Is St. Paul Gay?

greekgod

Until recently, many believed that the only type of homosexuality St Paul would have known about, was pederasty. This is a custom that is practised in many cultures, but is offensive to modern Western sensibilities. In the ancient Greek world, an older man, an erastes would take an eromanos, an adolescent boy as a student. The relationship envisaged by his parents involved the man teaching hunting, warfare, and adult male customs to the boy. An integral part of this relationship was anal or intercrural intercourse, with the teacher being the active partner and the student playing the passive role. The rationale of this was two-fold. First, in classical Greek culture, semen was believed to contain important spiritual, masculine qualities that would be passed on to the student during intercourse. Second, male dominance was a part of nature, and must be expressed in every aspect of the male-female relationship. In the erastes - eromanos relationship, the student was inculcated with skills in domination.
More recently, several authors, have argued that pederasty was not the only form of homosexuality known in Greek and Roman culture in the first century AD. Smith and Boswell especially give numerous examples of homosexual relationships that were not age structured, and were based on mutual consent. Moreover, both Roman and Greek cultures accepted homosexuality, and at times instituted it in non-pederastic forms. For example, Polybius (2nd century BC, Rome) reports that "most young men had male lovers" [Greenberg, 154]. Further, "many of the Roman emperors had homosexual tastes," and "in Greece, sexual preferences were frequently not exclusive," to the inclusion of Julius Caesar (Cato states that he was "every woman's husband, and every man's wife") [Greenberg, 155-56].

It has been argued that Paul's use of "arsenokoites and malakos" is for lack of a better expression for homosexuality in general. Paul wanted to condemn not only pederasty, but all forms of homosexuality, so he could not have used the words erastes and eromanos because to do so would have apparently limited his condemnation to pederasty. However, current scholarship indicates that the terms "erastes and eromanos" were not used exclusively for the boy-man, subordinate dominant relationship. On the contrary, these terms could refer to a relationship of long-lasting duration and equality between partners [Dover, 84-7]. Moreover, other specific pairs of words certainly did exist to describe active and pasive homosexual partners: "drwntes and paschontes", and  "paiderastai and paidika".




read whole article at;

http://www.geocities.com/pharsea/Greeks.html

Debmey

Where are the scriptural references?



Posts containing defamation of, or insults to religious figures, holy books, beliefs and practices of any religion will not be tolerated. Any posts that contain these will be deleted outright and further action may be taken by CARI Admin against members posting such material.

[ Last edited by DARSITA on 4-2-2005 at 05:29 PM ]

greekgod

rescuing the bible from fundamentalism
by: Father John Shelby Spong from Newark, US

you can even by the book from amazon.com

very clear.. somebody who has deep religion knowledge than you are wrote it..

dare to deny it?

Debmey

wat talkin yu?

greekgod

what am i talking...

that book talking about St. Paul as practising homosexuality!

you better buy that book, before make any other posting, or else, you are just showing your dumbness, talking something that you even do not know...



Let me speak aloud....


ST. PAUL that those TRINITY BELIEVER believe in WAS A HOMOSEXUALITY practisioner..

no wonder la... the pope, the bishop never get married!

Debmey

Nah, Paul wasn't homo.

[ Last edited by DARSITA on 4-2-2005 at 05:34 PM ]

greekgod

Originally posted by Debmey at 2-2-2005 08:27 AM:
Nah, Paul wasn't homo.

let everybody see something here...

we are talking about St. Paul,

and you are dragging somebody who clearly has no important to be discussed here..

it is up to you not to believe it...

but, to tell you, the book it real.. you can buy it.. you can read it..

you just want to close you eyes..

i think, i have made my point clear.. read the book, and find out the answer yourself. i dont have time to entertain kid like you.. sorry dude

[ Last edited by DARSITA on 4-2-2005 at 05:35 PM ]

greekgod

Originally posted by Debmey at 2-2-2005 08:27 AM:
Nah, Paul wasn't homo.

answer was based on nothing!

nothingness.... see ya round.. wanna deep more to let every readers here to read!

greekgod

Originally posted by Debmey at 2-2-2005 08:27 AM:
Nah, Paul wasn't homo.

answer was based on nothing!

nothingness.... see ya round.. wanna dig more to let every readers here to read!

Debmey

No scriptural reference huh?

peace

greekgod

need reference to scriptural..

this site, gonna be great and tough thing you have to encounter with...
im sorry, its my job now to make your life difficult..

it is not muslim site.

it is christian themselves site.. about gay in the bible...

http://www.melwhite.org/biblesays.html

Seraphim

Mind pointing the proof if St Paul is a homosexual instead of deriving conclusions based from..what..mere conjecture...

babybueno

hehe...it hurts debmey to find out the truth that st. paul is a gay and he cant accept the fact. Now he starts pointing muhammad as paedophile and a rapist, probably the reason why he rejects Muhammad as one of the prophets. Does his reaction show that debmey rather accept st. paul as his prophet than Muhammad? Does that mean st. paul is holier than Muhammad (including st patrick whom seemed to be holier and gained more respect than the other earlier prophets). These two individuals played a main role in making themself accepted by most christians and they outshone the real prophets!

greekgod

The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans

1:26 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:

1:27 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.

Seraphim

Originally posted by greekgod at 2-2-2005 03:21 PM:
The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans

1:26 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:

1: ...

Nice attempt at trying to swindle..


1:25 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.

1:26 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:

1:27 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.

1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.

2:2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.

2:3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?





So want me to explain it to you word by word,alphabet by alphabet,sentence by sentence,phrase by phrase???...

[ Last edited by Seraphim on 2-2-2005 at 04:08 PM ]

Seraphim

Originally posted by babybueno at 2-2-2005 03:10 PM:
hehe...it hurts debmey to find out the truth that st. paul is a gay and he cant accept the fact. Now he starts pointing muhammad as paedophile and a rapist, probably the reason why he rejects Muham ...

It hurts when people believe such crap in a gullible manner without first trying to ascertain it's constancy..And i mean to direct this to you and others.

greekgod

sure dude..

am not any expert in this field..

believe me, im not the one you have to convince..
besides.. i dont have to charge for any thing in your holy book.

many of great, extremely expert in christian wrote such a book,
and made such a statement.. later supported by other christian.
surely, what he said was something, none other than true thing.

dont ask me, i believe it or not.. i'll leave it to you!

you can googling around, asking for st. paul is gay, and you'll get so many results.... so, my point here... i dont play with shit!

Seraphim

Originally posted by greekgod at 2-2-2005 04:22 PM:
sure dude..

am not any expert in this field..

believe me, im not the one you have to convince..
besides.. i dont have to charge for any thing in your holy book.

many of great, extremely e ...

The problem is, you're are pasting phrases out of the whole context which will later mean entirely something else..I dont care what google or anything got to do with this..But clearly you're trying to pervert the message from the Epistle of Paul by posting incomplete materials...Just a yes or no for this..

PS:-If you want to undermine Christianity,at least have the diligence to get more convincing materials for your devious agenda ...

Truth.8

The one who question St Paul gay is they themselves is gay. otherwise he will never question this.

nightlord

Obviously Greeky has again fallen on his face in not reading the whole thing and understanding the missive.

Trying very hard to discredit ST PAUL:no: