[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by photon

Actually according to Strong's that Greek word's first definition is the death of the body, with other definitions, and the last one is the seperation you talk about. That exact greek word is used in other contexts by Paul to refer to physical death (the death of Jesus for example). So it still appears to choose this word to mean one thing in one context and another thing in another. Paul could be saying that their actions are worth of an early physical death (killing people for things they did wasn't uncommon at the time)

Strongs is not a dictionary. It only gives the base meaning and often the root meaning. It is no substitute for comparing usage. Yes the word means death but, the bible clearly doesn't see death in the same light as an atheist would. How the Bible uses the word is significant. There is no reason to assume Paul was calling for murder and no where in the New Testament do we see this call for judgment by the churches. Also, when Paul refers to Jesus' physical death he is referring to a separation from the body.

And it's not just "some guy with a page" that sees this, many biblical scholars far more educated than you and I combined have argued over this passage in far greater detail.. And people always seem to come to the conclusion that best fits their world view. Some choose tolerance and focus on the big picture issues of the Bible, others pick one issue that has a couple of scriptures about it and choose that to divide and judge.

Yes but the argument began when societies began to embrace homosexuality and ridicule churches for their historical stance. Before that no one thought this passage difficult to understand. The scholars in the 15th century didn't have a social agenda when the looked at this passage. Today we have a small group of scholars all of sudden questioning every passage dealing with this issue and attempting to reinterpret them. I'll stand the 17th century scholars up against any of the bright minds today who are trying to make the Bible politically correct. Also you will find the scholars who question these passages are small in number and have achieved much of their stature by taking this popular stance.

Considering how prevelant and socially accepted homosexuality was during the time of Jesus, you'd think there'd be more against it and more clear if it was a big an issue.

Yes I agree it was more common because of Greek culture. I think more isn't written against it because Christians were such out casts. They had no recognition in society. Homosexuality is just one of many sins and didn't raise much controversy. It has been asked here why churches don't say more about adultery or fornication. Well a good part of the reason is we don't have Adultery parades or fornication parades. We don't have society calling us bigots and narrow minded because we see homosexuality as sin. Their are not laws being passed protecting adulterers on fornication from the hurtful words someone might say against them. If we were in the 17th century or the 1st century we wouldn't be having this conversation. I guess adultery and fornication was then just like today more common than the sin of homosexuality and because of that received more attention.