Hi Austin

Thank you for your comment at Provoketive Magazine (http://provoketive.com). We’re creating a space of rich conversation about life, faith, justice and culture without judgment. Our desire is to provoke the reader’s imagination through conversation and open up spaces of dialogue, learning, and hope.  We want to invite you to come back soon and continue to participate in the conversation. 

Thank you,
Jonathan Brink
Provoketive Magazine

You posted the following comment:
---------------------------------
This is a functional misnomer. While the words in the Greek typically refer to an older man and a younger boy, they also were applied to men of the same age in comitted relationships. Likewise, the Greeks played on the idea of female same sex unions (the Isle of Lesbos is where we get our word Lesbian from). They had these ideas and they applied them. While it is popular nowadays to read into the culture a condemnation only of the adult/child homosexual relationship, this is only possible if it is read into the scripture, rather than extracted from scripture. Likewise, looking at the Greek fails to address the Hebrew basis (OT) for the Greek usage (NT). In Leviticus, there was no pattern of adult men/boy relationships to be paralleled. From a biblical basis, the pattern of behavior has to be understood from the earlier basis rather than viewing this strictly as a Greek discussion. Remember that Paul was a Hebrew first, a Pharisee second, and a Christian Apostle third. His understanding would be derived from the Hebrew Scriptures.

While the word used in Leviticus can be debated, the understanding is difficult to reverse. The List of sins decried in this list is all sexual sins, and homosexuality is included. The idea of homosexuality being openly allowed in the society is difficult to accept... The committed relationship is not talked of because the committed relationship is only allowed in marriage which is by implication between a man and a woman. The idea is to remove sexual sin - which includes sex outside of marriage. Since marriage is between a man and a woman (there are innumerable marriages listed in scripture and not one of them is homosexual in nature, the creation was a man and a woman, the institution of marriage is between a man and a woman - for this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and they will become one flesh, the language has words for bride and groom seperate than man and woman, and they are used in complementary text - I could keep going), committed homosexual relationships cannot be called marriage in a religious sense, therefore, they still fit the category of sexual sin.

If we as a society want to look beyond the biblical definition of marriage, I have serious issues with using the religious word marriage, or claiming that it is based off religious understandings (that is, allowed to be instituted by clergy). If this is the case, it becomes merely a legal institution, which is fine.