Homosexuals are not still condemned in the Bible

My apologies for not specifying the religious affiliation was Christianity. I also apologize for not being completely thorough as I stated I would be before. Thank you for calling me out on that. A1: I brought up Leviticus because it was used in an argument by you in a previous debate you had been in. I always make sure to check out my contender before beginning my arguments. I understand that Leviticus (as well as the entire Old Testament itself) is no longer in line with the Christian laws. I thought it best to just include that bit in case you believed otherwise. I must also say that the word "sodomite" is nothing but an inhabitant from some place called Sodom. Any other use of the word in regards to homosexual men is completely false and cannot be shown anywhere in the Bible. I call it false because there is no evidence anywhere from the source people act like it came from that it means homosexual males. " You make sweeping assumptions without a single source to be found. You say that when two males had sex in the ancient Middle East, it was usually an act of violence or rape. Where did you get this idea? A book? A website? You give us nothing but your word, which on this site is not enough." Biblical scholars have employed the social sciences to study the relational and gender patterns of the ancient Mediterranean world"the world that produced the Bible. Professor Mary Tolbert (a professor of Biblical studies in regards to LGBT, you can search her up) summarizes that research with the following words: "The single most important concept that defines sexuality in the ancient Mediterranean world, whether we are talking about the kingdoms of Egyptor of Assyriaor whether we are talking about the later kingdoms of Greeceand Rome, is that approved sexual acts never occurred between social equals. Sexuality, by definition, in ancient Mediterranean societies required the combination of dominance and submission. This crucial social and political root metaphor of dominance and submission as the definition of sexuality rested upon a physical basis that assumed every sex act required a penetrator and someone who was penetrated. Needless to say, this definition of sexuality was entirely male"not surprising in the heavily patriarchal societies of the Mediterranean. In these societies, sexual acts between men did happen, but they happened in order to show dominance of one group of men or a man over another, especially during times of war. It was not uncommon for men who had conquered a foreign army to rape them in order to show they were dominant and of a higher status." Also: https://en.wikipedia.org... A2: "You make the even more dubious assumption that homosexuality "as we know today" didn"t exist at all in premodern times, saying things like..." I said it went unrecognized. At least, that is, among heterosexuals. Having sexual relations with the same-sex (exclusively because of attraction) did of course exist. However, it was highly unlikely (near impossible) for homosexuals to be recognized. Same-sex activity took place very common among old times, therefore it would be at least a 1 out of 100 chance of identifying a homosexual (especially since exclusively being attracted to the same-sex was, as mentioned before, not recognized until at least 1800-1900 AD) Not inserted into English Bibles until 1940-50's AD: https://carm.org... https://serendipitydodah.files.wordpress.com... Making of the word "homosexual": http://rictornorton.co.uk... A3: You went past the first definition, why? Homosexuality (according to Merriam-Webster's definition) - "of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex" Men interested in dominance had no desire for the men themselves. Not to mention, I believe homosexuality to be that of a person being attracted sexually to the same-sex. "There was no "discovery"; there have always been different orientations, even before history." Of course, there were, and I'm not saying there weren't. It's like using that little 'trick question' from Middle School "before Mount Everest, what was the highest mountain in the world". It was always Mount Everest. Just because it hasn't been discovered or recognized, does not mean it doesn't/didn't exist before discovery. A4: "It is a compound word combining the words for "male" and "bed". Koitai, the "bed" word, is obviously sexual, as it came down to English as "coitus". The intent is clear: Paul is saying that gays will not go to Heaven. This is the quote I rely on when I say that the Bible condemns homosexuality." I must ask, do you read the NIV or the KJV? The KJV Bible was created before the NIV. If you look at the KJV, it states "abusers of themselves unto mankind". That was what the reference of "arsenokoites" was directed at, not the word "homosexual" itself. Because like I said, that did not even exist in the Bible until 1940's AD. "Abusers of themselves unto mankind" reference: https://www.stopbibleabuse.org... "Again, no source and no explanation. I"m baffled, to be honest; please elaborate on what happened in 1959." My links are given above in A2. "At no point does the Bible specifically condemn lesbians, though it"s implied, because it says marriage is only between a man and a woman (Matthew 19:4), and that sex outside of marriage is immoral (1 Corinthians 7:2)." I simply implied that it further proves my point that sex between two men (more commonly a man and boy) were the directivity of this. It makes no mention, why? Because women did not do these actions. It was only among men that were recorded through history (unless you can find information on women popularly going to girl for sexual pleasure?). Women did not visit little girls for prostitution and "girl love" as the men did. Link in A1. "No, plenty of people know what it means, including me now. You say that it was always used to refer to economic exploitation. Can you give any examples? Because the list in 1 Corinthians had plenty of sexual sins." I believe this was an error on my part. I don't know why I stated that therefore I admit to fault on my behalf for this area of the argument. Overall Sources: 1. https://en.wikipedia.org... 2. https://carm.org... 3. https://serendipitydodah.files.wordpress.com... 4. http://rictornorton.co.uk... 5. https://www.stopbibleabuse.org... Extra source: (Abusers of themselves unto mankind reference) 6. http://www.adventistonline.com...