Anti-Homosexuality In The Bible a Mistranslation?

[Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver]

(13-12-2012 04:16 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Playing semantic games with the language based on modern language idiosyncrasies is beyond bunk. Sodomy was homosexuality. Period.

Well not necessarily. Sodomy is no more about gay sex than Onanism is about masturbation. In a lot of jurisdictions in the United States, Sodomy is defined an any kind of unorthodox, aberrant sex. In many cases this can mean any form of sex aside from face to face missionary style intercourse with the man on top. If you enjoy oral sex as a heterosexual, you're also a Sodomite.

[Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver]

But back to the original thread. No there's no mistranslation. Yahweh really does hate fags. There are numerous Old Testament references to this and a number in the New Testament as well where Paul warns that those who do this 'will not inherit the Kingdom of God.' i.e. go to hell.

[houseofcantor]

(13-12-2012 04:11 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  No. It's pretty clear. In the OT, Moses instructs against homosexuality, and in the NT, Paul instructs against it.

But why? In Leviticus, it was to separate the Jews from the decadence of the Greeks, Persians, Romans, who got into that kinda thing. Well, basically you got a standing military, you got soldiers laying down with soldiers. Us guys are just walking dicks like that.

And then Paul- just a fucking shrew can't stand to see anyone having a good time.

If you cut through all the agenda, posturing, and ignorance in the Bible, it's just god basically telling you to keep yer head out of your ass, like any other sacred text. So, yeah, it could be construed that misinterpretation occurs... only, not like the OP implies. Cause the OP is a twit.

And what's up with the KC Calvinist-atheist-shotgun thingy going on? Huh?

[StartThinking2012]

There is also the passage in Romans 1: 24-28 (NIV)

[font='Charis SIL']24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.[/font][font='Charis SIL']26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.[/font][font='Charis SIL']28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done[/font]

These verses also clearly condemn homosexual sex too (interesting here both genders are mentioned too which is not the case for the verses in Leviticus.)

My lecturer at uni once went on about how these verses were condemning the practice of pederasty between teacher and student in the Roman society - however this seems like an attempt to justify his personal belief that the Bible is the Word of God (albeit I don't know a great deal about his personal beliefs). His reading of the text does not gel with me at all. Homosexuality was widespread in the ancient world and was an accepted part of Roman society with rules about who could have sex with whom etc. (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuali...cient_Rome for more info).

Paul probably took the view he did because he was a Jew who would be familiar with the texts from Leviticus and with Jewish law on the matter. He then transmitted this idea to the newly formed group of Roman Christians via his letter (which as we know became 'scripture') as Paul was deemed to have apostolic authority he could pronounce on such matters and his views tended to be accepted as he was the founding apostle of the communities he wrote to (by and large).

[shiranl]

Well, since orthodox Jews hate gays as well, and they read the bible in the original language, then I would say you're wrong. And also- as someone who can read in Hebrew, you are wrong.
The only difference that I can think of is that in orthodox Judaism being gay doesn't consider to be a sin, just the act that followes it (you know what I mean....).

[ScienceGeek2587]

Even among cultures where homosexuality was more acceptable (Greece, Rome) anal penetration was still taboo between men (favoring intetcrural intercourse, between the thighs). There are many gross mistranslations in the Bible, but these mandates are not among them.

The biggest problem is that the Bible and it's believers take issue with ALL human sexuality whether normal (consensual heterosexuality/homosexuality) or pathological (pedophilia, necrophilia, etc.).

[Birdguy1979]

(13-12-2012 01:23 PM)Vosur Wrote:  

(13-12-2012 12:57 PM)FZUMedia Wrote:  I think most Christian's are completely going up the wrong tree when it comes to anti-homosexuality. Considering that the bible is a translation from the original language many errors can be made obviously.

Sure, it's possible. With that aside, you could just look up the verses in their original language (Hebrew) if you think that everyone who translated the Bible into a different language mistranslated them.

(13-12-2012 12:57 PM)FZUMedia Wrote:  Anyway, I don't think Christian's are supposed to be anti-gay, since from what I have read of the bible, there is only a brief verse on 'thou shalt not lay with another man', but mostly it is anti forced sodomy (Prison rape for example, it is a show of dominance rather than love making.)

Neither Leviticus 18:22, nor Leviticus 20:13 are laws against forced sodomy.

Leviticus 18:22
וְאֶת-זָכָר--לֹא תִשְׁכַּב, מִשְׁכְּבֵי אִשָּׁה: תּוֹעֵבָה, הִוא
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind; it is abomination.

Leviticus 20:13
וְאִישׁ, אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁכַּב אֶת-זָכָר מִשְׁכְּבֵי אִשָּׁה--תּוֹעֵבָה עָשׂוּ, שְׁנֵיהֶם; מוֹת יוּמָתוּ, דְּמֵיהֶם בָּם.
And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Source

(13-12-2012 12:57 PM)FZUMedia Wrote:  So it's very likely that there is a mistranslation where it was meant to be anti-forced sodomy rather than consensual homosexuality. It can be easily confused. I think it might be interesting thing to bring up when talking to Christians.

No, it's not likely at all. The original Hebrew says the very same thing. See above.

(13-12-2012 12:57 PM)FZUMedia Wrote:  Since back in Jacob's time, there was a lot of forced sodomy just like the environment of a prison.

How do you know that and what are your sources?

Well one source that you can go to would be the bible. There is at least one story about that in there that I know of for sure. I know the bible if full of shit and completely fiction, but myths do come from some kind of reality. So, to say that it was probably happening against the will of some people back in those days is a fair statement.

[Mr Woof]

(13-12-2012 12:57 PM)FZUMedia Wrote:  I think most Christian's are completely going up the wrong tree when it comes to anti-homosexuality. Considering that the bible is a translation from the original language many errors can be made obviously. So basing the word of God, from the translated word of man, seems a bit ridiculous, not to mention if God really wanted his message out there, wouldn't he give his word to people of all languages?

Anyway, I don't think Christian's are supposed to be anti-gay, since from what I have read of the bible, there is only a brief verse on 'thou shalt not lay with another man', but mostly it is anti forced sodomy (Prison rape for example, it is a show of dominance rather than love making.) Since back in Jacob's time, there was a lot of forced sodomy just like the environment of a prison. So it's very likely that there is a mistranslation where it was meant to be anti-forced sodomy rather than consensual homosexuality. It can be easily confused. I think it might be interesting thing to bring up when talking to Christians.

Mostly anti forced sodomu?



Come off it, the Bible states Lot gave his daughter to the sodomites. Hardly consentual sex!