Israel Folau saga.

Forums › Sports › Israel Folau saga.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ... | 26

2576 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2263780 25-Jun-2019 09:54

He is a dick plain and simple and needs to grow up and get over himself, Do i believe in god, nope never have never will his beliefs are a load of bollocks IMO.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding : Ice cream man , Ice cream man

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#2263782 25-Jun-2019 09:56

dafman:
You should really get your facts right.
Firstly, his social media account at the time he made the tweet had as its main banner a photo of him in a Rugby Australia shirt.
Secondly, his tweet did not directly quote the bible. I am so sick of hearing this false statement. The bible does not state anywhere that hell awaits homosexuals, so how can you say his tweet directly quotes the bible?!

I wasn't going to comment further. However, if you want to dispute facts, you should make sure you have yours right first!

Here is a copy of Folaus tweet...

As you can see, the tweet clearly quotes the bible. Nor is Folau wearing a Rugby australia tshirt on the tweet banner.

That particular bible quote says that fornicators (ie, including homosexuals) will not inherit the kingdom of god. In other words, they go to hell. How can you argue otherwise?

You claim...

" The bible does not state anywhere that hell awaits homosexuals"

Please explain this then...

Corinthians 6:9–10
The New King James Version
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2263800 25-Jun-2019 10:08

surfisup1000:

dafman:
You should really get your facts right.
Firstly, his social media account at the time he made the tweet had as its main banner a photo of him in a Rugby Australia shirt.
Secondly, his tweet did not directly quote the bible. I am so sick of hearing this false statement. The bible does not state anywhere that hell awaits homosexuals, so how can you say his tweet directly quotes the bible?!

I wasn't going to comment further. However, if you want to dispute facts, you should make sure you have yours right first!

Here is a copy of Folaus tweet...

As you can see, the tweet clearly quotes the bible. Nor is Folau wearing a Rugby australia tshirt on the tweet banner.

That particular bible quote says that fornicators (ie, including homosexuals) will not inherit the kingdom of god. In other words, they go to hell. How can you argue otherwise?

You claim...

" The bible does not state anywhere that hell awaits homosexuals"

Please explain this then...

Corinthians 6:9–10
The New King James Version
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.

Whats this The New King James Version?

I am doubtful that the Bible uses the modern word homosexuals. Or are some people updating the Bible, with "their new Bible" If so, then the "Bible"
as I know it, an ancient historical document, is being plagiarised for nefarious purposes

Shadowfoot

First time caller
385 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2263810 25-Jun-2019 10:18

I prefer to focus my sinning on Leviticus:

Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.
'Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.
Ye shall keep my sabbaths, and reverence my sanctuary: I am the LORD.
Regard not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after wizards, to be defiled by them: I am the LORD your God. (Does this include Siri?)
Turn ye not unto idols, nor make to yourselves molten gods: I am the LORD your God. (I think this one refers to TV, probably sports on TV.)

I haven't broken this one yet: Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you.

Blue Sky: shadowfoot.bsky.social

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#2263811 25-Jun-2019 10:19

tdgeek:

Whats this The New King James Version?

I am doubtful that the Bible uses the modern word homosexuals. Or are some people updating the Bible, with "their new Bible" If so, then the "Bible"
as I know it, an ancient historical document, is being plagiarised for nefarious purposes

Google it, Corinthians 6:9-10

You'll find plenty of varying translations , all of them are consistent.

Dafman is trying to make the claim that the bible is not anti-homosexual. I just couldn't let that slide!

Time to ban the bible maybe?

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2263814 25-Jun-2019 10:29

surfisup1000:

tdgeek:

Whats this The New King James Version?

I am doubtful that the Bible uses the modern word homosexuals. Or are some people updating the Bible, with "their new Bible" If so, then the "Bible"
as I know it, an ancient historical document, is being plagiarised for nefarious purposes

Google it, Corinthians 6:9-10

You'll find plenty of varying translations , all of them are consistent.

Dafman is trying to make the claim that the bible is not anti-homosexual. I just couldn't let that slide!

Time to ban the bible maybe?

Not consistent at all. We need to look at The Bible, not what varying people decide they want THEIR translation to be

QUOTE

The debate about 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 is confusing, and there simply isn’t one decisive answer that resolves all the difficulties in this passage. Let’s take a closer look at some of the issues in these verses.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 in the KJV (we’ll get to the NIV momentarily) reads:

9Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate [μαλακοὶς], nor abusers of themselves with mankind [ἀρσενοκοῖται], 10Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

When it comes to homosexuality and the Bible, the two key words in this passage are the Greek words μαλακός (malakós) and ἀρσενοκοίτης (arsenokoítēs), which I’ve bolded in the text above.

μαλακός literally means “soft.” The KJV translates it as “effeminate.” This word was widely used in the ancient world and has a broad range of meanings, including “effeminate.” It appears several other times in the New Testament where it is usually translated as “soft.” But, given that this is just a list without any further context, no one knows for sure exactly what Paul had in mind when he included it in his list of immoral behaviors. It might be referring to weakness of character, or cowardice, or some other moral (but not necessarily sexual) shortcoming.

UNQUOTE

How does "effeminate...shall not inherit the kingdom of God" Translate to "send all homosexuals to hell?

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/unfundamentalistchristians/2015/08/clobbering-the-confusion-about-1-corinthians-69-10/

Shadowfoot

First time caller
385 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2263819 25-Jun-2019 10:34

effeminate? Does that mean it's okay when I hit on hunky guys?

Blue Sky: shadowfoot.bsky.social

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

GV27

5896 posts

Uber Geek

#2263820 25-Jun-2019 10:34

Kiwifruta:

He is not a bigoted jerk. He has shared his own weaknesses (womanising) that he needed to repent of. His message was a message of warning and hope. By repenting and through the atonement of Jesus Christ there is hope for a heavenly reward. Where is the hate in that?

Separate out what you believe from the need to tell everyone else they're scum. He's free to believe what he wants, but if you're going to be a jerk when you evangelise then there's going to be consequences for the fact you're a jerk, not what for what you believe.

tyronne

33 posts

Geek

#2263830 25-Jun-2019 10:54

surfisup1000:

You claim...

" The bible does not state anywhere that hell awaits homosexuals"

Please explain this then...

Corinthians 6:9–10
The New King James Version
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.

Reviler
to assail with contemptuous or opprobrious language; address or speak of abusively.
to speak abusively.

His criticism will lead him to hell anyway. Way to go!

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2263977 25-Jun-2019 12:43

doing some bible study i see?

well I think you are allowed to mingle with the effiminate from this passage, there's nothing wrong with become like one to win one's heart (and soul)

1 Corinthians 9:19-23 New International Version (NIV)

Paul’s Use of His Freedom

19 Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some. 23 I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2264012 25-Jun-2019 13:00

I have never delved into this issue to any great depth and I don't speak any of the languages involved in the various translations (other than English), but I do speak other languages and I have worked as a translator. It is not difficult to make a good translation of any passage or phrase into another language. This is one of the wonders of language, that every language has the words that are needed to translate any concept from any other language. But sometimes one language may need many words to explain something that a different language has one word for.

What really can be difficult, sometimes to the point of near-impossibility, is perfectly translating a single word. Names of objects are usually not hard. Most languages will have a simple word for 'tree' or 'house' that is understood the same everywhere. But words that have a cultural context or are laden with value judgements, can be much harder. In the western English-speaking world, the word 'queer' used to be a very pejorative label for homosexual. In recent years the gay community has reclaimed it and turned it into something much more positive. But it still carries all kinds of connotations that the more neutral 'homosexual' does not. Queer does mean homosexual, as well as other things. But if it is simply translated as homosexual, then it is incorrect as all the other nuance is stripped away. For this reason I don't take seriously any attempt to interpret what any biblical translation purports to say unless it is academically annotated research of the original words used by the original author in the context of the language and culture at the time the words were used. If the use of a word like 'queer', or especially, 'gay', can change so drastically in the popular parlance over the space of a mere generation or so, how can anyone possibly say with any kind of certainty what a term used 2,000 years ago might have meant to the people of that time, never mind that it has been garbled by being passed through so many different cultures.

I am not religious but I don't have a problem with those who are, especially if they are sincere about it. But anyone who takes today's bible literally, or even (especially) the version published in 1611, is simply being ignorant. It is a mishmash of misinterpretation and inaccurate translation and personal prejudice spanning two millennia. If you really think this is the word of god, then at least have the decency to learn Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, and spend a few decades studying some cultural archaeology so you at least have a minimal understanding of what it is actually saying.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

gzt

17104 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2264086 25-Jun-2019 14:32

I've seen a few posts more or less assuming this could happen to any employee or that this could occur in any employment relationship. That is absolutely incorrect.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2264149 25-Jun-2019 15:21

His new and improved funding website has topped A$600,000 in 12 hours. Discrimination is clearly a popular pastime

mm1352000

1149 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2264207 25-Jun-2019 15:38

Rikkitic:

I am not religious but I don't have a problem with those who are, especially if they are sincere about it. But anyone who takes today's bible literally, or even (especially) the version published in 1611, is simply being ignorant. It is a mishmash of misinterpretation and inaccurate translation and personal prejudice spanning two millennia. If you really think this is the word of god, then at least have the decency to learn Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, and spend a few decades studying some cultural archaeology so you at least have a minimal understanding of what it is actually saying.

I assume you realise that the vast majority of people who might describe themselves as sincere Christians don't learn Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek.

mm1352000

1149 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2264211 25-Jun-2019 15:42

gzt: I've seen a few posts more or less assuming this could happen to any employee or that this could occur in any employment relationship. That is absolutely incorrect.

True if you assume that Folau repeatedly discriminated, and in so doing breached his contract. Some people obviously don't agree with that assessment, least of all Folau himself.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ... | 26