Homosexuality - Rebel Priests defy Pope on Blessing Same-Sex Unions

[sky]

Originally Posted by Altair

Well FWIW, creating an image about people you disagree with clearly allows you to present yourself as ''tolerant'' and ''virtuous''. That's why you continuously bring that nonsense up out of nowhere even when it isn't in any way relevant to the discussion.

If you want to focus on the scripture than by all means, do so. There are passages about this topic in Leviticus and stuff that Paul wrote. How would a Christian deal with that? Would they accept the Bible is fallible and written by different authors? If yes, then we may have a case for gay acceptance, especially if one believes Paul wasn't really inspired by the holy ghost and the OT is about a different God than the one Jesus prayed to. This would also come closer to a Gnostic point of view. But if Jesus is the incarnation of God and every bit of the Bible is connected and ''holy'' than it becomes more difficult doesn't it.

I've noticed this 'conflict' returns across different threads in the Christian forum. Does one take the Bible as a holy book or not, that is the question.

Some do see the Bible as a Holy Book but most choose the ' Parts ' they deem ' Holy '....

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by Altair

Here's the actual context behind the Elohist/Yahwist discussion between me and John: we talked about it before in other threads. The Bible consists of different sources. John brought it up here and I think that's interesting because using this approach one could pick a more free/liberal perspective or a more hardline perspective on this particular topic. What is shows is that people use the Bible differently, and this returns in every discussion here in the Christianity forum.

What I find interesting about the Elohist/Yahwist versions on creation, flood, etc., is that apparently they did not 'fight' amongst themselves over these 'issues'. They seemed to respect each others viewpoint on the matter.

In the Levitical Laws, most of the laws violated carried with it capital punishment, but how many times were these laws executed? This in of itself should help to put this issue to rest, but I doubt it will. And then we come to the Kings...... the Law was not enforced and at the end of the wars, they 'find' the Laws only to be surprised that such a thing existed.

Writing on the Kings, we should look at what were some of the issues behind that. One was the worship of Asherah, the sacred poles, and as modern archaeologist have uncovered, the elevation of Yahweh's consort to the same level as Yahweh. This consort was different from other consorts that other nations worshipped. Archaeologists claim this consort had a male appendage between her legs as identified in statues.

[RabbiO]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

Elohists were the ones who wrote about Elohim. Elohim exists in Hebrew but basically 'disappeared' when it came to the English language.

I'm confused. From what I have read of your posts, I would have, perhaps incorrectly, guessed that your knowledge of biblical Hebrew was minimal at best. Yet, you seem to be indicating that you have a mastery of the language.

סִימָן לְגסּוּת עֲנִיּוּת הַתּוֹרָה

[BigJohn]

                    אולי

[sky]

יִתָכֵן

[Altair]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

What I find interesting about the Elohist/Yahwist versions on creation, flood, etc., is that apparently they did not 'fight' amongst themselves over these 'issues'. They seemed to respect each others viewpoint on the matter.

Alternatively, there was a third party later on that put the two accounts together (for whatever reason). Or do you have evidence that the two sources were not having any issues over scripture and thought ''yeah, lets put these two different stories together, no biggie.'' ?

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by Altair

Alternatively, there was a third party later on that put the two accounts together (for whatever reason). Or do you have evidence that the two sources were not having any issues over scripture and thought ''yeah, lets put these two different stories together, no biggie.'' ?

There seems to be other groups, like you mentioned. Some claim 5 different groups.

When Yahweh is introduced, the expression Yahweh Elohim is used. This is at the beginning of the second creation account. This expression is used in other places and at times the expression Elohim Yahweh is used. To me, these expressions came after the creation accounts were written. The person or group who put these accounts together in one Book appear to use the expression Elohim Yahweh to give the transition from one account to the other account an 'even flow'.

In modern times, chapters and verses, etc. were added. We could say this is another 'group'. When they added chapters, it is apparent they 'goofed' right at the beginning. The first chapter of Genesis should have ended at the end of the first creation account and the next chapter should have begun at the beginning of the second creation account. But then there is the thought that maybe they were fully aware there are two separate creations accounts and they had no intentions of making this obvious.

As for the Original Poster's question, it appears to me that what was written in the Bible is very metaphysical in nature and just like this Forum, each person has their right to their opinion(s).

[BigJohn]

As I mentioned in my previous post, "As for the Original Poster's question, it appears to me that what was written in the Bible is very metaphysical in nature and just like this Forum, each person has their right to their opinion(s)" elevates the Bible to a 'new' level for us to 'see' it in a way that is more palatable for everyone.

[sky]

http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/genesis_texts.html


Mybe RabbiO who's the expert might have something to add , it's an interesting subject for Biblical readers.

[BigJohn]

Thanks for the reference.

I found this information on my own by studying Genesis. I was dumbfounded to find later that this type of information has been known by others but for whatever reason, never seemed to got disseminated.

One point I enjoyed reading was "The final editing--and the addition of the P Text (Priestly Text) material--occurred during or soon after the Babylonian exile (597 and 587/586 BCE). At this time, the Judaic priests were probably desperate to retain their unique monotheistic beliefs in the face of overwhelming Babylonian influence, but they also faced the challenge of harmonizing their world view with that of the Babylonian tradition" which mimics, in many ways, what I have been writing.