Yeah, he should have been an Egyptian, not a Roman, the way he pushed the pyramid scheme. . .
(I guess that doesn’t really work, on an “irreverent humor” level. Can somebody run with that, please?)
What I find amazing is that people find some tiny little sect and extrapolate larger lessons from it. It’s amazing that you people have even heard of this tiny little sect.
Country music is a subgenre of Rock and Roll, why you’d see that as odd when they are already banning Rock and Roll, is odd. At least they are consistent and aren’t making exceptions for aesthetic reasons.
Ah yes…these are the parents who think that Bob Jones University is “too libral” They’re not as messed up as Christian Idenity folks…but they ARE really messed up. The good news is that this population is dying!
Well the evangelical movement is dying 80% of kids raised evailingcal leave the church. Not to mention that the fastest growing religion is " nothing in particualr"
Also, forty years ago the same Christians thought that segregation or biracial marriage was teh evil!
No it’s not. Not at all.
Well effeminate is the word for male prostitutes in NIV not homosexual offenders. Anyways effeminate is quite obviously an eupheism for homosexual since I don’t God will damn people for being sissy. The word for homosexual offender in KJV is “abusers of themselves” which seems to be a warning against masturbation.
At any rate why does everyone think I “hate” homosexuals? I didn’t say I hate or despise homosexuals I just think it’s a sin. As for Jesus; He certainly while loving and caring for all human beings wasn’t an all-permissive “everything is cool with me”.
Statistics please on 80% of Evangelicals kids leaving their churches. Also not just Evangelicals but Roman Catholics, conservative Anglicans (those in Africa that is which the last bastion of Anglicanism; it’s virtually dead in England and rapidly becoming another Unitarian Universalist denomination in the USA), Eastern Orthodox, and almost all Christians outside of North America, Europe, and Australia share my views on homosexuality.
And who told you that?
I’m not stupid. 
The Greek words are μαλακοι (soft men) and άρσενοκοίταις (? something to do with men).
Whether being a wuss or a gay man was the sin, we can all agree Paul was okay with the lesbians.
So you can love someone while silently noting that their souls are going to hell?
Why don’t you care enough about them to do something about this? Or do you condone their fate- in which case- do you really truly like them in the first place? OR is it out of your hands, and you’re just following the orders of your book?
It’s a very slippery slope, Curtis, you can’t have your cheesecake and eat it too.
The word translated as ‘effeminate’ by the NIV is malakos, and the word translated as ‘homosexual offender’ is arsenokoites. Malakos was not used in connection with male prostitution to my knowledge, and arsenokoites is a word that Paul probably made up himself and whose meaning is unclear. If you search those terms, you’ll find lots of threads where Diogenes argues about the proper translation of them with various posters taking conservative Christian stances.
You might want to actually educate yourself on this point before spouting off. Several years studying Classical and Koine Greek would be appropriate.
I agree, but sometimes it takes a bit of work. And if I can just offer a little bit of advice: there are a lot of folks around here who aren’t stupid themselves, and many of them have the advantage of having been down this road before, and might take this as an easy opportunity to cram that fact down your throat.
I take your response to mean that you figured it out on your own, but what I’m asking you is, did you really? Or were you burdened with somebody else’s assumptions, and if so, is that OK with you? I mean, is there something self-evident about the distinction between “effeminate” and “homosexual” that leads you to that conclusion?
What I’m trying to get at is the unavoidable reality that the expressions you are willing to credit as coming from the “official” Bible are still translations. Statements like “effeminate is the word for male prostitutes in NIV not homosexual offenders” and “effeminate is quite obviously an euphemism for homosexual” skirt the issue of man-made translation, I think. The posters above have given a bit of detail about the words involved, and the particular challenges they present to your stated perspective.
It’s a bit like trying to look up the definition of a word in a dictionary if you don’t know what any other words mean to begin with. We can say for certain that a particular word was used in similar ways a number of times in different books, but to say that that particular word had the same connotations as a modern English word is very difficult. Even translating from one modern language to another is fraught with complications, since language is cultural and very nuanced.
Obviously the phrase “homosexual offender” doesn’t actually appear in the original text of the Bible – it’s English; what I’m asking you to do is appraise critically the fact that someone responsible for the translation was forced to make editorial decisions when putting together the text that you read today. It is already the case that you read the words on the page with particular filters in place, which is natural. I’m just asking you whether you wouldn’t get more out of the whole exercise by including in that process the difficulty of translating words with such subtly different, yet socially charged meanings. Especially in circumstances where translating the word differently would drastically impact one’s outlook on a significant social issue, I think one has a certain responsibility (particularly in light of, say, the sermon on the Mount) to be open to learning about another way to look at the problem.
It takes a lot of work to open yourself up to that kind of possibility, but I think it’s worth it in the end, because what you end up with is a set of beliefs that are really and truly yours.
I try to convince you in these debates, that is my way of what some would call “missionary work” and thus I am doing something about this.
Hmmm…you might have point there. It’s just frustrating. (That and I’m a bit cranky over the results of the Pens game tonight)
Curtis, you do realize we have a large number of gay posters here, and all of them have heard this line before. So they’re going to take this a wee bit personally.
ETA: If “masturbation” is a sin, I think this entire board is on a Highway to Hell!
How do you know if everyone here masturbates? And many will repent in my bet. Also gay posters will not like my views obviously but I do not choose opinions by popularity.
That should be your next poll. And make it private just to see what answers you get.
Thanks for the enlightenment on that one. I’m going to have to search for that thread now.
I laughed. I’m so… well, not going to Hell, but maybe somewhere in the neighborhood for a few days?
If you’re Catholic, that’d be Purgatory.
I’m actually curious why, given how the Old Testament is quite rigid on proscribing gender roles, one would think it’s unlikely God would damn someone for being a “sissy” (which could be defined as failure to be proper man in assuming and fulfilling responsibilities, as well as lacking key virtues such as bravery) but homosexuality so obviously must be a capital-S Sin.
Not Catholic: but they might have to let me in for a few days. 
Personally, I believe sin is sin. God forgives all, or is capable of forgiving all, if I just ask Him to. So there’s no difference between Sin and sin.
But (and this is a huge one) I don’t believe homosexuality is a sin. There. I said it. I refuse to believe God could create a human being who would choose to go through the hate and bigotry that the LGBT community has endured. I cannot bring myself to condemn anyone, because I believe God loves everyone. I know Curtis will disagree, and that’s fine. That’s my relationship with my God.
I have a neighbor in my apartment complex who’s never masturbated for religious reasons. He’s got 4 kids and he’s 21. I hear him and his wife yelling and screaming at each other as their kids are crying through the air vents.
The guy’s miserable and we’re all paying for his kids with our tax dollars. They obviously don’t believe in birth control, but the religious right benefit if the majority of them don’t resent their parents by the age of 18, and vote as there folks would.
I’d much rather jerk off.