• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Does the Bible really say "homosexuals"?

Does the Bible use that word (homosexuality or homosexual)?


  • Total voters
    16

thomas t

non-denominational Christian
Are you arguing against the use of that word to describe this or if this had been going on prior to the 19th century?
no, I am arguing against the idea that Bible was really talking about this, as you put it. I mean if you mean homosexuality by this.

You don't find the term homosexuality in the Bible.
My position equals Unveiled Artist's as expressed in this post here: Does the Bible really say "homosexuals"?
 

thomas t

non-denominational Christian
I used the term because I thought that it would help me make my point about how gay isn't just a term that refers to romantic relationships.
Lifestyle implies that you can swap it.
And I think this is exactly why this word is perused by what @Left Coast calls the Christian Right.
From my experience in 2 big Christian message boards, this is the point they are always trying to make: homosexuality, according to them, is a decision.
Scientific or scriptural proof for their theory? Zero.
So why use a word like that?
If you want a neutral word, why not use "life according to one's sexual orientation"?
This is also neutral. This is also implying it's more than just romantic feelings.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
You don't find the term homosexuality in the Bible.


Curiously, you don't find any word in the bible that didn't exist at the time those texts were written.


:rolleyes:

Some men were having sex with men though. This has been the case throughout recorded history.
Just because we have a new word to classify that practice, or the phenomenon within which that practice occurs, doesn't mean the text that doesn't use that new word isn't talking about said practice.


You are making a very goofy semantic argument here.
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Hmmm... Well, the bible can't use "homosexuality" as a word, since it's a modern English word.

That said, there are plenty of verses that disparage homosexuality in the bible. One that comes to mind is Leviticus 20:13.

"If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."

Edit: Then again, those verses are for male homosexuality. I can't think of any verses about female homosexuality being a bad thing...
I am not sure that "If a man lies with a male as with a woman..." entails homosexuality. It could be a bi-sexual, which is not the same thing. Or a curious heterosexual man. I know a few ones who could not possibly fall in love for a man, while being curious to experiment very now and then. And for sure, that verse excludes all truly homosexual women.

Ergo, it is not homosexuality per se which is a no go on Leviticus, but the physical act between at least two men.

Now, the big question is whether that is still valid after the 2nd covenant, or it belongs to the same category of abominations as "eating shrimps".

Ciao

- viole
 
Last edited:

Colt

Well-Known Member
How does that reflect upon the credibility of the Bible in its entirety, if the OT says nothing can be added and then the NT was added to the OT?

If the NT could be added as God's testimony after the OT was completed why couldn't another testimony from God be added after the NT was completed? Where in the NT does it say that God would never speak again? If God did speak again, would you want to know what He revealed?

Thanks, I did not know that it was written and rewritten. If these were just holy men who wrote it why do Christians believe that it is the Word of God? How could you possibly ever know that it came from God?
The "written word" is not the Word of God. The Word of God is Living Truth. The scriptures should always be appreciated for what they are and are not.

But because religious institutions derive their authority from the scriptures, they stake the claim that God wrote them.
 

SigurdReginson

Grēne Mann
Premium Member
I am not sure that "If a man lies with a male as with a woman..." entails homosexuality. It could be a bi-sexual, which is not the same thing. Or a curious heterosexual man. I know a few ones who could not possibly fall in love for a man, while being curious to experiment very now and then. And for sure, that verse excludes all truly homosexual women.

Ergo, it is not homosexuality per se which is a no go on Leviticus, but the physical act between at least two men.

Now, the big question is whether that is still valid after the 2nd covenant, or it belongs to the same category of abominations as "eating shrimps".

Ciao

- viole

Those are some really excellent points!
 

Clara Tea

Well-Known Member
1. homosexuals can't reply. At least in one big Christian message board. The usual bullying...


2. concept of what homosexuality really is... did not emerge until the late 19th century? If I am informed right?

Christians must be kind to all and it is up to God to judge others. "Judge not lest ye be judged" (Jesus, Sermon on the Mount). Christians should always allow others to have their say. Talking things out strengthens religion.

Homosexuality has been around since the beginning of mankind, I presume. So, it doesn't matter when the term was created. Old bibles expressed things as well as they could. The bible can be translated to modern wording but it has to be correct, and often errors occur.
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
Often, on Christian message boards, they cite Bible verses that, for some reason, put the word "homosexuality" in some verses.
And yet, homosexuals can't reply. At least in one big Christian message board. The usual bullying...

Well now to the question:

Does it make sense to attribute this word to a Bible verse, when the concept of what homosexuality really is... did not emerge until the late 19th century? If I am informed right?

In my opinion it does not.

Here's a list of versions that use "homosexuality":
1 Timothy 1:10 for the sexually immoral, for homosexuals, for slave traders and liars and perjurers, and for anyone else who is averse to sound teaching
Quite a few.

Some versions also use that word for the OT.

If the Bible doesn't express homosexual behavior codes without using a specific word in Koine Greek, how is it that everyone at RF understands that homosexual practice is condemned throughout the Bible?
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Lifestyle implies that you can swap it.
And I think this is exactly why this word is perused by what @Left Coast calls the Christian Right.
From my experience in 2 big Christian message boards, this is the point they are always trying to make: homosexuality, according to them, is a decision.
Scientific or scriptural proof for their theory? Zero.
So why use a word like that?
If you want a neutral word, why not use "life according to one's sexual orientation"?
This is also neutral. This is also implying it's more than just romantic feelings.

How does sexual orientation imply more than romantic feelings? Some people say sexual orientation is about who someone is attracted to, and gender dysphoria is about who you identify as. The term same sex attraction implies that homosexuality is just about who one is attracted to. It doesn't imply the personal orientation, and gender dysphoria is a cousin situation.
 

thomas t

non-denominational Christian
If the Bible doesn't express homosexual behavior codes without using a specific word in Koine Greek, how is it that everyone at RF understands that homosexual practice is condemned throughout the Bible?
if it's all so utterly clear, why don't they let homosexuals post in their debates?
Are they afraid of something?
You and I had a long debate in a major Christian forum.
At least that was a poster also called "Billiards Ball"
And yet, homosexuals couldn't reply.
They can't post there, if they identify as gay and want to keep their behavior.
If everything is so very clear, why the need to be afraid of an honest debate. ?
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Often, on Christian message boards, they cite Bible verses that, for some reason, put the word "homosexuality" in some verses.
And yet, homosexuals can't reply. At least in one big Christian message board. The usual bullying...

Well now to the question:

Does it make sense to attribute this word to a Bible verse, when the concept of what homosexuality really is... did not emerge until the late 19th century? If I am informed right?

In my opinion it does not.

Here's a list of versions that use "homosexuality":
1 Timothy 1:10 for the sexually immoral, for homosexuals, for slave traders and liars and perjurers, and for anyone else who is averse to sound teaching
Quite a few.

Some versions also use that word for the OT.

I dont think its fair to say that the question or concept of homosexuality didnt emerge until the 19th century. It is a whole other subject I think and I am no expert on this. Yet I do know that homosexuality and even their persecution dates back to early Roman advances in the UK and also dates back to ancient Egypt and some others.

Nevertheless, the word used by Paul in the New Testament is Arsenokoitus. As you know the English word Coitus is derived from the same Greek word Koitus. Arsen means men. This word is mentioned along with drunkards, thieves, and also "Soft Men" which is Malakoi.

What do you think that word means?
 

thomas t

non-denominational Christian
I dont think its fair to say that the question or concept of homosexuality didnt emerge until the 19th century. It is a whole other subject I think and I am no expert on this. Yet I do know that homosexuality and even their persecution dates back to early Roman advances in the UK and also dates back to ancient Egypt and some others.

Nevertheless, the word used by Paul in the New Testament is Arsenokoitus. As you know the English word Coitus is derived from the same Greek word Koitus. Arsen means men. This word is mentioned along with drunkards, thieves, and also "Soft Men" which is Malakoi.

What do you think that word means?
First off, I am neutral to whether homosexuality is a sin or not.

This word arsenokoitai literally means "menbedder", if I am informed right. I would add an asterisc saying that this word sounds very similar to that passage in Leviticus where it says that men should not lie with men as they do with women.
So, if I was the translator, I would probably translate: "those folks who have same sex sex"
As @viole explained very well, you cannot infer from men having sex with men that they were homosexual, though.
I also know men who had sex with men. Straight men.
 

Fallen Prophet

Well-Known Member
no, I am arguing against the idea that Bible was really talking about this, as you put it. I mean if you mean homosexuality by this.

You don't find the term homosexuality in the Bible.
My position equals Unveiled Artist's as expressed in this post here: Does the Bible really say "homosexuals"?
Well - if we start applying arbitrary standards to what "homosexuality" is - then it's possible to argue that it isn't found anywhere.

Homosexual acts were considered sinful - not same-sex attraction.

As long as no one acted on those same-sex attractions - they committed no sin.

I know today we like to label people based on their inner feelings - but that can be scary - because we can change.

We can't change what we have done - but we can change how we think and feel.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
Well, the majority of the planet, my country, my place of work, and my entire family do. It kind of matters to me too, by proxy.
Really? What you mean is that the majority of the people on this earth pick and choose what parts of ancient scriptures (and newer writings like those of and Charles Taze Russel, and Joseph Smith, and Ballulah) to believe and what parts to ignore.

But I would still ask: Why should any rational person care about what a bunch of old men wrote 2000 or 3000 years ago?
 

ecco

Veteran Member
The translation you cited is the NIV. Look at how different the KJV translation is.

10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

Interesting that the KJV does not condemn womenstealers.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
First off, I am neutral to whether homosexuality is a sin or not.

This word arsenokoitai literally means "menbedder", if I am informed right. I would add an asterisc saying that this word sounds very similar to that passage in Leviticus where it says that men should not lie with men as they do with women.
So, if I was the translator, I would probably translate: "those folks who have same sex sex"
As @viole explained very well, you cannot infer from men having sex with men that they were homosexual, though.
I also know men who had sex with men. Straight men.

Sin is not the question. Its the meaning of a word.

Tell me mate. Why would Paul embed "Menbedder's" with all kinds of sinners? A simple question.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
You can fight against what is in the Bible or you can support those who no longer adhere to the Bible and are promoting a new religion that has new teachings and laws that are pertinent to this age.
Or, you can fight against all superstitions in the hopes of eventually doing away with all religions.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Or, you can fight against all superstitions in the hopes of eventually doing away with all religions.
Good luck with that as religion is on the rise, not on the decline.

Since the year 2000, religion has made resurgence whereas atheism and agnosticism are on the decline.

The growth rates of the Abrahamic religions from 1910-2010 were as follows: Judaism .11%, Christianity 1.32%, Islam 1.97%, and Baha’i Faith 3.54%.

Atheism was growing at a rate of 6.54% from 1910-2010 but dropped to a growth rate of 0.05% from 2000-2010. Agnosticism was growing at a rate of 5.45% from 1910-2010 but dropped to a growth rate of 0.32% from 2000-2010. That demonstrates that both atheism and agnosticism are on the decline but also that there are many more agnostics than atheists.

Statistics from: Growth of religion - Wikipedia

So it is just a matter of which religion should rise and which religion should decline.
 
Top