The Bible condemns homosexual sex

Translations When regarding translations of the Bible, we have to understand that there is no translated version of the Bible that is not impacted by cultural bias. Since this debate is done from a Christian standpoint, we must assume that the original text was divinely inspired and is the unquestionable, infallible word of God. All of my arguments have been and will continue to be based on that belief system. Because of these beliefs, most, if not all, religions have developed a system of elders who have been deemed capable of interpreting their respective holy books. These elders are respected for having an elevated relationship with (in this case) God. Their expertise with the material is not to be disregarded by those of us with less knowledge about the faith. I completely agree with my opponent that we cannot pick a single translation of any verse and decide that they are definitive. In my comparison of the translations, I was attempting to show that all of the possible interpretations must be considered when trying to decide about the implied meaning of the words. In response to the argument that we should not consider the newer translations of the Bible to be as accurate as the traditional versions, I would say that the process through which Bibles are revised does often purposely attempt to use cultural or current terms and phrases. This makes it easier to understand for contemporary readers. Whereas a young reader of an old translation may be confused by the phrase "as with women," they are apt to understand the term "homosexual." These differences are often not by mistake, but an attempt to make the passages clearer. This updating process is carried out carefully by biblical scholars. The translators of the New International Version sum this ideal up perfectly by saying, "When the original Bible documents first emerged, they captured exactly what God wanted to say in the language and idiom of ordinary people. There was no friction between hearing God"s Word the way it was written and understanding it the way it was meant. The original audience experienced a unique fusion of these two ingredients. Readers of the Bible today, however, can no longer experience this fusion. The passage of two thousand years has turned the Greek and Hebrew of Bible times from living languages into historical artifacts. If we had the original documents in our hands today, they would still represent exactly what God wanted to say. But the vast majority of people would no longer be able to understand them." This principal is shown wonderfully by the verse Job 39:9 that has been presented. When the King James Version was written, reading about unicorns would not have been unheard of, however, when the American Standard version was written the translators understood that their audience would not be able to identify with this wording and changed it accordingly. I believe that I have sufficiently explained why it is reasonable to look at the differences present in newer revisions of the Bible without disregarding them. Marriage in General It is actually suggested in 1 Corinthians 1:7 that it would be better for men not to marry but that they should take wives so that they do not succumb to sexual immorality. Here, the Lord does specifically say that men should take wives if they have sexual desire. It is clearly established in Corinthians that the laws being laid out are in the name of the lord. While I do agree that it is not laid out word for word in this passage that sex outside of marriage is a sin, it is clearly articulated. 1 Corinthians 1:1-15 actually encompasses more than enough information to understand that sex outside of marriage is considered a sin. 1 Corinthians 1:1-6 states "Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry. 2But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. 3The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 I say this as a concession, not as a command." While it can be argued that this verse and others like it do not mean that sex outside of marriage is a sin, it would be an argument of semantics that went against common sense and the interpretations of generations of biblical scholars. Thought Crimes I would like to reply directly to the argument pertaining to thought crimes. My opponent has stated that finding someone attractive does not necessarily entail that you are sexually attracted to them. I would like to apply common sense to this argument and state that understanding that another human of the same sex is attractive would not constitute a homosexual thought, and thereby does not apply in this argument. A thought crime of homosexuality would be an actual sexual attraction to someone of the same sex. Conclusion In response to my opponent's challenge to present two verses that meet their standards of a clear condemnation of homosexual sex and homosexual attractions, I would say that they know that the Bible does not contain these verses and that the determination of these biblical moral standards must be done more delicately, as we do with many of the moral standards accepted by the Christian community. I do concede however, that the Bible does not expressly mention female homosexuality anywhere that I am aware of. Personally, I believe that the passages regarding male homosexuality would apply to females as well, but I do not think that the case is strong enough for that opinion to be supported well and agree that there is very little evidence of a biblical perspective on female homosexuality. http://www-01.sil.org... http://www.niv-cbt.org... http://www.biblestudytools.com...