SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Luke 17:34 - 36

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Re:

Unless you suffer from persecution mania, I don't remember calling you any names. And all you've done so far is actually distort scripture, not discuss. Lets not skirt around this.

And if we're going to discuss this scripture in context, we should look to Philogos's post. The majority of modern translations seem to agree with his post as well. It takes a rather subjective predisposed spin to take this where you're trying to take it. Which is why I had to question why you would go through such great effort of back browsing to dig this thread up. My question still stands, by the way.

 2010/7/3 3:03









 Re: EverestoSama

You're right. You didn't call me any names. You simply characterized my posts as "anti-Biblical propaganda" and suggested that my posting is "trolling."

You have now said that I may be suffering from persecution mania, and that all I have done is distort the Scripture. In a discussion, it will be necessary to demonstrate where I have distorted the passage in Luke 17, not simply accuse me of distorting it.

Would you like to discuss the passage, my friend?

I didn't dig the thread up, as you suggest. I found it while googling for some research I'm doing.

So how about those three gay and lesbian couples in Luke 17? Jesus didn't have blanket condemnation for the six homosexuals. He accepted them on the same basis as heterosexuals, on a case by case basis.

 2010/7/3 3:12









 Re:

Read Philologos's post. Then we'll discuss this further. The context was NOT in reference to six homosexual couples. Paul was pretty clear that homosexuals would not inherit the Kingdom of God, I'm not so sure why you're saying something to the contrary.

 2010/7/3 3:16









 Re:

I am writing in response to the following question:

"In the light of the current flurry of threads on homosexuality, how did the choice of 'two men in a bed' ever get into scripture.......?"

I'm just staying on topic, my friend. Answering the question. My answer to the question is essentially this:

The phrase "two men in one bed" is in the Scripture because Jesus used three same-sex couples to illustrate a lesson on judgment, the main point of which was to show that sexual-orientation is a non-issue for God.

Those three couples appear in Luke 17:34-36 (KJV):

I tell you, in that night
there shall be two men in one bed;
the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.

Two women shall be grinding together;
the one shall be taken, and the other left.

Two men shall be in the field;
the one shall be taken, and the other left.
(Luke 17:34-36, KJV)

Three same-sex couples, four gays and two lesbians. Three gays and lesbians are delivered out of judgment, and three are left.

And the context of Luke 17:22-32 requires us to understand that these were homosexuals.

Jesus contravened the O.T. law on other occasions, and he contravened Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 in this passage.

"Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock" (Matthew 7:24).

 2010/7/3 3:27









 Re:

Notice that all the action takes place at night.

Two men in one bed--at night.

Two women grinding together--at night.

Two men in the field--at night.

 2010/7/3 3:44









 Re:

Because every time night is mentioned, it's clear that it's referring to something sexual. I'm glad we've all been shown the light here.

 2010/7/3 3:49









 Re:

Not so, EverestoSama. The immediately preceding context of Luke 17:22-32 tells us it was sexual. Those verses are about Sodom, Lot, fire and brimstone, and Lot's wife. The sin of Sodom was widely believed to be primarily homosexual.

So all the details of Sodom are brought up, immediately followed by a reference to "two men in one bed" and "two women grinding together." Jesus intended us to think "sex." I'm not reading something into the text. That is what it refers to in context.

This is what they mean when they say "you have to read it in context."

In all seriousness, to say that "two men in one bed" does not refer to a homosexual encounter is to take it out of context, to say that context doesn't matter.

The fact that it occurs at night simply confirms it, and draws our attention to the same-sex element.

 2010/7/3 3:54









 Re:

HAHA. OK dude. Feel free to continue.

 2010/7/3 3:57
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
Then comes the reference to "two men in one bed,"



Except that it doesn't say 'two men' in one bed. It just says two 'people'. See my earlier post.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2010/7/3 5:07Profile









 Re:

Bible translators agree that it can be translated either way. It can be "two people" or it can be "two men."

The scribes that produced the Vaticanus Sinaiticus manuscript of the N.T. translated the verse "two men will be in one boat." Men and women didn't work together fishing--it was all men on the fishing boats.

So it is clear that early Christian scribes understood it to be "men."

I believe that these scribes were uncomfortable with the implications of "two men in one bed," and amended the text to read "two men in one boat," but that is only a speculation as to why they made the change.

The fact remains that early Christians read it as "men."

And this is the direction our minds would naturally go after Jesus just finished talking about the Sodom story, where men having sex with men would have been the dominant image in the minds of Jesus' hearers.

Context, context, context.

The order of the elements runs like this:

Lot
Sodom
Fire and brimstone
Lot's wife
In that night.
Two men in one bed.
Two women grinding together.
Two men in the field.

This is the order, this is the context. The verse must not be isolated from its context when we interpret it.

We shouldn't take verse 34 out of context and insist it refers to a woman and her husband.

There is nothing in the context of Luke 17 that suggests we not render it two men. In fact, all the contextual flags point to "two men."

Once again, Jesus abrogated various O.T. laws, and he abrogated Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 here in Luke 17:22-36.

My friends, believe me, this was a startling discovery for me, one that took a while to sink in.

 2010/7/3 6:16





©2002-2024 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Revival to this Generation.
Privacy Policy