Homosexuality part 2

This is part two of the homosexuality subject. I’m focusing on the three verses that Matthew uses from the NT.
Let’s recap the three verses Matthew uses from the NT. They are: Romans 1:26-27, 1st Corinthians 6:9, and 1st Timothy 1:10

Romans 1:26-27 “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.”

1st Corinthians 6:9 “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,”

1st Timothy 1:10 “for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine,”

Let’s start with the verses from Romans. Matthew tries to make the claim that what Paul really is condemning is lust and lustful behavior. If that was true, then Paul would have plainly stated that. If you read the Bible, people are pretty clear in what they mean. They don’t say one thing and mean another. Paul also clearly states that men with men and women with women is unnatural and that men with women and women with men is natural.

Matthew claims that Paul never mentions love, commitment and faithfulness. Why would he? Paul was clear that it’s a vile passion and unnatural.
Now, Matthew only quotes verses 26-27 and claims Paul is targeting the issue of lust, but if we back up and add verse 25 for context, it changes the context. This is what 25 says: “Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.” If you add verse 26 and read verses 25 and 26 together, this is what you have:

25-26: “Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:”

Notice what 26 starts out saying: “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections” What Cause? According to Matthew, it’s lust. But, if you back up, the real reason is that they changed the truth of God for a lie, not lust, as Matthew says. The homosexuals claim we cherry-pick verses and leave things out, yet, it is Matthew who left out verse 25 and cherry-picked the verse he wanted. Matthew claims Paul is saying this all stems from a burst of excess, yet that’s not what Paul says. Matthew claims that in the ancient world, men who practiced homosexuality, were married and therefore it stemmed from lust. The problem with this reasoning is that you need to prove that. Bring in historical evidence to support this, otherwise it is simply your opinion and theory.

Even if you could somehow make the case for this theory, I have proved in part one, God condemned homosexuality in the OT, which is also part of the ancient world. Claiming you’re married and having gay sex on the side is still outside of God’s plan, and you’re not able to claim you’re a true believer in God living like this.

Matthew tries to use 1 Corinthians 11:14. “Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?”
This is the only verse in the Bible that says this, but many verses in both Old and New Testament claim homosexuality is wrong and condemned in the eyes of God. Paul does not say having long hair is a sin, or that it is an abomination. We’re not told men with long hair will be kept out of heaven. The verse claims nature declares men with long hair is a shame, not God. Also, as I said before, define long? One person has hair two inches long, and that’s long compared to a bald guy; but a guy with hair that’s 6 inches long is really long compared to the guy with hair that’s only two inches, and now that 2 inch hair is no longer long, but seems short.

Now, let’s look at 1st Corinthians 6:9-10.
1Co 6:9 “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals,nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.”

It is very plain that these verses say that homosexuals will not enter into the kingdom of heaven. It’s not just saying homosexuals but a list of other people who will not either. For Matthew Vines’ purpose and mine, were only talking about homosexuals.

Now, I will let Matthew speak for himself on this subject. This was taken from Matthew’s Tumbler account. http://matthewvines.tumblr.com/

Matthew Vines says:

The word translated as “abusers of themselves with mankind” in the King James is a compound word. In the Greek, it is “arsenokoites,” “arsen” meaning “male,” and “koites” meaning “bed,” generally with a sexual connotation. And so the argument is that we can determine the meaning of this term from its etymology: male plus bed in the plural form must, then, refer to men who sleep with other men. But there are several problems with this approach. First, simply looking at a word’s component parts doesn’t necessarily tell us what it means. There are many English words where this approach would fail: for example, the words “understand,” “butterfly,” “honeymoon.” The component parts here – “honey” and “moon” – really don’t tell us anything about what that word actually means. In order to understand what a word means, you have to consider how it’s used in context. The problem with the word “abusers of themselves with mankind” – arsenokoites – is that it was used extremely rarely in ancient Greek. In fact, Paul’s use of it in 1 Corinthians is considered to be its first recorded use anywhere. And after Paul, the few places that it appears tend to be in lists of general vices, which are not the most helpful of contexts. Fortunately, however, many of these lists are grouped by category, and this Greek word consistently appears among sins that are of a primarily economic nature rather than those that are primarily sexual. This and some other contextual data indicate that this term referred to some kind of economic exploitation, likely through sexual means. This may have involved forms of same-sex behavior, but coercive and exploitative forms. There is no contextual support for linking this term to loving, faithful relationships. The other word, “effeminate,” in the King James is “malakos” in the Greek. This was used a lot in ancient Greek, and it means “soft.” It was a form of trash talking, like saying “You’re fat,” “lazy,” “marshmellow,” or “chicken.”

In the final passage, 1 Timothy 1:10, the first word meaning – “abusers of themselves with mankind” – reappears in a list of people Paul says the law was written against. Here, the translation is “them that defile themselves with mankind.” The translation issues and debates here are the same as those from 1 Corinthians. Again, the strongest inference that can be drawn from other uses of this term is that it referred to economic exploitation through sexual coercion — possibly involving same-sex activity, but a very different kind than what we are discussing.

Back to what Rick says:
We see this from blue letter bible Greek Lexicon: https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G733

“one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual”

KJV Translation Count — Total: 2x
The KJV translates Strongs G733 in the following manner: abuser of (one’s) self with mankind (1x), defile (one’s) self with mankind (1x).
Thayer’s Greek Lexicon

G733
Word / Phrase / Strong’s Search
Concordance Results Using KJV

Strong’s Number G733 matches the Greek ἀρσενοκοίτης (arsenokoitēs),
which occurs 2 times in 2 verses in the Greek concordance of the KJV

Tools specific to 1Co 6:9

1Co 6:9

“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,” G733

Tools specific to 1Ti 1:10

1Ti 1:10

“For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, G733 for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;”

Lexicon :: Strong’s G733 – arsenokoitēs
ἀρσενοκοίτης
Transliteration
arsenokoitēs

Pronunciation
är-se-no-koi’-tās (Key)
Part of Speech
masculine noun

Root Word (Etymology)
From ἄρρην (G730) and κοίτη (G2845)

Vines points out that the word is a compound term made up of arsēn, which means “male” and koitē that means “bed” with it referring to a bed being used in a sexual manner (we get the word ‘coitus’ for sexual intercourse from it). To make his case against the word meaning homosexual sex, Vines argues that you cannot easily take compound terms and create a word that has an explicit meaning from them. He uses the words “Butterfly” and “Honeymoon” as examples.

However, this argument that Vines and other homosexual apologists use overlooks something critically important. They fail to mention that the Bible of Paul and of his readers in the first century was the Septuagint, which is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament. Why is that important?

When you look at the Septuagint’s translation of Leviticus 20:13, which is one of the verses condemning homosexual behavior, something very interesting is found: the compound word Paul uses for homosexual in 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy:

The text could not be any more plain – arsēn and koitē are side by side and form the homosexual term that Paul used in his New Testament epistles. This fact devastates Vines’ argument that asserts a person cannot know the real meaning behind many words formed via compound terms. In this case, it is very clear.

Moreover, Vines and others promoting homosexual Christianity admit that the Leviticus passage condemns homosexual sex, but they attempt to diffuse the prohibition by saying there are “many things that these passages say that don’t apply to Christians today.”

Paul evidently disagreed where God’s holiness code is in view, and in particular, where homosexuality is concerned.

The passages in 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy dealing with homosexual behavior do condemn homosexual sex and warns those practicing that lifestyle of the consequences that will come from living that lifestyle. However, it is interesting in Vines’ message that he didn’t keep reading in 1 Corinthians where Paul says: “Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.” (1 Corinthians 6:11). Why does he ignore this verse?

Vines doesn’t cite the passage because Paul’s statement destroys the idea that homosexuals can be called Christians. Paul tells his readers that such practices were evidences of their old life, but now that they have been born again, they have new holy affections and desires, which stand in opposition to the way they used to live.

Now onto the final verse, 1st timothy 1:10 “For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;”

This is what Matthew Vines says about this passage:
In the final passage, 1 Timothy 1:10, the first word – “abusers of themselves with mankind” – reappears in a list of people Paul says the law was written against. Here, the translation is “them that defile themselves with mankind.” The translation issues and debates here are the same as those from 1 Corinthians. Again, the strongest inference that can be drawn from other uses of this term is that it referred to economic exploitation through sexual coercion—possibly involving same-sex activity, but a very different kind than what we are discussing.

Rick says, Go back and read my part 1 topic and re-read what I just wrote. Homosexual lifestyle goes against sound doctrine.