Palin joins Fox - right where she belongs!

[pattygreen 5]

What part of her statement do you consider WRONG!!! And why? QUOTE First of all, the bible was written by men, not God, not women and each man who has rewritten the bible has added his own interpretation of what the original words mean when translated into another language

God gave the words, men wrote them down. When the bible was re-written, noone added his own interpretations to it.

If you feel that what was written was interpreted differently, then you may read from the original greek which is translated into english. I have that bible and when I compare it to other translations (NIV,American Standard,KJV, Amplified, etc.)There is no differing in meanings.

[tdslf1 0]

There goes that lack of humility I was mentioning. No ones version about the bible can be right except hers. No one can interprete it like her thus they have to oviously be wrong. Only she knows what the intent of founding fathers and God intended for everyone. Arrogant people never see the lack.

[pattygreen 5]

PG: You have used the quote below to prove that God opposes homosexuality. The following is a rabbi's interpretation and I would think he was well versed and knowledgable:

DOES THE BIBLE PROHIBIT HOMOSEXUALITY?

Jacob Milgrom

____________________________________________________________

The biblical prohibition is addressed only to Israel. It is incorrect to apply it on a universal scale.

____________________________________________________________

This past Yom Kippur, September 25, 1993, my synagogue invited me to explain the afternoon scriptural reading, the list of forbidden sexual liasons in Leviticus 18. I chose to focus on what is today one of the most frequently quoted passages in the entire Bible, "Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman, it is an abomination" (Leviticus 18:22).

What I said may be both good news and bad news to my Christian friends, depending on their position on gay and lesbian rights. This biblical prohibition is addressed only to the Jews. Non-Jews are affected only if they reside in the Holy Land, but not elsewhere (see the closing exhortation in Leviticus 18, verses 24-30). Thus, it is incorrect to apply this prohibition on a universal scale.< /span>

But I spoke to my fellow Jews, who are required to observe this prohibition. What is the rationale for this prohibition? In a previous column, I noted that the Bible's impurity rules are part of a symbol system representing the forces of life and death. Israel is required to avoid these impurities and adhere to the laws commanded by God, who promotes the forces of life. Thus in the same chapter we read, "You shall heed my statutues and my rules, by doing them one shall live" (Leviticus 18:5). A man who discharges semen, whether intentionally or otherwise, is declared impure and must purify himself by bathing (a sort of re-baptism) before he is permitted to enter the Temple or touch sacred (sacrificial) food (Leviticus 15:16-18). Why? Because semen stands for life, and the loss of semen symbolizes the loss of life.

Note also that in the entire list of forbidden sexual unions, THERE IS NO PROHIBITION AGAINST LESBIANISM. Can it be that lesbianism did not exist in ancient times or that Scripture was unaware of its existence? Lesbians existed and flourished, as attested in an old (pre-Israelite) Babylonian text and in the work of the lesbian poet Sappho (born c. 612 B.C.E., during the time of the First Temple), who came from the island of Lesbos (hence lesbianism). But there is a fundamental difference between the homosexual acts of men andwomen. IN LESBIANISM THERE IS NO SPILLING OF SEED. Thus life is not symbolically lost, and therefore lesbianism is not prohibited in the Bible.

My argument ostensibly can be countered by a more comprehensive biblical injunction. The very first commandment, given to Adam and repeated to Noah, is "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth" (Genesis 1:28 and Genesis 9:1,7). The descendents of Noah--the entire human race--are duty-bound to fulfill this commandment. But the truth is that we have not only filled the earth, we have over-filled it. This does not mean, however, that the commandment should be thought of as no longer in force--especially among Jews, who have lost a third of their members in our lifetime. I recall an incident during a premarital interview from the early years of my rabbinate. The starry-eyed bride declared her noble intention to have twelve children to compensate for the tragic loss of six million killed in the Holocaust. I gasped, "Must you do it all by yourself?"

I have since come to regret my flippant reply. This couple regarded their forthcoming marriage as a sacrament not just between themselves, but with the Jewish people. The problem has worsened for American Jews. Because intermarriage is rife and the Jewish birth rate is low, American Jewry, once at zero population growth, has dipped into the minus column. Were it not for a steady stream of converts, the extinction of American Jewry would be even more imminent. For us the divine command, "Be fruitful and multiply" is truly in force.

To Jewish homosexuals I offer an unoriginal solution. As compensation for your loss of seed, adopt children. Although adoption was practiced in the ancient world (as attested in Babylonian law), there is no biblical procedure or institution of adoption. As a result the institution of adoption is absent from rabbinic jurisprudence. Yet there are isolated cases of a kind of pseudo-adoption in the Bible. For example, Abraham, long childless, complains to God that Eliezer of Damascus, his steward, will inherit him (Genesis 15:2). And barren Rachel beseeches her husband Jacob, "Here is my maid Bilhah--go into her that she may bear on my knees and that through her I too may have children" (Genesis 30:3). Adoption is certainly a possibility today. Lesbian couples have an additional advantage. Not only do they not violate biblical law, but through artificial insemination each can become the natural mother of her children.

Thus from the Bible we can infer the following: Lesbians, presumably half of the world's homosexual population, are not mentioned. More than ninety-nine percent of the gays, namely non-Jews, are not addressed. This leaves the small number of male Jewish gays subject to this prohibition. If they are biologically or psychologically incapable of procreation, adoption provides a solution.

I hope the Eternal, in love and compassion, will then reckon their spilled seed as producing fruit.< /span>

Jacob Milgrom.

Another interpretation and I assume different from yours. Again proving my point.

This guy has not read the bible, for if he did, he wouldn't believe the malarky he does. The laws that God handed down in the Old Testament are for all people, not just the Jews. "Thou shalt not murder" is also an OT law. Is he going to say that Christians do not need to adhere to that law because God spoke it to the Jews?

What about all the New Testament writings forbidding Homosexuality? Even if that law was given to only the Jews, which it wasn't, Jesus gives it to all of us also in the NT.

The problem with people interpreting the bible is that they do not know ALL of it before they come to their conclusion. They pick something out of the bible and try to conform their rules of morality through one verse.

[BJean 16]

You do know folks, that there is a whole group of "born agains" who think it is their mission to convert Jews to Christianity. Talk about arrogance!

patty, to say that all of the translations of the Bible have never resulted in any passage being changed, just proves that you are missing out on this life. You have wrapped yourself up in what you think is the word of God and you have closed yourself off to the real message of the Bible. You have decided what the Bible says, what it intends for us, what God expects and what he promises. But there is much more to learning to live with the Bible and spirituality. It transends your small little narrow-minded world. You're missing it and will continue to miss it until you become open and accepting of other doctrines and people outside your brand of Christianity.

You say you are happy that God has brought you into his arms and has made you the Bible disciple you are today and you are happy with it. I don't doubt that your life is improved over the way you were living, but unfortunately you have not reached nirvana yet. You have a far, far way to go in order to have true understanding of the world, the universe and beyond.

And trust me, you do not sound happy. You sound as if you struggle everyday. You sound like someone who is unhappy and fighting to resist the sins that you are faced with everyday. It doesn't have to be that hard. Life can be much more pleasant and enjoyable and you can make good choices much more easily if only you would throw down that cloak of superiority and become open to the bigger world instead of staying bolted to just the small little narrow tiny space on earth that you occupy.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

This guy has not read the bible, for if he did, he wouldn't believe the malarky he does.

"This guy" is a rabbi and he didn't read the bible - are you kidding me?

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Again this speaks to different translations and refers to the original Greek words and how they could be interpreted differently. And 25 English VERSIONS of the bible? Why do we need 25 if everyone should be on the same page? With only one interpretation: Pattygreen's.

I Corinthians 6:9:

The passage: In his first epistle to the church at Corinth, Paul lists many activities that he believes will prevent people from inheriting the Kingdom of God (heaven). Robertson's Word Studies refers to this passage as: "a solemn roll call of the damned even if some of their names are on the church roll in Corinth whether officers or ordinary members." 1

Unfortunately, the Greek original from which many English language Bibles have been translated, is ambiguous about two of the groups who are condemned.

The King James Version of the Bible translates verse 9 and 10 as:

"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." (Emphasis ours)

This verse has been translated in many ways among the 25 English versions of the Bible that we have analyzed. Unfortunately, many of the translations do not differentiate between:

Persons who are sexually attracted to others of the same-sex, but who are celibate and do not act on their desire, andPersons who are are sexually active and who act on their sexual attraction to others of the same sex.

The two activities of interest -- shown above in bold -- have been variously translated as:

effeminate (KJV, NASB): In the English language, this covers a wide range of male behavior such as being unmanly, lacking virility. One might think of the characters "John," the receptionist on NYPD Blue, or "Jack" on Will and Grace.

homosexuals, variously described as: "men who practice homosexuality," (ESV);"those who participate in homosexuality," (Amplified); "abusers of themselves with men," (KJV); "practicing homosexuals," (NET Bible). This translation would refer only to persons with a homosexual or bisexual orientation who is sexually active with persons of the same sex. It would not include persons who are sexually attracted to persons of the same sex, but who are celibate."homosexuals," (NASB, CSB, NKJ, NLT, The Great Book: The New Testament in Plain English); "homosexual perversion," (NEB); "homosexual offenders," (NIV); "liers with mankind," (Rhiems); and "homosexual perverts." (TEV) "passive homosexual partners." (NET Bible)Although "homosexual" is a very common translation, it is almost certain to be inaccurate:

If Paul wanted to refer to homosexual behavior, he would have used the word "paiderasste." That was the standard Greek term at the time for sexual behavior between males.

The second term is "arsenokoitai" in Greek. The exact meaning of this word is lost. It seems to have been a term created by Paul for this verse. "Arsen" means "man" in Greek. So there is no way that "arsenokoitai" could refer to both male and female homosexuals. It seems that the translators gave in to the temptation to widen Paul's condemnation to include lesbians as well as gay males.Unfortunately, the term "homosexual" is commonly defined in two different ways: as a behavior (engaging in same-sex activity) or as a sexual orientation (being sexually attracted only to members of the same sex). Most of the biblical translations appear to refer to behavior rather than orientation.

male prostitutes, also described as "men kept for unnatural purposes." The term "male prostitutes" (NIV, NRSV, CSB, NLT) can be interpreted in modern times as men who are paid to have sex with men only or with women only or with men or women. The original Greek appears to refer only to male-male contact.

catamites, or boy prostitute. This is a young male who is kept as a sexual partner of an adult male. (Jerusalem Bible, NAB, James Moffatt). These translations provide another example of a theme that runs throughout the Bible: the transfer of guilt and punishment from guilty perpetrators to innocent persons.

pederasts: male adults who sexually abuse boys; an abusive pedophile (an adult who molests young children) or abusive hebephile (an adult who molests post-pubertal teenagers).

perverts: a person engaged in some undefined activity that is one of the dozens of sexual activities that some consider to be perversions. (Phillips, The Great Book: The New Testament in Plain English)

sodomites: This used to refer to inhabitants of the city of Sodom which is described in Genesis 19. It is now used as a "snarl" word to refer to men who have sex with men. InGenesis 19, the men of the city are described as wanting to rape some male visitors. Many Christians interpret this as a blanket condemnation of all homosexual behavior, whether rape or consensual; whether a one-night stand or within a committed relationship. (NRSV, NKJ, NAB).

other terms: The Message refers to "Those who ... use and abuse sex," which is probably the broadest translation ever.BBE translates it as "or is less than a man, or makes a wrong use of men."

Lost meaning? Broadening translations? Proves my point, AGAIN.

Edited January 18, 2010 by Cleo's Mom

[Devana 0]

My point was that people DO interpret and understand things differently. It is not a divine understanding you get when you believe. I have had this same bible discussion with many----from others just interested as myself, to preachers, and even a catholic Nun. The one word those TEACHERS used, every single one of them, was Faith. You just have faith that this is what it is meant to be.

I have no problem with that, but I am not going to buy the idea that every word is exact truth, and in exact form of how it was originally written. Questioning is not disbelieving. To question implies belief.

For instance away from the Bible---because believe it or not this is NOT a bible thread----we will take a simple sentence, and show how people say it and mean it make it mean totally different things, even tho it is the exact same sentence.

"Oh my God, I am pregnant!"

Said along with jumping up and down and tears of happiness by the couple who had been fighting infertitlity for years, it is a happy statement.

The same sentence uttered in fear by an unwed HS girl, is still the same sentence, but means a world of different things.

You're so right here, Kat. I recall taking a communication course in the mid '70's where the professor took two people out of the class and showed them a photograph. They each came back into the class separately and described the picture. One described it as the first warm day of very early spring. The sun was shining and the snow was beginning to melt. The old woman was delighted to be out walking for possibly the first time since winter and she had been to the store and was coming home in the sunshine with a few groceries.

The other person described the scene as a cold and snowy day. The poor old woman was trudging home in the snow, lugging heavy groceries. She was probably alone and lonely and had nobody to help her with her shopping.

Two totally different interpretations of the SAME PHOTOGRAPH. I think the interpretation of words is even more open to different perceptions. (Hence the use of emoticons in forums like this to help the writer get across the intended meaning.)

The point of the class was to explore perceptions and why we perceive in the different ways we do.

There are words written down in the Bible that are as solid as the photograph my classmates looked at. But how we interpret those words or that photograph has everything to do with what we are and our past experiences.

[BJean 16]

Thank you Devana! Kat and you both have stated the obvious so that no one, even the most obtuse, can mistake that the Bible can be interpreted as many different ways as there have been translations and readers.

That's one very good reason why we have so many denominations in the Christian faith.

Furthermore, there is even more than one "bible" with many different deities hailed as the one true god. And the followers of those texts believe with all their heart that their faith in that deity is what will get them into heaven.

Even the Catholic church recognizes and respects the sacraments of other church denominations although some of the fundamentalist religions are not so generous. They believe that they are the ones with the only correct interpretation of the Bible (because that's what they've done when coming up with their religion that is different from all of the others.)

I appreciate very much that you all stated it so simply and obviously.

[pattygreen 5]

You do know folks, that there is a whole group of "born agains" who think it is their mission to convert Jews to Christianity. Talk about arrogance!

Not 'just' jews, but all people. It is the Christians mission to tell all about Jesus, the Messiah who came to save the people from their sins. The Jewish people have missed his coming. They do not accept the truth that Jesus was the Messiah they have been waiting for. How is that arrogance? I call it love. Christians want 'all' people, even the jews, to know about Jesus. Arrogance? No way.

patty, to say that all of the translations of the Bible have never resulted in any passage being changed, just proves that you are missing out on this life. You have wrapped yourself up in what you think is the word of God and you have closed yourself off to the real message of the Bible. You have decided what the Bible says, what it intends for us, what God expects and what he promises. But there is much more to learning to live with the Bible and spirituality. It transends your small little narrow-minded world. You're missing it and will continue to miss it until you become open and accepting of other doctrines and people outside your brand of Christianity.

You say you are happy that God has brought you into his arms and has made you the Bible disciple you are today and you are happy with it. I don't doubt that your life is improved over the way you were living, but unfortunately you have not reached nirvana yet. You have a far, far way to go in order to have true understanding of the world, the universe and beyond.

I don't desire to reach nirvana. Or at least your definition of it. I believe that knowing Jesus is the ultimate joy and rest and peace. He is all I need.

And trust me, you do not sound happy. You sound as if you struggle everyday. You sound like someone who is unhappy and fighting to resist the sins that you are faced with everyday. It doesn't have to be that hard. Life can be much more pleasant and enjoyable and you can make good choices much more easily if only you would throw down that cloak of superiority and become open to the bigger world instead of staying bolted to just the small little narrow tiny space on earth that you occupy.

Wrong. I am very happy. I do not ever struggle, cause Jesus did all the struggling for me on the cross. I am free. My sinful life is just that. I understand that I will sin every day, and accept that. I know what Jesus has done for me, and accept his free gift of forgiveness. And because I have been born again, I know where I will live eternally, I know who has my back, I know who is in control, I have no fears, I have peace and joy and contentment in my life. It is your world that is in turmoil, not mine. You don't even know what God considers right and wrong. Your right and wrong is determined by how you feel about an issue at the time. You have no absolutes or moral code to abide by. Without one, you will always be questioning, never really knowing truth.

[pattygreen 5]

This guy has not read the bible, for if he did, he wouldn't believe the malarky he does.

"This guy" is a rabbi and he didn't read the bible - are you kidding me?

The whole, complete bible includes the new testament.

[pattygreen 5]

Again this speaks to different translations and refers to the original Greek words and how they could be interpreted differently. And 25 English VERSIONS of the bible? Why do we need 25 if everyone should be on the same page? With only one interpretation: Pattygreen's.

I Corinthians 6:9:

The passage: In his first epistle to the church at Corinth, Paul lists many activities that he believes will prevent people from inheriting the Kingdom of God (heaven). Robertson's Word Studies refers to this passage as: "a solemn roll call of the damned even if some of their names are on the church roll in Corinth whether officers or ordinary members." 1

Unfortunately, the Greek original from which many English language Bibles have been translated, is ambiguous about two of the groups who are condemned.

The King James Version of the Bible translates verse 9 and 10 as:

"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." (Emphasis ours)

This verse has been translated in many ways among the 25 English versions of the Bible that we have analyzed. Unfortunately, many of the translations do not differentiate between:

Persons who are sexually attracted to others of the same-sex, but who are celibate and do not act on their desire, andPersons who are are sexually active and who act on their sexual attraction to others of the same sex.

The two activities of interest -- shown above in bold -- have been variously translated as:

effeminate (KJV, NASB): In the English language, this covers a wide range of male behavior such as being unmanly, lacking virility. One might think of the characters "John," the receptionist on NYPD Blue, or "Jack" on Will and Grace.

homosexuals, variously described as: "men who practice homosexuality," (ESV);"those who participate in homosexuality," (Amplified); "abusers of themselves with men," (KJV); "practicing homosexuals," (NET Bible). This translation would refer only to persons with a homosexual or bisexual orientation who is sexually active with persons of the same sex. It would not include persons who are sexually attracted to persons of the same sex, but who are celibate."homosexuals," (NASB, CSB, NKJ, NLT, The Great Book: The New Testament in Plain English); "homosexual perversion," (NEB); "homosexual offenders," (NIV); "liers with mankind," (Rhiems); and "homosexual perverts." (TEV) "passive homosexual partners." (NET Bible)Although "homosexual" is a very common translation, it is almost certain to be inaccurate:

If Paul wanted to refer to homosexual behavior, he would have used the word "paiderasste." That was the standard Greek term at the time for sexual behavior between males.

The second term is "arsenokoitai" in Greek. The exact meaning of this word is lost. It seems to have been a term created by Paul for this verse. "Arsen" means "man" in Greek. So there is no way that "arsenokoitai" could refer to both male and female homosexuals. It seems that the translators gave in to the temptation to widen Paul's condemnation to include lesbians as well as gay males.Unfortunately, the term "homosexual" is commonly defined in two different ways: as a behavior (engaging in same-sex activity) or as a sexual orientation (being sexually attracted only to members of the same sex). Most of the biblical translations appear to refer to behavior rather than orientation.

male prostitutes, also described as "men kept for unnatural purposes." The term "male prostitutes" (NIV, NRSV, CSB, NLT) can be interpreted in modern times as men who are paid to have sex with men only or with women only or with men or women. The original Greek appears to refer only to male-male contact.

catamites, or boy prostitute. This is a young male who is kept as a sexual partner of an adult male. (Jerusalem Bible, NAB, James Moffatt). These translations provide another example of a theme that runs throughout the Bible: the transfer of guilt and punishment from guilty perpetrators to innocent persons.

pederasts: male adults who sexually abuse boys; an abusive pedophile (an adult who molests young children) or abusive hebephile (an adult who molests post-pubertal teenagers).

perverts: a person engaged in some undefined activity that is one of the dozens of sexual activities that some consider to be perversions. (Phillips, The Great Book: The New Testament in Plain English)

sodomites: This used to refer to inhabitants of the city of Sodom which is described in Genesis 19. It is now used as a "snarl" word to refer to men who have sex with men. InGenesis 19, the men of the city are described as wanting to rape some male visitors. Many Christians interpret this as a blanket condemnation of all homosexual behavior, whether rape or consensual; whether a one-night stand or within a committed relationship. (NRSV, NKJ, NAB).

other terms: The Message refers to "Those who ... use and abuse sex," which is probably the broadest translation ever.BBE translates it as "or is less than a man, or makes a wrong use of men."

Lost meaning? Broadening translations? Proves my point, AGAIN.

Even without the word of God man can 'know' that their Creator intended them to be with woman. Their bodies are formed to have sexual relations with each other and bring forth children. The man's organ fits into the woman's where the sperm reaches the egg. The first man and woman were Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. When men have sex with men, that ends the human race, for if all were homosexual, there could be no new births. Let's face it, even without God actually "telling" you in the bible that it's not right, you know it full well. It's not what was intended for humans.

[pattygreen 5]

You're so right here, Kat. I recall taking a communication course in the mid '70's where the professor took two people out of the class and showed them a photograph. They each came back into the class separately and described the picture. One described it as the first warm day of very early spring. The sun was shining and the snow was beginning to melt. The old woman was delighted to be out walking for possibly the first time since winter and she had been to the store and was coming home in the sunshine with a few groceries.

The other person described the scene as a cold and snowy day. The poor old woman was trudging home in the snow, lugging heavy groceries. She was probably alone and lonely and had nobody to help her with her shopping.

Two totally different interpretations of the SAME PHOTOGRAPH. I think the interpretation of words is even more open to different perceptions. (Hence the use of emoticons in forums like this to help the writer get across the intended meaning.)

The point of the class was to explore perceptions and why we perceive in the different ways we do.

There are words written down in the Bible that are as solid as the photograph my classmates looked at. But how we interpret those words or that photograph has everything to do with what we are and our past experiences.

God tells us to study to show yourself approved. This means that if you truly want to know what he is talking about, study his words. You can't get a 'right' idea about all he has to say on a subject until you read it ALL.

[BJean 16]

I disagree. I believe that you are wrong about your fundamentalist, exclusionary beliefs and I know that you're wrong about me. It certainly seems to me that you have a sad, little mind.

[tdslf1 0]

No, what she is is arrogant. Reasons stated many times. Can't change ignorance, arrogance, and studipity, just can't. Proof is right before us. Lesson learned.

[pattygreen 5]

No, what she is is arrogant. Reasons stated many times. Can't change ignorance, arrogance, and studipity, just can't. Proof is right before us. Lesson learned.

It is the ignorant one who needs to resort to name calling in order to feel inferior. It is the one with the lack of self esteem who needs to call others names in order to build up his own self esteem. Surely you have heard this before. Now, why don't you mature a little. I dare you to go back and find a post that you have written about me that doesn't have a 'name calling' in it for me. How childish. Oh, wait. How old are you?