Romans 1:26b -- against 'unnatural' female sex?

[Augustine2004]

Many moons ago, someone started a topic on whether the Bible really does condemn homosexuality–I think. I pointed out that Robert Alter claimed in his translation-commentary The Five Books of Moses: A Translation with Commentary (ISBN:0-393-01955-1) that lesbianism does not appear to be prohibited.

However, Paul may not have thought so. He is surely an authority, being one of Gamaliel’s students. In Romans he wrote (1:26), “. . . For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.” That seems clear: Paul did not approve of lesbianism as well as bestial acts by women.

It wasn’t until yesterday that I really became aware of that.

Your thoughts?

[Little Shepherd]

Yeah, it's pretty clear.

[Chocobear]

It's very obvious. Only a spiritually blind person would miss that verse's meaning.

[shadze]

In all honesty the Bible does not mention Lesbianism in the Old Testament.
We have a real problem here - The Old Testament was a book that contained
Blessings and Cursing for the Godly. Their is no law in the Old Testament
about same sex relationships amongst woman. I think this really odd.
The Romans scripture in full context shows the reader a sexual act which
Involves idol worship. If we then condemn any act that is involved in idol worship
we condemn sexulity in general. I really doubt scripture needed another 500
years to update its meaning in the New Testament. Before any judgment
is passed thier should be a confirming scriptures in both testaments.
The New Testament is a fulfillment of the Old not a upgrade.
With this in mind the passage in Romans is not about any sexual identity
but a clarification on idol worship. It reads People who are born heterosexual
and are involved in a act of homosexual IDOL WORSHIP will be punished.
This does not condemn someone who is homosexual why because heterosexual
acts within Idol worship are condemned.

[Little Shepherd]

Uh . . . no. But thanks for playing.

[shadze]

sigh you give a honest reply and are rewarded with a silly statement.
I interpret that as you have no facts to disagree to what I have written.
Just proves how brainwashed one can be when they write
statements producing no facts.Certainly your Faith is Blind

[Augustine2004]

In all honesty the Bible does not mention Lesbianism in the Old Testament.
We have a real problem here - The Old Testament was a book that contained
Blessings and Cursing for the Godly. Their is no law in the Old Testament
about same sex relationships amongst woman. I think this really odd.

If you really do think it's odd, why are you not questioning your interpretation of the Bible, that may be a sign it is wrong?

The Romans scripture in full context shows the reader a sexual act which
Involves idol worship.

I'm baffled how you got that.

If we then condemn any act that is involved in idol worship
we condemn sexulity in general.

I am even more baffled how worshipping idols could be equated with sexuality except in a rather remote and analogical sense.

With this in mind the passage in Romans is not about any sexual identity
but a clarification on idol worship. It reads People who are born heterosexual
and are involved in a act of homosexual IDOL WORSHIP will be punished.
This does not condemn someone who is homosexual why because heterosexual
acts within Idol worship are condemned.

May I be frank stating that I think either you are very badly confused or indulging in bafflegab?

[Little Shepherd]

sigh you give a honest reply and are rewarded with a silly statement.
I interpret that as you have no facts to disagree to what I have written.
Just proves how brainwashed one can be when they write
statements producing no facts.Certainly your Faith is Blind

It may be honest, but it's just a repetition of the baseless "it was only prohibited in the context of idol worship" statement. You're hardly the first to bring it up, and it's as unsupported by actual historical evidence now as it was when I first heard it a few years back. It took me by surprise once, and only once. What you're saying goes against the entirely of nearly 2,000 years of Christian teaching and scholarship on the matter, as well as hundreds of years of Jewish teaching and scholarship prior to that.

The fact of the matter is that, with the exception of child sacrifice, the context of worship isn't being spoken of at all in Leviticus 18. If you're going to be consistent, then you must also hold that incest and bestiality are condoned by God so long as they aren't done in a religious context. I don't think you'd be willing to go there. At least I would hope not. Otherwise to be consistent, you must accept that homosexual acts are prohibited, period, just as these other acts that it is sandwiched between in Leviticus 18.

It also shows a basic misunderstanding of Jewish law and ancient Hebrew language use to think for a second that not specifically mentioning females in any way excludes them from the prohibition against homosexual acts in Leviticus 18. Unless there was some physical reason for doing so(such as in the case of rules concerning menstruation and childbirth) or a circumstance in which women were expected to behave differently from men, it was very unusual in Hebrew law to single women out specifically. So unless an exception was specifically made on one of those grounds, any laws pertaining to men were considered equally applicable to women in analogous situations. I see no such exception in Leviticus 18, old Jewish writings make it clear this is how pre-Christian Jews themselves interpreted it, and Romans 1 sets the question to rest.

Considering the amount of study you've apparently done on the topic, I'm being very nice here. When you say something as unsubstantiated and half-baked as you did, you really shouldn't expect serious responses. But I'm a nice guy, so . . . there goes another half hour of my life, repeating the same stuff that anyone could know with even a tiny bit of serious study into the issue.

[shadze]

It may be honest, but it's just a repetition of the baseless "it was only prohibited in the context of idol worship" statement. You're hardly the first to bring it up, and it's as unsupported by actual historical evidence now as it was when I first heard it a few years back. It took me by surprise once, and only once. What you're saying goes against the entirely of nearly 2,000 years of Christian teaching and scholarship on the matter, as well as hundreds of years of Jewish teaching and scholarship prior to that.

Im afraid it is you who is incorrect. Thier is now debate amongst the Jews about wether the Torah does condemn Homosexuality.
http://www.myjewishlearning.com/life...exuality.shtml

The fact of the matter is that, with the exception of child sacrifice, the context of worship isn't being spoken of at all in Leviticus 18. If you're going to be consistent, then you must also hold that incest and bestiality are condoned by God so long as they aren't done in a religious context. I don't think you'd be willing to go there. At least I would hope not. Otherwise to be consistent, you must accept that homosexual acts are prohibited, period, just as these other acts that it is sandwiched between in Leviticus 18.



It is a known fact that Leveiticus reflects the practices of the time forbidden. The worship of asheroth is very old and showed temple male prostitute with same sex acts. With this in mind we can see
the Paul in romans was condeming idol worship in general.

It also shows a basic misunderstanding of Jewish law and ancient Hebrew language use to think for a second that not specifically mentioning females in any way excludes them from the prohibition against homosexual acts in Leviticus 18. Unless there was some physical reason for doing so(such as in the case of rules concerning menstruation and childbirth) or a circumstance in which women were expected to behave differently from men, it was very unusual in Hebrew law to single women out specifically. So unless an exception was specifically made on one of those grounds, any laws pertaining to men were considered equally applicable to women in analogous situations. I see no such exception in Leviticus 18, old Jewish writings make it clear this is how pre-Christian Jews themselves interpreted it, and Romans 1 sets the question to rest.

Your acts in levitcus as was written earlier reflect homosexaul acts involved in Idol worship
and does not condemn homosexuality in general.

Considering the amount of study you've apparently done on the topic, I'm being very nice here. When you say something as unsubstantiated and half-baked as you did, you really shouldn't expect serious responses. But I'm a nice guy, so . . . there goes another half hour of my life, repeating the same stuff that anyone could know with even a tiny bit of serious study into the issue.

I cannot believe how you can ignore valid facts. Why wasnt lesbianism condemned in the old testament as it under your blinded translation was condemned in the New testament.
You cannot pick up scripture here and thier. It must be consistent through out the bible.
You also ignored another fact both scriptures refer to idol worship as was part of the Daiana
worship in Pauls time to the asteroth in the time of Moses. With this in mind you cannot condemn
homosexual acts condemned in idol worship. You also have to condemn heteresexual acts in idol worship. When reading roman read it in FULL Context not take pieces from it to support your bigotry

[Little Shepherd]

Im afraid it is you who is incorrect. Thier is now debate amongst the Jews about wether the Torah does condemn Homosexuality.

Modern Jewish arguments are relevant to Christians how? If they wish to argue against the entirety of pre-Christian Jewish teaching(not to mention nearly 2 millenia of post-Christian Jewish teaching) on the matter, that has no bearing on the fact of the matter.

It is a known fact that Leveiticus reflects the practices of the time forbidden. The worship of asheroth is very old and showed temple male prostitute with same sex acts. With this in mind we can see
the Paul in romans was condeming idol worship in general.

Oh, gosh. Another person nearly completely unknowledgeable about ANE legal codes in general. Yes, idolatry was one of the concerns addressed in Leviticus, but it was not the only concern, and the context of idolatry cannot be read into every prohibition that you wish to ignore nowadays. The context of Leviticus 18, as I pointed out, is not that of idol worship, but of sexual behavior in general. Is incest okay? Is bestiality okay? If your answer is no, then why not? They're forbidden in the exact same chapter as homosexual acts. The prohibition on homosexual acts is literally sandwiched between them.

Your acts in levitcus as was written earlier reflect homosexaul acts involved in Idol worship
and does not condemn homosexuality in general.

I already pointed out that this is not the case. I'm afraid your baseless assertion to the contrary is not enough to warp reality.

I cannot believe how you can ignore valid facts.

Since you haven't presented any valid facts, there has been precious little of substance for me to ignore. If you'd like to rectify the situation, I'm all ears. Simply stating that I'm ignoring something that you haven't bothered to substantiate won't get you anywhere.

Why wasnt lesbianism condemned in the old testament as it under your blinded translation was condemned in the New testament.

In my previous post, I explained how lesbianism was very much condemned in the Old Testament. It's not my fault that you don't know much(if anything) about ANE legal codes, the context of Leviticus 18, ancient Hebrew language usage, and how those all relate to the application of laws to people of both sexes in general.

You cannot pick up scripture here and thier. It must be consistent through out the bible.

I'd advise you to take your own advice. In a passage dealing with all kinds of sexual immorality, you attempt to press a special context on a single verse. It is therefore you who is "picking up scripture here and there." The prohibition against homosexual acts(including lesbianism) is quite consistent throughout, and you've presented nothing beyond baseless assertions. Certainly nothing of actual substance in support of a contrary opinion.

You also ignored another fact both scriptures refer to idol worship as was part of the Daiana
worship in Pauls time to the asteroth in the time of Moses.

I already pointed out that Leviticus 18 is not referring to such at all. Romans 1 mentions idolatry, but the various sins it mentions afterward are not in the context of idolatry. Unless you're going to claim that other such things as "murder, strife, deceit, malice; . . ." are only being forbidden in the context of idol worship. I think it would do you well to actually read the passages you're commenting on so that you don't keep repeating these obvious errors.

With this in mind you cannot condemn homosexual acts condemned in idol worship. You also have to condemn heteresexual acts in idol worship. When reading roman read it in FULL Context not take pieces from it to support your bigotry

Since you've yet to say anything remotely true, my "bigotry," as you call it, is perfectly justified. And I still stand by my original statement. "Uh . . . no. But thanks for playing."

[Cyber Disciple]

Well I never Read Romans 1:26 Without Reading Romans 2:1-5

[themuzicman]

Many moons ago, someone started a topic on whether the Bible really does condemn homosexuality–I think. I pointed out that Robert Alter claimed in his translation-commentary The Five Books of Moses: A Translation with Commentary (ISBN:0-393-01955-1) that lesbianism does not appear to be prohibited.

However, Paul may not have thought so. He is surely an authority, being one of Gamaliel’s students. In Romans he wrote (1:26), “. . . For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.” That seems clear: Paul did not approve of lesbianism as well as bestial acts by women.

It wasn’t until yesterday that I really became aware of that.

Your thoughts?

That would probably fall under "adultery", and be treated as such. Male homosexuality is apparently sufficiently MORE disgusting than lesbianism that it requires it's own mention and immediate penalty.

Michael

[shadze]

In my previous post, I explained how lesbianism was very much condemned in the Old Testament. It's not my fault that you don't know much(if anything) about ANE legal codes, the context of Leviticus 18, ancient Hebrew language usage, and how those all relate to the application of laws to people of both sexes in general.

Show me the scripture were lesbianism is mentioned a abomination in the Old Testament . You cant you have proven nothing.
Thier is no scripture

Because their is no mention of this in the same passages of scripture the Toevah meaning was more in reference to anal sex in Temple worship
than it referring to same sexuality. The Jews themselves fell away from God as we know and Preach a system full of traditions of Men.
How therefore can we decipher a God given inspiration with their imperfections. If God meant this to be a sexual condemnation then both
sexes wpuld of been condemned. Lev 18 refers to Idol Worship and sexual acts. Romans 1 is just the same. The amusing part of your bigotry
is you are so blinded to this fact. Since lesbianism is not written in the Old testament then it is clear without any of your preconcieved reasoning
that Lev 18 and confirmed in Rom 1 is about Idol worship and NOT SEXUAL GENDER

[Augustine2004]

Shadze, please, don't repeat anymore.