Weekly Discussion Thread. 10/16/21-10/22/21.

submitted by send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Fonched 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Here is a question for the devout Christians on this board about what the Bible has had to say about homosexuality. I am not focusing on debating Christianity vs. Paganism here; this section is solely a comparison of pro and anti-LGBT views within the Christian sphere.

Currently I am not a practicing Christian, although I am looking to expand on my horizons. I am focusing on the Bible’s contents relating to homosexuality, being a strong historical/moral foundation for our beliefs and often cited by us. Multiple Christian figures and academics allege nearly every passage mentioning homosexuality does not refer to the sexuality as a whole, and that such mistranslations have only appeared in recent years. For the most part, I have managed to solve a few of these “clobber passages”, such as the infamous “arsenokoites” https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/78917576/#78957117 passage that has indeed stood for same-sex relations in the languages of Biblical times, considering the fact that the word “homosexuality” was not invented until the 19th century. However, there are still passages that confound me; that being the Sodom and Gomorrah story being about inhospitality, Leviticus 18:22 being of shrine prostitution, and the various definitions of marriage listed in the Bible that do not entirely drive. There is also the question whether the Old Testament, where the vast majority of criticism against homosexuality lies, has been superseded by the New Testament and modern moral codes.

[–]nordmannenLegionnaire 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

What exactly is the question here, bro? Does Christianity condemn homosexuality? Well yeah. Are modern academics right about American Christianity exclusively and wrongly condemning homosexuality? Well yeah, Christian civilizations have condemned it and based the condemnation on scripture and Christian tradition. Everyone from the Knights Hospitaller to the Eastern Romans had strict laws against sodomy. Out of curiosity, is this issue something that is preventing you to convert?

[–]Fonched 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

The question is about whether the Bible explicitly speaks about condemning homosexuality or not. The laws held of the time are true, but I'm willing to see if these verses really are against homosexuality or other kinds of perversions instead (shrine prostitution, other paraphilias) now that there has been more of a focus on revising that sort of history.

I am already a Christian, although I am looking to practice more, verifying these verses to see if it's right for me.

[–]nordmannenLegionnaire 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

You said you were not a practicing christian, so I was asking if this is an issue that prevents you from embracing Christianity. So, this is obviously a topic that has been done to death in mainstream circles, but I can try to get something started here. What do you think is being said in Romans 1:26-27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11?

For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. (Romans 1:26-27 NKJV)

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Corinthians 6:9-10 NKJV)

In 1 Corinthians 6:9, homosexual is referring to catamites, which is a condemnation of pederasty. With that said, as the based and righteous clerical fascist has explained, all non-reproductive sex is sodomy. Sodomites, like pederasts, do not inherit the kingdom of heaven.

In Romans, it is explicitly described as men who abandon the natural use of women in exchange for men. To me, this is a condemnation of the act of homosexuality and homosexuals "marrying" and living together, along with anything else that we recognize as the natural use of women by men. It also condemns lesbianism for the same reason. The homosexual's response is not some reinterpretation of the scripture, but instead they reference scripture that says we can not judge them. Frankly, we aren't. God is, and God does.

[–]Fonched 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Yes, it is for now. Although I am currently verifying everything I know I forgot my sources that state the contrary by the way, there are many such but here are a few inventories with lots of detail: https://www.gaychristian101.com/ https://johnpavlovitz.com/2017/07/21/no-gay-lesbian-bisexual-transgender-not-sin/ https://moanti.wordpress.com/2010/08/02/gaychristians/

These sources say that 1 Cor 6:9 was printed as "weaklings" or "effeminates" in accordance with the root word, "malakoi" until the 20th century and that the original writers were not intending for it to mean homosexuality itself. Although I also discovered this thread (https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/235821095/#235828411) that provides another perspective to it. Romans, meanwhile, has been alleged for centuries to be about shrine prostitution from those sources.

[–]nordmannenLegionnaire 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Throwing random blogs at me isn't going to help here. There are plenty of other examples of the words (malakoi, arsenokoites) in classical Greek texts that refer to homosexual acts and impulses, and the reason why no one has critiqued this is because homosexuals didn't start infiltrating the church en masse until the 20th Century. Surely it's no coincidence that every Christian society had laws against homosexuality and derived them from Christian teachings. Even the Eastern Romans, who spoke the same language these heretical gays are pretending to understand, had these laws. Were they, along with the more than 1000 years of church fathers and millions of Christians suddenly illiterate and could not understand their own language? It's not a problem that modern bibles refer to homosexuality because the act, impulses, and lifestyle of homosexuality is what is being condemned, and you can't get around this by arguing that specific words could have different meanings that very obviously don't make sense in the broader context. Actually read the Bible, you will see where Romans describes man falling into bodily lust and replacing God with corrupted human passions. Paul described those who will not enter the kingdom of heaven. His condemnation of the so-called "weaklings" was of a sexual and "effeminate" nature, as you acknowledge but ignore for some reason. Paul was talking about submissive homosexuals and sodomites.

Stop posting tripe, anyone who claims to be a Christian while claiming God is "genderless" does not know God, is not a Christian, and should not be used as a source for anything.

[–]Fonched 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

It was just some sources I forgot, which illustrated my previous questions. I do want to see more examples of these words meaning "homosexual", even despite some of the uses of arsenokoites/malakoi in other publiccations meaning not to be that. Other than that good points and surreal to see these gay christian sources make a logical fallacy.

[–]nordmannenLegionnaire 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I'd refer you to the church fathers, Eusebius of Caesarea, St. Clement, St. Basil, and St. John Chrysostom, all of which should have excerpts present here: https://www.churchfathers.org/homosexuality

Yeah I know why you provided them and I appreciate that. I would ask, however, are you aware that there are countless christian blogs that will do this exact thing, with equally weak arguments, against homosexuality? If you seek Christianity, you can't base your spiritual foundation on what random people on the internet say.

A few other notes: the distinction between active and passive members in a homosexual relation is in line with the Roman dichotomy regarding sexuality, and that Roman conception is likely what influenced early Christian society, and why you see terms like pederasty and sodomy appearing so frequently regarding this topic. Also, it should be pointed out that we are instructed, according to Genesis 1:28, to be fruitful and multiply. This is obviously not possible in a homosexual relationship. Additionally, we are warned about the sin of lust, regardless of who it is towards, and it is a desire of the flesh, which is of the world, according to 1 John 2:16, and a sin against your own body according to Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:18 (remember what I said about broader context).

[–]Fonched 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thank you for the references. How would I base my own spiritual foundation instead of looking quotes? Just use my own stances on the topic to keep my faith going?