Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: Tal
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders -1 Corinthians 6:9 (NIV)
-----------------------------------------------------------
Above is for the folks saying the bible doesn't mention homosexuality.....
I don't think it's moral. I think God doesn't want people doing it. I definitely don't believe that it's healthy. I don't think it's worse than lying or cheating or stealing. As far as taxes go, IIRC, married couples claiming two incomes actually get the shaft in taxes and pay more. My wife is staying at home these days caring for our two kids... 2 yrs and 7 months, so it doesn't apply to us....
-Tal
I found all 5 instances and all are addressed:
1. The story of Sodom in Genesis 19 is about offense against the sacred duty of hospitality. That is how Ezekiel 16:48-49 and Wisdom 9:13-14 interpret this text. The attempted male rape only heightens the atrocity of this offense.
What is Wisdom 9:13-14? None of my many translations of the Bible seem to have this book......I'm assuming that it's a book of the Apocrypha...
2. Leviticus 18:22 does forbid male-male sex as an "abomination". But the word simply means an impurity or a religious taboo like eating pork. As in the case of Catholics who used to be forbidden under pain of mortal sin to eat meat on Friday, the offense was not in the act itself but in the betrayal of one's religion. The ancient Jews were to avoid practices common among the unclean Gentiles
Not sure I agree with the interpretation of this. NIV says: "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." KJV says: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." These seem pretty clear on the DO NOT DO THIS part of the message. The adjective on the end doesn't seem to change that.
3. Romans 1:27 mentions men having relations with men. But the terms used to describe them are "dishonorable" and "shameless". These refer deliberately to social disapproval, not to ethical condemnation. Moreover, according to Paul's usage, different from the prevalent Stoic philosophy of the day, para physin ("unnatural") would best be translated "atypical" or "beyond the ordinary." So it bears no reference to natural law. And it can imply no ethical condemnation because in Romans 11:24 God is said to act para physin. Paul sees gay sex as an impurity (see Rm. 1:24), just like uncircumcision or eating forbidden foods. He mentions it to make the main point of his letter, that purity requirements of the Jewish Law are not relevant in Christ Jesus.
NIV reads: "In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion." the KJV reads: "And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet." I had to look up resompence and M-W had the definition as: "1 a : to give something to by way of compensation (as for a service rendered or damage incurred) b : to pay for. 2 : to return in kind." Now the difinition isn't really the point, both translations seem to refer to this act as an "error" which seems pretty straight forward. We all don't want to commit an error, so I guess this means we should have man-man sex.
4. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:8-10 list arsenokoitai among those who will be excluded from the Reign of God. This obscure term has been translated "homosexuals" but its exact meaning is debated. It certainly does not include women but only some kind of male sexual offenders. It must be interpreted in light of the abuse and licentiousness commonly associated with male-male sex in the Roman Empire.
On the first (Corinthians) I found it funny that the KJV in referring to those who will not enter the Kingdom of God says "nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind." Effeminate? Young's Literal Translation refers to "sodomites." Do you have an online resource for the greek (I'm assuming arsenokoitai is Greeek...) I haven't even googled for one, but if you've got one I'd appreciate it!
5. Finally, Genesis 1-3 shows Adam and Eve created for mutual companionship and procreation. These accounts use the most standard of human relationships to teach a religious lesson. The point is the love and wisdom of God, who made all things good and wills us no evil. Nothing suggests the biblical authors intended a lesson on sexual orientation.
You're right that this probably only loosely interpreted as a lesson on sexual orientation. I would assume that if God intended Adam (my namesake ) to have homosexual relations that he would have provided another man with whom to have these relations. As I said, loose at best.
-----------
here is the link to married discriminatory tax code, A single person or un-married gay partner can only make $27,950 before falling into the 30% bracket (28% now) while joint filers (married) can make up to $46,700 before doing so. The scale continues this pattern in every bracket. This is discriminatory to single filers as well as un-able to be married homosexuals. Of course there are some scenarios where both parties work were filing separate or single is advantagous.