Quote:
Originally posted by Jeff Higgins
I'm pretty sure it was aimed at me. I did my best to provide you with an opinion regarding the story of Lot and the angry mob. Intersting that you chose to reply to others' responses, but not mine. Especially after this remark.
Context is far more important. We all know that; or we should, anyway. Every beginning reader is made to understand the importance of context. Those that would discount the importance of it are universally trying to alter the meaning conveyed by the context, as they are in this case. Because they have a pro-gay agenda.
I tried to explain the context in which this one word is given, and how angels are presented in the Bible. You chose to ignore all of that and go after the lower-hanging fruit.
Isn't that kind of what you have done here?
|
No.
I was only pointing out that the 'traditional' interpretaion, and it's use for condemning homosexuality from a church prespective, may be greatly affected by the translation. Using a different form of a word can create a whole different slant on the purpose of the story, don't you think?
We've all been told the story of Lot many times over. I think it's suspicious that the incestuous relationship with his daughters was left out in every case.
I see it as manipulation of language to influence the behaviour of the masses.
Not trying to pick a fight with you and I'm sorry if my remarks came across that way.
My apologies.
