Why are gay activists winning?

[Hermeneut7]

Baptistboarders,

I really apologize if this post pushes the limits on the rule against discussion of sexually related material, but as the discussion is based on biblical passages and the growing debate among certain sections of society, I think something should be said.

Below I'll mention just the first few points from the lengthy article by David F. Wright, "Homosexuals or Prostitutes? The Meaning of ΑΡΣΕΝΟΚΟΙΤΑΙ (1 Cor. 6:9, 1 Tim. 1:10)," Vigiliae Christianae 38 (1984): 125–153.

The basis for the translation of ARSENOKOITHS is rooted in the OT:

Lev 18:22 - "Thou shalt not lie down with a man (ARSENOS) in bed (KOITHN, i.e., coitally) as with a woman."

Lev 20:13 - "Whoever lies with a man in bed (ARSENOS KOITHN) as with a woman, both have committed an abomination . . . ."

Obviously these passages denounce as sinful the act of males having sex with males as is done with females, without specification whether this is illicit sex or licit sex. In other words, it is the act itself that is an abomination without any qualification. Also, the NT church did not abrogate these OT moral laws as they did the ceremonial laws, as many patristic passages (some of which I mention below) make clear.

Wright's article, which deals a drubbing to the lexical opinions of the gay and now deceased (from AIDS) Yale professor John Boswell, does a thorough job dealing with all the cognate words and etymologies and also the usage in early literature. For example, Hippolytus of Rome (around 150 years after Paul) writes about the founder of the Naassene Gnostics in his Refutatio omnium haeresium (Refutation of All Heresies) 5.26.23: "So Naas committed lawlessness: for he went in unto Eve and after seducing her committed adultery with her. And he also went in unto Adam and had him as a "little boy," which is also likewise lawlessness. Thus began MOICEIA and ARSENOKOITIA." As an ARSENOKOITHS is someone who does ARSENOKOITIA, the usage here is pretty explicit: MOICEIA (μοιχεία) is heterosexual (i.e. adultery), ARSENOKOITIA (ἀρσενοκοιτία) is homosexual (i.e. gay coitus).

See also just a few of the other passages he discusses, including some that reference the Levitical passages above:

Eusebius, Demonstratio evangelica (Demonstration of the Gospel) 4.10.6 (PG 22:276; GCS 23:165).

Eusebius, Dem. ev. 1.6.67 (PG 22:65; GCS 23:33). Cf. also Dem. ev. 1.6.33 (PG 22:56; GCS 23:27-28).

Eusebius, Praeparatio evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel) 13.20.7 (GCS 43/2:251-2).

Apostolic Constitutions 6.28 (PG 1:984).

Apos. Con. 7.2 (PG 1:1000).

Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem (Against Marcion) 1.29.4 (CCL 1:473).

You still did not produce any ancient document that justifies translating either the Greek malakos or arsenokoites by how we understand the modern term "homosexual" or "homosexuality". I find it odd that for some reason, everyone speaks of homosexuals as if they are always assuming a male or female role. [snipped]

 

[jonathan.borland]

You still did not produce any ancient document that justifies translating either the Greek malakos or arsenokoites by how we understand the modern term "homosexual" or "homosexuality". I find it odd that for some reason, everyone speaks of homosexuals as if they are always assuming a male or female role. Or, is it only the anal intercourse that is the sin?

I'll issue you a challenge. First read the article I cited (easily found in any theological library), which directly answers, convincingly, I think, the question you posed on this discussion board. When a scholar writes a cogently-argued 30-page article with 80 detailed endnotes on the precise question you pose, why not make an attempt to read it, if you're really interested? And by the way, the 10 documents (out of many) I happened to mention are ancient documents relating to the terminology at hand.

 

[Yeshua1]

Politically they, like other groups, are simply trying to make America life up to the Pledge of Allegiance. What is it about "liberty and justice for all" that people do not understand?

Gay Americans already have the same constitutional rights as straight Americans do!

They want far more, as they want to have marriage refedined as being NOT as God ordasined it ONLY being, but as they want it to be!

 

[Salty]

Gay Americans ...!

Please do not use that stupid term.

First - I despise any (fill-in-the-blank) - american
Second - the term is hom0sexual - NOT "Gay"

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Please do not use that stupid term.

First - I despise any (fill-in-the-blank) - american
Second - the term is hom0sexual - NOT "Gay"

Like it or not that is a perfectly acceptable term for this discussion.

 

[Yeshua1]

You still did not produce any ancient document that justifies translating either the Greek malakos or arsenokoites by how we understand the modern term "homosexual" or "homosexuality". I find it odd that for some reason, everyone speaks of homosexuals as if they are always assuming a male or female role. [snipped][/QUOTE

Please understand that the radical gay agenda is to get the bible to retranslate/redefine what God actually meant by condemning that behavour/practice, as they wish to have the hebrew/Greek terms used to mean something NOT intended by God!

 

[Rippon]

Please understand that the radical gay agenda is to get the bible to retranslate/redefine what God actually meant by condemning that behavour/practice, as they wish to have the hebrew/Greek terms used to mean something NOT intended by God!

The radical element is not interested in the Bible or Christianity.

 

[Hermeneut7]

I'll issue you a challenge. First read the article I cited (easily found in any theological library), which directly answers, convincingly, I think, the question you posed on this discussion board. When a scholar writes a cogently-argued 30-page article with 80 detailed endnotes on the precise question you pose, why not make an attempt to read it, if you're really interested? And by the way, the 10 documents (out of many) I happened to mention are ancient documents relating to the terminology at hand.

If what you say is true, you can produce and quote the ancient text to prove the ESV & NIV2011 are correct. I quoted 2 texts earlier and if you have what you claim, do likewise:

From the Sibylline Oracle 2.70-77.10 -
"(Never accept in your hand a gift which derives from unjust deeds.)

Do not steal seeds. Whoever takes for himself is accursed (to generations of generations, to the scattering of life.

Do not arsenokoitein, do not betray information, do not murder.) Give one who has labored his wage. Do not oppress a poor man. Take heed of your speech. Keep a secret matter in your heart. (Make provision for orphans and widows and those in need.)

Do not be willing to act unjustly, and therefore do not give leave to one who is acting unjustly."

From the Acts of John -
"You who delight in gold and ivory and jewels, do you see your loved (possessions) when night comes on? And you who give way to soft clothing, and then depart from life, will these things be useful in the place where you are going? And let the murderer know that the punishment he has earned awaits him in double measure after he leaves this (world). So also the poisoner, sorcerer, robber, swindler, and arsenokoités, the thief and all of this band. ...So, men of Ephesus, change your ways; for you know this also, that kings, rulers, tyrants, boasters, and warmongers shall go naked from this world and come to eternal misery and torment (section 36; Hennecke-Schneemelcher)."

The example that male and bed is used in the LXX of Lev. 18:22; 20:13 has nothing to do with proving the ESV and NIV2011 are correct. Two words are used in an LXX text and Paul used the same two words and made a compound of them, so what? For centuries the church was able to see malakos is "effeminate" and arsenokoites is "sodomite" as far as we can put into one word. We know "sodomite" is not "homosexual", so how or what did the evangelical translators find in the ancient record to alert us that the church did not really understand that section of 1 Cor. 6:9 until recently? I will step aside and wait to see if anyone produces the ancient text that uses either malakos or arsenokoites in the meaning of "homosexuality" as used in this day. The 'world' sees evangelicals making this same empty reasoning about the translation and they correctly challenge it and reject it. So, I too will await the evidence from historical writings. It is clear it is a sex sin between males, but the translation in the ESV seems to have no foundation that I can find and so far no one has produced it.

 

[jonathan.borland]

The article I cited has all the quotes in the original Greek and Latin, usually without translation. Just go to the library and photocopy the source yourself. Why would I type out for you what you can go and look for yourself? This is a discussion board, not secretary service for those unwilling to leave their computer screens for the information they seek.

 

[Hermeneut7]

The article I cited has all the quotes in the original Greek and Latin, usually without translation. Just go to the library and photocopy the source yourself. Why would I type out for you what you can go and look for yourself? This is a discussion board, not secretary service for those unwilling to leave their computer screens for the information they seek.

In clear words, you cannot produce it either! :laugh:

 

[jonathan.borland]

I see that one can either go to a library and photocopy the article or buy a digital copy of the article from the link below for $30.00. So, no more excuses, if one is really interested in an important contribution to the scholarly debate.

David F. Wright, "Homosexuals or Prostitutes? The Meaning of ΑΡΣΕΝΟΚΟΙΤΑΙ (1 Cor. 6:9, 1 Tim. 1:10)," Vigiliae Christianae 38 (1984): 125–153.

 

[jonathan.borland]

In clear words, you cannot produce it either! :laugh:

Why mock me? I have the entire 30-page article in my hands.

 

[Hermeneut7]

Why mock me? I have the entire 30-page article in my hands.

I have the BDAG with the same reference you give:

ἀρσενοκοίτης, ου, ὁ (ἄρσην ‘male’ + κοίτη ‘bed’; Bardesanes 719 fgm. 3b 10, 25 p. 653 Jac. [in Eus., PE 6, 10, 25]; Anth. Pal. 9, 686, 5 and Cat. Cod. Astr. VIII/4 p. 196, 6 and 8 have the sp. ἀρρενοκοίτης; Theoph. Ant. 1, 2 [p. 60, 27]; in a vice list—ἀρσενοκοιτεῖν SibOr 2, 73; AcJ 36 [Aa II/1, 169]; cp. the association of ἄρσην and κοίτη Lev 20:13, s. Soph. Lex.: ἀ.= ὁ μετὰ ἄρσενος κοιμώμενος κοίτην γυναικείαν=‘one who has intercourse w. a man as w. a woman’; cp. the formation of μητροκοίτης [μήτηρ + κοίτη] ‘one who has intercourse w. his mother’ Hipponax 15, 2 Diehl3 [=Degani 20, 2]) a male who engages in sexual activity w. a pers. of his own sex, pederast 1 Cor 6:9 (on the impropriety of RSV’s ‘homosexuals’ [altered to ‘sodomites’ NRSV] s. WPetersen, VigChr 40, ’86, 187–91; cp. DWright, ibid. 41, ’87, 396–98; REB’s rendering of μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται w. the single term ‘sexual pervert’ is lexically unacceptable), of one who assumes the dominant role in same-sex activity, opp. μαλακός (difft. DMartin, in Biblical Ethics and Homosexuality, ed. RBrawley, ’96, 117–36); 1 Ti 1:10; Pol 5:3. Cp. Ro 1:27. Romans forbade pederasty w. free boys in the Lex Scantinia, pre-Cicero (JBremmer, Arethusa 13, ’80, 288 and notes); Paul’s strictures against same-sex activity cannot be satisfactorily explained on the basis of alleged temple prostitution (on its rarity, but w. some evidence concerning women used for sacred prostitution at Corinth s. LWoodbury, TAPA 108, ’78, 290f, esp. note 18 [lit.]), or limited to contract w. boys for homoerotic service (s. Wright, VigChr 38, ’84, 125–53). For condemnation of the practice in the Euphrates region s. the ref. to Bardesanes above.—RBurton, The Book of the Thousand Nights and a Night, 1934, vol. 6, 3748–82, lit. reff. and anthropological data relating to a variety of Mediterranean cultures; DBailey, Homosexuality and the Western Christian Tradition, ’55; KDover, Greek Homosexuality ’78; RScroggs, The NT and Homosexuality ’83; JBoswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality ’80; JBremmer, Greek Pederasty, in JBremmer, ed. From Sappho to de Sade2 ’91, 1–14; ECantarella, Bisexuality in the Ancient World ’92.—Pauly-W. 8, 1333f; 1459–68. DELG s.v. ἄρσην. M-M.

The materials are listed. So, why has no evangelical who supports and understands the evidence for the ESV & NIV2011, posted the actual writings from the past? Show us. The gay activists and their theologians have posted two showing the word in history and it surely is not about what we call homosexuality in this day. Why has no evangelical done it? I am not asking you to do it yourself, but certainly you seem knowledgeable and can give a link to a site that gives the record that the BDAG and L&N reference.

 

[John of Japan]

John, my post to which you refer was not directed at you, but to a drift I'd detected earlier. I was referring to translation of 1 Cor. 6:9 in particular, not the sins of male sex with males.

Okay then.

 

[Yeshua1]

Are you saying that God did not prohibit that behavior in ther Bible then?

Reswponse to posting 33!

 

[John of Japan]

In clear words, you cannot produce it either! :laugh:

Jon has carefully given you all the information you need and refuted the OP. He is well qualified in this field with advanced degrees, being is a linguist with expertise in Greek and Latin (not to mention Chinese, etc.). The fact that you refuse to even consider or interact with his evidence means to me that either you have a hidden agenda so that you refuse everything that doesn't agree with your praise of homosexual "scholarship," or you are a stubborn person who mocks and rejects any evidence that doesn't support your position, or something else I haven't figured out.

At a minimum, your attitude generates no respect for you and your position.

 

[robycop3]

Back to the question asked in the beginning of the thread...the flood of gay 'marriages', etc. and their having special rights in workplaces, etc. is dueta ATTITUDE, not Bible translations. Many professing Christians are not treating homosexual activity as SIN.

Yes, we are to evangelize those people, same as any other sinners, but we are forgetting to point out to them that HS is SINFUL. The usual HS excuse is, "Hey, I didn't set out to become gay before adolescence; it just HAPPENED, so God must think it's OK, as He musta caused it." Nothing could be further from the truth. It was SATAN who caused it, same as God allows Satan to cause people to be born with physical birth defects. God has allowed some people to have a greater burden than others.

But no matter what the cause, the active homosexual needs to be convinced that HS acts are SINFUL, in & of themselves, plus the sin of fornication. But we must also remind these people that if their "orientation" remains toward the same gender, they must control their libido, same as a married hetero must control his/hers, and not allow their imaginations to run free.

Yes, we must evangelize the homosexuals, but we must NOT forget to convince them that homosexual activity is SINFUL! I believe getting away from that sin element is why homosexuals are prevailing in their attempts to be recognized as "normal" and are flaunting their activities more-openly because society is becoming more-tolerant.

This is parta the great "falling away" prophesied for the end times.

 

[preachinjesus]

You know, sometimes folks are so convinced of their own conclusions its impossible to argue them out if them no matter how obviously wrong they are. That is clearly an issue in this thread.

 

[Yeshua1]

Back to the question asked in the beginning of the thread...the flood of gay 'marriages', etc. and their having special rights in workplaces, etc. is dueta ATTITUDE, not Bible translations. Many professing Christians are not treating homosexual activity as SIN.

Yes, we are to evangelize those people, same as any other sinners, but we are forgetting to point out to them that HS is SINFUL. The usual HS excuse is, "Hey, I didn't set out to become gay before adolescence; it just HAPPENED, so God must think it's OK, as He musta caused it." Nothing could be further from the truth. It was SATAN who caused it, same as God allows Satan to cause people to be born with physical birth defects. God has allowed some people to have a greater burden than others.

But no matter what the cause, the active homosexual needs to be convinced that HS acts are SINFUL, in & of themselves, plus the sin of fornication. But we must also remind these people that if their "orientation" remains toward the same gender, they must control their libido, same as a married hetero must control his/hers, and not allow their imaginations to run free.

Yes, we must evangelize the homosexuals, but we must NOT forget to convince them that homosexual activity is SINFUL! I believe getting away from that sin element is why homosexuals are prevailing in their attempts to be recognized as "normal" and are flaunting their activities more-openly because society is becoming more-tolerant.

This is parta the great "falling away" prophesied for the end times.

The biggest problem is that many professing Christians in leadership/pastors/head of groups, and well known authors, have argued for the christian faith to redefine and accept it as being the way God created it, and that we do not show "love of Christ' if we insist they are to cease and desist such if claiming to now been saved by jesus christ!

Its the church adopting it/redefining it, making our norms what culture states, not what the Bible does!