plumbbetter

Can you hear the HSSS of the snake? "...did God really say...?

Kevin V

Not that long ago, a person could read or hear people saying, basically, “OF COURSE the Bible condemns homosexual acts. Trying to deny that is silly. But I’m not a Christian and don’t believe in the Bible, so that means nothing to me.”

That, at least, was an honest take. Today, we see this have-my-cake-and-eat-it-too attitude of, “I’m a Christian AND homosexuality is A-OK.”

If the professing Christians involved in this film want to split hairs over the presence or absence of the word “homosexual” in the Bible even while the concept is clearly there, what would they say about the Trinity?

pjp

The word "homosexual" wasn't coined until the 1870s, that's why it isn't in earlier translations. But the larger point is there are only two sexes according to God - male and female. God does not condone homosexual behavior in either the OT or NT. These linguistic machinations are designed to normalize sin. Male and female are what we as human beings are. Sex is what we do. Even the word "heterosexual" sets us down this path of lunacy. That's why we now have transexuals, pansexuals and the rest of the alphabet soup.

RCRE8109

Sounds like it could be a little bit convincing as a propaganda piece for gullible and wishful thinking. They are basing their case on a single slight-of-word question from a 1940’s English Translation and in only one place of the Bible. Conveniently ignoring the rest of the Bible. What is really surprising, is the total lack of significant support by the gay community. Only 1,700 donations for just a $150,000 to promote it? They may have made it to a couple of film festivals, but I doubt this film will get much farther and will likely die quite death of irrelevance that it deserves.

Sean McGrew

Tim Barnett of "Red Pen Logic" fame and staffer at Stand to Reason ministries (str.org) has a great takedown of this "Paul was actually talking about keeping boys for sexual slavery, etc., etc." eisegesis. Here's Tim:

"1 Corinthians 6:9 is not about a loving, committed, same-sex relationship. Rather, it refers to exploitative, homosexual sex like rape or sex slavery. To justify this claim, the video cites how exploitative homosexual sex was being practiced in the Greco-Roman world. This kind of behavior was happening in Paul’s day. But how does this prove that’s what Paul is talking about? Well, it doesn’t, and here’s why.

First, Paul uses the word “arsenokoitai,” which he coined by combining two Greek words, “arsen,” meaning “male,” and “koite,” meaning “bed” or “lie with.” So, “arsenokoitai” literally means “men who lie with a male.” Nothing in the word itself limits Paul’s condemnation to just exploitive, same-sex acts.

Second, the word “arsenokoitai” has an important background context. The Greek words “arsen” and “koite” appear together in only two Greek Old Testament verses, Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13. These two verses seem to universally prohibit homosexual behavior, not just exploitive sex.

Third, we should use Paul to help us interpret Paul. Paul knew about mutual, non-exploitative, same-sex relationships. How do we know? In Romans 1, in addition to describing lesbianism, which wasn’t exploitative, Paul describes homosexuality as men burning in their passion for one another. Clearly, this isn’t describing rape or sex slavery. In Making Sense of Sex, William Loader, who’s probably the most prominent expert on ancient views of sexuality and is himself gay-affirming, says nothing indicates that Paul is exempting some same-sex intercourse as acceptable. That’s not hate or homophobia. That’s just good hermeneutics."

RudyBSean McGrew

Agreed. There is no doubt that Paul is condemning homosexual activity as the English word has been clearly understood to mean for decades. But the quoted argument (from Tim Barnett of "Red Pen Logic") is exegetically and logically flawed.
First, Paul did not "coin" the noun arsenokoitai (ἀρσενοκοῖται) in 1 Corinthians 6:9 nor arsenokoitais (ἀρσενοκοίταις) as it appears in 1 Timothy 1:10. Both are different forms of the same noun to fit the proper syntax of the text. This word appears twice in the New Testament but existed in the ancient world as seen in various extant extrabiblical manuscripts. [See BDAG the best Greek-English Lexicon that we have].
In addition we should remember that the original Old Testament documents were in Hebrew not Greek. So the statement that the Greek words “'arsen' and 'koite' appear together ” in Leviticus 18 and 20 can be misleading. The Greek version of the Hebrew text , the Septuagint or LXX (written a few centuries later) can be helpful at times, especially when studying Greek New Testament passages. But we must be careful using this argument which is not particularly helpful here since the LXX is a translation from the Hebrew. It should be pointed out that these words also appear together in Judges 21:11 & 12 as well as Numbers 31:17 & 18. So the statement that they only appear in Leviticus is at best an oversight.
Regardless of this the Hebrew and English clearly makes the point that homosexual acts are "detestable" (not just "seems"). Using the argument of the words simply appearing together is weak. The plain text is in itself clear and fits with the original Hebrew.
Also it is an etymological fallacy to build a case for the meaning of the noun “arsenokoitai” based on the building blocks of the word. Many Greek words, as well as English, have meanings that differ significantly from the original cognate. So again one must be careful when building an argument based on this. We want our case to stand and not be attacked because we overlooked, or didn't find, other uses of words. Nor that we are building a case based on the origin of a Greek word. And this especially when the original Bible that we study was written in Hebrew (OT) and Greek (NT).
The case for the traditional view of Paul as well as simply the Biblical position is unassailable without leaps of logic and re-interpretation of scripture.

TOBA5039

Leviticus 18:22 says, "You shall not lie with a male as with a women. It is an abomination." (New KJV) That is very clear, no word games required. This is an activity God hates. It is reiterated in the New Testament as well. Jesus died to forgive sins, not justify them as good. People want to go to heaven without wanting to please God. That doesn't work.

Mom23Is

The truth is, if someone wants to twist or ignore Scriptures, he could get rid of any doctrine the Bible teaches. Why should this one be any different? If a person wants an excuse for sin, he will find it.