On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Philip Hart wrote: @> > @> both the old testament and new testament state it's wrong (read: a sin) @> > @> for a man to sleep with a man and a woman to sleep with a woman. @> > @> > Well, sort of for the Old Testament, see above. The New Testament contains @> > no such thing, although it does have prohibitions against rape and @> > beastiality (Jude 1), pederasty (Matthew 8), fertility cults (Romans 1), @> > and temple prostitution (1 Corinthians 6, 1 Timothy 1) which are @> > frequently (and, probably, deliberately) mistranslated or misconstrued as @> > specific prohibitions of homosexuality by people with an agenda to push. @> @> IANAX, but Paul seems clear enough in Romans 1:26/7 @> @> 26: For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their @> women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: @> 27: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, @> burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which @> is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error @> which was meet. Actually, Paul here is amusingly describing God turning people into homosexuals as punishment for worshipping idols and performing Pagan fertility rites. While he clearly doesn't approve, the concept of sin doesn't even come up. There's more to it than that,translationwise, but rather than pretend I speak ancient Greek I will link to a random Google hit which agrees with me: http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibc3.htm My favorite is the part where people have translated a term used to describe long hair on men in other parts of the Bible as "against nature" in this passage.