Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Participatory Government

Expand Messages
  • iltwoods1984
    the Bible does not in any way address homosexual orientation...It s not addressed in the Bible because homosexuality as a sexual orientation did not exist in
    Message 1 of 8 , Oct 4, 2002
      "the Bible does not in any way address homosexual orientation...It's
      not addressed in the Bible because homosexuality as a sexual
      orientation did not exist in Bible times."

      Homosexuality as a sexual orientation didn't exist in bible times?
      Where did you learn this? Does the same source say when
      homosexuality as a sexual orientation is first documented in history?

      Thank you sir.
    • nyguy_1225
      Till later then... ... KNOW ... BIBLE ... MORE. I ... SCRIPTURES, ... THEOLOGY ... AWHILE. ... very ... if ... it ... at a ... such ... writing?, ... the ...
      Message 2 of 8 , Oct 4, 2002
        Till later then...

        --- In exexgayministry@y..., BearJER@j... wrote:
        > AGREED, FAIR ENOUGH. TILL LATER,
        >
        > JERRY
        >
        > On Fri, 04 Oct 2002 10:57:04 -0000 nyguy_1225 <no_reply@y...>
        > writes:
        > > --- In exexgayministry@y..., BearJER@j... wrote:
        > > ALEX (AND OTHERS), I DON'T THINK I'M BEING LAZY BY WANTING TO
        KNOW
        > > WHAT YOU TEACH ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE. I'VE ALREADY READ THE
        BIBLE
        > > THROUGH FROM COVER TO COVER, BUT I'M SURE I CAN LEARN A LOT
        MORE. I
        > >
        > > WILL RESPOND TO YOUR POST IN DETAIL LATER WITH LOTS OF
        SCRIPTURES,
        > > HOPEFULLY USED CORRECTLY. FIRST I'LL CHECK THOSE PRO-GAY
        THEOLOGY
        > > WEBSITES OUT MORE THOROUGHLY, SO YOU WONT HEAR FROM ME FOR
        AWHILE.
        > > TILL LATER,
        > > JERRY
        > >
        > > Jerry (and others), Glad to hear from you and although I look
        very
        > > forward to your "responding to [my] post in detail with lots of
        > > scriptures," please bear in mind as I've said to you before that
        if
        > >
        > > we really intend to look at this passages with some degree of
        > > detail, accuracy and truly have a productive dialog about them,
        it
        > > might be most fruitful if we agree to examine the passages one
        at a
        > >
        > > time. In this way we can pay some due attention to addressing
        such
        > >
        > > questions as: (1) Who was the writer and to whom was he
        writing?,
        > > (2) What was the cultural-historical setting?, (3) What was the
        > > meaning of the words in their original language?, (4) What was
        the
        > > intended meaning of the author and why was he saying it?, (5)
        What
        > > should this mean to me in my situation today? These basic
        questions
        > >
        > > and others must be explored in any serious attempt to understand
        the
        > >
        > > Bible. On the other hand, if you intend to simply dump a
        truckload
        > >
        > > of passages into one post, you'll prohibit the very helpful and
        > > fruitful dialog you've often claimed to want.
        > >
        > > For that matter you may even choose to identify your posts by
        their
        > >
        > > respective passage references, e.g. Gen 1:27, Lev 18:22, 1 Cor.
        6:9,
        > >
        > > or Rom 1: 26-27, etc. I am more than willing to invest the time
        to
        > >
        > > examine these passages (if you bear with me as I do have limited
        > > time to invest here). However, I will expect you to invest the
        time
        > >
        > > and effort as well. In other words, I don't expect you to
        simply
        > > just sit back and say, "Now YOU tell ME what these mean." I
        will
        > > expect you to tell us why you think they prohibit any and all
        > > expressions of homosexuality. Looking forward to our dialog.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
        > >
        > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > > exexgayministry-unsubscribe@y...
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        > ________________________________________________________________
        > GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
        > Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
        > Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
        > http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
      • nyguy_1225
        Ideas and understandings of sexuality have changed greatly over the centuries. People in biblical times did not share our knowledge or customs of sexuality;
        Message 3 of 8 , Oct 5, 2002
          Ideas and understandings of sexuality have changed greatly over the
          centuries. People in biblical times did not share our knowledge or
          customs of sexuality; we do not share their experience. In those
          days there was no romantic dating as we know it today; marriages
          were arranged by fathers. Romance, as we know it, did not come into
          being until the Middle Ages, which is precisely why the period is
          referred to as the "romance period."

          The ancients, as MIT's David Halperin notes: "conceived
          of 'sexuality' in non-sexual terms: What was fundamental to their
          experience of sex was not anything we would regard as essentially
          sexual. Rather, it was something essentially social -- namely, the
          modality of power relations that informed and structured the sexual
          act." In the ancient world, sex was "not intrinsically relational
          or collaborative in character, it is, further, a deeply polarizing
          experience: It serves to divide, to classify, and to distribute its
          participants into distinct and radically dissimilar categories. Sex
          possesses this valence, apparently because it is conceived to center
          essentially on, and to define itself around, an asymmetrical
          gesture, that of the penetration of the body of one person by the
          body, and, specifically, by the phallus -- of another. .... The
          proper targets of [a citizen's] sexual desire include, specifically,
          women, boys, foreigners, and slaves -- all of them persons who do
          not enjoy the same legal and political rights and privileges that he
          does." In studies of sex in history, Stanford classics professor
          John J. Winkler warns against "reading contemporary concerns and
          politics into texts and artifacts removed from their social
          context." This, of course, is a basic principle of biblical
          hermeneutics.

          So contrary to the attacks by the antigay lobby, neither the men of
          Sodom, nor cult prostitutes, slave boys and masters, nor call boys
          and customers were gay. And contrary to the special pleading of the
          GLBTQ apologists, Ruth and Naomi were not lesbians, David and
          Jonathan weren't gay, and neither were Jesus and John. The Bible is
          an empty closet.

          And that is why I concur with the likes of Dr. Marten H. Woudstra,
          former Calvin Theological Seminary Old Testament scholar and
          chairman of the NIV Old Testament translation committee who
          said, "There is nothing in the Old Testament that corresponds to
          homosexuality as we understand it today," SMU New Testament scholar
          Victor Paul Furnish who said: "There is no text on homosexual
          orientation in the Bible," and Robin Scroggs of Union Seminary who
          said: "Biblical judgments against homosexuality are not relevant to
          today's debate. They should no longer be used, not because the
          Bible is not authoritative, but simply because it does not address
          the issues involved."

          I can't answer your second question precisely, however, the
          term "homosexuality" itself was only coined one century ago in 1892
          and prior to this was not used in any translations of the Bible.
          Harper's Bible Dictionary says of homosexuality: "A word for which
          there is no specific equivalent in the Hebrew OT or the Greek NT,
          since the concept itself as well as the English word originated only
          in the nineteenth century."

          On an unrelated note, please don't call me "sir" although I'm sure
          you did not mean it to be offensive. I'm just another man like you -
          - a recipient of God's indescribable grace, experiencing His loving
          presence even in the midst of our sometimes very difficult and cruel
          world.



          --- In exexgayministry@y..., iltwoods1984 <no_reply@y...> wrote:
          > "the Bible does not in any way address homosexual
          orientation...It's
          > not addressed in the Bible because homosexuality as a sexual
          > orientation did not exist in Bible times."
          >
          > Homosexuality as a sexual orientation didn't exist in bible
          times?
          > Where did you learn this? Does the same source say when
          > homosexuality as a sexual orientation is first documented in
          history?
          >
          > Thank you sir.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.