Luke 17:34 - 36 | SermonIndex

sermonindex Feb 3, 2006

Luke 1734 I tell you, in that night there shall be two [men] in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.35 Two [women] shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left.36 Two [men] shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Having posted this yesterday, I realised from the italics in my KJV that I hadn't noticed the brackets round 'men' and 'women' in the above verses.In the light of the current flurry of threads on homosexuality, how did the choice of 'two men in a bed' ever get into scripture.......?

G

Greenquality Feb 4, 2006

Hello, in lev.18:22 1kin 14:24 also in this time compared to, or likend to the day's of noah and lot.

G

Greenquality Feb 4, 2006

Now the word two in the greek is =(dou) does this text refer to homosexualty ?? it would take further studying in to the greek& hebrew! (men) used in this text could be man and man or father and son, it was all so custom to sleep in one bed or share. so I can't say yet! also two women griding together,IT was costum to send women to the mill house, an act of milling by hand. BUT I think the real ??? is who is taken and who is left.and did the eagles do the taking? or gather the one who is left?

C

Christinyou Feb 4, 2006

Luke 17:34 I tell you , in that night there shall be two men in one bed ; the one shall be taken , and the other shall be left .This word can also mean table or couch or bed.Search for G2825 in KJVSLklinh kline klee'-nayfrom 2827; a couch (for sleep, sickness, sitting or eating):--bed, table.The word for in is not the word en but the word epi which has a better rendering in this setting of being in the meaning "at". 1909. epiSearch for G1909 in KJVSLepi epi ep-ee'a primary preposition; properly, meaning superimposition (of time, place, order, etc.), as a relation of distribution (with the genitive case), i.e. over, upon, etc.; of rest (with the dative case) at, on, etc.; of direction (with the accusative case) towards, upon, etc.:--about (the times), above, after, against, among, as long as (touching), at, beside, X have charge of, (be-, (where-))fore, in (a place, as much as, the time of, -to), (because) of, (up-)on (behalf of), over, (by, for) the space of, through(-out), (un-)to(-ward), with. In compounds it retains essentially the same import, at, upon, etc. (literally or figuratively).I don't believe it has anything to do with Gay rights. But it does have to do with Christs' rights to His Body and in two men being at table, one will be taken and the other left.Lu 17:34In that night there shall be two men on one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Day and night exist simultaneously upon the earth, and the Lord's coming will be at noon to some and at midnight to others. His saints will be found mingled with the rest of the people and engaged in duties befitting the hour. But the Lord will receive them to himself as his own (Joh 14:3; 1Th 4:17), and they will be ready to be detached from their worldly ties that they may go to meet and welcome the bridegroom at his coming (Mt 25:6-7).Quote: ""In the light of the current flurry of threads on homosexuality, how did the choice of 'two men in a bed' ever get into scripture.......? "" OOPS, :-? In Christ: Phillip

sermonindex Jun 30, 2010

In response to your question, "how did the choice of 'two men in a bed' ever get into scripture?"

It was deliberate. Luke drew our attention to the issue of homosexuality with his whole discussion of Sodom, Lot, fire and brimstone, and Lot's wife in 17:28-32.

The O.T. background for Luke 17:34 are the prohibitions of the Law against homosexual sex in Leviticus 18 and 20. The context of this verse is the story of the destruction of Sodom, where the homosexual theme is so strong.

Jesus used three same-sex couples to illustrate a lesson about God's judgment. In this passage, Jesus taught that half the gays and lesbians were taken, and half of them were left.

If people's sexual orientation were an issue to God, all six homosexuals would have been left to face God's wrath.

Luke 17:34-36 must be studied in the context of verses 28 through 37, not in isolation and out of context.

C

castling Jun 30, 2010

I think it's sad that we can no longer speak of two people of the same gender sharing the same bed, without eliciting perverse interpretations. I've done it before - what's the problem?

Don't let homosexual propaganda hijack your mind.

btw I realized today that the "gay pride" flag has six instead of seven colours. It's not God's rainbow after all :)

P

philologos Jun 30, 2010

The way that cases work in Greek is different to English. In English if a man and a woman were in one bed we would say 'they' which is 'neutral' (not neuter). In Greek if two men were in a bed it would be 'they' in the masculine. If two women were in a bed it would be 'they' in the feminine. HOWEVER, if a man and a woman were in a bed it would be 'they' in the masculine. The masculine would take precedence over the feminine in the Greek idiom.

See this in
Acts 18:2 And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome:) and came unto them.

The last word in the sentence, 'them' is in the masculine plural form even though one person was male and the other female.

Luke 17"34-36 is an interesting mix in the Byzantine and TR textforms.

It would read something like this.

"There shall be two (masc gender - grammatically not sexually) upon a bed; the one (feminine gender) will be taken and the other (masculine) shall be left."

It looks to me as if the most natural interpretation here is that we have a married couple on a bed. In this case the 'two' would be in the masculine even though one person was a woman. The scenario continues that 'one' masculine (the man) would be taken and the other (feminine) the woman would be left behind.

What we have here is a statement that in the last day even those in the closest bonds may find that the 'day' will separate them.

On the other level. In more primitive and poorer cultures more than one male would frequently share a bed. In my father's family there were two beds, one had three daughters in it and the other had 6 sons! There is no homosexual connotation in this passage.

sermonindex Jul 3, 2010

In context we are intended to be reminded of forbidden sexual relations between two men. Luke 17:22-32 is a recounting of the salient points of the Sodom story (Sodom, Lot, fire and brimstone, and Lot's wife). Then comes the reference to "two men in one bed," which refers back to Levitical prohibitions against homosexual relations. "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination" (Lev. 18:22).

The story of Sodom is the immediate context of "two men in one bed." In context, we were intended to think of two men in one bed--at night.

When we study the Bible, we're supposed to compare scripture with scripture. In this case, the only O.T. background for two man sleeping in one bed is Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. And this is precisely what we were intended to think of, with this reference following so closely the Sodom material.

The scribes who worked on one particular manuscript, the Vaticanus Sinaiticus, understood it to be two men, which can be seen in the variant reading they produced: "Two men shall be in one boat."

Men and women did not work together on fishing boats. Fishing was a man's job.

I believe some unknown scribes felt uncomfortable with the implications of "two men in one bed" and changed "bed" to "boat." But this is speculation.

Most scholars I've read agree that verse 34 can be understood either way, as "two people" or "two men." Since verse 35 has "two women," the parallelism that is so typical in Scripture also strongly suggests that we're looking at "two men in one bed."

Also, another unknown scribe introduced verse 36 from Matthew 24, "two men in the field." Why did the scribe borrow this verse and place it here? In order to place all the same-sex couples together in one place.

Please note: everything in these three verses takes place at night. And "in that night" is a very unusual phrase in the scripture.

Luke 17:22-37 forms what I call "Luke's Gay Apocalypse." Luke 17:34-36 forms what I call "The Same-Sex Triptych of Jesus."

Please, let's not get involved in name-calling. Let's study together what this passage actually says, in context, and in the context of its time.

sermonindex Jul 3, 2010

Jesus used three same-sex couples to illustrate a lesson about God's judgment. In this passage, Jesus taught that half the gays and lesbians were taken, and half of them were left. If people's sexual orientation were an issue to God, all six homosexuals would have been left to face God's wrath. Luke 17:34-36 must be studied in the context of verses 28 through 37, not in isolation and out of context.

Yes.... I'm sure that must be it.... God doesn't mind homosexuality so much as we might believe.... Just let me begin by cutting Romans out of my Bible, and we're already seeing Him care less and less... There we go....

A quick question, if you haven't decided to just do a hit and run posting. How long did you have to back browse the forums before you could find a suitable one to dig up and spew this sort of anti-Biblical propaganda, as this one appears to be what, four years old or so? Or perhaps you're just trolling...

sermonindex Jul 3, 2010

My friend, let me repeat what I said at the end of my last post:

"Please, let's not get involved in name-calling. Let's study together what this passage actually says, in context, and in the context of its time."

Sarcasm and name-calling, my friend, are not in the spirit of these forums. If you'd like to discuss the Scripture, then I'll be glad to interact with you in a spirit of constructive dialogue. All I have done so far is discuss Scripture.

sermonindex Jul 3, 2010

Unless you suffer from persecution mania, I don't remember calling you any names. And all you've done so far is actually distort scripture, not discuss. Lets not skirt around this.

And if we're going to discuss this scripture in context, we should look to Philogos's post. The majority of modern translations seem to agree with his post as well. It takes a rather subjective predisposed spin to take this where you're trying to take it. Which is why I had to question why you would go through such great effort of back browsing to dig this thread up. My question still stands, by the way.

sermonindex Jul 3, 2010

You're right. You didn't call me any names. You simply characterized my posts as "anti-Biblical propaganda" and suggested that my posting is "trolling."

You have now said that I may be suffering from persecution mania, and that all I have done is distort the Scripture. In a discussion, it will be necessary to demonstrate where I have distorted the passage in Luke 17, not simply accuse me of distorting it.

Would you like to discuss the passage, my friend?

I didn't dig the thread up, as you suggest. I found it while googling for some research I'm doing.

So how about those three gay and lesbian couples in Luke 17? Jesus didn't have blanket condemnation for the six homosexuals. He accepted them on the same basis as heterosexuals, on a case by case basis.

sermonindex Jul 3, 2010

Read Philologos's post. Then we'll discuss this further. The context was NOT in reference to six homosexual couples. Paul was pretty clear that homosexuals would not inherit the Kingdom of God, I'm not so sure why you're saying something to the contrary.

sermonindex Jul 3, 2010

I am writing in response to the following question:

"In the light of the current flurry of threads on homosexuality, how did the choice of 'two men in a bed' ever get into scripture.......?"

I'm just staying on topic, my friend. Answering the question. My answer to the question is essentially this:

The phrase "two men in one bed" is in the Scripture because Jesus used three same-sex couples to illustrate a lesson on judgment, the main point of which was to show that sexual-orientation is a non-issue for God.

Those three couples appear in Luke 17:34-36 (KJV):

I tell you, in that night
there shall be two men in one bed;
the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.

Two women shall be grinding together;
the one shall be taken, and the other left.

Two men shall be in the field;
the one shall be taken, and the other left.
(Luke 17:34-36, KJV)

Three same-sex couples, four gays and two lesbians. Three gays and lesbians are delivered out of judgment, and three are left.

And the context of Luke 17:22-32 requires us to understand that these were homosexuals.

Jesus contravened the O.T. law on other occasions, and he contravened Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 in this passage.

"Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock" (Matthew 7:24).

sermonindex Jul 3, 2010

Notice that all the action takes place at night.

Two men in one bed--at night.

Two women grinding together--at night.

Two men in the field--at night.

sermonindex Jul 3, 2010

Because every time night is mentioned, it's clear that it's referring to something sexual. I'm glad we've all been shown the light here.

sermonindex Jul 3, 2010

Not so, EverestoSama. The immediately preceding context of Luke 17:22-32 tells us it was sexual. Those verses are about Sodom, Lot, fire and brimstone, and Lot's wife. The sin of Sodom was widely believed to be primarily homosexual.

So all the details of Sodom are brought up, immediately followed by a reference to "two men in one bed" and "two women grinding together." Jesus intended us to think "sex." I'm not reading something into the text. That is what it refers to in context.

This is what they mean when they say "you have to read it in context."

In all seriousness, to say that "two men in one bed" does not refer to a homosexual encounter is to take it out of context, to say that context doesn't matter.

The fact that it occurs at night simply confirms it, and draws our attention to the same-sex element.

sermonindex Jul 3, 2010

HAHA. OK dude. Feel free to continue.

P

philologos Jul 3, 2010

Then comes the reference to "two men in one bed,"

Except that it doesn't say 'two men' in one bed. It just says two 'people'. See my earlier post.

sermonindex Jul 3, 2010

Bible translators agree that it can be translated either way. It can be "two people" or it can be "two men."

The scribes that produced the Vaticanus Sinaiticus manuscript of the N.T. translated the verse "two men will be in one boat." Men and women didn't work together fishing--it was all men on the fishing boats.

So it is clear that early Christian scribes understood it to be "men."

I believe that these scribes were uncomfortable with the implications of "two men in one bed," and amended the text to read "two men in one boat," but that is only a speculation as to why they made the change.

The fact remains that early Christians read it as "men."

And this is the direction our minds would naturally go after Jesus just finished talking about the Sodom story, where men having sex with men would have been the dominant image in the minds of Jesus' hearers.

Context, context, context.

The order of the elements runs like this:

Lot
Sodom
Fire and brimstone
Lot's wife
In that night.
Two men in one bed.
Two women grinding together.
Two men in the field.

This is the order, this is the context. The verse must not be isolated from its context when we interpret it.

We shouldn't take verse 34 out of context and insist it refers to a woman and her husband.

There is nothing in the context of Luke 17 that suggests we not render it two men. In fact, all the contextual flags point to "two men."

Once again, Jesus abrogated various O.T. laws, and he abrogated Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 here in Luke 17:22-36.

My friends, believe me, this was a startling discovery for me, one that took a while to sink in.