2008, 4:33 pm

So, is your friends thesis coming any time soon?

I really do want to read it.



AlexandertheSolitary
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 945
Location: Melbourne

26 Nov 2008, 11:05 am

Hurricane_Delta wrote:
richardbenson wrote:
Hurricane_Delta wrote:
I got two things to say to you. One: You seem to have some very bizarre ideas for someone with AS. I doubt you have it. Two: You seem to be very self-righteous. Like Ted Haggard.
son what is your problem? bizzare ideas? right. its infact the right idea! an alien made you boy so stop crying. and you doubt i have aspergers? oh please, not another one of you. its always fashionable to question someones elses diagnosis when your feeling are hurt, wahwah :roll:


Not you. The guy the guy who pissed me off. The guy who you wanted a summary of.

I'm talking about the fruitcake, not you. Sorry about the misunderstanding. Should have made it more clear who yanked my chain.


Asperger's Syndrome does not prevent one from having bizarre ideas, thank goodness; I have them all the time. It's if or when I start to put some of them into practice that the troubles will begin...


_________________
You are like children playing in the market-place saying, "We piped for you and you would not dance, we wailed a dirge for you and you would not weep."


AlexandertheSolitary
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 945
Location: Melbourne

27 Nov 2008, 1:41 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
ToadOfSteel wrote:
If you want some interesting arguments concerning the nature of God and Christianity, look at some of Sir Isaac Newton's works. He actually spent more time writing about religion and theology than the laws of physics that he's so famous for now...

I know, one of the things he is best known for as a Christian is the fact that he was anti-trinitarian. I think he started off closer to being an Arian, but got closer to the Socinianism of the time. He put down worshiping Christ as God to be idolatry, and he also recognized the Comma Johanneum as being fallacious. His attempt was ultimately one to restore what he considered the traditional Christian view. Also, interestingly enough, he argued that God was necessary to keep the planets in the sky (gravity should pull them down), and I think he was very interested in looking at the Bible for hidden messages. In any case, are there really a lot of widely available works by Isaac Newton on this matter? Like, his views are still difficult for scholars to unravel due to how much he hid them. But yeah, I did a bit of research on Newton when I was trying to figure out the trinity.


Correct. I tried to point out some of this to Ragtime in an earlier thread, but he seemed as defensive as if Isaac and not Yeshua were the Messiah, lol. As far as I can recall, and this was some time back, no one was actually trying to deny that Newton was a brilliant physicist and mathematician, though some raised his interest in alchemy (not such a black mark as it might firest appear; lots of great thinkers were interested in alchemy - e.g. Thomas Aquinas and his mentor Albertus Magnus, Friar Roger Bacon). They (alchemists) did lay the foundations of modern chemistry, and an anonymous Taoist alchemist seeking the elixir of life did invent gunpowder (how can people read such things and deny that God and the Enemy alike have intervened in human history?)

He (Newton) was interested in Apocalyptic studies. Fascinating work. This sub-genre of prophecy includes Daniel, Enoch (a pseudepigraphical work, i.e, one that did not even make it into the Apocrypha/Deuteronomical works - apparrently the Ethiopian Orthodox; it appears to be essentially an extended Midrash of Genesis 6) and most famously the Apocalypsis or Revelation of Jochanon/Ioannes/John, as well as sections of Isaiah and of the Gospels (e.g. Mark 13, Matthew 25).


_________________
You are like children playing in the market-place saying, "We piped for you and you would not dance, we wailed a dirge for you and you would not weep."


slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

27 Nov 2008, 3:22 am

flutter wrote:
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/abs/long.htm

Just as an interesting aside.


And Claire, the purpose of the thread was to possibly make some christians question homosexuality as sin.

It appears the only christian responding though already realizes that if it is a sin, it's a minor one.

So, I don't think I'm doing a very good job converting the masses. ;)


To what? Homosexuality? The love of buggery?



flutter
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 575

27 Nov 2008, 10:35 am

slowmutant wrote:
flutter wrote:
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/abs/long.htm

Just as an interesting aside.


And Claire, the purpose of the thread was to possibly make some christians question homosexuality as sin.

It appears the only christian responding though already realizes that if it is a sin, it's a minor one.

So, I don't think I'm doing a very good job converting the masses. ;)


To what? Homosexuality? The love of buggery?


Either you really don't get things, or you are deliberately obtuse. From the context of the thread, it should be obvious that I'm speaking of the stigmata of homosexuality as a sin.

I'm not trying to convert breeders.... someone needs to make the next generation of fabulous people.



slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

27 Nov 2008, 10:44 am

flutter wrote:
slowmutant wrote:
flutter wrote:
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/abs/long.htm

Just as an interesting aside.


And Claire, the purpose of the thread was to possibly make some christians question homosexuality as sin.

It appears the only christian responding though already realizes that if it is a sin, it's a minor one.

So, I don't think I'm doing a very good job converting the masses. ;)


To what? Homosexuality? The love of buggery?


Either you really don't get things, or you are deliberately obtuse. From the context of the thread, it should be obvious that I'm speaking of the stigmata of homosexuality as a sin.

I'm not trying to convert breeders.... someone needs to make the next generation of fabulous people.


Indeed! :D And the world is pretty overpopulated as it is ...



Greyhound
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,191
Location: Birmingham, UK

28 Nov 2008, 9:58 am

flutter wrote:
...breeders

You call heterosexuals 'breeders' - you're okay with heterosexuals calling homosexual peole 'fags', 'fa***ts', 'buggers', 'poofs' or 'fairies' are you?

If heterosexuals aren't allowed to use derogatory terms for homos, then I suggest homosexuals don't use derogatory terms for heteros.



(As if all heterosexuals have children anyway - I certainly don't want any. Urgh...)


_________________
I don't have Aspergers, I'm just socially inept

Dodgy circuitry! Diagnosed: Tourette syndrome. Suspected: auditory processing disorder, synaesthesia. Also: social and organisation problems. Heteroromantic asexual (though still exploring)


slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

28 Nov 2008, 10:31 am

Political correctness really isn't what it seems. It's a quagmire.



flutter
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 575

28 Nov 2008, 12:13 pm

Greyhound wrote:
flutter wrote:
...breeders

You call heterosexuals 'breeders' - you're okay with heterosexuals calling homosexual peole 'fags', 'fa***ts', 'buggers', 'poofs' or 'fairies' are you?

If heterosexuals aren't allowed to use derogatory terms for homos, then I suggest homosexuals don't use derogatory terms for heteros.



(As if all heterosexuals have children anyway - I certainly don't want any. Urgh...)


Breeder is a term of endearment for those hetero's that make children in the desperate hope of producing a truly fabulous child. ;)

1 in 10 actually succeed!

Besides, breeding isn't really a negative thing, unless you believe in the extinction of mankind?



Greyhound
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,191
Location: Birmingham, UK

28 Nov 2008, 4:44 pm

flutter wrote:
Greyhound wrote:
flutter wrote:
...breeders

You call heterosexuals 'breeders' - you're okay with heterosexuals calling homosexual peole 'fags', 'fa***ts', 'buggers', 'poofs' or 'fairies' are you?

If heterosexuals aren't allowed to use derogatory terms for homos, then I suggest homosexuals don't use derogatory terms for heteros.



(As if all heterosexuals have children anyway - I certainly don't want any. Urgh...)


Breeder is a term of endearment for those hetero's that make children in the desperate hope of producing a truly fabulous child. ;)

1 in 10 actually succeed!

Besides, breeding isn't really a negative thing, unless you believe in the extinction of mankind?

It's always been used as a derogatory term.

Wikitionary:
breeder n
2. (gay slang; derogatory) A heterosexual; i.e. one whose sexual intercourse can lead to breeding.

The word 'breeding' is usually reserved for animals.


_________________
I don't have Aspergers, I'm just socially inept

Dodgy circuitry! Diagnosed: Tourette syndrome. Suspected: auditory processing disorder, synaesthesia. Also: social and organisation problems. Heteroromantic asexual (though still exploring)


flutter
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 575

28 Nov 2008, 8:16 pm

Greyhound wrote:
flutter wrote:
Greyhound wrote:
flutter wrote:
...breeders

You call heterosexuals 'breeders' - you're okay with heterosexuals calling homosexual peole 'fags', 'fa***ts', 'buggers', 'poofs' or 'fairies' are you?

If heterosexuals aren't allowed to use derogatory terms for homos, then I suggest homosexuals don't use derogatory terms for heteros.



(As if all heterosexuals have children anyway - I certainly don't want any. Urgh...)


Breeder is a term of endearment for those hetero's that make children in the desperate hope of producing a truly fabulous child. ;)

1 in 10 actually succeed!

Besides, breeding isn't really a negative thing, unless you believe in the extinction of mankind?

It's always been used as a derogatory term.

Wikitionary:
breeder n
2. (gay slang; derogatory) A heterosexual; i.e. one whose sexual intercourse can lead to breeding.

The word 'breeding' is usually reserved for animals.


It's a matter of context, I've called Slowmutant a breeder on more then one occasion. ;)

Besides, you're detracting needlessly from the actual purpose of the thread, if you want to berate me for deragatory usage of breeder in a thread where people have already claimed that homosexuality is a choice, and stated that they are opposed to the granting of civil rights to homosexuals....you can talk to me in PM's, because I think my infraction is pretty minor in comparison. Don't dilute the importance of this message with accusatory bull$hit.



Accelerator
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 236
Location: Netherlands

30 Nov 2008, 8:07 pm

Ragtime wrote:
I've never heard the classical "homosexual" interpretation/translation challenged.


Nevertheless.. it is easy enough..

First of all.. any translation that uses the word "homosexual" is making a serious error.

The prophets used "men who lie with men" as a metaphor.. just as we still speak of "the Liberals getting in bed with the Conservatives".. to mean both parties are sharing in the same ideas.

To understand that the two political parties are having sex with each other.. is just being ridiculous.. yet there are many Christians.. and even translators.. who fall into this literalist trap.

There are three passages in Paul's letters.. a couple of passages from Moses (commands which were made obsolete by the New testament anyway).

And there are a couple of passages in Isaiah.. in which it is obvious.. he is taking about those in power.. getting in bed with each other.. and not homosexuals.

If we consider what Paul is saying..

“…fornicators, men who lie with men, kidnappers, liars, false swearers, and whatever other thing is in opposition to the healthful teaching.”

1Timothy 1.8

-

Then put it in context with..

"We must obey God as ruler rather than men.” - Acts 5:29

-

It makes it much easier to understand what Paul really means..

There are many more examples.. such as this.. in the bible that warn about “getting in bed” with the thoughts.. and teachings of men.

Those who turn these into church doctrines against homosexuality.. are acting foolishly.. by reading such metaphors literally.

Organized religion is rife with such errors.. which is why the bible demonstrates a lot of anger towards O.R.

Jesus never said anything about homosexuality.. but he did say this.. (which is what Paul is remarking on.. when he speaks of men laying with men)...

----

In reply Jesus said to them: ‘Why is it you also overstep the commandment of God because of your tradition?

Isaiah aptly prophesied about you hypocrites, as it is written, ‘This people honour me with their lips, but their hearts are far removed from me. It is in vain that they keep worshiping me, because they teach as doctrines the commands of men.

Letting go the commandment of God, you hold fast the tradition of men.

Further, he went on to say to them: ‘Adroitly you set aside the commandment of God in order to retain your tradition.. and thus you make the word of God invalid by your tradition which you handed down. And many things similar to this you do.’"

Matthew 15:3 & Mark 7:6

-

Jesus was quoting what Isaiah said about "getting in bed with the ideas of men".

-

"And God says: "For the reason that this people have come near with their mouth, and have glorified me merely with their lips, and they have remove their heart itself far away from me, and their fear towards me becomes men’s commandments that are being taught, therefore here I am, the One that will act wonderfully again with this people, in a wonderful manner and with something wonderful; and the wisdom of their wise men must perish, and the very understanding of their discreet men will conceal itself."

Woe to those who are going very deep in concealing counsel from God himself, and whose deeds have occurred in a dark place, while they say: "Who is seeing us, and who is knowing of us?"

The PERVERSITY of you men !"

Isaiah 29:13

-

Both Jesus and Isaiah.. saw men's religious teachings as a perversity.. not homosexuality.

So this is what Paul really means when he writes:

“…fornicators, men who lie with men, kidnappers, liars, false swearers, and whatever other thing is in opposition to the healthful teaching.”

1Timothy 1.8

-

He was just emphasizing what Jesus was teaching.. which was.. don't get in bed with men's teachings.. which in a nutshell is...

-

"We must obey God as ruler rather than men.”

Acts 5:29

-



Mosse
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 22 Sep 2008
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 428

30 Nov 2008, 9:27 pm

Meh. Everything is a sin... :?


_________________
Wavering and fraying,
The end of existence is near.
Will the demon inside,
End it all?


nightbender
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,065

30 Nov 2008, 10:00 pm

flutter wrote:
Greyhound wrote:
flutter wrote:
...breeders

You call heterosexuals 'breeders' - you're okay with heterosexuals calling homosexual peole 'fags', 'fa***ts', 'buggers', 'poofs' or 'fairies' are you?

If heterosexuals aren't allowed to use derogatory terms for homos, then I suggest homosexuals don't use derogatory terms for heteros.



(As if all heterosexuals have children anyway - I certainly don't want any. Urgh...)


Breeder is a term of endearment for those hetero's that make children in the desperate hope of producing a truly fabulous child. ;)

1 in 10 actually succeed!

Besides, breeding isn't really a negative thing, unless you believe in the extinction of mankind?


you mean 1 in 100