How does the Bible NOT condemn homosexuality?

Talking to yourself again I see.

 

Except that there is no consensus that what you have quoted is actually what the bible says, for one the "as with" is disputed.

If translated word for word, Leviticus 18:22 is roughly ‘And with mankind you shall not lie beds (plural noun) a woman/wife (singular noun).’ This final two-noun phrase is unclear in the original Hebrew. it is shared with Leviticus 20:13 (yet sometimes translated differently in the two verses), and it doesn’t occur anywhere else in the Bible. Although ‘beds of a woman’ seems to be the consensus for its meaning, other prepositions and relationships are also possible. The obscurity of this phrase opens the way for a wealth of different translations among which, out of tradition, a single basic line of thought characterizes English translations, and those English translations were all done by religious people with a bias against homosexuality.

mishkâb is NEVER translated to mean "while with" or "as with" anywhere else in the 46 times in the 44 verses it appears.

 

Roxana of Bactria, Stateira II of Persia and Parysatis II of Persia might disagree with your assessment.

 

Maccabee and other homophobic "Christians" keep citing Leviticus to explain their "Biblically-based" opposition to gay rights....



but then when you point to where Leviticus says "don't wear clothes made of two different cloths"....they say "Oh, that doesn't count anymore!"

 

Didn't you know that apologetics can make the Bible say pretty much anything that people want it to say? Doesn't matter what's actually printed there or what its context or its historical and cultural background may be, if a bible believer wants it to say something else, then it will say something else.

Thus Christians will also insist that the Bible is not a flat-earth book in spite of every book contained in it mentioning the matter depicting the earth as basically a flat object with a solid dome erected over it and set over an abyss.

 

What? All you said is that he was gay and I agreed with you. The Spartans weren't. If they were they would have all only lasted one generation

Meaning I rejected the brain washing.

Nobody does its bonkers.

I get it. Much like a genie god magiced the world into existence

Saying your childish little backward stories are more complex than they are is hilarious.

 

Tell Battle3

- - - Updated - - -

Tell Battle3

- - - Updated - - -

Tell Battle3

 

Maccabee is Jewish...sort of.

But yes, they preach about Leviticus when it can be used to say homosexuals are to be hated. But the cat suddenly has their tongue when you point out in Leviticus where it can be used to say homosexuals need to be stoned to death.

Clearly they pick and choose what parts of the bible they follow.

 

I've never claimed that.

 

It would've specify as such.

 

Leviticus 18:6-17. Show me its condoned.

For one thing it wasn't blessed and for another it was before Leviticus so ex post facto comes into play.

The first generation married siblings and the next cousins and so on. The reason why it was ok then is because they didnt had a faulty gene code.

God doesn't hate homosexuals he hates homosexuality. And it's logical to assumed that what works for the goose also works for the gander.

 

Where in OP?

That wasn't in OP.

Evidence?

Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.

No.

That's a discussion on a different thread.

I wasn't talking about Lazarus I was talking about Jesus. He also turned water into wine.

You believe one part of the Bible but not the other because those parts are supernatural.

The authors of the wiki page.

Satan went into the snake and made it talk. It had nothing to do with vocal cords.

Evidence?

 

You didnt even tell me why it's nonsense.

Ok.

I agree that by today's definition a unicorn is a horse with a horn but when the Bible was written in English it referred to the rhino.

But I have, for the most part.

Example?

- - - Updated - - -

Which Hebrew are you using?

 

I would say that the 'Bible' of Leviticus condemns the deification of the man named Jesus Christ even more.

 

There are some grammar issues with that post (NOT an issue), so I'm going to assume you meant that, "The Bible would have specified same sex behavior if that's what it meant." I would point out that the Bible DID specify same sex behavior. It didn't mention homosexuality, probably because homosexuality appears not to be something that was understood back then.

We moved forward with women, too. Today, women are considered equals - which was not the case in Biblical times, and differences are noted in the Bible. In fact, it was nearly a couple thousand years before America was formed, and we allowed women to vote. We're still working on seeing women as being equal. Also, there are other proscriptions in both the old and new testaments where we do not see them as being valid today.

We shouldn't be allowing the Bible to hold us to first century rules. We've moved forward since then. Treating people equally is something we of today see as fundamental enough to write into our constitution.

 

The title.

Yes it was.

Posted already.

There are no such things as "cuss words" that is just though police.

Why did you post that nonsense than?

You mean it's a lie you tell yourself and you know it.

Jesus is God. God can do that, men cannot without grapes yeast and time.

Yep, just like you, I just don't lie to myself about it.

What about them?

How did he go into the snake? crawl up it's ass?

Evolution.

 

It makes no sense.

And that was what i was talking about. So your bible babble is pointless.

You have what?

Of objectivity? Simple. Unless there is some vast conspiracy to undo religion, the studies are scientific, peer reviewed in scientific journals are objective. If you want me to swallow some political source you are going to have to do a better job selling the "liberal conspiracy."

you want your source to be credible, post accreditation. I can find a source that says dinosaurs aren't real.

 

Look.....how can any person condemn the actions of another as long as those actions do not hurt anyone?

AA

 

People invent religions to justify immorality.

 

Some people cannot even handle just the idea that when they die that could be it.

AA

 

You can believe in an after life without religion.

 

Yes you can.

Today's religion is tomorrows mythology.

AA

 

It was yesterday's religion.

 

ואת זכר לא תשכב משכבי אשה תועבה הִוא
V’et-zachar lo tishkav mishk’vei ishah to’evah hi.
(Transliterated using modern Israeli Sephardic pronunciation.)

 

You are the one insisting Alexander was gay.