Elementary, actually.LOL
Gee, how deep.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Elementary, actually.LOL
Gee, how deep.
I guess holding one accountable to actually apply the truth of his logical construct to all areas of his discourse is not deemed appropriate anymore? Oh, sorry. :love2:This is inappropriate behavior...
Here's what I was going to say:
Your misconstruals and mischaracterizations, such as that above, by which you jump to erroneous conclusions is why I doubt your appraisal of the non-disruptive behavior of your seven dinner friends and the character and purpose of the Christian group dining there.
I guess holding one accountable to actually apply the truth of his logical construct to all areas of his discourse is not deemed appropriate anymore? Oh, sorry. :love2:
I would suggest it's illiteracy tinged with a bit of Feminism in the reader.Well, your over-generalizations is what led to this problem.
I would suggest it's illiteracy tinged with a bit of Feminism in the reader.
A stay-at-home dad, or, househusband, as they're sometimes called, is not one who stays home by necessity, just as no one thinks a stay-at-home moms or housewife is one by necessity. Not understanding that implication in the term is a bit back-woodsy.
That covers the suggestion of illiteracy.
The tinge of Feminism is the same as that which compels one to defend bobbed hair, bossy wives and women preachers.
You know why what you are doing is inappropriate. It is the EXACT same thing Rippon did that you chided him for in the other thread.
Your posts do not contribute to the SUBJECT of this thread. They are designed to do nothing but hound me.
start a thread about it. I will meet you there. I love to debate this matter. You don't have to twist my arm- I PROMISE. But highjacking a thread because you have a bee in your bonnet is beneath what a moderator should be.
Never read it, but love the title, and would caution you against jumping to conclusions. You've no idea. :smilewinkgrin:John R. Rice.
I read that book when I was 15.
I really thought it was something back then.
Now I think we get an idea of where you come from...
If you pick and choose your verses you can make scripture say about anything. I don’t believe anyone should ever quote I Cor 6:9 without including verses 10 and 11, it changes the meaning completely. 6:9 tells us the unrighteous will not “inherit the kingdom of God,” and then verses 9 and 10 list some of those sins, but then verse 11 says those same unrighteous can be saved by Jesus Christ. The bible does not condemn those listed sinners to hell any more than it condemns any of us that reject Christ. It lists some sins, but then says the members of the Church at Corinth included members who had commited those sins.
The Greek word translated effeminate in I Cor 6:9 is malakos. It occurs in scripture 4 times, the other three times it occurs are in Matt 11:8 (twice) and Luke 7:25. In both verses it is translated “soft” and is used as an adjective to describe clothing. I Cor 6:9 is the only place in scripture where it is used as a noun. Most Greek lexicons and dictionaries define malkos as a reference to the passive partner in a male homosexual act. If you exclude those with a specific agenda to legitimize homosexuality it is unanimous.
Some scholars incorrectly define this word as simply a homosexual man, but it is much more specific than that. It can be used to describe male prostitutes, especially those who dressed and acted like women as part of the pagan temple prostitutes that made up much pagan worship in Paul’s day. A malkos did not have to be a transvestite prostitute, but a transvestite prostitute would certainly be a malkos.
So let’s be clear here. Paul is not condemning (anyone really) girly men or men that are more feminine than others. The sinners listed are homosexuals, including transvestite prostitutes. Which of course, when we look at verse 11, and realize that some of the members of the church had been malkos, it gives a good view of the acceptance, tolerance, and forgiveness of the early church. How many of our churches today would welcome a former homosexual transvestite prostitute?
Some men are certainly more feminine than others. We can’t all be manly mountain men. That does not make them any less men or any less capable of being affective husbands and fathers. There are certainly times in my own life I could have displayed a bit more understanding and insight.
And yes, SolaSaint, I have known quite a few preachers over the years that demonstrated feminine qualities. They had to have the silk suit, the styled haircut and the manicure. Their watches and rings held more gold than most women’s jewelry and they probably spent more on their shoes as well. I think most of us would be better off with a little less polish and a little more spit, and that includes the women as well as the men. But that is just the mountain man in me speaking.
But defining what scripture says in what we translate into English as “effeminate” is critical to your argument. God does certainly make some of us more manly than others.This post was in response to the false accusation against God, that He 'made them that way'. The fact that He listed effeminate as a sin, negates that supposition to any student possessing reason.
And yes, SolaSaint, I have known quite a few preachers over the years that demonstrated feminine qualities. They had to have the silk suit, the styled haircut and the manicure. Their watches and rings held more gold than most women’s jewelry and they probably spent more on their shoes as well. I think most of us would be better off with a little less polish and a little more spit, and that includes the women as well as the men. But that is just the mountain man in me speaking.[/FONT][/SIZE]
I've seen some of these types, but I'd compare them more to used car salesmen. Not effeminate but definitely narcissitic (sp?) At one of my first jobs out of college we regularly had the pastor of a large SBC church come in, always with a perfect appearance, always in a hurry, always arrogant. Needless to say that I was not surprised when years later I heard he was let go for an "inappropriate relationship", of course now he has been restored and is pastoring another local church.
But defining what scripture says in what we translate into English as “effeminate” is critical to your argument. God does certainly make some of us more manly than others.
Did he wear a silk suit?:laugh:
The tinge of Feminism is the same as that which compels one to defend bobbed hair, bossy wives and women preachers.
If you want to stick to the topic the original topic was simply a question of does the word effeminacy deal with dress only or can it include mannerisms of speech or the way someone walks.This isn't a versions debate. The word "effeminate" is found in the OP. It is an English word. It is found in the English Bible. It is found in Spanish, in the Spanish Bible: "...ni los afeminados,..."
I speak English. If you would like to debate this topic with someone who speaks Koine Greek, invent a time machine. Or address the English wording at hand. Effeminate...damned.
If you want to stick to the topic the original topic was simply a question of does the word effeminacy deal with dress only or can it include mannerisms of speech or the way someone walks.
My short answer, yes it can.
If you want to expand that question and say that scripture calls effeminacy a sin then understanding what scripture says is relevant.
It is not about versions, it is about understanding what the Bible says, in English or any other language. The Bible does not say that having feminine qualities is wrong or sinful. It does say committing homosexual acts is.
Saying that God made some men effeminate then becomes blasphemy.