Oops, the Deacon's Son is Gay

[Jack]

Jesus described the waiting room, where those awaiting the final judgement as being very hot. The story of Lazarus and the rich man was not a parable, Jesus described them as actual people and the rich man went to a very hot place when he died.

The Bible describes the final judgement where the condemned are cast into the lake of fire, and the saved people receive their immortal glorified sinless body.

I just wanted to mention this to make sure you don't believe in soul sleep, as many denominations erroneously teach.

Bingo! Parables didn't use literal Biblical people, I.E. Moses and Abraham!

 

[Arthur81]

Genesis condemns homosexuality.
Jesus confirmed that.
The Apostles confirmed that.
Revelation confirms that.

Gen 19:9 ASV "And they said, Stand back. And they said, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and drew near to break the door."

That is an attempt at rape, violence, nothing to do with the OP! Jesus mentions Sodom but NOT about any sexual sin, but in their rejection of His messengers and His word.

 

[Arthur81]

Lets examine this closer:

The ESV reads:

9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.


The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. Crossway Bibles, 2016, p. 1 Co 6:9–11.

The ESV has a footnote regarding vs "homosexual", which reads:

The two Greek terms translated by this phrase refer to the passive and active partners in consensual homosexual acts.

The Greek text for vs 9 reads as follows (UBS5)


ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἄδικοι θεοῦ βασιλείαν οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν; μὴ πλανᾶσθε· οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται


Aland, Barbara, et al., editors. The Greek New Testament. Fifth Revised Edition, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2014, p. 1 Co 6:9.

The two words of note in the passage are μαλακός and ἀρσενοκοίτης or Malakos and Arnsenokiotes

-BDAG defines μαλακός (malakos) as:

μαλακός, ή, όν (s. two prec. entries; ‘soft’: Hom. et al.; ins, pap, LXX, Philo; Jos., Ant. 8, 72 βύσσος μ.; Mel., P. 80, 594 στρωμνῆς μ.)

① pert. to being yielding to touch, soft, of things: clothes (Hom. et al.; Artem. 1, 78 p. 73, 10 ἱματίων πολυτελῶν κ. μαλακῶν; PSI 364, 5 ἱμάτιον μαλ.) μ. ἱμάτια soft garments, such as fastidious people wear Lk 7:25. (τὰ) μ. soft clothes (Sb 6779, 57; s. λευκός 2, end) Mt 11:8ab.

② pert. to being passive in a same-sex relationship, effeminate esp. of catamites, of men and boys who are sodomized by other males in such a relationship, opp. ἀρσενοκοίτης (Dionys. Hal. 7, 2, 4; Dio Chrys. 49 [66], 25; Ptolem., Apotel. 3, 15, 10; Vett. Val. 113, 22; Diog. L. 7, 173; PHib 54, 11 [c. 245 b.c.] may have this mng.: a musician called Zenobius ὁ μαλακός [prob. with a sideline, according to Dssm., LO 131, 4—LAE 164, 4]. S. also a Macedon. ins in LDuchesne and CBayet, Mémoire sur une Mission au Mont Athos 1876 no. 66 p. 46; Plautus, Miles 668 cinaedus [Gk. κίναιδος] malacus; cp. the attack on the morality of submissive homoeroticism Aeschin. 1, 188; DCohen, Greece and Rome 23, ’76, 181f) 1 Cor 6:9 (‘male prostitutes’ NRSV is too narrow a rendering; ‘sexual pervert’ REB is too broad)=Pol 5:3.—S. lit. s.v. ἀρσενοκοίτης. B. 1065. DELG. M-M.

Arndt, William, et al. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., University of Chicago Press, 2000, p. 613.

-ἀρσενοκοίτης or (Arsenokoites) is defined as "male bedder".

ἀρσενοκοίτης, ου, ὁ (ἄρσην ‘male’ + κοίτη ‘bed’; Bardesanes 719 Fgm. 3b 10, 25 p. 653 Jac. [in Eus., PE 6, 10, 25]; Anth. Pal. 9, 686, 5 and Cat. Cod. Astr. VIII/4 p. 196, 6 and 8 have the sp. ἀρρενοκοίτης; Theoph. Ant. 1, 2 [p. 60, 27]; in a vice list—ἀρσενοκοιτεῖν SibOr 2, 73; AcJ 36 [Aa II/1, 169]; cp. the association of ἄρσην and κοίτη Lev 20:13, s. Soph. Lex.: ἀ.= ὁ μετὰ ἄρσενος κοιμώμενος κοίτην γυναικείαν=‘one who has intercourse w. a man as w. a woman’; cp. the formation of μητροκοίτης [μήτηρ + κοίτη] ‘one who has intercourse w. his mother’ Hipponax 15, 2 Diehl3 [=Degani 20, 2]) a male who engages in sexual activity w. a pers. of his own sex, Pederast, 1 Cor 6:9 (on the impropriety of RSV’s ‘homosexuals’ [altered to ‘sodomites’ NRSV] s. WPetersen, VigChr 40, ’86, 187–91; cp. DWright, ibid. 41, ’87, 396–98; REB’s rendering of μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται w. the single term ‘sexual pervert’ is lexically unacceptable), of one who assumes the dominant role in same-sex activity, opp. μαλακός (difft. DMartin, in Biblical Ethics and Homosexuality, ed. RBrawley, ’96, 117–36); 1 Ti 1:10; Pol 5:3. Cp. Ro 1:27. Romans forbade pederasty w. free boys in the Lex Scantinia, pre-Cicero (JBremmer, Arethusa 13, ’80, 288 and notes); Paul’s strictures against same-sex activity cannot be satisfactorily explained on the basis of alleged temple prostitution (on its rarity, but w. some evidence concerning women used for sacred prostitution at Corinth s. LWoodbury, TAPA 108, ’78, 290f, esp. note 18 [lit.]), or limited to contract w. boys for homoerotic service (s. Wright, VigChr 38, ’84, 125–53). For condemnation of the practice in the Euphrates region s. the ref. to Bardesanes above.—RBurton, The Book of the Thousand Nights and a Night, 1934, vol. 6, 3748–82, lit. reff. and anthropological data relating to a variety of Mediterranean cultures; DBailey, Homosexuality and the Western Christian Tradition, ’55; KDover, Greek Homosexuality ’78; RScroggs, The NT and Homosexuality ’83; JBoswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality ’80; JBremmer, Greek Pederasty, in JBremmer, ed. From Sappho to de Sade2 ’91, 1–14; ECantarella, Bisexuality in the Ancient World ’92.—Pauly-W. 8, 1333f; 1459–68. DELG s.v. ἄρσην. M-M.


Arndt, William, et al. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., University of Chicago Press, 2000, p. 135.

To put it bluntly, ἀρσενοκοίτης is the man who's pitching, μαλακός is the man catching. The ESV combines the two words to describe homosexual acts. Other translations like the the NASB separate the words out so that it reads "Effeminate and homosexuals).

The NRSV update reads:


9 Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, men who engage in illicit sex,,* 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, swindlers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God.
with the footnote: meaning of Gk uncertain

New Revised Standard Version: Updated Edition. Friendship Press, 2021, p. 1 Co 6:9–10.

So let me get this straight, in the year 2000 we knew what μαλακός and ἀρσενοκοίτης meant and had solid lexical support but suddenly in 2021 we didn't. Was there an avalanche of scholarship or new texts that were discovered? Nope, the editors of the NRSV UE are lying to us. Even BDAG recognizes that Paul is referencing Lev 20:13 in the LXX:


13 Καὶ ὃς ἂν κοιμηθῇ μετὰ ἄρσενος κοίτην γυναικὸς, βδέλυγμα ἐποίησαν ἀμφότεροι· θανάτῳ θανατούσθωσαν, ἔνοχοι εἰσιν.


13 And whoever lies with a male in sexual intercourse as with a woman, they have both committed an abomination; ⌊let them be executed⌋; they are guilty.


Brenton, Lancelot C. L. The Septuagint Version: Greek. Samuel Bagster & Sons, 1851, p. Le 20:13.

Brannan, Rick, et al., editors. The Lexham English Septuagint. Lexham Press, 2012, p. Le 20:13.

Quibble over the choice of homosexual all you want but the behavior is clearly forbidden regardless of orientation or any other reason. If someone feels attracted to members of the opposite sex then they should repent and mortify that sin. Understand that Jesus Christ bled and died for that sin too and in Him is forgiveness and life eternal. As for the deacon, he should take a sabbatical for a season until this issue is resolved. If the issue cannot be resolved then he should resign. The church and Christians everywhere should pray for and assist with the situation. At no point should the father disassociate with his son, but neither can the father accept his son's choice.

Notice in your quote about "malakos" from the BDAG, the phrase "esp. of catamites, of men and boys who are sodomized by other males". A sodomizer is a "sodomite", and a "sodomite" is NOT synonymous with "homosexual". The BDAG is so eager to condemn any "male who engages in sexual activity w. a pers. of his own sex, Pederast, 1 Cor 6:9" that it entangles itself in such a contradiction.

You further write about the NRSVue: "So let me get this straight, in the year 2000 we knew what μαλακός and ἀρσενοκοίτης meant and had solid lexical support but suddenly in 2021 we didn't. Was there an avalanche of scholarship or new texts that were discovered? Nope, the editors of the NRSV UE are lying to us."

At least you see the problem when there is no new scholarship or texts over a span of time. Considering the KJV was adhered to as THE English translation for 400 years, the new evangelical translations must explain their new texts or their better scholarship! I'll take the KJV over the ESV, NASB or NKJV anytime, as being the authentic word of God on 1 Cor. 6:9.

 

[Arthur81]

Such cynicism is hardly surprising considering the source.

Now that is a typical response from someone who does not have the knowledge to discuss the topic intelligently! It is what I find common among the homophobic fundamentalists and evangelicals.

 

[Arthur81]

Mistake #1 = trusting in so-called 'experts'
Example #1: "Experts agree that sexual orientation isn’t a choice and can’t be changed."

Leviticus ch18
Also you shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness as long as she is in her customary impurity. 20Moreover you shall not lie carnally with your neighbor’s wife, to defile yourself with her. 21And you shall not let any of your descendants pass through the fire to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God: I am the Lord.
22You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.
23Nor shall you mate with any animal, to defile yourself with it. Nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it. It is perversion.

David, do you not know the difference between an Old Covenant Israelite and a New Covenant believer in Christ? You apparently do not.

"These are the statutes and judgments and laws, which the LORD made between him and the children of Israel in mount Sinai by the hand of Moses." (Lev 26:46 ERV)

These are the commandments, which the LORD commanded Moses for the children of Israel in mount Sinai. (Lev 27:34 ERV)

The verses Lev. 18:22 and 20:13 are not quoted for the New Covenant believer. That is nonsense to say Paul picked two Greek words out of the LXX and created his word 'arsenokoites'. If Paul had those verses in mind, he'd have quoted them as he quoted other verses from the LXX.

 

[Arthur81]

The following is a rebuttal to the idea malakos means a "catamite" or the "bottom" in LGBTQ lingo.

"malakos, G3120, as found in the Greek Septuagint and then in the Greek New Testament

It is used in Pro 25:15 in place of the Hebrew H7390, and in Pro. 26:22 in place of H3859

"By long forbearing is a prince persuaded, and a soft/malakos tongue breaketh the bone." (Prov 25:15 KJV
H7390 in Strong's is "1. (literally or figuratively) tender. 2. (by implication) weak."

"The words of a talebearer are as wounds/malakos, and they go down into the innermost parts of the belly." (Prov 26:22 KJV)
H3859 in Strong's is "1. (properly) to burn in. 2. (figuratively) to rankle"

Neither occurrence, as found in the LXX, is anywhere close to having a meaning of sexual conduct.

In the NT, the three occurrences other than 1 Cor. 6:9 are found in the following:

"But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft/malakos raiment? behold, they that wear soft/malakos clothing are in kings' houses." (Matt 11:8 KJV)

"But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft/ raiment? Behold, they which are gorgeously apparelled, and live delicately, are in kings' courts." (Luke 7:25 KJV)

These three occurrences of malakos do not hint at sexual conduct!

Malakos is an adjective, the noun is malakia which the original Strong's Greek Dictionary defines thus:

"From G3120; softness, that is, enervation (debility):—disease." [The KJV translates always as "disease" three times in Matthew.]

I'm still searching for any connection to sexual conduct, so I go to the Scott-Liddell-Jones Lexicon of Classical Greek to see if it defines the word as a "catamite" or any meaning as "sexual conduct". Read it for yourself μαλακός - Ancient Greek (LSJ)

That is a huge section of various meanings for "Malakos", nothing of "catamite" or any sexual conduct there. There is NO variation from the old Greek Textus Receptus to the latest NA28 Greek. Here are two recognized Greek scholars from the past defining the word in a standard manner different from the BDAG or Thayer's, and I do not believe more recent scholars are more bright than those of the past, dealing with the very same Greek:

Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyers, 19th century German Lutheran:
"μαλακοί ] effeminates , commonly understood as qui muliebria patiuntur , but with no sufficient evidence from the usage of the language (the passages in Wetstein and Kypke, even Dion. Hal. vii. 2, do not prove the point); moreover, such catamites ( molles ) were called πόρνοι or κίναιδοι . One does not see, moreover, why precisely this sin should be mentioned twice over in different aspects. Rather therefore: effeminate luxurious livers . Comp Aristotle, Eth. vii. 7 : μαλακὸς καὶ τρυφῶν , Xen. Mem. ii. 1, 20, also μαλακῶς , iii. 11. 10 : τρυφὴ δὲ καὶ μαλθακία , Plato, Rep. p. 590 B."

1 Corinthians 6 - Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.org

1 Corinthians 6, Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, Meyer's New Testament Commentary provides critical insights through original text analysis, essential for Christian comprehension.

www.studylight.org

The Expositor's Greek Testament (William Robertson Nicoll)
"μαλακοί , soft, voluptuous, appears in this connexion to signify general addiction to sins of the flesh; lexical ground is wanting for the sense of pathici , suggested to some interpreters by the following word and by the use of molles in Latin."

1 Corinthians 6 - The Expositor's Greek Testament - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.org

1 Corinthians 6, The Expositor's Greek Testament, The Expositor's Greek Testament provides Christians deep insights via deep Greek analysis and historical context, enriching biblical understanding.

www.studylight.org

These Greek scholars from the past were well aware of some scholars wishing to read malakos as a "catamite". The obsession over homosexuals found in the 1946 RSV, was corrected in the 1972 RSV Revised, but the homophobia of the religious right seems to have influenced their evangelical translations!

I will side with the scholarship of the men translating the KJV as effeminate as in the 1828 Websters -
"EFFEM'INATE, 1. Having the qualities of the female sex; soft or delicate to an unmanly degree; tender; womanish; voluptuous.
The king, by his voluptuous life and mean marriage, became effeminate, and less sensible of honor.
2. Womanish; weak; resembling the practice or qualities of the sex; as an effeminate peace; an effeminate life.
3. Womanlike, tender, in a sense not reproachful."

"Not since the Septuagint—the Greek-language version of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) produced between the 3rd and the 2nd centuries BCE—had a translation of the Bible been undertaken under royal sponsorship as a cooperative venture on so grandiose a scale. An elaborate set of rules was contrived to curb individual proclivities and to ensure the translation’s scholarly and nonpartisan character." King James Version (KJV) | Bible, History, & Background

"The population from which scholars can now be drawn is much larger than in the seventeenth century, but it would be difficult now to bring together a group of more than fifty scholars with the range of languages and knowledge of other disciplines that characterized the KJB Translators. (Bible – The Story of the King James Version 1611-2011 Oxford, Gordon Campbell, Oxford University Press 2010.)" King James Bible Translators

The translators of the Tynedale, Bishops, KJV, RV, ASV and YLT seemed to have agreement that the word does not mean a form of sexual conduct! I'll stay with that lineage of English translations.

 

[PGS11]

Its pretty interesting that all sinners are excepted into the church but Gay people you can murder steal covet sin any of the ten commandment and be accepted back but if your Gay not only can you not come to Jesus you can't even enter the church to find him.The only sinners barred from Jesus and the Church who can never be forgiven or find Jesus.. Any other sexual crime come on in and join us your ok as long as your not gay.A lot of these people condemning them go home and commit the same sexual acts.Any crime or victimizing against another human being no matter what the reason is a grave sin.Keep the hate going and see where it gets you.Christian sinners turning other sinners away from Jesus now I have heard it all.When I hate I look inwards because that's where the problem is.

 

[St. SteVen]

Its pretty interesting that all sinners are excepted into the church but Gay people you can murder steal covet sin any of the ten commandment and be accepted back but if your Gay not only can you not come to Jesus you can't even enter the church to find him.The only sinners barred from Jesus and the Church who can never be forgiven or find Jesus.. Any other sexual crime come on in and join us your ok as long as your not gay.A lot of these people condemning them go home and commit the same sexual acts.Any crime or victimizing against another human being no matter what the reason is a grave sin.Keep the hate going and see where it gets you.Christian sinners turning other sinners away from Jesus now I have heard it all.When I hate I look inwards because that's where the problem is.

--- Parody ---

Conversation between Christian protester and doughnut shop patron. (customer)

Patron: What are doing picketing a donut shop?
Protester: I'm protesting the sin of gluttony.
Patron: Why on earth would you do that?
Protester: Gluttony is a sin, this has to stop.
Patron: Not everyone who buys a donut is a glutton.
Protester: We can't say that for sure.
Patron: Don't you have gluttony at your church?
Protester: No, we kicked them all out, unless they would repent.
Patron: Wow, for eating donuts?
Protester: No, gluttony takes many forms.
Patron: Right, like a church pot-luck dinner?
Protester: Exactly, they are banned at our church.
Patron: Did you know that some people are born with
weight-gain issues they will never get ahead of?
Protester: That's no excuse. Sin is sin.
Patron: You look exhausted, can I buy you a donut?
Protester: Sure, just don't tell the church.
Patron: Your secret's safe with me.

/

 

[MA2444]

Conversation between Christian protester and doughnut shop patron. (customer)

Patron: What are doing picketing a donut shop?
Protester: I'm protesting the sin of gluttony.
Patron: Why on earth would you do that?
Protester: Gluttony is a sin, this has to stop.
Patron: Not everyone who buys a donut is a glutton.
Protester: We can't say that for sure.
Patron: Don't you have gluttony at your church?
Protester: No, we kicked them all out, unless they would repent.
Patron: Wow, for eating donuts?
Protester: No, gluttony takes many forms.
Patron: Right, like a church pot-luck dinner?
Protester: Exactly, they are banned at our church.
Patron: Did you know that some people are born with
weight-gain issues they will never get ahead of?
Protester: That's no excuse. Sin is sin.
Patron: You look exhausted, can I buy you a donut?
Protester: Sure, just don't tell the church.
Patron: Your secret's safe with me. dont tell the chuch I'm gay either, ok?

 

[David in NJ]

David, do you not know the difference between an Old Covenant Israelite and a New Covenant believer in Christ? You apparently do not.

"These are the statutes and judgments and laws, which the LORD made between him and the children of Israel in mount Sinai by the hand of Moses." (Lev 26:46 ERV)

These are the commandments, which the LORD commanded Moses for the children of Israel in mount Sinai. (Lev 27:34 ERV)

The verses Lev. 18:22 and 20:13 are not quoted for the New Covenant believer. That is nonsense to say Paul picked two Greek words out of the LXX and created his word 'arsenokoites'. If Paul had those verses in mind, he'd have quoted them as he quoted other verses from the LXX.

But I want to remind you, though you once knew this, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. 6And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day;
7as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Jude ch1

 

[Arthur81]

It's amazing to read that some Christians are trying to defend homosexuality, saying the New Testament doesn't condemn it like the Old Testament did.
This idea suggests that God has gone soft on Sodomites in His old age. But the truth is God has always been the same, nothing about Him has ever changed.
So we can be sure that the God of the old testament (who destroyed entire cities) for this same sin, will exact the same kind of eternal punishment on all those who do the same.

God doesn't have a personality disorder or bipolar disorder, His wrath still abides on those who take part in this rebellion.

You are correct, God is immutable and does NOT change. Therefore, I'll accept what the Lord GOD Himself said was the sin of Sodom:

"As I live, saith the Lord GOD, Sodom thy sister hath not done, she nor her daughters, as thou hast done, thou and thy daughters. Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom; pride, fulness of bread, and prosperous ease was in her and in her daughters; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good." (Ezek 16:48-50 ERV)

There is nothing about homosexuality there! The English "abomination" here is the Hebrew to ebah and Ezekiel uses it about 40 times! It is invariably in connection with idols, not specifically sexual conduct. As Strong's defines it:

"Feminine active participle of H8581; properly something disgusting (morally), that is, (as noun) an abhorrence; especially idolatry or (concretely) an idol:—abominable (custom, thing), abomination."

The Jews in 180 BC knew what the sin of Sodom was as is seen in the Apocryphal book of Sirach as translated in the King James Version:

Sir 16:8 KJVA "Neither spared he the place where Lot sojourned, but abhorred them for their pride."

A passage in the Apocryphal book of Wisdom is of interest also:

Wis 19:14-17 KJVA "For the Sodomites did not receive those, whom they knew not when they came: but these brought friends into bondage, that had well deserved of them. 15 And not only so, but peradventure some respect shall be had of those, because they used strangers not friendly: 16 But these very grievously afflicted them, whom they had received with feastings, and were already made partakers of the same laws with them. 17 Therefore even with blindness were these stricken, as those were at the doors of the righteous man: when, being compassed about with horrible great darkness, every one sought the passage of his own doors."

 

[David in NJ]

You are correct, God is immutable and does NOT change. Therefore, I'll accept what the Lord GOD Himself said was the sin of Sodom:

"As I live, saith the Lord GOD, Sodom thy sister hath not done, she nor her daughters, as thou hast done, thou and thy daughters. Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom; pride, fulness of bread, and prosperous ease was in her and in her daughters; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good." (Ezek 16:48-50 ERV)

There is nothing about homosexuality there! The English "abomination" here is the Hebrew to ebah and Ezekiel uses it about 40 times! It is invariably in connection with idols, not specifically sexual conduct. As Strong's defines it:

"Feminine active participle of H8581; properly something disgusting (morally), that is, (as noun) an abhorrence; especially idolatry or (concretely) an idol:—abominable (custom, thing), abomination."

The Jews in 180 BC knew what the sin of Sodom was as is seen in the Apocryphal book of Sirach as translated in the King James Version:

Sir 16:8 KJVA "Neither spared he the place where Lot sojourned, but abhorred them for their pride."

A passage in the Apocryphal book of Wisdom is of interest also:

Wis 19:14-17 KJVA "For the Sodomites did not receive those, whom they knew not when they came: but these brought friends into bondage, that had well deserved of them. 15 And not only so, but peradventure some respect shall be had of those, because they used strangers not friendly: 16 But these very grievously afflicted them, whom they had received with feastings, and were already made partakers of the same laws with them. 17 Therefore even with blindness were these stricken, as those were at the doors of the righteous man: when, being compassed about with horrible great darkness, every one sought the passage of his own doors."

Today's Bible Basics for God's Children

A=B
C=D

A+B=C+D

A.) "and committed abomination before Me...." - Ezekiel 16:48-50

B.) 7as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these,
having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh,
Jude 1:7

C.) therefore I took them away as I saw good." (Ezek 16:48-50 ERV)

D.) Sodom and Gomorrah are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Jude 1:7

SEEING is Believing

 

[Arthur81]

Today's Bible Basics for God's Children

A=B
C=D

A+B=C+D

A.) "and committed abomination before Me...." - Ezekiel 16:48-50

B.) 7as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these,
having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh,
Jude 1:7

C.) therefore I took them away as I saw good." (Ezek 16:48-50 ERV)

D.) Sodom and Gomorrah are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Jude 1:7

SEEING is Believing

"And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." (Jude 1:6-7 KJV)

"Remember too those angels who were not content to maintain the dominion assigned to them, but abandoned their proper dwelling-place; God is holding them, bound in darkness with everlasting chains, for judgement on the great day. Remember Sodom and Gomorrah and the neighbouring towns; like the angels, they committed fornication and indulged in unnatural lusts; and in eternal fire they paid the penalty, a warning for all." (Jude 1:6-7 REB)

Remember this thing about the angels not keeping to their own habitation:

"And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all that they chose. And the LORD said, My spirit shall not strive with man for ever, for that he also is flesh: yet shall his days be an hundred and twenty years. The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them: the same were the mighty men which were of old, the men of renown." (Gen 6:1-4 ERV)

The wicked Sodomites were seeking to mix human flesh with that assumed by the angels. The phrase "strange flesh" in the KJV, or "unnatural lusts" in the REB is the Greek:

"strange" = heteros, or "other or different"

"flesh" = sarx, or "flesh (as stripped of the skin), that is, (strictly) the meat of an animal (as food), or (by extension) the body (as opposed to the soul (or spirit)"

"All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another." (1Cor 15:39-40 KJV)

A "human male" with another "human male or female" cannot be called a different or strange flesh. But, a "human" with an "angel" is surely a different or other flesh!

Again, nothing here about homosexuals in loving cohabitation!

 

[David in NJ]

"And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." (Jude 1:6-7 KJV)

"Remember too those angels who were not content to maintain the dominion assigned to them, but abandoned their proper dwelling-place; God is holding them, bound in darkness with everlasting chains, for judgement on the great day. Remember Sodom and Gomorrah and the neighbouring towns; like the angels, they committed fornication and indulged in unnatural lusts; and in eternal fire they paid the penalty, a warning for all." (Jude 1:6-7 REB)

Remember this thing about the angels not keeping to their own habitation:

"And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all that they chose. And the LORD said, My spirit shall not strive with man for ever, for that he also is flesh: yet shall his days be an hundred and twenty years. The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them: the same were the mighty men which were of old, the men of renown." (Gen 6:1-4 ERV)

The wicked Sodomites were seeking to mix human flesh with that assumed by the angels. The phrase "strange flesh" in the KJV, or "unnatural lusts" in the REB is the Greek:

"strange" = heteros, or "other or different"

"flesh" = sarx, or "flesh (as stripped of the skin), that is, (strictly) the meat of an animal (as food), or (by extension) the body (as opposed to the soul (or spirit)"

"All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another." (1Cor 15:39-40 KJV)

A "human male" with another "human male or female" cannot be called a different or strange flesh. But, a "human" with an "angel" is surely a different or other flesh!

Again, nothing here about homosexuals in loving cohabitation!

Only Children with the Holy Spirit are able to SEE that which you posted is all about sexual perversion.
A - rebellious angels cohabitating with humans = Genesis chapter5
B - "Even as Sodom Gomorrha........giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh/unnatural desires = Jude

A+B=C+D

C - "set forth as an EXAMPLE"
D - "suffering the vengeance of eternal fire."

"unnatural desires" = men desiring men/women desiring women/ men & women desiring sex with animals(bestiality)
versus
NATURAL Desire = "He created them male and female, and blessed them and called them Mankind in the day they were created"

Only God's Children SEE

 

[Wick Stick]

I've never met a pre-teen who had same sex attraction in a Godly functional family.

...that you know of. We both grew up in an era where a young man would probably rather have cut off his left ear than admit such a thing.

 

[Athanasius377]

At the end you wrote: "Quibble over the choice of homosexual all you want but the behavior is clearly forbidden regardless of orientation or any other reason."

I note you indeed wrote it is "behavior" that is clearly forbidden regardless of orientation. Therefore, show the passage in God's word, the New Covenant, that forbids two males cohabiting in a loving long-term relationship. You can pile up the multitude of evangelical translations, and twist the presentation found in the BDAG to write "homosexual" in 1 Cor. 6:9 7 1 Tim. 1:10, but you cannot find a condemnation of the two males I referenced, whether they identify as Gay or Bisexual or a Heterosexual in particular circumstances.

After the 1946 RSV NT improperly used "homosexuals" in 1 Cor. 6:9, the translations of honest scholarship dropped that misleading choice. Staying with the KJV, RV, ASV and YLT, you get the truth of the passage.

Are you really trying to tell me these two men are not having sex? lol. So in other words you have no response and now you are rationalizing sin. I even gave you the Greek which I note you ignored because it simply does not work in your favor. Instead of homosexual the translators could have used homophiliac, sodomite, man-penetrator, man-bedder, buggerer (as the Geneva Bible of 1560 put it). or even a particular ancient Greek slang term that involves radishes that I won't repeat here. The simple fact is either you are being deceived or you already know the truth about is forbidden and are now raging at God as a result. But let's test your idea that about loving long term relationships negating the "wrongdoing", as the NRSV UE puts it.


9 Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, men who engage in illicit sex,,* 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, swindlers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And this is what some of you used to be. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.


New Revised Standard Version: Updated Edition. Friendship Press, 2021, p. 1 Co 6:9–11.

-The sexually immoral: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-idolaters: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-adulterers: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-male prostitutes: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-men who engage in definitely not homosexuality: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-thieves: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-the greedy: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-drunkards: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-revilers: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-swindlers: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.

Let's say I have concubine even though I am married, but I am in a loving long-term relationship with my concubine. That negates the whole adultery thingy, right? Do you really think Jesus is going to be cool with that? I mean Paul had no idea that a married man and a concubine could have such a loving relationship, right?

"checks notes"

Nope, I don't see anything like that in the text. What I do see that it says ,"And this what some of you used to be". The solution here isn't to try to revise the sin list but rather it is to repent, the be washed, sanctified and justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Spirit of our God.

 

[Athanasius377]

Notice in your quote about "malakos" from the BDAG, the phrase "esp. of catamites, of men and boys who are sodomized by other males". A sodomizer is a "sodomite", and a "sodomite" is NOT synonymous with "homosexual". The BDAG is so eager to condemn any "male who engages in sexual activity w. a pers. of his own sex, Pederast, 1 Cor 6:9" that it entangles itself in such a contradiction.

Lol, So the problem is BDAG, ok. Let's look at other lexical sources:


μαλακός, -ή, -όν, soft; soft to the touch: ἱμάτια, Mt. 11:8 R G L br.; Lk. 7:25, (ἱματίων πολυτελῶν κ. μαλακῶν, Artem. oneir. 1, 78; ἐσθής, Hom. Od. 23, 290; Artem. oneir. 2, 3; χιτών, Hom. Il. 2, 42); and simply τὰ μαλακά, soft raiment (see λευκός, 1): Mt. 11:8 T Tr WH. Like the Lat. mollis, metaph. and in a bad sense: effeminate, of a catamite, a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness, 1 Co. 6:9 (Dion. Hal. antt. 7, 2 sub fin.; [Diog. Laërt. 7, 173 fin.]).*


Thayer, Joseph Henry. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Being Grimm’s Wilke's Clavis Novi Testamenti, Harper & Brothers., 1889, p. 387.


88.281 μαλακόςb, οῦ m: the passive male partner in homosexual intercourse—‘homosexual.’ For a context of μαλακόςb, see 1 Cor 6:9–10 in 88.280. As in Greek, a number of other languages also have entirely distinct terms for the active and passive roles in homosexual intercourse.


Louw, Johannes P., and Eugene Albert Nida. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains, Electronic ed. of the 2nd edition., vol. 1, United Bible Societies, 1996, pp. 771–72.

Weird, huh.

 

[David in NJ]

Are you really trying to tell me these two men are not having sex? lol. So in other words you have no response and now you are rationalizing sin. I even gave you the Greek which I note you ignored because it simply does not work in your favor. Instead of homosexual the translators could have used homophiliac, sodomite, man-penetrator, man-bedder, buggerer (as the Geneva Bible of 1560 put it). or even a particular ancient Greek slang term that involves radishes that I won't repeat here. The simple fact is either you are being deceived or you already know the truth about is forbidden and are now raging at God as a result. But let's test your idea that about loving long term relationships negating the "wrongdoing", as the NRSV UE puts it.


9 Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, men who engage in illicit sex,,* 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, swindlers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And this is what some of you used to be. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.


New Revised Standard Version: Updated Edition. Friendship Press, 2021, p. 1 Co 6:9–11.

-The sexually immoral: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-idolaters: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-adulterers: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-male prostitutes: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-men who engage in definitely not homosexuality: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-thieves: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-the greedy: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-drunkards: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-revilers: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.
-swindlers: except those who are in loving long-term relationships.

Let's say I have concubine even though I am married, but I am in a loving long-term relationship with my concubine. That negates the whole adultery thingy, right? Do you really think Jesus is going to be cool with that? I mean Paul had no idea that a married man and a concubine could have such a loving relationship, right?

"checks notes"

Nope, I don't see anything like that in the text. What I do see that it says ,"And this what some of you used to be". The solution here isn't to try to revise the sin list but rather it is to repent, the be washed, sanctified and justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Spirit of our God.

Good post.

OT = Leave out the concubine as that is not adultery and never considered as sin UNLESS you were King over Israel.

NT = Those who are church leaders cannot have more then one wife.

We KNOW that God created one man for one women = Genesis, Gospel

TRUTH for Thought = Isaiah 4:1
And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying,
“We will eat our own food and wear our own apparel;
Only let us be called by your name,
To take away our reproach.”

 

[Christian Soldier]

Bingo! Parables didn't use literal Biblical people, I.E. Moses and Abraham!

Absolu

You are correct, God is immutable and does NOT change. Therefore, I'll accept what the Lord GOD Himself said was the sin of Sodom:

"As I live, saith the Lord GOD, Sodom thy sister hath not done, she nor her daughters, as thou hast done, thou and thy daughters. Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom; pride, fulness of bread, and prosperous ease was in her and in her daughters; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good." (Ezek 16:48-50 ERV)

There is nothing about homosexuality there! The English "abomination" here is the Hebrew to ebah and Ezekiel uses it about 40 times! It is invariably in connection with idols, not specifically sexual conduct. As Strong's defines it:

"Feminine active participle of H8581; properly something disgusting (morally), that is, (as noun) an abhorrence; especially idolatry or (concretely) an idol:—abominable (custom, thing), abomination."

The Jews in 180 BC knew what the sin of Sodom was as is seen in the Apocryphal book of Sirach as translated in the King James Version:

Sir 16:8 KJVA "Neither spared he the place where Lot sojourned, but abhorred them for their pride."

A passage in the Apocryphal book of Wisdom is of interest also:

Wis 19:14-17 KJVA "For the Sodomites did not receive those, whom they knew not when they came: but these brought friends into bondage, that had well deserved of them. 15 And not only so, but peradventure some respect shall be had of those, because they used strangers not friendly: 16 But these very grievously afflicted them, whom they had received with feastings, and were already made partakers of the same laws with them. 17 Therefore even with blindness were these stricken, as those were at the doors of the righteous man: when, being compassed about with horrible great darkness, every one sought the passage of his own doors."

Ezek 16:48-50 may not have used the word "Homosexuality" but I believe it is implied by saying they "committed abomination". I believe that abomination was homosexual rape.

Gen 13:13 But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly.

Notice this verse is specifically referring to the men of Sodom. Sodomy is still understood to mean homosexual or an unnatural sex act, to this day.

Gen 18:20 And the Lord said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous;

What sin is being referred to as very grievous, in the above verse.

Jude 7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire. they “indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire”.
Unnatural desire can only be referring to homosexual sex. Genesis 19 is a record of homosexual rape, the bible makes it clear that homosexual sex is an abomination.

Leviticus 18:22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. ​

Romans 1: 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. ​

The Bible makes it clear that Sodomy/Homosexual sex is a grievous abominable sin in Gods sight. We may not see it as such but our standards are nowhere near Gods standards.

 

[Jack]

Gen 19:9 ASV "And they said, Stand back. And they said, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and drew near to break the door."

That is an attempt at rape, violence, nothing to do with the OP! Jesus mentions Sodom but NOT about any sexual sin, but in their rejection of His messengers and His word.

They rejected the woman because they wanted men!