Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder And yep, I just googled "Where was (is) the Garden of Eden". Those wacky Mormons think it was Jackson County, MO. Siiiiiiiiiiigggghhhh...
Originally Posted By doombuggy "Straight out of the prophet's mouth." Wouldn't that be straight from the prophet's HAT? GOD I love south park lol
Originally Posted By barboy /// the more I'm discovering the reasons for these cities going under was for religious infidelity. Not homosexuality./// Well Dean, according to Genisis 19, males gathered outside Lott's place and demanded Lott surrender his two male guests(angels)so that they could have sex with the two. These types of acts, again based on Bible passages, displeased God; so he rained on the cities with brimstone and fire(King James version) or if you prefer burning sulfur(NIV).
Originally Posted By Dabob2 "according to Genisis 19, males gathered outside Lott's place and demanded Lott surrender his two male guests(angels)so that they could have sex with the two." The KJ translation says they demanded the angels be brought out so they could "know" them. Because the English word "know" is used elsewhere in KJ as a euphemism for sex, this had led to this confusion. Subsequent English translations have made things worse by actually saying "sex." But if you look at the original, the word used is simply the word for "to know" in the non-sexual sense, not the word for sex. So most theologians agree that this story is not about sex, but about the sin of turning over one's guests to his enemies, and that over the years "sodomy" became a misnomer. If it is about sex, it would be about unwilling sex, ie rape, obviously a sin regardless of the genders involved. In the NT, Jesus even states flat out that "the sin of your sister Sodom" was turning over guests to their enemies. You can look it up.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>according to Genisis 19, males gathered outside Lott's place and demanded Lott surrender his two male guests(angels)so that they could have sex with the two.<< As usual, what the Bible says and what some of its adherents have DECIDED it says are two different things. This is way up there on the list of reasons why the Bible MUST NOT be used as a basis for a society. PLEASE think carefully about this, Barboy. It's a very important concept in the whole America thing.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer It's hard enough to read a book from just fifty or sixty years ago and to understand the idioms and the meaning of certain words. Seeing the word "cool" in something by Thomas Wolfe means a whole different thing than seeing it in something by Tom Wolfe. Even the meanings of a document that has 200 years of intensive analysis of meaning and intent such as the Constitution is still up for interpretation. Reading Paul or Augustine or Billy Graham tells us a lot more about those individuals and the times in which they lived than it does about the original intent and meaning of the Bible. You can't remove the person from the context of their time. Someone in the 21st Century doesn't have the cultural comprehension needed to fully understand Leviticus. They can study it, they can study the history of the era, but the full weight and meaning of every day idioms are lost to time. Regardless, whether Leviticus forbids homosexuality is irrelevant according to Christian theology. Christ's sacrificed freed us from the ancient laws.
Originally Posted By barboy ///The KJ translation says they demanded the angels be brought out so they could "know" them. Because the English word "know" is used elsewhere in KJ as a euphemism for sex,/// Yep, I know that So if "know" in this context is not about sex, then what is it? Further, if sex is not at issue then why did Lott offer the male mob his **VIRGINOUS** girls as a replacement? Why didn't he offer them turkey on rye, blankets or wine? ///So most theologians agree that this story is not about sex,/// Now you just made that up---there is no way you could possibly know that.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>So if "know" in this context is not about sex, then what is it?<< It's an old English translation from ancient Hebrew, which neither you nor, I'm assuming, your pastor know how to read. But to answer your question directly, it means "interrogate". Selah. >>Further, if sex is not at issue then why did Lott offer the male mob his **VIRGINOUS** girls as a replacement?<< Because he was a righteous man! Duh.
Originally Posted By barboy ///Bible MUST NOT be used as a basis for a society./// I wish that were the case...... faith and politics make for a bad combo. At least we aren't some Mid East Koran society. But, 'ya' I don't dig it when scripture affects our public policy. ///PLEASE think carefully about this, Barboy. /// I have(well, at least I believe that I have given ample time mulling it over). Anyway, I don't care too much about this Bible stuff since I am not a devotee. If there weren't so many contradictions and far out stories in it I might take it seriously.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 "So if "know" in this context is not about sex, then what is it?" Mawnck answered that. "Further, if sex is not at issue then why did Lott offer the male mob his **VIRGINOUS** girls as a replacement? Why didn't he offer them turkey on rye, blankets or wine? " He was offering them sex with women as a bribe-- here, you can have sex with these girls if you leave our guests alone. ///So most theologians agree that this story is not about sex,/// "Now you just made that up---there is no way you could possibly know that." Actually I do, and a quick google search would probably show you the same. I remember it from pre-Internet days because it was something I was interested in as a gay Christian, and it was important to me at the time, so it was significant to me when I read it. And the passage on Jesus' reference to it is certainly easy to find.
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 <<I'm much more willing to believe the Garden of Eden was in what is now Iraq or wherever than I am that it was in Missouri>> There might be a place called Garden of Eden in Missouri, St Louis likely.
Originally Posted By YumaJohn Back in post 27 Tom Sawyer had it exactly right. Part of Jesus's sacrifice was to free us from ancient Judaic law. This is why most Christians eat shellfish, cut their beards, wear clothes made of two cloths, etc. Why so many fundamentalists latch on to Leviticus's ban on homosexuality is truly a mystery to me. I am a believer and truly resent the bad name these bigots give my religion. I have nothing against gays whatsoever.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
