Thursday, December 5, 2013 8:41:31 PM
Speaking of being uninformed, if it's not so bad (following the New Testament) and you`re so much more informed than "Christians", why do you hate it so much yourself?
Would you explain what you mean, because I`m not following you. Are you replying to me or using a generic `you`?
Thursday, December 5, 2013 8:26:14 PM
Speaking of being uninformed, if it's not so bad (following the New Testament) and you`re so much more informed than "Christians", why do you hate it so much yourself? You see, ALL people bend and twist things to serve their individual purpose.
Thursday, December 5, 2013 8:11:11 PM
The words used in that translation were as CrakrJak described.
Except that they weren't.
But I admit that they`re close enough for a plausible speculative etymology.
So why did Paul make up a new word rather than using existing words? He was well educated in Greek - he would have known them. Homosexuality was hardly unknown in ancient Greece (although they viewed it differently to the modern idea of it).
Paul`s writing is notoriously open to interpretation (and notoriously unpleasant).
Thursday, December 5, 2013 7:56:36 PM
Christ did talk about marriage as being between a man and a woman. The new testament talks about sexual immorality. Which was sex among unmarried people. The bible talks about spouses submitting to one another. And as too slavery it was not that God wanted slavery (God didnt want Kings by the way) it was that slaves could inherit the kingdom and everlasting life and that was more important that this life.
Thursday, December 5, 2013 11:36:03 AM
@Angilion Yes, I am sure CrakrJak was aware that the OT was originally written in Hebrew (he said "Greek translation").
Whenever Paul or any of the Gospel writers references Old Testament scripture in their writing, they use the Septuagint (a very popular Greek translation). The words used in that translation were as CrakrJak described.