Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums General Common Interests Voters in 11 states reject gay marriage

Originally posted by sigma:

---

Quote:

---

And if you want to go back to the origional written hebrew and interpret it your way, thats fine.

---

Did I say my way? No. I said that other theologians disagree with your interpretation.

Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:

---

I'll stick to the professionally translated scripts, any one of them, because I'm not an interpriter.

---

Bible translations were commissioned by politicians and translated in a way that they saw fit. Your "Word" is nothing more than a politically manipulated translation of a translation. It's like a game of "Telephone" (I think that's what we called it) where one person says something and they tell another, and they tell another, until the person at the end as an entirely different sentence than the one that started.

Quote:

---

EDIT: And tell me how your bible interprits Romans 1:26,27, or 1 Corinthians 6:9,10. It seems clear to me that the bible condemns homosexuality. Use whatever translation you want.

---

I'm glad that it's clear to you. And your interpretation is your right.

Romans 1:26 was written by Paul -- you and your Church undoubtedly ignores almost every command that Paul gave. Have you ever worn a hat? That's a sin according to Paul. Do your women speak in Church? Paul called that a sin too. Paul thought that slavery was a great institution. Why do you pick and choose which verses you want to follow and which you don't? Almost every passage referring to homosexuality as a sin (or at least could be read that way) was written by Paul. A man who is ignored in virtually everything else he proclaimed.

Paul also doesn't proclaim that homosexuality was a sin -- but that being "unnatural" and "lustful" were the sins. If one is born homosexual (argument of course) the sin is denying what oneself is and pretending to be heterosexual in direct opposition to the way that God made you. That is the sin.

And Corinthians 6:9? A perfect example of how translation can skew meanings. The translation you probably read explicitly says "homosexual" and "abusers of mankind".

Originally Paul used a word that means "soft" not "homosexual" or "effeminate" -- it's common usage was for a person born with a silver spoon in their mouth. Jews like Paul do not look kindly upon those who did not work for what they have.

And Paul's original Greek wording was not "abusers of mankind" but "abusers of young boys" -- Child Molestation.


It's amazing how two people can read something entirely different. That's not downing the Bible in any way. That is the hallmark of a great piece of literature upon which to base a country or relgion. Our own Constitution is exactly the same way.

---