[TunaForBrains]

Re: Leviticus: mistranslation?

Indeed. You are a fantastic example of that.

Don't you have a same-sex partner you should be fondling about now rather than bothering True Christians™ with your infantile assertions/misconceptions/delusions/heresy/blasphemy?

If you must know, I'm bisexual.

I cannot recall being this offended by a heathen in my life. I am deeply offended on two fronts. The first, your pathetic grasp of Gods chosen language (American). The second your guttural suggestion that my blessed Savior Jesus would have a "bromance" [sic] with John the Apostle. Sir, I must beg you recant these utterances or face eternal fire. I pray it is too late for you.

Bromance brings Lady GaGa to mind ( I love her; and she's bisexual!). And everyone knows Jesus loved John more than women...its in the bible.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: Leviticus: mistranslation?

[…]So Leviticus 18:22's real meaning: You shall not lie with a male on a wife's (woman and wife are synonymous) bed.

If woman and wife are synonymous, how do we know that “wife” has been implied, or is it a convenient guess to support your theory of adultery?

Leviticus 18:22 is the only passage regarding sexuality that does NOT say "You shall not have sexual relations with..."

As far as I am aware, no verse begins, "You shall not have sexual relations with..."

but instead says "A male shall not lie with another male." […] Leviticus was written as a code for God's Israelite Covenant, and said that these rules did not apply to his Christian followers.

I fail to see how God can be separated from Jesus Christ. Moreover, it seems a little harsh and without cause, if you are to be stoned for falling asleep on some woman’s bed after a night of prayer with your friend…

Romans 1:26-27 […] all of them when translated have a negative connotation in English that may not be present in the Greek writing.

Homerism was rife in Greece… probably still is. Whether or not the Greeks thought is sinful is irrelevant.

Hmmm… the important word is “may”, which also implies, “may not.”

Corinthians 6:9 and Timothy 1:14 (I think those are the right quotes, may be wrong) demonstrate that while the Bible was being translated the translators had a bias against homosexuals

No. God sees it as an abomination.

You have problems with this line of argument. The first is that KJV1611 is inerrant. It is the final Word of God. Previous scribblings were erroneous, God corrected everything in KJV. If it’s there, it’s correct.

The second is

1st Kings 14:24 And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel.

Deuteronomy 23:17 There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel.


What, pray tell is the point of this line of heresy?

[...] and besides Jesus said to love everyone, [...]

Have you Scripture to support that?

[Meek and Humble]

Re: Leviticus: mistranslation?

But since two men couldn't get married, if a husband had sex with another man, it is cheating on the wife (wives).

Why couldn't men get married?

[Professor Bessemer]

Re: Leviticus: mistranslation?

Yes, I have a thought.

I think you are a queer.

If you must know, I'm bisexual.

Just as I thought, another sodomite trying to legitimize his abominable lifestyle choice by reinterpreting the Bible and slandering Jesus. If I did not despise you so, I might actually pity you.

And I have another thought. Are you by any chance a Jew as well? Very few non-Jew queers have much interest at all in the Old Testament.

[TunaForBrains]

Re: Leviticus: mistranslation?

If woman and wife are synonymous, how do we know that “wife” has been implied, or is it a convenient guess to support your theory of adultery?

Because in either context it would still be adultery.

As far as I am aware, no verse begins, "You shall not have sexual relations with..." I fail to see how God can be separated from Jesus Christ. Moreover, it seems a little harsh and without cause, if you are to be stoned for falling asleep on some woman’s bed after a night of prayer with your friend…

In the hebrew....

What, pray tell is the point of this line of heresy?

Have you Scripture to support that?

You're the one defending your bible, provide a scripture that says to HATE people.

*snip*

Too bad ancient hebrews aren't alive. Your point is moot.

And you can't put homosexuality side-by-side to bestiality, as there is no consenting individuals in bestiality.

And if God didn't want homosexuals, being the omnipotent being that he is, they wouldn't be here in the first place.

This comment is a good example how what consenting adults do, doesn't stay in the bedroom. It changes culture. It destroys the concept of male friendship. As this comment indicates, it even destroys history. Friendship between males can only mean that sex is involved. No other explanation be imagined.

But on the particulars of this position, John Gill explains:

Not pressing upon that part of Christ's body, which would have been irreverent in John, and troublesome to Christ; but leaning at table upon his bed or couch, on which he lay; and which was next to, and just before Christ; so that he was very near unto, and seemed to lie in the bosom of Christ; as such are said to do, who sit next at table to another.

See also John Gill's explanation of the likely form in which they were laying (Jews either sat or lay while eating).

As this poster indicates, what happens in someones bedroom inevitably finds it way into society. Gays have destroyed the concept of male friendship. People can no longer read between love between male and not sexualize this. But once upon a time there was an age where males could be friends without sex. And it is to great harm to our society that we have
lost that.

Well no the concept hasn't beeb "Broken" as you say. Homosexuals can live alongside the same-sex, even if they feel attraction for them.

Or are you saying you can't be friends with a female? Or perhaps you want to f*ck every female you come across?
Stop being ridiculous.

As a bisexual, I have straight friends and it doesn't mean I want to *PERVERSION DELETED*.

Just as I thought, another sodomite trying to legitimize his abominable lifestyle choice by reinterpreting the Bible and slandering Jesus. If I did not despise you so, I might actually pity you.

And I have another thought. Are you by any chance a Jew as well? Very few non-Jew queers have much interest at all in the Old Testament.

Oh I'm not re-interpreting, you are just misinterpreting.

And no I am not a Jew.

[Pastor Isaac Peters]

Re: Leviticus: mistranslation?

You're the one defending your bible, provide a scripture that says to HATE people.

Psalm 139:21-22: Do not I hate them, O LORD, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies.

Too bad ancient hebrews aren't alive. Your point is moot.

You ought to post while standing on a ladder, so that the point to which you're responding won't go quite so far over your head. Whether or not they're still alive, it stands to reason that they understood their own language better than do a few modern fringe liberal scholars. Do you have a serious argument to the contrary?

And if God didn't want homosexuals, being the omnipotent being that he is, they wouldn't be here in the first place.

Then I guess God doesn't mind murderers and robbers. After all, if God didn't want them, being the omnipotent Being Who He is, they wouldn't be here in the first place.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: Leviticus: mistranslation?

[...]You're the one defending your bible, provide a scripture that says to HATE people.

As I thought - you have no Scripture at all; you are making this up in a deluded way to support your vile iniquities.

As it happens Pastor Ezekiel's signature has many of those that God hates in it - look it up - you can do something for yourself - God hates the slothful.

[TunaForBrains]

Re: Leviticus: mistranslation?

Psalm 139:21-22: Do not I hate them, O LORD, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies.

"Finally, all of you be of one mind, having compassion for one another; love as brothers, be tenderhearted, be courteous; not returning evil for evil or reviling for reviling ... " (1 Peter 3:8)

You ought to post while standing on a ladder, so that the point to which you're responding won't go quite so far over your head. Whether or not they're still alive, it stands to reason that they understood their own language better than do a few modern fringe liberal scholars. Do you have a serious argument to the contrary?

So if ancient hebrews understood it better why haven't you assimilated your ways of English to truly become a True Christian?
Afterall, you said yourself if anyone is going to understand the scriptures the best are hebrews. And since you are not, you can't be a True Christian.

Then I guess God doesn't mind murderers and robbers. After all, if God didn't want them, being the omnipotent Being Who He is, they wouldn't be here in the first place.

I guess you don't know the 10 commandments and how being homosexual isn't listed, whereas thievery and murder is.

[Norah Dint]

Re: Leviticus: mistranslation?

My precious Lord ! My eyes are hurting from seeing such trash! My Noah better never let another man's hoho near his humhum!!! DISGUSTING !!!!!!!! I don't think God sanctions such activity in my bed or out of my bed !!!!

Ohhhh I feel the vapors coming on at the thought !



Norah

[Pastor Isaac Peters]

Re: Leviticus: mistranslation?

"Finally, all of you be of one mind, having compassion for one another; love as brothers, be tenderhearted, be courteous; not returning evil for evil or reviling for reviling ... " (1 Peter 3:8)

If you read closely, you'll see that there is no contradiction. That Epistle was addressed to Christians, so "having compassion one of another" (as the KJV puts it) refers to the way in which Christians should treat one another. If it didn't refer just to Christians, we'd have to be be of one mind with the unsaved, and that isn't what God wants.

So if ancient hebrews understood it better why haven't you assimilated your ways of English to truly become a True Christian?
Afterall, you said yourself if anyone is going to understand the scriptures the best are hebrews. And since you are not, you can't be a True Christian.

Do you know what a non sequitur is? We're not the ones arguing that they didn't understand the language of their own Bible; you are.

I guess you don't know the 10 commandments and how being homosexual isn't listed, whereas thievery and murder is.

I guess you don't know that the Bible contains considerably more than ten commandments.

[TunaForBrains]

Re: Leviticus: mistranslation?

If you read closely, you'll see that there is no contradiction. That Epistle was addressed to Christians, so "having compassion one of another" (as the KJV puts it) refers to the way in which Christians should treat one another. If it didn't refer just to Christians, we'd have to be be of one mind with the unsaved, and that isn't what God wants.

You don't know what God wants.

Do you know what a non sequitur is? We're not the ones arguing that they didn't understand the language of their own Bible; you are.

Staw man. Its about interpretation, and that yall lack the correct one.

I guess you don't know that the Bible contains considerably more than ten commandments.

You circumvented my rebuttal.

[Pastor Isaac Peters]

Re: Leviticus: mistranslation?

You don't know what God wants.

We do if He tells us.

Staw man. Its about interpretation, and that yall lack the correct one.

Thanks for demonstrating that our argument was in fact not a straw man. You might want to look up those terms before throwing them around.

You circumvented my rebuttal.

No: I just disproved your argument.

[TunaForBrains]

Re: Leviticus: mistranslation?

We do if He tells us.

Why is not a She or an It?
So if He tells you to be homosexual what do you do?

Thanks for demonstrating that our argument was in fact not a straw man. You might want to look up those terms before throwing them around.

No your argument of my argument was indeed so.

No: I just disproved your argument.

No, you circumvented from admitting the fallacy made when comparing thievery and murder to homosexuality.

[Pastor Isaac Peters]

Re: Leviticus: mistranslation?

Why is not a She or an It?

Exodus 15:3: The LORD [is] a man of war: the LORD [is] his name.

That's why not. As for the rest of your post, it is just so much word salad. You really ought to try thinking through your arguments (or lack thereof) before arguing with the grownups. Have a blessed evening.

[TunaForBrains]

Re: Leviticus: mistranslation?

Exodus 15:3: The LORD [is] a man of war: the LORD [is] his name.

That's why not. As for the rest of your post, it is just so much word salad. You really ought to try thinking through your arguments (or lack thereof) before arguing with the grownups. Have a blessed evening.

how condescending, but thats the christian way, right? Ad hominem much?

It's people like you who give real Christians a bad name.