Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,482 Year: 3,739/9,624 Month: 610/974 Week: 223/276 Day: 63/34 Hour: 2/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Checking for validity of supposed early christian gay marriage rite
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5106 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 61 of 124 (484751)
10-01-2008 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Rrhain
09-27-2008 5:08 AM


Greek on Geeeeek?
, one would think that they would have something to say about how to interpret their own religious text.
So any Greek who interprets Homer's Iliad, Oddyssey and greek mythology as a whole should be considered a higher authority than anyone else interpriting those texts/myths, because they are Greek in origin?
So a 6 day Creationist should be the prme authority over scientists and atheists who interpret the Bible, because they are Judaic-Christian scriptures?
And here's a hint; Christians may not have had the Torah as long as the Jews, but it is our text too.

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Rrhain, posted 09-27-2008 5:08 AM Rrhain has not replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5106 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 62 of 124 (484758)
10-01-2008 1:13 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Rrhain
09-30-2008 2:27 AM


Toeyvah
Here issome more on Toeyvah
"Something disgusting(mor.), i.e. (as noun)an abhorrence; espec. idolatry or (concr.) an idol: abomination (113x) abominable thing (2x), abominable (2x)
To/ebah means abomination; loathsome, detestable thing. (1) To'ebah defines something or someone as essentially unique in the sense of being dangerous, sinister, and repulsive to another individual (Gen 43:32; 46;34; Prov 29:27) (2) When used with reference to God, this word describes people, things, acts, relationships, and characteristics that are detestable to him because they are contrary to his nature; such as (2a) things related to death and idolatry (Deut 14:3); (2b)people with loathsome habits are themselves detestable to him (Deut22:5) (3) IT is used in some contexts to describe pagan practices and objects (Deut 7:25-26) (4) It describes the repeated failures to observe divine regulations (Eze 5:7, 9). (5) To'ebah may represent (5a)the pagan cultic practices themselves (Deut 12:31), or (5b)the people who perpetrate such practices (Deut 18:12). (6) It is used in the sphere of Jurisprudence and of family or tribal relationships; certain acts or characteristics are destructive of societal and familial harmony; both such things and the people who do them are described by to'ebah"
The New strong's expanded Exahstve Concordance of the Bible, Red Letter edition, (Most accurate and up-to-date), by James Strong and John Kohlenberger (modern contributor).
"A feminine noun meaning an abomination. This word is primarily understood in the context of the Law. It identifies unclean food (Deut 14:3); the activity of the idolater (Isa 41:24)the practice of child sacrifice (Deut 12:31); intermarraige by the Israelites (Mal. 2:11; the religious activities of the wicked (Prov 21:27); and homosexual behavior (Lev. 18:22). In a broader sense, the word is used to identify anything offensive (Prov 8:7)
"Word study series: The Complete Wordstudy Dictionary; Old Testament" By Warren Baker, D.R.E. and Eugene Carpenter, Ph.D.

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Rrhain, posted 09-30-2008 2:27 AM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by ramoss, posted 10-02-2008 1:10 PM LudoRephaim has replied
 Message 71 by Rrhain, posted 10-03-2008 3:58 AM LudoRephaim has replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 438 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 63 of 124 (484859)
10-02-2008 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Taz
09-06-2008 12:09 AM


Just a reminder for our resident haters that whether there was such a thing as a christian gay marriage in the distant past or not has absolutely nothing to do with how society should treat some of our members nowadays. In other words, you keep your religion of hate to yourselves and we'll keep our intolerance of your intolerance to ourselves. I started this thread out of pure curiosity. Nothing more.
In other words, in case you plan on getting mad, I was mad first, so don't try it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Taz, posted 09-06-2008 12:09 AM Taz has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 64 of 124 (484864)
10-02-2008 11:37 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by LudoRephaim
09-17-2008 6:19 PM


Hey Catholic Scientist
Hi Ludo,
Good job in this thread. You have me convinced that Leviticus really is talking about homosexual activity.
I thought trolling was different from what Rrhain wrote. What is all entailed by "Trolling"?
From wiki:
quote:
An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial and irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.
Do you still think Rrhain isn't a troll?

Science fails to recognize the single most potent element of human existence.
Letting the reigns go to the unfolding is faith, faith, faith, faith.
Science has failed our world.
Science has failed our Mother Earth.
-System of a Down, "Science"
He who makes a beast out of himself, gets rid of the pain of being a man.
-Avenged Sevenfold, "Bat Country"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by LudoRephaim, posted 09-17-2008 6:19 PM LudoRephaim has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Fosdick, posted 10-02-2008 12:35 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 72 by LudoRephaim, posted 10-05-2008 2:45 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Fosdick 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5522 days)
Posts: 1793
From: Upper Slobovia
Joined: 12-11-2006


Message 65 of 124 (484871)
10-02-2008 12:35 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by New Cat's Eye
10-02-2008 11:37 AM


Troll?
CS asks Ludo:
Do you still think Rrhain isn't a troll?
Butting in here, I'd say he is not a troll, but instead a boring bumper sticker for gay marriage.
”HM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-02-2008 11:37 AM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by AdminModulous, posted 10-02-2008 2:35 PM Fosdick has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 634 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 66 of 124 (484872)
10-02-2008 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by LudoRephaim
10-01-2008 1:13 PM


Re: Toeyvah
The problem from Strongs is that he is using the Christian interpretation of the scriptures, rather than what is originally meant.
It would be much more accurate to say that 'tovah' was ritualistically unclean. It specifically was talking about conditions needed to enter the temple. The same word was used for "laying with a man as with a woman" as eating shrimp, or mixing wool and linen, or eating milk and meat together, or pork.
Now, if you want to equate homosexual behavior with eating pork, and to condem it, I certainly hope you never had a BLT>

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by LudoRephaim, posted 10-01-2008 1:13 PM LudoRephaim has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-02-2008 2:55 PM ramoss has replied
 Message 70 by ICANT, posted 10-03-2008 2:07 AM ramoss has replied
 Message 73 by LudoRephaim, posted 10-05-2008 2:57 PM ramoss has not replied

  
AdminModulous
Administrator
Posts: 897
Joined: 03-02-2006


Message 67 of 124 (484875)
10-02-2008 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Fosdick
10-02-2008 12:35 PM


Trolling
You were asked to avoid 'sly insults, goading, smartass comments etc' directed against Rrhain regarding this topic. You ignored that request and it got you suspended. You are now suspended for 4 days for a second infraction.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Fosdick, posted 10-02-2008 12:35 PM Fosdick has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 124 (484879)
10-02-2008 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by ramoss
10-02-2008 1:10 PM


Re: Toeyvah
Now, if you want to equate homosexual behavior with eating pork, and to condem it, I certainly hope you never had a BLT>
Christians have a New Testament too...
In our beliefs, homosexual activity is sinful but eating pork.... not so much.
The basis for the belief in the sinful nature of homosexual activity might be the same as for eating pork, but there's other stuff in the Bible after that.
There's nothing wrong with a christian condemning homosexuality while eating a BLT.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by ramoss, posted 10-02-2008 1:10 PM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by ramoss, posted 10-02-2008 4:01 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 634 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 69 of 124 (484884)
10-02-2008 4:01 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by New Cat's Eye
10-02-2008 2:55 PM


Re: Toeyvah
That is a different issue. However, the specific discussion was what 'Tovah' meant. I was pointing out that using Leviticus for the prohibition against homosexuality for Christians is 'cherry picking'.
Now, if you wanted to dissect the New Testaments passages, and make a case for that, well, that is debatable too. That is a different case, and the passage in Romans would have to be dissected from a historical viewpoint also to see if it would preclude the 'supposed earl christian gay marriage rite'. The ancient interpretation of those passages would have to be understood, not the modern interpretations.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-02-2008 2:55 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 70 of 124 (484910)
10-03-2008 2:07 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by ramoss
10-02-2008 1:10 PM


Re: Tovah
Hi ramoss,
I am having a difficult time finding the Hebrew words you are talking about.
ramoss writes:
It would be much more accurate to say that 'tovah' was ritualistically unclean. It specifically was talking about conditions needed to enter the temple.
Could you give me the passage of scripture you are talking about and what word tovah is supposed to be? If you know the Hebrew word that would be great.
The transliteration tovah does not match any word in my Lexicons. Maybe they are outdated.
ramoss writes:
The same word was used for "laying with a man as with a woman" as eating shrimp, or mixing wool and linen, or eating milk and meat together, or pork.
Are you saying tovah was the same word used for these things or a different word was used for them. If so what Hebrew word.
Or,
Are you saying the same word tovah was used to describe what God thought about those things?
Are you using tovah for abomination in Leviticus 18:22; 22:12, 13?
The Hebrew word for abomination is ‘ and the transliteration is tow`ebah. The primary meaning is, 1) a disgusting thing.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by ramoss, posted 10-02-2008 1:10 PM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by ramoss, posted 10-06-2008 10:17 AM ICANT has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 71 of 124 (484914)
10-03-2008 3:58 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by LudoRephaim
10-01-2008 1:13 PM


LudoRephaim writes a lot of sound and fury, but still no answer to my question. Let's try again, shall we?
How does "toeyvah" relate to "zimah"?
If you don't know the Hebrew, and you've certainly been giving the indication that you don't, how can you claim to know what it means? You've questioned whether or not I've quoted the text accurately, but surely you can look that up. You've managed to look up a lot of other things, so this shouldn't be that hard.
It really is a simple question:
How does "toeyvah" relate to "zimah"? Now, you've come pretty close to the answer, but you need to take the final step. And since the sins in Leviticus are described as "toeyvah" when they could have been described as "zimah," what do you think that means? After all, Leviticus also describes some things as "zimah":
Leviticus 19:29
al-te.kha.lel et-bit.kha le.haz.no.ta ve.lo-tiz.ne ha.a.rets u.mal.a ha.a.rets zi.ma
— — —-— —— ‘- ——-—
That one deals with prostitution. There are a couple other passages in Leviticus that mention it. You really wanna get into it:
Proverbs 24:9:
zi.mat i.ve.let kha.tat ve.to.a.vat le.a.dam lets
— — ‘ — —
There, you've got them both. Why do you think that is?
Here's another hint. The common phrase when using "toeyvah" is "toeyvah ha-goyim." How do you think that makes us look at the word?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by LudoRephaim, posted 10-01-2008 1:13 PM LudoRephaim has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by LudoRephaim, posted 10-05-2008 4:09 PM Rrhain has replied
 Message 83 by ICANT, posted 10-09-2008 2:34 PM Rrhain has replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5106 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 72 of 124 (485141)
10-05-2008 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by New Cat's Eye
10-02-2008 11:37 AM


Hey there
Good job in this thread. You have me convinced that Leviticus really is talking about homosexual activity.
Thank you Catholic scientist
Its not easy debating this thread (despite the facts people still cling to their politics), and i have been tempted to just leave it, but i'm glad i'm not alone on this thread/forum.
Do you still think Rrhain isn't a troll?
I hate to call somebody somthing like that, but the definition does fit. Not being insultive to Rrhain, but the definition sticks.
Edited by LudoRephaim, : No reason given.

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-02-2008 11:37 AM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5106 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 73 of 124 (485142)
10-05-2008 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by ramoss
10-02-2008 1:10 PM


igstNa on the attacking other eligionsRay
Hey Ramoss
Sorry I haven't responded to your previous posts, but i didn't want to get bogged down trying to debate three or more people at the same time (its usually how people of my persuasion lose on this forum; tiring out mentally responding to so much strikes and counter ones).
The problem from Strongs is that he is using the Christian interpretation of the scriptures, rather than what is originally meant.
Lets not go there on another area of debate; Judaism VS Christianity has not had the best of history, let alone religion debating religion. That gets nowhere quick. I once saw a Christian downing Islam in London on a CN show once; he had plenty to argue with, and sometimes his life was threatened. What does that accomplish?
Now, if you want to equate homosexual behavior with eating pork, and to condemn it, I certainly hope you never had a BLT>
Eating Pork is not against Christian beliefs (as Catholic scientist made clear in a recent post), but sexual immorality, as defined in the Torah, is. So the things about pork and ceremonial thingies dont matter to a Christian.
It should matter to a Jew though, who is under the dictates of the full Torah (though different demoninations of Judaism differ in opinion asto what exactly they are under when it comes to the Torah, and live similarly in some regards to a Christian.
BTW: I've never had a BLT, but i have had Bacon; excellent stuff. But i'm just getting out of severe surgery and trying to live healthier. Turkey Bacon though is very healthy compared to Pig bacon and has the same great taste. But then again for a Jew i'm not sure that a Turkey would be considered "clean". I'll have to research.

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by ramoss, posted 10-02-2008 1:10 PM ramoss has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Rrhain, posted 10-07-2008 3:21 AM LudoRephaim has replied

  
LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5106 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 74 of 124 (485148)
10-05-2008 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by Rrhain
10-03-2008 3:58 AM


Once againhehehehehahahahehehehahaha
Rrhain gives birth to rhetoric to us, take it in the rear...
, but still no answer to my question.
There are several questions you haven't answered of mine, either.
How does "toeyvah" relate to "zimah"?
They both condemn evil practices, both sometimes used for sexual deviance (see Zondervan NIV exhaustive Concordance, page 2372 (num 2365), Stongs again (the one I quoted), page 75 (number 2154)and "The Complete Word Study Dictionary: Old Testament", page 293 (numz 2154).
Strangely, the word "Zimah" is a eminine noun that can refer to "Plan, purpose, counsel" as well as "wickedness, Lewdness and sin" (latter lbid)Just as Toevyeh is "something disgusting", can refer to things that are against God's Nature (strongs), and anything offensive (Complete word study Old Testament lbid), like child sacrifice or idolatry (lbid). Seems Toevyeh is more strenous and more powerful a word for sin than Zimmah is. Strange...
If you don't know the Hebrew, and you've certainly been giving the indication that you don't, how can you claim to know what it mans?
Simple; I study the work of people who Know Hebrew (scholars, professors, experts) and relate their results, which you seem not to have a response to. Where are your credentials? Where are your books and scholarly papers? Even if you put them on here, why should I take your word over the numerous scholars that see the obvious? Perhaps you dont know the Hebrew either, but pretend you do, writing what you see in a Hebrew Old Testament but cannot understand.
That one deals with Prostitution.
Yet you forget that Toevyeh refers to the likes of adultery, incest, child sacrifice (passing your "seed" to Le Molech)as well as Homosexual sexs and bestiality (See Leviticus 18:1-30. Notice the following:
"But you shall keep my statutes and my rules and do none of these abominations, either the native or the stranger who sojourns among you (for the people of the land, who were before you, did all of these abominations, so that the land became unclean), lest the land vomit you out when you make it unclean, as it vomited out the nation that was before you. For everyone who does any of these abominations, the persons who do them shall be cut off from among their people. So keep my charge never to practice any of these abominable customs that were practiced before you, and never to make yourselves unclean by them: I am the Lord your God."
Leviticus 18:26-30.
And what weree those abominations??
Incest (18:6-17)
Menstrual sex (18:19)
Adultery (18:20)
Child sacrifce (18:21)
Human-animal sex (18:23)
And (da dada DAAAAHHH!!!!!!!!)
Homosexual sex (18:22).
All these things okay in your book, since they are called "Toevyeh"? Okay outside of ritual?
The common phrase when using Toevyeh is "Toeveh ha-Goyim". How do you think that makes us look at the word?
"Do not make yourselves unclean by any of these things, for by all these the nations I am driving out before you have become unclean, and the land became unclean, so that I punished its iniquity, and the land vomited out its inhabitants. But you shall keep my statutes and my rules and do none of these abominations, either the native or the stranger who sojourns among you"
Leviticus 18:24-26
Probably means that abomiable practices, "as done by the Gentiles around you" (winkwink), are not to be done by the children of Israel.
BTW: is "Goyim" (Gentile) in Leviticus 18:22?
And since the sins in Leviticus aredescribed as "Toeyvah" when they could have been described as "Zimah", what do you think that means?
That the sins listed in Leviticus were not just "lewd" but "disgusting". Of course many people forget that there are several different words we use for sexual deviance today (Sick,gross, evil, detestable, unrighteous, unholy, sickening, depraved, warped, grotesque, etc)
If someone describes sexual deviance today (as we "define" it ) as "unholy" or "Ungodly" or even (Congress forbid! Oprah Forbid!!!!!) "Unchristian", then therefore the sexual deviance in question (perhaps beastiality, pedophilia, dedrophilia (hopethatsspeltzright), then those sexual sins are only sins when it comes to ritual prctices? Is it illegal to do such things in a modern place of worhip in America, but okay anywhere else?
After all, Leviticus alsodescribes some things as "Zimah".
Were does it describe beastiality and child sacrifice as "Zimah"? Whyn are not all the sexual sins described in leviticus 18 (yes, despite your cavorting around about Zimmah and Toevyeh, that is what the context is all about)desribed as "Zimah"? Incest is in verse 17, but were else? Is it in the chapter other than that?
So therefore, if Homosexuality is okay in your book, considering it is listed as "toeyveh" and not "Zimah" (as if God didn't want us to use common sense in interpreting his word) then do you consider Beastiality and child sacrifice okay?
ad btw: ALL sins in Leviticus are described as "Toeyvah"? Look back at Leviticus 19:29 again.
Thee, you've got them both; why do you think that is?
So therefore Mockery is just as bad as child sacrifice and Beastiality, no more no less? Evidence, please.
And child Sacrifice/Beatsiality is not as bad as Prostitution? One only for ritual purposes and the other for everyday life (remember those Temple Prostitutes you were going on about earlier. Notice the context of verses 29-30, where the train of thought is cut off from the last verse before "I am the Lord", and where it mentions in the last verse here "reverence for my sanctuary" (19:30)?) Evidence there too, please.
Edited by LudoRephaim, : No reason given.

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Rrhain, posted 10-03-2008 3:58 AM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Straggler, posted 10-05-2008 7:30 PM LudoRephaim has not replied
 Message 78 by Rrhain, posted 10-07-2008 3:58 AM LudoRephaim has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 75 of 124 (485158)
10-05-2008 7:30 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by LudoRephaim
10-05-2008 4:09 PM


Re: Once againhehehehehahahahehehehahaha
Leviticus 18:26-30.
And what weree those abominations??
Incest (18:6-17)
Menstrual sex (18:19)
Adultery (18:20)
Child sacrifce (18:21)
Human-animal sex (18:23)
And (da dada DAAAAHHH!!!!!!!!)
Homosexual sex (18:22).
So therefore, if Homosexuality is okay in your book, considering it is listed as "toeyveh" and not "Zimah" (as if God didn't want us to use common sense in interpreting his word) then do you consider Beastiality and child sacrifice okay?
Do you seriously consider menstrual sex to be comparable to child sacrifice???
WTF!!!!!!!
How many red blooded straight guys around the world have partaken in that "abomination" I wonder?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by LudoRephaim, posted 10-05-2008 4:09 PM LudoRephaim has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024