RE: Church stance on gay marriage "for good of society", says Bishop Michael Nazi
April 25, 2012 at 4:50 pm
(This post was last modified: April 25, 2012 at 4:53 pm by Tea Earl Grey Hot.)
(April 25, 2012 at 4:43 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote:Well, revisionism is only bad if it's revising something that was already correct. If the revisionism is actually correct, then what's wrong with that?Quote:20th century translations render it "homosexual."Well, I'm not really a fan of biblical revisionism. I think that things are rather clear. Translations of not, Judaism also views homosexuality as a sin.
And well, there is no certain "word" that is used in the verse I've posted. It describes the act in full, as you see. It doesn't call them this or that, it just describes the act, and deems it worthy of death. A mortal sin.
That is all.
It sounds like you're thinking of the Romans chap 1-2 message. When you get down to the original text and deal with the grammar, people like Countryman will argue that the text really says that God *made* the gentiles like homosexual acts as punishment for not worshiping him. It's a subtle but important difference.
Again, these people could be wrong, but I'm just letting you aware that the view that the Bible condemns homosexuality is on shaky ground.
EDIT: on the Leviticus 18:22 passage. If I remember correctly that might have connection to cultic worship acts in OT days, not just two guy's loving each other in San Fran like us moderns think of homosexuality.
My ignore list
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
