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 -  (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?