Not at all. For me, lying with a woman is not having sex with her. So it’s a sin for me not to have sex with men!
(bolding mine)
That is one verse that, to many, is a proscription against homosexual intercourse (as those who believe it is a proscription see gay sex).
However.
Show me one verse in the Bible that says, in effect, “thou shalt not be gay”.
Here’s a hint: you might want to either make one up or start looking in the Apocrypha, because not even the staunchest of A) Biblical Literalists, B) Bibliolatrists or C) out-and-out Fundies has shown me a verse (and I have asked this question more times than I would care to count) that clearly said “thou shalt not be gay” in any discussion I have ever seen, and I’m pretty sure I’m not alone there.
There is, in addition, much debate as to what the “clear” meaning of the sentence is. Your “clear” may well be my “how the hell do you arrive at that position?” And my “clear” may well be your “perversion of the language”. You would be wise to avoid trying to put yourself forward as some sort of final authority on what the Bible does or does not say;)
Now. You’ll notice “as” highlighted there. In the common form “to lie with” meaning to have sexual intercourse, penile-vaginal is of course the common meaning.
Men do not, by and large, have vaginas, and women, from what I have read in medical texts (and, in more than one case, seen in person), do not have penises. As such, it is categorically impossible for man to “lie with” man as with woman. Maybe this is being a bit too literal, but remember the group you’re dealing with here is a group that seems to randomly place “figurative/metaphorical” and “literal” as tags around stories and such depending on how it suits their mood. I have never been able to understand this differentiation. The only quasi-explanation I have ever heard is from Libertarian, who said that it was a matter of how it demonstrated love (which is about as broad a generalization as I think can be made, really:D)
Bonus points to the first person who can show me somewhere else in the OT where the word abomination, as it is in the original Hebrew, is in the Bible. Hint: look at the guide to eating seafood.
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, he shall be very busy and very damned sore the next day.
My literalist reading of the quoted passage says that as long as there’s one fellah out there you haven’t had your wicked way with, you’re okay.
It’s harder to be damned for all eternity than you’d think.
What if they really meant LYING, as in, “No honey, your ass DOESN’T look fat!”
Maybe some Christians (or many of them) just don’t understand that Jesus Christ and the New Testament came to “reform” the meanings of old books (that was one of the reasons he was crucified for).
Some tend to take literally the old doctrines. Even Jesus didn’t, who are them to do it?
I’m not a practicing christian nor an homosexual, but it seems to me that Jesus’ message was love and good for all. If to be a Christian I’d have to hate any kind of people, then I better use my free will and keep in my non-religious state.
That’s unfair. You’re quoting me out of context. When laying down the law in Leviticus, the Bible is talking about invoking Moloch and having intercourse with demons, which bears no resemblance at all to Wicca beliefs and practises.
You’re either reading much too hastily or you’re deliberately trying to pick a fight.
Mr Tambo, your words above:
“Of course, it classifies a wide range of activities as sins, in between enthusiastic accounts of massacres and murders, many of which are considered okay (or nonexistent -witchcraft) today.”
Bolding mine. It seems to me (and, I think, Otto) that you are saying that witchcraft is nonexistent today. Is this an accurate surmisal of your comment?
Christians versus homosexuals?
Well, it IS closer to fair than Christians versus lions, I suppose.
The witchcraft that the Bible refers to (in the line ‘Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live’), that is; traffic with demons, is, IMO I suppose, nonexistent today and was always nonexistent because, again IMO, there is no such thing as demons. I made the ill-advised remark as an example of one of the ways that the Old Testament is less than… err, Gospel (sorry 
) as a guide to modern-day life.
Wicca or paganism, of course, have nothing to do with demon-worship, nothing to do with the lines in Leviticus and nothing to do with my original post. I apologize if my loose wording caused any offence.
I suppose I’m not the first person to tell you, Mr Tambo, that your belief that demons do not exist in no way operates as a premise for all, the conclusion of which premise follows that demons do not exist;) But I suppose further that I’d just be making trouble by saying that:D
Anyway, I understand the word rendered as “witch” in the KJV better translates to “poisoner”.
<raises hand> Loving Christian here. Polycarp has it right. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with being gay, and any “Christian” who says otherwise is no friend of mine. To me, the Bible is about love and peace and kindess to others.
Correct me if I’m mistaken, but isn’t the story of Sodom and Gomorrah one of the incidents fundies point to when it comes to condemning homosexuals? If memory serves me correctly,( Polycarp, tell me if I get this wrong) Lot was housing some travelers (angels in disguise), and the men of Sodom wanted Lot to kick them out of his house so the men could rape them. Lot offered his virgin daughters instead. Haven’t some pointed to the men’s lust for homosexual acts as “proof” of it’s immorality? Like I said, if I’m wrong, feel free to tell me to shut up.
To me anyway, the sin of the men of Sodom was not homosexuality, but the urge to commit rape. In other words, unchecked lust and a desire to hurt others was their sin.
KCSuze, I wrote a parable (with bits and pieces borrowed from other places, of course) that illustrates, I think, the core of your post. It’s most of the way down the page here. Thought you might enjoy it if you hadn’t already seen it:)
** iampunha **, I just read it. It’s lovely. It even made me sniffle a little. 
You be smart, my friend.
Unfortunately, dear Matt, that’s not true. If you’re referring to the imfamous verse in Exodus, I had a friend who’s fluent in Hebrew help me translate it. In that verse, the word witch translates as “a (female) whisperer of spells.” It does pretty much mean what it says in English. Of course, the God of the Jews always seemed a bit wary of anyone not practicing His type of magic. Check out Stanley Tambiah’s Magic, Science, Religion and the Scope of Rationality for a good treatment of that.
This is PURE SLANDER upon my character. Matt slept on the couch that night!
Hmph.
KCSuze, you got it precisely right. I’m a veteran of many Christians vs. homosexuals discussion, and I’ve gotten used to the major points the opposition uses. (**rainbowskittle[/b, like Polycarp, I’m a devout Episcopalian, and straight as a board.) Another part of the Bible which people use to condemn homosexuality are various Epistles in which Paul condemns “fornication”. The thing is, a lot of those same verses also condemn things such as malice, slander, and gossip. I’ve also heard that one reason such people focus on homosexuality is because they see society as encouraging immorality, but on the other hand, surely the various gossip columnists also encourage gossip.
rainbowskittle, welcome to the SDMB. I hope I get to see a lot more of you here. Unfortunately, I think there are some people who are threatened by things they do not understand, and there are a lot of people out there who feel homosexual sex is a bit oogy. They can’t understand why the likes of you and I can’t just be like everyone else (I find other ways to be strange!). Also, because they think they don’t know any homosexuals, they don’t understand how homosexuals can be good people. In my case, a few years ago, I learned one of my few childhood friends is gay. This Labor Day, he and his partner will celebrate their 10 year anniversary, and I will be thrilled for them. Will be? Am! 
CJ
My very Christian maternal grandma is slowly turning into a major gay rights activist. Considering that she’s 82, that’s pretty impressive, since most of her cohort won’t even TALK about these things, or if they do it’s incredibly negative.
Ooginess is in the eye of the beholder. I find the thought of MY having sex with another woman…well, oogy. I’m very very very straight. However, I do not extend that “oogy” feeling past myself. How hard is it to accept that other people are DIFFERENT? And that maybe there’s NOTHING WRONG with that?
Abomination? The only abominations I can think of are decaffeinating coffee, making mild chedar cheese, regular season interleague baseball games and the designated hitter.
Must be a mistranslation of one of those.
Eww, mild cheddar cheese. What’s the point? It’s barely even cheese.