Effeminate Gospel, Effeminate Christians.

SoulandForm

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind.

1 Corinthians 6:9.

And yet a lot of people now seem under the impression that Christianity is a wishy-washy effeminate Religion- and to a certain extent you cant blame given how that is how it is often presented (though much more so in the south of the country than in Ulster). The fact that southern Irish atheists are often so obnoxious in their talk of "breaded sky fairies" and "the flying spaggetti monster" I believe comes out of this- if they had ever been given the slightest hint of the dread Holiness of God I dont think such talk would possible. An internet discussion recently in which a lot of people were shocked by the idea that Jesus wants his followers to be armed got me thinking about this issue.

The below article raises a lot of valid points even if it goes over the top at times (for instance comparing married physical love if contraception is used to homosexuality is a bit mad in my humble opinion). I will try to find other material dealing with this important issue and post it here.

http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2005/07/10/effeminate-gospel-effeminate-christians/

homer911

That's a King James translation?

It's pretty unique in its content - other translations don't use the word "effeminate"

http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/6-9.htm

The Aramaic Bible in plain English seems more consistent with modern translations:

"Or do you not know that evil men do not inherit The Kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; no fornicators, neither worshipers of idols, neither adulterers, neither sexual molesters, neither males lying down with males,"

Manach

My version, Catholic (Douay-Rheim) one on Kindle, states.
"1co.6.9 Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom
of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers,
1co.6.10 Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God.. "

Offhand, when I think effeminate, it pertains to the caring and nurturing community oriented aspect of Christianity, which is an aspect of our society building ethos.

SoulandForm

Manach wrote: »

Offhand, when I think effeminate, it pertains to the caring and nurturing community oriented aspect of Christianity, which is an aspect of our society building ethos.

No femininity and its nurturing aspects are part of God's creation. Effeminancy is something different- its lack of back bone, vainity, pettiness, selfishness, etc. Though maybe being all soft with someone when they need at the very least the verbal version of a good slapping would count as effeminacy.

SoulandForm

Manach think about it this way; men and women by reason of their gender tend to certain virtues and vices but there is something particularly disgusting when a man or a woman manifests the vices (though not the virtues) of the opposite gender. A good example of this would be Hilary Clinton and her reaction to the brutal murder of Col Ghaddafi- it would have been disgusting if a man had reacted that way but because it was a woman in made it ten times worse. Effeminacy is when men manifest the vices that women tend to- for instance gossiping.

iverjohnston

Here goes SoulandForm again. Managed to get something like 40 pages arguing that everyone except the forces of law and order be allowed to purchase and carry assault rifles or rocket launchers without hindrance. All based on a selective rendering of not very relevant bible quotes . Yawn.

Corkfeen

SoulandForm wrote: »

Manach think about it this way; men and women by reason of their gender tend to certain virtues and vices but there is something particularly disgusting when a man or a woman manifests the vices (though not the virtues) of the opposite gender. A good example of this would be Hilary Clinton and her reaction to the brutal murder of Col Ghaddafi- it would have been disgusting if a man had reacted that way but because it was a woman in made it ten times worse. Effeminacy is when men manifest the vices that women tend to- for instance gossiping.

What you're doing is stereotyping traits by gender. It was really easy to predict who started this thread.

mathepac

I worry sometimes that the real messages of hope and reconciliation contained in the New Testament get lost in over-analyzing small portions of text in isolation from the "punch-line" to use a rather crude expression.

1Co.9.11

"And such were some of you:but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God." ASV

"And such were some of you:but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God" KJV

So the admonishment is not to be effeminate, whatever the word means in this context, but to turn to God. So if the "southern Irish atheists" accuse Paulines / Christians of being effeminate, the response is that it's a contradiction in terms.

Just on the other point your post raises "An internet discussion recently in which a lot of people were shocked by the idea that Jesus wants his followers to be armed ..." Christians who don't understand that the Nazarenes (nothing to do with Nazareth), an armed revolutionary group of Jews in Biblical times, counted Jesus and his Apostles amongst their number, may need to read historical references (and cultural ones).

The "INRI "symbol traditionally pinned over the crucified Christ on the crucifix used to be translated to me in school as a mocking Roman comment "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews" SOme now contend that it symolises the term "Jesus the Nazarene / Nazarite, King of the Jews".

Interestingly neither the Old Testament nor Josephus mention Nazareth, but Nazarenes and Nazarites appear in the context of off-shoots, small branches, new sproutings, etc

All of the above is based on the (rickety) assumption that current English translations of ancient mu;ti-lingual texts and re-translations are accurate.

SoulandForm

Corkfeen wrote: »

What you're doing is stereotyping traits by gender. It was really easy to predict who started this thread.

And you are seriously now going to tell me that gender is a social construct? The way what is falsely labeled "cultural Marxism" has penetrated mainstream southern Irish society is absolutely shocking.

SoulandForm

mathepac wrote: »

I worry sometimes that the real messages of hope and reconciliation contained in the New Testament get lost in over-analyzing small portions of text in isolation from the "punch-line" to use a rather crude expression.

1Co.9.11


"And such were some of you:but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God" KJV

Indeed there is Salvation from effeminacy in Christ-but looking how Irish Churches are emptying something is going wrong isnt it? People are not being sanctified and justified.

Turtwig

SoulandForm wrote: »

And you are seriously now going to tell me that gender is a social construct? The way what is falsely labeled "cultural Marxism" has penetrated mainstream southern Irish society is absolutely shocking.

Some historians and anthropologists have suggested it.

the link. wrote:

Heterosexual” was actually coined in a letter at the same time as the word “homosexual,” [in the mid-19thcentury], by an Austro-Hungarian journalist named Károly Mária Kertbeny. He created these words as part of his response to a piece of Prussian legislation that made same-sex erotic behavior illegal, even in cases where the identical act performed by a man and a woman would be considered legal. And he was one of a couple of people who did a lot of writing and campaigning and pamphleteering to try to change legal opinion on that matter. He coined the words “heterosexual” and “homosexual” in a really very clever bid to try to equalize same-sex and different-sex. His intent was to suggest that there are these two categories in which human beings could be sexual, that they were not part of a hierarchy, that they were just two different flavors of the same thing.

Not sure where I stand but I do agree that the gender of someone isn't necessarily straight forward.

lmaopml

SoulandForm wrote: »

Manach think about it this way; men and women by reason of their gender tend to certain virtues and vices but there is something particularly disgusting when a man or a woman manifests the vices (though not the virtues) of the opposite gender. A good example of this would be Hilary Clinton and her reaction to the brutal murder of Col Ghaddafi- it would have been disgusting if a man had reacted that way but because it was a woman in made it ten times worse. Effeminacy is when men manifest the vices that women tend to- for instance gossiping.

I think there are certain 'vices' and 'virtues' that we aspire to, or are victims of as both males and females, we're written on by what we choose freely, by the books we choose to read, by the people we choose to call somebody we would like to follow, and by how we choose to listen or to not listen to others too, actually right down to emulating a hero in very many cases. Whether they are worthy or no, false promises etc, as we have learned and continue to learn every day, even as lately as the last century - most especially the last century.

Of course there is a 'path' we tread. However, I do believe that we only ever are capable of sowing a seed, and somebody else waters it, we sow and then we let it grow in it's own time through trust and prayer - entering into seeking the face of God or even just stepping off the whirl wind of opinion to be quiet is what we all do in common because we're all only people that Grace has shone on..

All sinners, all not perfect people, but in that knowing is the beginning of a joint journey where we hold hands with our neighbour and don't think them below us, and even the one we call enemy at times. We love them even more.

It's very difficult sometimes what is expected. I think however, if one looks at love doing what love does they see why Christ is not 'just one of many' but singularly the one who stumbled to a throne - his story is ours, and his wounds speak to ours, and only God can speak to pain and suffering and make sense of it, in a crazy world, the Cross speaks more than words, that's the power of the Cross. All real love involves sacrifice, and that is a very great truth.

Everybody wants love, real love, not fake love. God is love - Reconciling Justice, Mercy, and Love is not so very difficult when one sees love in action and the effect real love has on hearts.

Doc Farrell

Not sure what the point of the thread is? Is it that Irish Catholicism isn't conservative enough? The only background I can find to the magazine you linked to are references to racist klu klux clan type, anti immigration stuff?
Of course you are perfectly entitled to hold whatever views you like, I'm just not sure what these views are?

SoulandForm

Doc Farrell wrote: »

Not sure what the point of the thread is? Is it that Irish Catholicism isn't conservative enough? The only background I can find to the magazine you linked to are references to racist klu klux clan type, anti immigration stuff?
Of course you are perfectly entitled to hold whatever views you like, I'm just not sure what these views are?

Are you seriously suggesting that Pat Buchanan whatever his views on immigration is "racist Klu Klux Klan stuff"? No I disagree with a lot of his views however he sometimes makes very strong points. The founder of the magazine was personal friend of the last Pope- would Cardinal Ratizenger be hanging out with Klu Klux Klan types?

Mass immigration is a complex subject.

And not its not about "conservatism" as such (personally I dont like using political terms in matters of Religion") but about effeminacy which is tied in to a lack of the sense of the Holiness of God.

Lapis lazuli

Paul was writing to Greeks in Corinth. The Greek Gods Dionysus and Hermaphroditus were often linked to effeminacy, so in my opinion it was probably a much deeper issue than merely being 'camp'.

And as the Carpenter warned, we'd be better to sort out the planks in our own eyes, rather than looking for splinters in others. I would think effeminacy, if there even is any, is the least of the problems the Church is facing at the moment.

SoulandForm

Lapis lazuli wrote: »

Paul was writing to Greeks in Corinth. The Greek Gods Dionysus and Hermaphroditus were often linked to effeminacy, so in my opinion it was probably a much deeper issue than merely being 'camp'.

And as the Carpenter warned, we'd be better to sort out the planks in our own eyes, rather than looking for splinters in others. I would think effeminacy, if there even is any, is the least of the problems the Church is facing at the moment.

Nearly all the problems the Church is facing in the west in general are linked into effeminacy.

SoulandForm

The author is a Protestant by the way.

iverjohnston

And that is relevant to the argument?

homer911

SoulandForm wrote: »

Nearly all the problems the Church is facing in the west in general are linked into effeminacy.

Hi SoulandForm

I note that you conveniently ignored my post indicating many bible translations make no reference to effeminancy in this verse

Maybe you need to take this to the Conspiracy Theories Forum?

SoulandForm

homer911 wrote: »

Hi SoulandForm

I note that you conveniently ignored my post indicating many bible translations make no reference to effeminancy in this verse

Maybe you need to take this to the Conspiracy Theories Forum?

Sorry I thought Manach had answered your point in the third post- if both the English Reformers and the RCC could agree that effeminate is there I would strongly suspect that these modern translations probably have a certain view point behind them excluding that word.

Whether the King James or the Douay Rheims is best might be a good idea for a thread though.

Doc Farrell

SoulandForm wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that Pat Buchanan whatever his views on immigration is "racist Klu Klux Klan stuff"? No I disagree with a lot of his views however he sometimes makes very strong points. The founder of the magazine was personal friend of the last Pope- would Cardinal Ratizenger be hanging out with Klu Klux Klan types?

Mass immigration is a complex subject.

And not its not about "conservatism" as such (personally I dont like using political terms in matters of Religion") but about effeminacy which is tied in to a lack of the sense of the Holiness of God.

Educate me here so, are you referring to Mr Fleming as a personal friend of the former Pope?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Fleming_(political_writer)

Wasn't he also a founding member of the League of the South in good ole Alabama?

SoulandForm

Doc Farrell wrote: »

Educate me here so, are you referring to Mr Fleming as a personal friend of the former Pope?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Fleming_(political_writer)

Wasn't he also a founding member of the League of the South in good ole Alabama?

Uh the link proves nothing- not all those who are Southern Particularists are racist. Chattel slavery in "Dixie" was evil and immoral but wage slavery in the north wasnt exactly Christian now was it?

Fr Richard John Neuhas was the person I was referring too.

SoulandForm

Doc Farrell wrote: »

Educate me here so, are you referring to Mr Fleming as a personal friend of the former Pope?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Fleming_(political_writer)

Wasn't he also a founding member of the League of the South in good ole Alabama?

The KKK is militantly anti-Catholic; Chronicles magazine is largely pro-Catholic.

<SNIP>

Turtwig

Folks,

Please drop this line of discussion. Water under the bridge and move it on. Please refrain from personal attacks on a poster. Deal with the points not their presumed personal character or behaviour.

Doc Farrell

I'm just trying to fathom what the thread is about. The op links to a magazine , I do a quick search on the google machine and this comes up

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Chronicles_(magazine)

I didn't write it, what's the issue?

iverjohnston

A pot boiler of a thread, whereby the author is convinced that the bible is warning that Christians should guard against any homosexual tendencies. Without actually using the word.

You know what they say ,don't feed the trolls!

SoulandForm

iverjohnston wrote: »

A pot boiler of a thread, whereby the author is convinced that the bible is warning that Christians should guard against any homosexual tendencies. Without actually using the word.

You know what they say ,don't feed the trolls!

No not all those who are effeminate are homosexuals and not all homosexuals are effeminate. A forth right discussion of the homosexual question is forbidden on these forums anyway.

Links234

SoulandForm wrote: »

Manach think about it this way; men and women by reason of their gender tend to certain virtues and vices but there is something particularly disgusting when a man or a woman manifests the vices (though not the virtues) of the opposite gender.

Why is this 'particularly disgusting'?

honestly, this has to be one of the more peculiar threads I've come across on this forum. you can't be a godly man unless you're a burly, beardy lumberjack, or a godly woman unless you're in the kitchen knitting cakes and baking jumpers? just absurd really

iverjohnston

Perhaps what the poster finds "particularly disgusting " is the advent of effeminate women in the role of clergy.

SoulandForm

iverjohnston wrote: »

Perhaps what the poster finds "particularly disgusting " is the advent of effeminate women in the role of clergy.

Women cannot be effeminate.

I dont have a problem with female Ministers-or at least not overly so.

Its not something I get worked up by. Similarly I dont get worked up by people being opposed to them. Michael Heiser wrote something good on the issue that I will see if I can find.

_Redzer_

SoulandForm wrote: »

Women cannot be effeminate.

I dont have a problem with female Ministers-or at least not overly so.

Its not something I get worked up by. Similarly I dont get worked up by people being opposed to them. Michael Heiser wrote something good on the issue that I will see if I can find.

So you support the stereotypes that men should be men and women should be women, and you'd like it best if there were no women ministers in such 'man jobs' as you said you're not completely comfortable with it.

Such a seriously bizaar thread this is