...Human error. But if what you've stated is true, it's still good we have Paul's (overall) more reflective, more thoughtful follup letter better known as 2nd Corinthians. :)
"Sounds like Paul bashing to me."
No bashing intended. Paul might well have been the greatest of the apostles. Yet as intelligent and wise as he and others like Moses and Soloman probably were, they were once more not invunerable to human error and as such not beyond human criticism.
...Corinthians. The problem with this is that he COULD have responded to much of what he heard perhaps from passions as shock and anger rather than reflective thought. If so, it's probably not the only time since He went as far to say in Galatians that even an angel of Heaven should be cursed for teaching something apart from what he himself taught. So yes, IF by "malakoi" Paul were referring to catamites, I could see him making such a condemning, (hasty) remark in such a... (Cont.)
@clay56 That's a lot of speculation to explain why Paul might have contradicted both himself and Jesus... and for what? Meanwhile, the historical meaning of malakoi simultaneously allows him to remain consistent with both himself and Jesus. No speculation required!
Again, this is not an argument for inerrancy. It's solely allowing Paul to be consistent with himself. Why would we assume Paul was less self-consistent than any other ancient author? Sounds like Paul bashing to me.
...Be right. Im only stating that having read his epistles, I myself could see Paul initially reacting in shock and anger which could have caused him to speak rashly. And again, it wouldn't be the only time if such were the case.
"Why would we assume Paul was less self-consistent than any other ancient author?"
Why indeed, since I myself have simply been stating that Paul, like every other person before and after the time of Christ, was only human and not invunerable to... (Cont.)
...Meaning" is one of a number of definitions to the word "malakoi." Again, Christ used it to describe a garment belonging to John the Baptist. Paul himself didn't specify precisely what he meant by the word. This makes consistancy between them both another presumption.
"Again, this is not an argument for inerrancy."
Looks like we may be split here. Since Paul's not being inerrant could have made his teachings (unlike those of Christ's) less than perfect. Again, you may... (Cont.)
"That's a lot of speculation to explain why Paul might have contradicted both himself and Jesus... and for what?"
Perhaps because there are many Christians who may forget Paul was not perfect and as such think of him practically every bit as flawless as Christ Himself.
"Meanwhile, the historical meaning of malakoi simultaneously allows him to remain consistent with both himself and Jesus. No speculation required!"
It's actually more personal presumption since the "historical... (Cont.)
...This distinction. Not saying there isn't a VAST amount of knowledge and wisdom to be gained from Paul's teachings, ONLY that he wasn't perfect since again no one was who lived before or since the time of Christ. Moses had wisdom, yet according to Christ he wrote at least one law not intended by our Lord "from the beginning" (Matt. 19:8-9). Soloman was said to have been the wisest man to have lived before or since Christ. It didn't keep him from setting Israel down a path... (Cont.)
...To ruin. Paul also had wisdom. It didn't keeping him from being quite arguably wrong in not wanting to give a traveling companion, John-Mark a second chance. Good thing his friend Barnabas felt felt differently otherwise we might not have the Gospel according to Mark. :)
...1st Tim. 2:11-15. These and other teachings of Paul would be considered at least somewhat questionable even in consertavitely based churches today. As wise and intelligent as those such as Paul, Moses and Soloman all probably were, they as everyone else who've lived before and since the time of Christ were human, and as such were and are vunerable to human error.
@clay56 Paul never said that woman who speak in church cannot enter God's kingdom nor did he say that about men who have long hair. Paul consistently taught that Lev 19:18 ("Love your neighbor as yourself") is God's entire Law. (Ro 13:8-9, Ga 5:14) He never deviated from this teaching one iota in the original Greek.
Those who say malakos meant shrine prostitutes make Paul appear to oppose himself. He was always careful to toe the Lev 19:18 line. Hence, that definition is impossible.
@clay56 It's important to separate what Paul taught about salvation/judgment from everything else he taught. If Paul was wrong about salvation/judgment, then Christianity has a huge problem. If he was wrong on others things, there's no problem.
Paul stated that the 'malakoi' cannot enter God's kingdom. This is a very different issue than hair length, his views on the place of women in the church, etc.
I believe Paul understood Jesus' teachings on salvation and judgment perfectly.
"If Paul was wrong about salvation/judgment, then Christianity has a huge problem."
Actually you have a VERY good point about the catamites. If they were doing what they did against their will, then it does indeed seem such in itself should not count against their salvation. But Paul was addressing a church he had been informed had serious problems with the conduct of many of it's members. Paul prided himself on his passions or "boldness" as evidenced in 2nd... (Cont.)
@clay56 Example of Paul's commitment to Lev 19:18-
He wrote that adultery is unlawful. (Ro 13:8-9)
He wrote that everything is lawful within the context of pre-marital sex with prostitutes (1 Co 6:12)
Why? Paul explained that adultery is unlawful because it violates Lev 19:18. (See Ro 13:8-9)
Even when it came to sexuality, Paul toed the Lev 19:18 line. The historical meaning of malakos (self-indulgent) simultaneously preserves Paul's consistency. It's the only logical choice.
"Even when it came to sexuality, Paul toed the Lev 19:18 line. The historical meaning of malakos (self-indulgent) simultaneously preserves Paul's consistency."
That's ONE definition, another means "soft." It was used in the Gospels to describe a a garment worn by John the Baptist. Indeed Paul did often state what he was passing down from the Lord as in 1 Cor. 14:34-37 and what came from his own wisdom such as in 1 Cor. 7:25. In many other passages he doesnt make... (Cont.)
Your video is correct that 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 doesn't condemn homosexuality. However your understanding of malakos is neither BIblically nor historically accurate.
Catamites were prostituted against their will. It is Biblically impossible that Paul would have taught that boys who were prostituted against their will cannot inherit the kingdom of God!
Aristotle and Dio Chrysostom used this word to refer to the overly self-indulgent. That matches the issues in historical Corinth perfectly.
"Catamites were prostituted against their will. It is Biblically impossible that Paul would have taught that boys who were prostituted against their will cannot inherit the kingdom of God."
However great or small the likelihood, I personally wouldn't call it impossible. This is the same Paul that said long hair on men and short hair on women fell outside nature (1 Cor. 11:13-15). He also said women were not suppose to be in charge over or teach men as stated in... (Cont.)
thank you very much, you really should be hired to translate the Bible correctly cause there is too much misunderstanding and these misunderstandings can really mess up people, but until then I will watch your videos to learn the real meanings of this important book, please continue making them,
take care gorgeous
p.s.: please forgive me if I made any mistakes in english,,,,I am french...thanx again
Hey there. I am new to youtube and almost all of my videos link to yours. :) I really like how insightful you are on the topic. This is also my passion to spread the word on what the Bible really says about homosexuality. May God give your viewers true discernment to break through their biased minds. God bless you.
"sodomite= Sodomy (pronounced /ˈsɒdəmi/) is a term used in the law to describe the act of "unnatural"[1] sex,"
The term is an all TOO likely misnomer based on the PRESUMED intent on a mob in the Biblical account of Sodom due to a SINGLE definition of the Hebrew word for "know" being emphasized over TEN others.
sodomite= Sodomy (pronounced /ˈsɒdəmi/) is a term used in the law to describe the act of "unnatural"[1] sex, which depending on jurisdiction can consist of oral sex, anal sex, or any non-genital to genital congress, whether heterosexual, homosexual, or with human or animal
The Gospels are silent on homosexuality. To state Christ advocacy of heterosexual marriage meant He opposed any and all types of homosexual unions may well be presuming too much on His part.
Jesus did condemn (1) fornication, and (2) adultry. Can you show that any marriage was sanctioned by Christ or the apostolic early church - the marraige between two men or two women? Outside of marriage any sexual act between two men or two women wold be fornication and/or adultry. So, Jesus did condemn Homosexuality as implied above.
( I Cor. 6:9). Male prostitutes (malakos) and Homosexual offenders (arsenokoites). The Greek word arsenokoites in the text is obvious ... arseno (ass) and Koites (sex): Thus "arsenokoites" literally means "ass fucking." This was an abomination. In Israel any sex outside of marriage was ADULTRY therefore sin. There was no tradition of men marrying, therefore any sex outside of the sanctity of marriage was fornication and/or adultry, period.
@MolokaiAlika Uhhh, what? Did you hear what she said? "Arsen" means "MAN" (not ass) and "koites" means "beds." The compounded word was created by Paul and used only twice in the Bible and 76 times in non-Biblical Greek writings, many times in a way that would be impossible to mean homosexual: “Some do it with their own mothers and foster sisters or goddaughters. In fact, many men even commit arsenokoites with their wives!” -John the Faster, Patriarch of Constantinople, 575 AD
I found a new book that is excellent on this issue, check it out, "Thou Shalt Not Love: What Evangelicals Really Say to Gays" By Patrick M. Chapman, Ph.D..
anakrinontes - are you an Orthodox Jew? Do you follow Leviticus? Do Christians follow Leviticus? Do you know what Jesus said about the "holiness" code of Leviticus?
I'm not an Orthodox Jew. And I don't follow every injunction within the Holiness Code. Yet, there are a number of them that I do follow. What about you?
anakrinontes - If you are not an Orthodox Jew you are not required to follow anything in Leviticus, Jesus said defined "the Law" as the Ten Commandments and there is nothing in the Ten Commandments in regards to homosexuality.
anakrinontes - anyone who has read the Gospels would not have to ask that question. But I would like to turn it around, can you show where Jesus EVER referenced anything in Leviticus? Have you ever asked yourself why Christians do not follow the kosher laws?
anakrinontes - I don't play with idiots. If you wants answers to your questions, read the Bible, especially Matthew. The message of Jesus Christ would surprise you.
Hey again i just watched the video this was in response to = Kirk Cameron - Homosexuality - Part 1. what are your thoughts on what they say about 'the human heart being deceitfully wicked'. I found that kind of interesting, is that suppose to mean you can never trust yourself like you don't know whats right or wrong only the bible does, i'm confused about that.
the mind and the heart get confused. one tugs more than the other, forming our conscience. the bible is just a reference to see if our thoughts and feelings are in line. the bible is merely a reference book to check if your inline with the consciouness of jesus/god. we can find all the answers to life in a pure heart. i think it says somewhere in a scripture about gods laws being written on our hearts. i wouldn't know, i don't study the bible. i just believe.
your vids have really opened my eyes. its just crazy that in what the latest american version they actually say in a footnote that malakois means something other then homosexual but they don't change it in the text. i wonder why, it doesn't make any sense. do you have any idea why they admit it but don't change it? i don't know to much anymore about religious politics.
Part 4
...Human error. But if what you've stated is true, it's still good we have Paul's (overall) more reflective, more thoughtful follup letter better known as 2nd Corinthians. :)
"Sounds like Paul bashing to me."
No bashing intended. Paul might well have been the greatest of the apostles. Yet as intelligent and wise as he and others like Moses and Soloman probably were, they were once more not invunerable to human error and as such not beyond human criticism.
clay56 1 month ago
Part 2
...Corinthians. The problem with this is that he COULD have responded to much of what he heard perhaps from passions as shock and anger rather than reflective thought. If so, it's probably not the only time since He went as far to say in Galatians that even an angel of Heaven should be cursed for teaching something apart from what he himself taught. So yes, IF by "malakoi" Paul were referring to catamites, I could see him making such a condemning, (hasty) remark in such a... (Cont.)
clay56 1 month ago
Part 3
...Set of circumstances. NOT saying this made him a bad teacher or person, only that unlike Christ he wasn't perfect and vunerable to human error.
"I believe Paul understood Jesus' teachings on salvation and judgment perfectly."
It's fortunate we have the teachings of Christ Himself to be certain in any case. :)
clay56 1 month ago
@clay56 That's a lot of speculation to explain why Paul might have contradicted both himself and Jesus... and for what? Meanwhile, the historical meaning of malakoi simultaneously allows him to remain consistent with both himself and Jesus. No speculation required!
Again, this is not an argument for inerrancy. It's solely allowing Paul to be consistent with himself. Why would we assume Paul was less self-consistent than any other ancient author? Sounds like Paul bashing to me.
PaulOnHomosexuality 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Part 3
...Be right. Im only stating that having read his epistles, I myself could see Paul initially reacting in shock and anger which could have caused him to speak rashly. And again, it wouldn't be the only time if such were the case.
"Why would we assume Paul was less self-consistent than any other ancient author?"
Why indeed, since I myself have simply been stating that Paul, like every other person before and after the time of Christ, was only human and not invunerable to... (Cont.)
clay56 1 month ago
Part 2
...Meaning" is one of a number of definitions to the word "malakoi." Again, Christ used it to describe a garment belonging to John the Baptist. Paul himself didn't specify precisely what he meant by the word. This makes consistancy between them both another presumption.
"Again, this is not an argument for inerrancy."
Looks like we may be split here. Since Paul's not being inerrant could have made his teachings (unlike those of Christ's) less than perfect. Again, you may... (Cont.)
clay56 1 month ago
"That's a lot of speculation to explain why Paul might have contradicted both himself and Jesus... and for what?"
Perhaps because there are many Christians who may forget Paul was not perfect and as such think of him practically every bit as flawless as Christ Himself.
"Meanwhile, the historical meaning of malakoi simultaneously allows him to remain consistent with both himself and Jesus. No speculation required!"
It's actually more personal presumption since the "historical... (Cont.)
clay56 1 month ago
Part 2
...This distinction. Not saying there isn't a VAST amount of knowledge and wisdom to be gained from Paul's teachings, ONLY that he wasn't perfect since again no one was who lived before or since the time of Christ. Moses had wisdom, yet according to Christ he wrote at least one law not intended by our Lord "from the beginning" (Matt. 19:8-9). Soloman was said to have been the wisest man to have lived before or since Christ. It didn't keep him from setting Israel down a path... (Cont.)
clay56 1 month ago
Part 3
...To ruin. Paul also had wisdom. It didn't keeping him from being quite arguably wrong in not wanting to give a traveling companion, John-Mark a second chance. Good thing his friend Barnabas felt felt differently otherwise we might not have the Gospel according to Mark. :)
clay56 1 month ago
Part 2
...1st Tim. 2:11-15. These and other teachings of Paul would be considered at least somewhat questionable even in consertavitely based churches today. As wise and intelligent as those such as Paul, Moses and Soloman all probably were, they as everyone else who've lived before and since the time of Christ were human, and as such were and are vunerable to human error.
clay56 1 month ago
@clay56 Paul never said that woman who speak in church cannot enter God's kingdom nor did he say that about men who have long hair. Paul consistently taught that Lev 19:18 ("Love your neighbor as yourself") is God's entire Law. (Ro 13:8-9, Ga 5:14) He never deviated from this teaching one iota in the original Greek.
Those who say malakos meant shrine prostitutes make Paul appear to oppose himself. He was always careful to toe the Lev 19:18 line. Hence, that definition is impossible.
PaulOnHomosexuality 1 month ago
"Paul never said that woman who speak in church cannot enter God's kingdom..."
He said nothing about it or hair length either way, nor did he say the violations in 1 Cor. 6:9 was directly passed down from him by our Lord.
"Paul consistently taught that Lev 19:18 ("Love your neighbor as yourself") is God's entire Law. (Ro 13:8-9, Ga 5:14)..."
No argument there since he was probably voicing part of what Christ said in Matt. 22:36-39,
clay56 1 month ago
@clay56 It's important to separate what Paul taught about salvation/judgment from everything else he taught. If Paul was wrong about salvation/judgment, then Christianity has a huge problem. If he was wrong on others things, there's no problem.
Paul stated that the 'malakoi' cannot enter God's kingdom. This is a very different issue than hair length, his views on the place of women in the church, etc.
I believe Paul understood Jesus' teachings on salvation and judgment perfectly.
PaulOnHomosexuality 1 month ago
"If Paul was wrong about salvation/judgment, then Christianity has a huge problem."
Actually you have a VERY good point about the catamites. If they were doing what they did against their will, then it does indeed seem such in itself should not count against their salvation. But Paul was addressing a church he had been informed had serious problems with the conduct of many of it's members. Paul prided himself on his passions or "boldness" as evidenced in 2nd... (Cont.)
clay56 1 month ago
@clay56 Example of Paul's commitment to Lev 19:18-
He wrote that adultery is unlawful. (Ro 13:8-9)
He wrote that everything is lawful within the context of pre-marital sex with prostitutes (1 Co 6:12)
Why? Paul explained that adultery is unlawful because it violates Lev 19:18. (See Ro 13:8-9)
Even when it came to sexuality, Paul toed the Lev 19:18 line. The historical meaning of malakos (self-indulgent) simultaneously preserves Paul's consistency. It's the only logical choice.
PaulOnHomosexuality 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Even when it came to sexuality, Paul toed the Lev 19:18 line. The historical meaning of malakos (self-indulgent) simultaneously preserves Paul's consistency."
That's ONE definition, another means "soft." It was used in the Gospels to describe a a garment worn by John the Baptist. Indeed Paul did often state what he was passing down from the Lord as in 1 Cor. 14:34-37 and what came from his own wisdom such as in 1 Cor. 7:25. In many other passages he doesnt make... (Cont.)
clay56 1 month ago
Your video is correct that 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 doesn't condemn homosexuality. However your understanding of malakos is neither BIblically nor historically accurate.
Catamites were prostituted against their will. It is Biblically impossible that Paul would have taught that boys who were prostituted against their will cannot inherit the kingdom of God!
Aristotle and Dio Chrysostom used this word to refer to the overly self-indulgent. That matches the issues in historical Corinth perfectly.
PaulOnHomosexuality 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
"Catamites were prostituted against their will. It is Biblically impossible that Paul would have taught that boys who were prostituted against their will cannot inherit the kingdom of God."
However great or small the likelihood, I personally wouldn't call it impossible. This is the same Paul that said long hair on men and short hair on women fell outside nature (1 Cor. 11:13-15). He also said women were not suppose to be in charge over or teach men as stated in... (Cont.)
clay56 1 month ago
thank you very much, you really should be hired to translate the Bible correctly cause there is too much misunderstanding and these misunderstandings can really mess up people, but until then I will watch your videos to learn the real meanings of this important book, please continue making them,
take care gorgeous
p.s.: please forgive me if I made any mistakes in english,,,,I am french...thanx again
^B^ xoxoxox
Batcat1313 3 months ago in playlist More videos from NoWallsMinistry
This has been flagged as spam show
I run a gay social and support called GLBT OF HUNTERDON COUNTY OF NJ. COM
it a place to talk with each as we play board games.
I am very happy he came out on youtube. Hunterdon County NJ is a very gay friendly county to live in nj. There alot of gay families
web site: glbtofhunterdoncountyofnj com
Next Meeting is OCT 11, 2011 (Tue) 7PM to 9PM
It is National Coming Out Day
NORTH COUNTY BRANCH OF THE
HUNTERDON COUNTY LIBRARY
65 Halsted Street, Clinton,NJ 08809
gayandpeace 5 months ago
Psalms 118 verse 8, It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.
smurfboywv 5 months ago
Hey there. I am new to youtube and almost all of my videos link to yours. :) I really like how insightful you are on the topic. This is also my passion to spread the word on what the Bible really says about homosexuality. May God give your viewers true discernment to break through their biased minds. God bless you.
glbtchristians 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"sodomite= Sodomy (pronounced /ˈsɒdəmi/) is a term used in the law to describe the act of "unnatural"[1] sex,"
The term is an all TOO likely misnomer based on the PRESUMED intent on a mob in the Biblical account of Sodom due to a SINGLE definition of the Hebrew word for "know" being emphasized over TEN others.
clay56 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is for heterosexual and homosexuals
1 corinthains 6:9
sodomite= Sodomy (pronounced /ˈsɒdəmi/) is a term used in the law to describe the act of "unnatural"[1] sex, which depending on jurisdiction can consist of oral sex, anal sex, or any non-genital to genital congress, whether heterosexual, homosexual, or with human or animal
lamont2k7 1 year ago
The Gospels are silent on homosexuality. To state Christ advocacy of heterosexual marriage meant He opposed any and all types of homosexual unions may well be presuming too much on His part.
clay56 1 year ago
Jesus did condemn (1) fornication, and (2) adultry. Can you show that any marriage was sanctioned by Christ or the apostolic early church - the marraige between two men or two women? Outside of marriage any sexual act between two men or two women wold be fornication and/or adultry. So, Jesus did condemn Homosexuality as implied above.
MolokaiAlika 1 year ago
( I Cor. 6:9). Male prostitutes (malakos) and Homosexual offenders (arsenokoites). The Greek word arsenokoites in the text is obvious ... arseno (ass) and Koites (sex): Thus "arsenokoites" literally means "ass fucking." This was an abomination. In Israel any sex outside of marriage was ADULTRY therefore sin. There was no tradition of men marrying, therefore any sex outside of the sanctity of marriage was fornication and/or adultry, period.
MolokaiAlika 1 year ago
@MolokaiAlika Uhhh, what? Did you hear what she said? "Arsen" means "MAN" (not ass) and "koites" means "beds." The compounded word was created by Paul and used only twice in the Bible and 76 times in non-Biblical Greek writings, many times in a way that would be impossible to mean homosexual: “Some do it with their own mothers and foster sisters or goddaughters. In fact, many men even commit arsenokoites with their wives!” -John the Faster, Patriarch of Constantinople, 575 AD
glbtchristians 8 months ago
gay people can not have children. read gen: flesh of my flesh bone of my bone
3Michael82 1 year ago
Interesting.
IntrepidStranger 1 year ago
I found a new book that is excellent on this issue, check it out, "Thou Shalt Not Love: What Evangelicals Really Say to Gays" By Patrick M. Chapman, Ph.D..
Atlavocat 3 years ago
I'm just curious: what are your thoughts on Leviticus 18:22?
anakrinontes 3 years ago
anakrinontes - are you an Orthodox Jew? Do you follow Leviticus? Do Christians follow Leviticus? Do you know what Jesus said about the "holiness" code of Leviticus?
Atlavocat 3 years ago
I'm not an Orthodox Jew. And I don't follow every injunction within the Holiness Code. Yet, there are a number of them that I do follow. What about you?
anakrinontes 3 years ago
anakrinontes - If you are not an Orthodox Jew you are not required to follow anything in Leviticus, Jesus said defined "the Law" as the Ten Commandments and there is nothing in the Ten Commandments in regards to homosexuality.
Atlavocat 3 years ago
Are you going to give me scriptural references for your assertion that Jesus defined "the Law" exclusively as the Ten Commandments?
anakrinontes 3 years ago
And are you going to answer MY question for you?
anakrinontes 3 years ago
anakrinontes - anyone who has read the Gospels would not have to ask that question. But I would like to turn it around, can you show where Jesus EVER referenced anything in Leviticus? Have you ever asked yourself why Christians do not follow the kosher laws?
Atlavocat 3 years ago
So you won't answer my questions, eh? I see how you want to play.
anakrinontes 3 years ago
anakrinontes - I don't play with idiots. If you wants answers to your questions, read the Bible, especially Matthew. The message of Jesus Christ would surprise you.
Atlavocat 3 years ago
I have ANOTHER question for you: Where does Matthew 22:39 come from?
anakrinontes 3 years ago
Has anybody told you how awesome you are today?
Well you are awesome, there you have it.
<3
porolita22 3 years ago
Hey again i just watched the video this was in response to = Kirk Cameron - Homosexuality - Part 1. what are your thoughts on what they say about 'the human heart being deceitfully wicked'. I found that kind of interesting, is that suppose to mean you can never trust yourself like you don't know whats right or wrong only the bible does, i'm confused about that.
anim8ion 3 years ago
the mind and the heart get confused. one tugs more than the other, forming our conscience. the bible is just a reference to see if our thoughts and feelings are in line. the bible is merely a reference book to check if your inline with the consciouness of jesus/god. we can find all the answers to life in a pure heart. i think it says somewhere in a scripture about gods laws being written on our hearts. i wouldn't know, i don't study the bible. i just believe.
jamestangent69 3 years ago
manbeds! loves it.
your vids have really opened my eyes. its just crazy that in what the latest american version they actually say in a footnote that malakois means something other then homosexual but they don't change it in the text. i wonder why, it doesn't make any sense. do you have any idea why they admit it but don't change it? i don't know to much anymore about religious politics.
anim8ion 3 years ago
I think people are afraid to go against tradition... especially in religious areas
NoWallsMinistry 3 years ago
oh dude your on right now, thanks for the response!
anim8ion 3 years ago
Dear NoWallsMinistry: Thank you this was nicely researched and presented. Sincerely Aquatania
aquatania 3 years ago