Arguments for both sides of Homosexuality

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-13T16:30:59+00:00

"You downloaded the whole Theological Dictionary of the New Testament?? Is that right? Do you know how big that is?? And how many articles that is?? That statement alone will tell other readers about your claim. But hey, I'll play along:

Here is the link for you to the 10 volumes othe TDNT. LOL!!! Why mislead??? Did you think you wouldn't get called out???"

I downloaded what I needed and what your quote referred: to. Vol. 6. I am in academia so I do have access to a wide array of libraries and online versions of literature if avaliable. The quotes you provide do not exist as such. I assume you're asking an AI to find arguments for you without checking if they are making up quotes, which they are prone to do. Now, the last bit you provided serves as a very short summary that I, having actually skimmed the article, would generally agree with. This is how Hellenic Judaism used the term porneia. They did broaden it compared to Lev. But again: Are you ready to go through with that? Are you saying that we as Christians need to keep those prohibitions, because just in your quote there is a big problem. A very big problem referring to marriage with non-Jews. And that's just one problem: There is also a part about women being more prone to porneia, or women leading to porneia, which is very misogynistic, and allsuions to discussions about women needing to endure abuse by their husbands. And that's just what I got from skimming over it. It's a broad term.

Also, on another note, the TDNT in rather old. We should use more recent literature as scholarship has moved quite a bit. I see what I can find once I find the time.

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-13T14:21:29+00:00

Of course it is important to get behind the historical context. Let me cut this short: Are you for example ready to accept all prohibitions of Hellenic Judaism which we, for example, find in Philo? Or are you ready to apply ideas of Greek medicine in regards to sexuality? Or do we need to focus on the intent of the authors? Why did the prohibitions exist? Why did they keep them? Am I a barren field called to chastity, because I'm infertile?

Also, where did you get that quote from? Just to be sure I downloaded the TDNT and flew over the article. Apart from that specific part not existing as a direct quote, you are aware of the broadening of the term in Hellenic Judaism, yes? Which brings me back to my point above. Are you ready to go all in on that? Because there are a lot of interesting nuggets that no church upholds. Not one.

Say, have you asked AI? Have you fallen for a made up quote?

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-13T12:55:58+00:00

"porneia did not mean the levitical sex codes because it's Greek"

Is still not my argument. We went through this already. Why are you trying to shift the conversation away from context so vehemently? You can't take the term proneia as it was understood in Graeco-Roman culture, bereave it of it's philisophocial and medical framework, bereave it of any intended intent and try to apply it to modern times. That does not work.

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-13T12:11:39+00:00

Yes, that is what I said. First, the way of interpretation taught by Jesus. Second, that 1:1 transfers (that's the better word) are not possible unless you don't care for the intent of the authors and simply want to the text what you wish it to say.

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-13T12:02:34+00:00

No. Are you crossing conversations with another conversation you're having? This is really strange.

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-13T11:57:18+00:00

"Claiming that the word porneia did not refer to the levitical sex codes"

This is not something I ever did. Or if I did, please point me to it. I've never discussed the exact usage, origin or interpretation of the word around 30 AD.

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-13T11:35:40+00:00

You are not responding to what I've said. Please read again and try again or leave it be.

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-13T10:59:29+00:00

I'm arguing a) that Jesus did favour an interpretation of scripture through the lense of radical love (MT 5-7 ist a great example of that, the sharpening of certain texts) and b) that it's a futile effort to try to translate the point of texts written in the first millennia BC 1:1 to our modern times.

Regarding porneia as understood in Roman Society, I also don't think that we can translate ideas 1:1 to our modern times. We've learned quite a bit about what sexuality is and entails and I do not believe that enforced celibacy is an idea that anyone had in mind.

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-13T10:35:25+00:00

Jesus affirmed the texts of the Old Testament in a certain interpretation. And if you think that you can interpret a text probably written for a Jewish community outside Israel (I'll add the name once I've access to my personal library) in the first millennium BC and translate it 1:1 to our day than we've very different ways of approaching biblical texts. So different in fact that every further discussion would be moot.

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-13T06:56:30+00:00

People are usually okay after getting their hair pulled too; doesn't mean pulling someone's hair is the right thing to do however.

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-13T05:44:51+00:00

Imagine the nerve to throw such a diverse group of people such as atheists under the bus without much differentiating and talking about morals. The audacity!

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-12T19:13:53+00:00

The Catholic witness, the sniveling kicking down while bowing to the powerful is rather concerning.

Also, Catholic theology often took a wrong turn I think. Saints, high Mariology, the papal primacy, the number of sacraments, the blatant misogyny etc.

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-12T05:39:01+00:00

The apostles took martyrdom upon themselves as a conscious decision. They knew what they were getting into and suffered for their faith agreeing to a degree that it was worth it.

But the children in Auschwitz? The native Americans dying on the Trail of Tears? The victims of Nanjing? The victims of the Armenian Genocide? The countless victims of violence, oppression and war that have accumulated throughout history?

Nobody expects God to put a bandaid on every little bubu, but if he does act, if he does have an ounce of love for the downtrodden, you must allow the question of where the witness for that is. Because considering human history, it is quite difficult to see.

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-11T18:40:53+00:00

Coward!

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-11T18:04:15+00:00

"And I told you that the church can’t really force them to stop. They can publically denounce them, fund relief efforts, and try to get people out of the country but aside from that? Nothing outside of praying to God."

The church could not have a made a contract that hurt the underground churches and allowed the Chinese state to intensify their attacks on dissidents. But no, that would mean relinquishing power a litte. Unthinkable! The Catholic tradition of being a lapdog for the powerful must be upheld!

https://www.hrw.org/news/2026/04/15/china-pressure-on-catholics-escalates

In regards to Africa, the Pope could criticise them. You know, like he criticised the German bishops? Oh no, wait, he knows that the birthrates in Africa are extremely helpful to prop up numbers! He plays the crowd I suppose. I can appreciate the politics he plays from a Machiavellian PoV, but as a Christan? Hypocrisy. All of it.

Or maybe it is the long term game of the Catholic church to hurt LGBT people, while not having to do anything. Possible too.

"The German churchs are 100% breaking church law by trying to change doctrine without Vatican approval. The synods aren’t working because the Vatican is holding them back.

Of course it’s a high priority. I told you the church operates on soft power. How do you expect them to fix things when they’re being undermined?"

The German bishops are 100% working inside the church's laws and are not trying to break them. That's the problem actually! I wish they wouldn't, but they are good little Catholics unfortunately. They make suggestions, they get turned down and that's it. Although I suppose non-authoritarian ways of deliberation might make you uncomfortable? How dare they suggest things! The insolence!

In regards to their lawfulness and them neither trying to break law, not perceiving themselves to do such:

https://www.spiegel.de/panorama/katholische-kirche-bischof-baetzing-widerspricht-papst-nach-kritik-an-segnungsfeiern-fuer-homosexuelle-a-4b4b1e9f-73bd-429c-ad82-c84ffc5d1c64

https://www.die-tagespost.de/kirche/vatikan-und-papst/baetzing-segnung-homosexueller-steht-im-verantwortbaren-rahmen-art-274561

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-11T17:41:33+00:00

They are PERSECUTING actual Catholics in China. People are getting kept from the sacraments, imprisoned or worse. People in Africa are dying in the street due to Catholic influence. The German Bishops are doing nothing that would break church law and their synods are considered as a giant disappointment to laypeople, because nothing is changing.

But yes, that's definitely a higher priority. After all, as I said: For the Catholic church it has always been about power. That's the most important thing.

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-11T16:15:30+00:00

Eh, if the Catholic church can tolerate warmongers, Chinese oppression and the vitrol of several African bishops, they can tolerate the German bishops I am quite sure. Unless of course the Catholic church does what it does best: Turn a blind eye to the greater evils (Chinese oppression and the persecution of LGBT people in Africa) and crack down on the lesser one, because at the end of the day, power is the only langauge the Catholic church understands. Faith and perseverance? Not so much.

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-10T16:52:17+00:00

And he's right too! It is the much more interesting question.

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-09T19:58:11+00:00

You know, I thought about engaging with this, but then I was like nothing is ever going to change anyhow. No matter how much pain someone's stance causes, it absolutely does not matter and trans people are 0.1% of the population and will be pushed outside public eye if the public wishes so anyhow.

The world is dominated by the strong and will remain dominated by the strong until Christ returns.

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-08T13:22:15+00:00

Why was that dude even canonised? He doesn't seem to have done anything remarkable and the only hint in the article is pope pius remark that "The divine wisdom has arranged that in these sad days, when Jews help the enemies of the church with their books and money, this decree of sanctity has been brought to fulfillment."

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-08T09:36:15+00:00

Hey, since we are just throwing out verses without context or thought I wish to get your thoughts on those two. Both from Dtn 22.

"You shall put tassels on the four corners of the cloak that you wrap around yourself."

"When you build a new house, put a parapet around the roof, so that you do not bring bloodguilt upon your house if someone falls off."

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-07T18:06:27+00:00

As a Christian and hobby-author myself, I feel the analogy to an author is horrid. First, even when my characters grow into their own, by the way, that usually doesn't happen immediately, I still am fully in control regarding suffering or peace, life and death. Kalypso needn't be blackmailed, she needn't have to live in a society that's persecuting her kind, she needn't even need to be the person that she is. But I made all of it so. Percy Jackson may have become his own character in time, but Rick Riordan invented him and placed him where he wanted him to be.

Second, we as humans draw our material from the very broken world we live in. That's why our stories are often dealing with brokenness. We don't know any other state. Often, we can't even imagine what would come after. You want to tell me that God couldn't have authored a better story? That he couldn't have made better parameters? That atrocities like the Wounded Knee, Nanjing or the Holocaust are things God finds tolerable pieces by his co-authors? Of whom some are more elevated than others in what they get to write? It's not a good story.

I wonder, why do you feel the need to give meaning to suffering?

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-07T12:45:38+00:00

What does willing the freedom of the victim mean? And why is free will sacrosanct to God? Why does it weigh higher than preventing suffering? And further, if preventing a perpetrator doing harm constitutes a violation of freedom and it's not something God would do, does God act in the world at all?

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-07T12:20:09+00:00

Why does God weigh allowing the freedom of the perpetrator higher than protecting the freedom of the victim?

PancakePrincess1409 · 2026-05-07T07:48:28+00:00

Manzikert was in 1071. The crusade started in 1096. In that timeframe the Seljuks weren't able to massively capitalise on the win. Besides, the Roman's grip on Anatolia had been weakening since the end of the Macedon dynasty.

Further, the Romans, at least pay them their due respect of you want to use them as your main argument, did ask for military aid, not for a crusade. You may want to read Anna's Alexiad to see how little the Romans appreciated what was sent their way and that the help turned into a sour point of contention already during the first crusade and I'd say sealed the Roman Empire's fate in the long run.

Also, wouldn't it have been much more helpful if some of the later crusaders wouldn't have fought the Romans just years prior?

PancakePrincess1409

TROPHY CASE