FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-07-2005, 06:08 AM   #1
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Edmonton, Canada
Posts: 2,767
Default PEANUT GALLERY: seebs vs. calebnostro -- Does the Bible condemn homosexual activity?

This thread has been set up to provide a Peanut Gallery for a FORMAL DEBATE between seebs and calebnostro on the following resolution:

Resolved: The bible clearly condemns all homosexual activity.

calebnostro will affirm and seebs will oppose. The debate will tentatively have 5 rounds and calebnostro will go first.

We ask that the formal debate participants refrain from posting in the Peanut Gallery until after the debate is over.

Enjoy the debate!

- NS, FD Moderator
KnightWhoSaysNi is offline  
Old 11-07-2005, 02:08 PM   #2
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default

Perhaps this one will be better than the last?
Chris Weimer is offline  
Old 11-09-2005, 12:47 AM   #3
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Brighton, England
Posts: 6,947
Default

So would people think it "too close for comfort" if I comment on this debate - since my own ongoing debate is so similar in subject?
Dean Anderson is offline  
Old 11-09-2005, 12:50 AM   #4
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 8,068
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pervy
So would people think it "too close for comfort" if I comment on this debate - since my own ongoing debate is so similar in subject?
If I were you, I'd err on the side of caution and refrain from comment until whatsisname finally forfeits (as it looks like he's going to do from where I'm sitting).

As for calebnostro:

Too Long, Didn't Read

There's a reason why you get a time limit in formal debate; and why no-one ever pays attention to what's said in a filibuster. By all means make your case effectively, but get to the point if you want anyone to pay attention to you.



ETA: 5000 words! John 11:35. That's not an argument, that's literary elephantiasis.
Starshark is offline  
Old 11-09-2005, 09:57 AM   #5
New Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Manifesto
As for calebnostro:

Too Long, Didn't Read

There's a reason why you get a time limit in formal debate; and why no-one ever pays attention to what's said in a filibuster. By all means make your case effectively, but get to the point if you want anyone to pay attention to you.



ETA: 5000 words! John 11:35. That's not an argument, that's literary elephantiasis.
I agree that it was long, however I can understand the desire to lay all your cards out on the table at once. If you have a lot of material to cover, it might be better to get your main points over with so that you don't waste time going over one piece of the puzzle at a time.

Being long winded isn't such a bad thing. After all, I'm sure Jesus' Sermon on the Mount took up quite a bit of time, don't you?

Personally, I can't wait to see the reply. The guys evidence seemed pretty solid.
gaelicgirl23 is offline  
Old 11-09-2005, 02:01 PM   #6
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Out there
Posts: 486
Default

I fully agree with Calebnostro. Relying on the imprecision of "lying down" to declare the phrase meaningless is lame.

The Bible is one mean homophobic, misogynic, genocidal, pornographical, senseless and inhumane piece of bronze age garbage.

The most printed out book in the world... We humans are shit.
Philos Epikoureios is offline  
Old 11-09-2005, 04:04 PM   #7
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Picture postcard place
Posts: 2,376
Default

I doubt seebs is going to rely on imprecision on the translation of lying down. Actually, I don't think I've ever seen anyone try to dispute the translation of that term.
fragmentsofdreams is offline  
Old 11-09-2005, 04:53 PM   #8
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: The general vicinity of Philadelphia
Posts: 4,734
Default

Well that was a long first post. I can't say I agree with the reasoning of establishing the purity laws in Leviticus and then going on to 1 Corinthians. I am surprised that calebnostro skipped Romans 1 in that correlation.

However, I think this line of reasoning is errant:

Quote:
1 Corinthians 6:9: Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind.

There will be several things that I shall bring to your attention because of this passage, all of them relevant. Therefore, lets start with the first. It is the phrase "abusers of themselves with mankind". This phrase is surmized in a single Greek word - "arsenokoites". I quote from my sources again:
Calebnostro went to the greek word "arsenokoites" for translating "abusers of themselves with mankind" but did not bother referencing the greek word that is translated as "effeminate".

In the NAB (Catholic) translation 1 Corinthians 6:9: "Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolators nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites."

I know that they agreed on he KJV but nonetheless there is a context issue if calebnostro would like to go to the greek for sodomites or "abusers of themselves with mankind" and not the source for the previous condemnation. The word that is translated as boy prostitutes refers to catamites who were the cupbearers of the Gods in the Greco-Roman world and they were boy prostitutes. Therefore the following "arsenokoites" most likely refers to adult males who indulged in effeminate activities or sex with boys in that context.
Stumpjumper is offline  
Old 11-09-2005, 07:48 PM   #9
cajela
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by singletrack1
The word that is translated as boy prostitutes refers to catamites who were the cupbearers of the Gods in the Greco-Roman world and they were boy prostitutes. Therefore the following "arsenokoites" most likely refers to adult males who indulged in effeminate activities or sex with boys in that context.
I've heard that the term means "users of boy prostitutes" and can as well be translated as "child molesters" (or "catholic priests" ) But I'm no linguistics scholar so I don't vouch for that.

This should be interesting, anyway. Two Christians battling it out.
 
Old 11-09-2005, 08:26 PM   #10
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by singletrack1
.In the NAB (Catholic) translation 1 Corinthians 6:9: "Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolators nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites."
My NAB calls them "homosexual perverts" in Cor.6:9. "Can you not realize that the unholy will not fall heir to the kingdom of God? Do not deceive yourselves: no fornicators, idolaters, or adulterers, no homosexual perverts, sodomites, (10) thieves, misers, or drunkards, no slanderers or robbers will inherit God's kingdom."

I think the good news here is that in verse 11 Paul adds "And such were some of you; but you have been washed, consecrated, justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and in the spirit of our God."

The secret here is that we cannot inherit God's kingdom with any attachments.
Chili is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:27 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.