+
A PRIMER ON HOMO-HERMENEUTICS/3
.
3. These Will Not Inherit the Kingdom
.
Or do you not know that the unrighteous ones will not inherit God's
Kingdom? Do not be deceived! Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor
adulterers, nor effeminate appeasers, nor sexual perverts, nor thieves,
nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit
the Kingdom of God. And these some of you were; but you were washed
and sanctified and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in
the Spirit of our God. --- 1Corinthians 6:9-11 / Inclusive Edited Version
.
Now the homo-interpretation of this passage begins with the
recognition that the two Greek terms that I have here rendered into
English as 'effeminate appeasers' and 'sexual perverts' have been
variously translated in 25 English versions as 'unmanly', 'decadent',
'homosexuals', 'sodomites', 'perverts', 'male prostitutes',
'catamites', 'pederasts', and so on. From all this the writers observe
that "Apparently, lesbians are not included in this condemnation." But
this suggestion clearly does violence to the passage, since Paul is
obviously being deliberately inclusive in this list of unrighteous
people. Therefore, if anything is apparent, it is that 'effeminate
appeasers' and 'sexual perverts' includes pederasts, those who engage
in bestiality and other forms of unnatural sexual behavior, as well as
consenting adults in committed and loving (same gender) partnerships
(whether they be gays or lesbians). The writers then note that fundies
and evangelicals believe (rightly, in my judgment) that "this verse
condemns all homosexual activity, and that it is as valid today as it
was in the first century CE."
.
Then follows several snippets from conservative and liberal
theologians, which I shan't bother you with. Then the authors point out
(correctly) that the word 'homosexual' is a poor translation. Their
reasoning, however, leaves much to be desired. They claim that if Paul
had meant to convey the idea of 'homosexual' he would have used the
Greek word 'paiderasste' which "was the standard term at the time for
male homosexuals." But this would defeat the inclusiveness that Paul is
here striving after by excluding lesbians, which obviously he did NOT
want to do; and hence he chose the more general 'arsenokoitai' (which
I have rendered above as 'sexual perverts').
.
They then go on playing their word games to the end of generating as
much confusion as possible ("The precise meaning of arsenokoitai is
unclear.") so as to conclude that the passage "has no relation to
homosexuality in the normal sense of the term: i.e. consensual sexual
relations between adults of the same gender." But having now cleverly
installed themselves (by force) within the Kingdom of God (as if they
were righteous and faithful believers), the authors are not satisfied
with this, and go on at once to again assert that orientation
is incapable of change, and that "homosexual behavior is not
intrinsically sinful ..."
.
Thus we can plainly see that the ideology that empowers the entire
convoluted edifice of the homo hermeneutics rises from a direct denial
of the truths revealed in scripture. So they deny that homosexuality is
sinful, when the entire biblical tradition clearly indicates otherwise.
They deny that orientation/behavior can be changed by faith and
conversion, when Paul clearly states that is precisely what happened
to the Corinthians believers! Now they do not dare to call Paul a liar
directly, but that is exactly what their feeble denials and pathetic
assertions amount to.
.
And so it goes. Wherever the Bible states something which they
disapprove of, they yowl about bad translating, play their silly
word games, and install confusion and obscurity everywhere, so as to
conclude that the scriptures do not *really* say what it does say;
and lo and behold, the Word of God thus does agree entirely with
their abounding ignorance and idiocy! Now aren't you glad that
you're an enlightened and liberated Christian?
.
Up next: 4. The Problem With Jude
x+
+
A PRIMER ON HOMO-HERMENEUTICS/4
.
/ Ng: alt.religion.christian.biblestudy / 14March99 /
.
4. The Problem With Jude
.
So can we trust religioustolerance.org, and place our faith and eternal
destiny in the things that they say about the Sacred Scriptures? Before
you answer, have a close look at their brief commentary on 1 Timothy
1:9-10, which includes the following statement: "The book of Romans was
one of the 'Pastoral Letters' written by an unknown author perhaps half
a century after Paul's death, and falsely attributed to Paul." But,
of course, everyone knows that Romans is an authentic (indeed *the*
quintessential) epistle by Paul. What religioustolerance.org means to
say is that "The book of 1Timothy was ...".
.
Now I point out this absurd error not to ridicule the maintainers of
the www.religioustolerance.org web-site, but to show the Reader that
this sort of careless and bumbling "typo" is just the sort of mistakes
that are typical (and indeed pervasive) of the "noble" enterprise of
homo hermeneutics. Yes, they are so common because they arise directly
from an enormous absence of love and respect for the Word of God!
.
And having so quickly and erroneously dismissed 1Timothy, they move
on at once to the enlightened interpretation of the prophet Jude:
.
As Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them, in the like manner
to these fallen angels, having indulged in fornication, and having
lusted after *strange-flesh*, are set forth as an example of those
undergoing the penalty of eternal fire. [Jude verse 7 / IEV]
.
Note to Reader: for the full Inclusive Edited Version text of
'The Universal Epistle of Jude' please proceed at once to: http://
homestead.dejanews.com/user.textman/files/jude1.htm
.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -
.
Jude 7
[from 'The Bible and Homosexuality' by www.religioustolerance.org]
.
In the KJV, this refers to the people of Sodom as "giving themselves
over to fornication and going after strange flesh." "Strange flesh"
[ie. heteras sarkos] has been variously translated in other versions
as "perverted sensuality," "unnatural lust," "unnatural sex," "lust
of men for other men," and (in the NIV) "perversion."
.
Interpretations:
CTs [ie. Conservative Christian theologians]: This verse is referring
back to the story of Sodom and Gamorrah [ie. Gomorrah]. The male mob
in Sodom rejected the offer of a woman
.
[ie. He offered them his virgin daughters]
.
for sexual purposes and demanded to have sex with the angels.
.
[ie. the mob did not know that they were angels; and would not have
cared if they had known. They simply wanted to show the 'strangers'
their customary 'hospitality']
.
This proves that they were homosexuals.
.
[ie. it shows that they were arrogant and unrighteous sinners (law-
breakers, missing the mark), as well as sexual perverts; and thus a
stench unto the nostrils of the Lord and his good messengers]
.
The passage clearly condemns homosexual behavior.
.
[Indeed it does!]
.
LTs [ie. Liberal Christian theologians]: Jude does not define exactly
what sexual "perversion" he is referred to here. It seems to be sexual
in nature, because it is coupled with a condemnation of fornication.
Jude might have been referring to the intent of the mob to rape the
angels. Rape is a clear perversion of God-given sexuality. The fact
that the angels were non-human would have made their sin even worse;
bestiality would have been involved.
.
[Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha etc etc ... NO FRAGGIN COMMENT!]
.
Jude appears to be in conflict with other Biblical passages which also
refer to Genesis 19, but stress that the crime of the citizens of Sodom
was their lack of hospitality to strangers and insensitivity to the
needs of the poor.
.
[Oh yeah? And which passages might those be? References here would
be very *most* useful!]
.
Some biblical scholars interpret this verse as relating to an ancient
Jewish legend that the women of Sodom engaged in sexual intercourse
with angels.
.
[Huh? Wut? Does this have any connection to Genesis 6 maybe?]
.
Jude's reference would then be to the sin of bestiality, since angels
are a different species from humans.
.
[Different creatures, yes. But angels are *NOT* animals ... You baboon!]
.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -
.
Well, well, well! I art so overcome, that I art at a loss as to how to
begin. What can we say about such a huge and smelly pile of bullshit?!
Dare we suggest that religioustolerance.org has not the faintest glimmer
of understanding as regards the unfortunate epistle of Jude? Is this
not perfectly apparent to *all* True Believers? ... No?! ... Then let
us hasten at once to the heart of the matter. Let us see if there is
any truth to the assertion that Jude does not "define exactly" which
"sexual perversion" he is talking about ...
.
Now the first thing to do in order to understand v.7 is to place it
within its proper context. And the proper context is surely the entire
epistle as a whole. So the Universal Epistle of Jude is a letter to the
"Called Ones". It contains 25 pungently prophetic verses; which can be
set forth according to the following the thematic divisions:
.
1. Address, Blessing, & Opening (v.1-4)
2. The Lord's Constant Judgment (v.5-11)
3. The True Nature of These Distorted Ones (v.12-19)
4. Final Warnings & Admonitions (v.20-25)
.
The document as a whole is remarkably unified, coherent and concise,
*and* communicates its intent with both power and passion ... But only
to those who have ears to hear, and a heart open to receive the Truth
in humility and thanksgiving. In other words, ONLY the eyes of faith
are open to see and understand the Word of God! ... Amen!
.
In this letter to the churches, the prophet Jude has it in mind to
warn the faithful People of God about certain unrighteous people who
have entered into their assemblies, and made themselves right at home
therein. And who are these people, you ask? The prophet tells us that
they are "the Ones of Old (who were written about, and judged ungodly)".
And what do these 'Ones of Old' do? They deny Christ, and pervert grace
"into a license to be sexually unrestrained." And now they have "crept
in" among you (v.4).
.
The prophet then goes on (in section two) "to remind you (for you once
knew all these things)" of what the Lord did to "those who believed
not" (v.5). In v.6 he mentions "those Angels ... under darkness for
the judgment", and then it's on at once to our misinterpreted v.7 (see
above). Here we learn that the Ones of Old indulge in fornication, and
lust after "strange-flesh". And what might 'strange-flesh' be, you ask?
Well, let us just say that it has nothing whatsoever in common with the
*one-flesh* that our Lord spoke so passionately about! In any case,
what "these Dreaming Ones" (v.8) "understand 'naturally' is as
unreasoning animals; and in these things they are corrupted" (v.10).
.
Are we beginning to have an inkling about who the prophet is worried
about? No? Well fear not, for Jude hastens at once to describe the true
nature of the creeping Ones of Old, who are now "hidden reefs in your
love-feasts, feasting together with you without fear (and always
mindful unto themselves)". He compares them to "waterless clouds
carried about by the winds ..." (v.12), and "wild waves of the sea,
foaming out their own shameful actions" (v.13).
.
Is the light of understanding beginning to break through the heavy
darkness of ignorance, and centuries of deliberate misunderstanding and
willful concealment? "Yes, these Ones are the grumblers and complainers
who walk according to their own lusts. By their mouths they speak
haughty words; and also admire persons for the sake of advantage."
(v.16). Are you still unsure? Then consider this: "These are the Ones
creating divisions; these "natural" men and women (being utterly bereft
of the Holy Spirit)" (v.19)!
.
Now does anyone dare to claim that the prophet Jude does not know
*exactly* who these people are, and the things that they do? ... Who
rejects the Lord's righteous commands in the name of 'freedom and
liberation'; and at the same time defiles the flesh without shame or
conscience or remorse (cf. v.8)? Does anyone dare to accuse the Word of
God of being ignorant about these Dreaming Ones?! Do you understand now
why the many and varied apostate churches ignore and reject the epistle
of Jude? Yes indeed; for they consider it a great and terrible error
that it was ever even included among the Holy Books in the first place!
.
This, then, is the sole goal and purpose of all homo hermeneutics:
to blind your eyes to the saving Truth by any and every means at their
disposal. Therefore do NOT be deceived! The Word of God offers thee all
that thou needest to know concerning these so-called "controversial"
matters. And the Lord gave thee the mind and will to seek out the
Truth; and the heart to embrace it fully and without doubting ...
.
Therefore, let me end this brief primer on homo hermeneutics with
a quote (taken from the interpretation of 1Cor.6:9) by T.Crater:
"... A hallmark of Evangelicals is that we take a literal, normal,
face-value interpretation of the Bible. Some people attempt to
keep some form of Christianity and hold on to homosexuality, too.
It leads to strange interpretations of the Bible." . . .
Oh, yes; you can certainly say *that* again!
.
the almost inerrant one: textman ;>
.
P.S. For more information on the NT prophets James and Jude please
proceed to //homestead.dejanews.com/user.textman/ ... Where you may
also find the full text of this Primer; being also typo-free (I'm so
embarrased). And with many other challenging articles for God's People.
x
textman
*