91 wrote:
pandabear wrote:
It doesn't say that this was specifically Lesbianism. It could have been bestiality, which is expressly forbidden.
I gave you more than two verses. If you only wanted to interpret two, it probably should have been these.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual 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 shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.I think your last post probably did not bestow a complete picture.
If you examine the Noahide laws, which derive from the Torah:
http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/noahide.htmlthe forms of illicit intercourse include:
Quote:
ILLICIT INTERCOURSE
against (a man) having union with his mother
against (a man) having union with his sister
against (a man) having union with the wife of his father
against (a man) having union with another man's wife
against (a man) copulating with a beast
against a woman copulating with a beast
against (a man) lying carnally with a male
against (a man) lying carnally with his father
against (a man) lying carnally with his father's brother
against engaging in erotic conduct that may lead to a prohibited union
There isn't anything in there against Lesbianism. Nor is there anything in the Torah against Lesbianism. In your verse, "their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones" doesn't specifically identify Lesbianism as the "unnatural sexual relations." Since the Bible doesn't specifically identify Lesbianism as a crime, we must assume that Paul could only have been refering to bestiality.