Jesus on Marriage...

[mal]

The word “abomination” is found, of course, in the King James translation of Leviticus 18:22, a translation which reads, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.” Yet this is a thoroughly misleading rendition of the word toevah, which, while we may not know exactly what it means, definitely does not mean “abomination.” An “abomination” conjures up images of things which should not exist on the face of the earth: three-legged babies, oceans choked with oil, or Cheez-Whiz. And indeed, this is how many religious people regard gays and lesbians. It’s Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. Homosexuality is unnatural, a perversion, a disease, an abomination.

Yet a close reading of the term toevah suggests an entirely different meaning: something permitted to one group, and forbidden to another. Though there is (probably) no etymological relationship, toevah means taboo.

The term toevah (and its plural, toevot) occurs 103 times in the Hebrew Bible, and almost always has the connotation of a non-Israelite cultic practice. In the Torah, the primary toevah is avodah zara, foreign forms of worship, and most other toevot flow from it. The Israelites are instructed not to commit toevah because other nations do so. Deuteronomy 18:9-12 makes this quite clear:

When you come into the land that YHVH your God gives you, do not learn to do the toevot of those nations. Do not find among you one who passes his son or daughter through the fire; or a magician; or a fortune teller, charmer, or witch… because all who do these things are toevah to YHVH and because of these toevot YHVH your God is driving them out before you.

Does the Bible Really Call Homosexuality an ?Abomination?? | Sexuality/Gender | Religion Dispatches

Take out Abomination and read what I Highlighted...

Seriously, not amount of New Liguistic Translation is going to Undo what that says...

And it's Repeated throughout the Bible, Old and New.

"Sin" was also not Translated Correctly?...

Really?...

And none of you have Dealt with how the Beastiality Passage in Moral Law :Translates:...

Convenient that.



peace...

peace...

 

[bodecea]

You talk a lot, but you don't say much. Here is the key phrase...."the rest of the Scriptures".
That tells me Peter was calling Paul's writing "Scripture". "the rest" implies other Scripture, as in "along wth". Peter would have worded it differently if he intended to state Paul's writing was not Scripture.

The rest of you analysis is partial truth and partial fantasy. That's called "crap".

Wow......you really hear only what you wish to hear and nothing else, huh? So what's the weather like on Planet Buford?

I hear the Word. The Word says Paul's letters were "Scripture".

The Word? What the heck is that? Is it in the bible? Or just in your head?

 

[BDBoop]

Wasn't Peter BEFORE Paul? Didn't Paul persecute early Christians and then "suddenly" have this lightning conversion?

Pardon me for laughing at it all.

^Defiant to God's Word...

You have Bible in your Home Bodey?...

What's Leviticus 18 and 20 say about Homosexuality in that Book?



peace...

(sigh)....I go through all that and what do you do? Turn around and quote Leviticus again. And people wonder why I drink.

Your tag needs to change, now that the liberals have been educated.

 

[BDBoop]

Whatever makes you comfortable, dear.

I really don't rely on millenium old letters to make me comfortable.

Makes Bodey comfortable

Negged.

 

[NLT]

I really don't rely on millenium old letters to make me comfortable.

Makes Bodey comfortable

Negged.

 

[BluePhantom]

You talk a lot, but you don't say much. Here is the key phrase...."the rest of the Scriptures".
That tells me Peter was calling Paul's writing "Scripture". "the rest" implies other Scripture, as in "along wth". Peter would have worded it differently if he intended to state Paul's writing was not Scripture.

The rest of you analysis is partial truth and partial fantasy. That's called "crap".

Wow......you really hear only what you wish to hear and nothing else, huh? So what's the weather like on Planet Buford?

I hear the Word. The Word says Paul's letters were "Scripture".

uh huh. Buford....there is no question that "you understand according to the wisdom given to you."

 

[Buford]

Wow......you really hear only what you wish to hear and nothing else, huh? So what's the weather like on Planet Buford?

I hear the Word. The Word says Paul's letters were "Scripture".

The Word? What the heck is that? Is it in the bible? Or just in your head?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71NT42QtD64]Reporter Asks Pelosi: Was THE WORD [Jesus] Made Flesh at Conception or at Nativity? - YouTube[/ame]

 

[BDBoop]

Makes Bodey comfortable

Negged.

So. Too funny. Nice job on the return volley through Mal.


I'm still laughing. That is literally - classic.

Mal, you asked "why." Tell NLT if you two combine your IQ, you should be able to come up with why I negged YOU.

 

[BluePhantom]

So what Peter is saying here is essentially: "be real careful about Paul's teachings. It's easy to get the wrong idea and really fuck things up."

Rather prophetic, don't you think?

To be quite honest with you (and this will seriously piss some people off), if Jesus suddenly appeared here and now in front of us, I really don't think He would embrace Christianity as it is practiced and thought of today. I think He would say "wow...did you guys miss the point or what?" and walk off shaking His head.

 

[Sky Dancer]

So what Peter is saying here is essentially: "be real careful about Paul's teachings. It's easy to get the wrong idea and really fuck things up."

Rather prophetic, don't you think?

To be quite honest with you (and this will seriously piss some people off), if Jesus suddenly appeared here and now in front of us, I really don't think He would embrace Christianity as it is practiced and thought of today. I think He would say "wow...did you guys miss the point or what?" and walk off shaking His head.

I completely agree. Jesus is one thing. His followers are another.

 

[mal]

So what Peter is saying here is essentially: "be real careful about Paul's teachings. It's easy to get the wrong idea and really fuck things up."

Rather prophetic, don't you think?

To be quite honest with you (and this will seriously piss some people off), if Jesus suddenly appeared here and now in front of us, I really don't think He would embrace Christianity as it is practiced and thought of today. I think He would say "wow...did you guys miss the point or what?" and walk off shaking His head.

Especially the ones who say he would Embrace Sin.



peace...

 

[Buford]

Wow......you really hear only what you wish to hear and nothing else, huh? So what's the weather like on Planet Buford?

I hear the Word. The Word says Paul's letters were "Scripture".

uh huh. Buford....there is no question that "you understand according to the wisdom given to you."

The wisdom is the Word of God. The word of God that Peter wrote says Paul's letters are Scripture. Is the NT the Word of God or just part of it?

 

[Ravi]

How do you figure? All it really suggests is that Leviticus was already being misunderstood and misinterpreted by 50 AD. I am not quite following you.

This thread is "Jesus on Marriage". A 30 A.D. man.

So he would have been communicating with people whose 30 A.D. understandings/misunderstandings were likely closer to Paul's than to the scribes of Leviticus.

Oh ok. I gotcha. Well I guess I would say a few things about that. First, yes it's probable that if Paul was misreading Leviticus by that point that it was probably common practice to do so, but from there we have to take a position on the divinity of Jesus. If he was just a man then there's an argument to be made that his opinions would be influenced like any other man and as such he would probably hold a similar view. But if we consider him divine then it must be assumed that Jesus had an understanding of God's intent that transcended men and as such he may completely reject what by then had become a common interpretation even if (and especially if) it was in fact a misinterpretation.

And Jesus did stuff like that all the time. He hung out with people that would have been in violation of Jewish law. He touched lepers which would have been...I mean...no fucking way. So Jesus broke Jewish law quite frequently

I took it that she was referring to Paul as being a 30 AD man, not Jesus.

And if so, then she's just making the case that Paul should have used a word that the Corinthians understood. But he didn't. His letters were to instruct them on how to behave so he should have used words they understood.

 

[Ravi]

I hear the Word. The Word says Paul's letters were "Scripture".

uh huh. Buford....there is no question that "you understand according to the wisdom given to you."

The wisdom is the Word of God. The word of God that Peter wrote says Paul's letters are Scripture. Is the NT the Word of God or just part of it?

I have to say my take on "the wisdom" is similar to yours. Not meant as an insult, but meant as saying God gave Paul wisdom....or the word of God.

But that still doesn't mean Paul didn't rely on a faulty translation. After all, he was human. Even Popes aren't infallible, though the Church claims otherwise.

 

[bodecea]

I hear the Word. The Word says Paul's letters were "Scripture".

uh huh. Buford....there is no question that "you understand according to the wisdom given to you."

The wisdom is the Word of God. The word of God that Peter wrote says Paul's letters are Scripture. Is the NT the Word of God or just part of it?

And who tells us that what Peter wrote was the Word of God?

 

[mal]

uh huh. Buford....there is no question that "you understand according to the wisdom given to you."

The wisdom is the Word of God. The word of God that Peter wrote says Paul's letters are Scripture. Is the NT the Word of God or just part of it?

And who tells us that what Peter wrote was the Word of God?

Miserable Twat is Miserable.



peace...

 

[mal]

The word “abomination” is found, of course, in the King James translation of Leviticus 18:22, a translation which reads, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.” Yet this is a thoroughly misleading rendition of the word toevah, which, while we may not know exactly what it means, definitely does not mean “abomination.” An “abomination” conjures up images of things which should not exist on the face of the earth: three-legged babies, oceans choked with oil, or Cheez-Whiz. And indeed, this is how many religious people regard gays and lesbians. It’s Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. Homosexuality is unnatural, a perversion, a disease, an abomination.

Yet a close reading of the term toevah suggests an entirely different meaning: something permitted to one group, and forbidden to another. Though there is (probably) no etymological relationship, toevah means taboo.

The term toevah (and its plural, toevot) occurs 103 times in the Hebrew Bible, and almost always has the connotation of a non-Israelite cultic practice. In the Torah, the primary toevah is avodah zara, foreign forms of worship, and most other toevot flow from it. The Israelites are instructed not to commit toevah because other nations do so. Deuteronomy 18:9-12 makes this quite clear:

When you come into the land that YHVH your God gives you, do not learn to do the toevot of those nations. Do not find among you one who passes his son or daughter through the fire; or a magician; or a fortune teller, charmer, or witch… because all who do these things are toevah to YHVH and because of these toevot YHVH your God is driving them out before you.

Does the Bible Really Call Homosexuality an ?Abomination?? | Sexuality/Gender | Religion Dispatches

Take out Abomination and read what I Highlighted...

Seriously, not amount of New Liguistic Translation is going to Undo what that says...

And it's Repeated throughout the Bible, Old and New.

"Sin" was also not Translated Correctly?...

Really?...

And none of you have Dealt with how the Beastiality Passage in Moral Law :Translates:...

Convenient that.



peace...

peace...

 

[mal]

Again Ravi... Which Passage?... And what Translation?

I Corinthians 6:9-11

Leviticus 18:22

Leviticus 20:13

Deuteronomy 23:17

Genesis 19:4-8

Romans 1:24-27

I Timothy 1:10

Jude 7.

^Just some of what was Written.


Oh yeah, and that Pesky Marriage thing that only Man and Wife can Reflect:

Genesis 1:27, 28; 2:24; 4:1, 17, 25;

Matthew 19:5

You know... Because this Thread is about how Homosexual Marriage is Absurd in Relation to the Christian Faith based on the Old and New Testaments.



peace...

So many Consistent References...

But it was a Bad Translation each and every time...

God really LOVES Homosexuality.



peace...

 

[BluePhantom]

uh huh. Buford....there is no question that "you understand according to the wisdom given to you."

The wisdom is the Word of God. The word of God that Peter wrote says Paul's letters are Scripture. Is the NT the Word of God or just part of it?

I have to say my take on "the wisdom" is similar to yours. Not meant as an insult, but meant as saying God gave Paul wisdom....or the word of God.

But that still doesn't mean Paul relied on a faulty translation. After all, he was human. Even Popes aren't infallible, though the Church claims otherwise.

Well the whole point of all this is that the Bible today and the "Bible" then (there technically was no Bible then but I refer to the books the Bible is made of) are different things. We haven't even discussed books that are falsely attributed. Revelations for example is widely attributed to John the Apostle, but very few scholars actually think it was John the Apostle who wrote it. The style of writing is totally different, the language is problematic compared to other things John wrote, etc.

It was very common in those days for some person to write a political book (and we forget that at the time these books were all politics) and attribute it to someone famous in order to give it more credibility. There is tons of evidence that many (or at least some) of the books in the Bible were not written by the person traditionally associated with it. Revelation is just one example and its inclusion was controversial from day one. Martin Luther issued several strong opinions that having Revelation in the Bible was flat out absurd because it lacked credible authorship and was contrary to the message of God that was universal in other books.

And again I need to reemphasize that there were no printing presses in those days so the books were hand copied over and over. When they were copied, changes were made because in an earlier version a political point was being made, and then the guy copying it realized that it was now a moot point so he would change it to reflect a more current political point. And that happens over and over and over. So as we don't have the originals of any of these texts (all we have are copies) there is simply no way to know what they said to begin with.

So when we look at the Bible and ask "is it the word of God?" Well....it becomes an individual decision. For me, I believe that when the original authors wrote them they were divinely inspired and as such it was "the word of God". However, the moment someone copied it and began to change it as we know they did, it stopped being "the word of God" and started to become "the word of man". After 2,000 - 3,000 years depending on the book....that's a lot of changes and a lot of "man" corrupting the word of "God". In other words if it was "the word of God" it's not anymore.

Now that doesn't mean we should just toss the Bible over our shoulder, but what it does mean is that we should look for very general themes, large overriding concepts, etc. We should be focusing on the general point of a story or lesson and stop focusing so much on these little tiny details, because as Newby said "the devil is in the details" and when applied to this situation, that creates an entirely new meaning. The devil (if you believe in such a concept) is absolutely thrilled that the word of God has been changed and he would be ecstatic to know that people are focusing on issues like homosexuality instead of God's love.

 

[BluePhantom]

So many Consistent References...

But it was a Bad Translation each and every time...

God really LOVES Homosexuality.



peace...

Yeah you are starting to get it now. It's about fucking time.