How the Bible was re-written to attack homosexuality

  • metta

    Posts: 39099

    Jun 26, 2015 9:03 PM GMT
    How the Bible was re-written to attack homosexuality

    Lies, mistranslations and anti-gay editing – it’s not what you think, writes Kevin Childs



    http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/how-bible-was-re-written-attack-homosexuality260615
  • wellwell

    Posts: 2265

    Jun 27, 2015 3:53 AM GMT
    Obviously, the Vatican fully approves of homosexuality; as well as, molestation and prevarication.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4862

    Jun 27, 2015 4:02 PM GMT
    It is interesting to use a concordance to find every Biblical reference to "Sodom". Doing so is exceeding revelatory. All the OT reference see the sin of Sodom as being arrogant and failing to support the downtrodden. From Ezekiel 16:49:

    "Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy." KJV

    Other OT references are similar. NT references are somewhat different but considering that they were written centuries later, surely the OT references are more reliable.

    Of course the fulminating fundamentalists will carefully pick and choose while denying that they are doing so and while denying others the right to do so.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2015 8:58 PM GMT
    I really get tired of the "Bible is being distorted when it comes to gays" crowd. The simple fact of the matter is the Bible is CLEARLY anti gay. It always has been. Just get over it. Stop trying to have your cake and eat it too.

    The God of the Bible almost certainly doesn't exist anyway. So stop worrying and be grateful for the fact that you live in an age of sexual liberation when Bronze Age fables don't have to be taken seriously.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 28, 2015 11:42 PM GMT
    Quoting Dr. Bart Ehrman

    Many authors thought same-sex sexual acts between adult, free, men were “unnatural” because it meant that one of these persons was being submissive to the other. The one who was enforcing submission (by penetrating the other) was not thought to have behaved unnaturally. Adult free men were *supposed* to dominate others. (So, for many ancients, a man’s sex with a boy was not a problem; or sex with a male slave; or with anyone else he was supposed to dominate)

    The Bible was not re-written to attack homosexuality. Metta8, please get your facts straight. It is one thing to attempt to lead gay men against religion. It is another thing to be a rebel with factual errors. People are better off not following misinformation.
  • metta

    Posts: 39099

    Jun 28, 2015 11:46 PM GMT
    ^
    It is the opinion of Kevin Childs, not mine. I don't generally give opinions about the history of the bible. However, I do think that the bible has probably been translated during various parts of history to the advantage of those who translated it or for those that were in power at the time. And given that they were translated by fallible men, I'm sure that they were probably mistranslated as well. But then again, I don't look at the bible as being a book based on facts. They are books on beliefs. After all, that is what religions are...belief systems.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 28, 2015 11:52 PM GMT
    metta8 said^
    It is the opinion of Kevin Childs, not mine. I don't generally give opinions about the history of the bible. However, I do think that the bible has probably been translated during various parts of history to the advantage of those who translated it or for those that were in power at the time. And given that they were translated by fallible men, I'm sure that they were probably mistranslated as well. But then again, I don't look at the bible as being a book based on facts. They are books on beliefs.


    You do not even have the ethics of a good editor. It is irresponsible to point people to misinformation.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 28, 2015 11:58 PM GMT
    metta8

    I do think that the bible has probably been translated during various parts of history to the advantage of those who translated it or for those that were in power at the time.

    stephenoabc

    That does not hold water. Today, we have scholars who have gone to the earliest manuscripts to get the translations correct. Furthermore, these manuscripts have been investigated beyond that.

    metta8

    And given that they were translated by fallible men, I'm sure that they were probably mistranslated as well.

    stephenoabc

    The significance of that is smaller than the implication you are making.

    metta8

    But then again, I don't look at the bible as being a book based on facts.

    stephenoabc

    You are in error again. Archaeologists have done well by referencing the Bible for facts.

  • FRE0

    Posts: 4862

    Jun 29, 2015 12:02 AM GMT
    StephenOABC saidQuoting Dr. Bart Ehrman

    Many authors thought same-sex sexual acts between adult, free, men were “unnatural” because it meant that one of these persons was being submissive to the other. The one who was enforcing submission (by penetrating the other) was not thought to have behaved unnaturally. Adult free men were *supposed* to dominate others. (So, for many ancients, a man’s sex with a boy was not a problem; or sex with a male slave; or with anyone else he was supposed to dominate)

    The Bible was not re-written to attack homosexuality. Metta8, please get your facts straight. It is one thing to attempt to lead gay men against religion. It is another thing to be a rebel with factual errors. People are better off not following misinformation.


    Aren't you assuming that the only way gay men have sex is anal?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 29, 2015 12:06 AM GMT
    FRE0 said
    StephenOABC saidQuoting Dr. Bart Ehrman

    Many authors thought same-sex sexual acts between adult, free, men were “unnatural” because it meant that one of these persons was being submissive to the other. The one who was enforcing submission (by penetrating the other) was not thought to have behaved unnaturally. Adult free men were *supposed* to dominate others. (So, for many ancients, a man’s sex with a boy was not a problem; or sex with a male slave; or with anyone else he was supposed to dominate)

    The Bible was not re-written to attack homosexuality. Metta8, please get your facts straight. It is one thing to attempt to lead gay men against religion. It is another thing to be a rebel with factual errors. People are better off not following misinformation.


    Aren't you assuming that the only way gay men have sex is anal?


    I'm assuming? Ancient culture assumed that. I have a reputable book in my library on this topic (and apparently Bart Ehrman has the same information from whatever sources).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 29, 2015 12:21 AM GMT
    StephenOABC said
    FRE0 said
    StephenOABC saidQuoting Dr. Bart Ehrman

    Many authors thought same-sex sexual acts between adult, free, men were “unnatural” because it meant that one of these persons was being submissive to the other. The one who was enforcing submission (by penetrating the other) was not thought to have behaved unnaturally. Adult free men were *supposed* to dominate others. (So, for many ancients, a man’s sex with a boy was not a problem; or sex with a male slave; or with anyone else he was supposed to dominate)

    The Bible was not re-written to attack homosexuality. Metta8, please get your facts straight. It is one thing to attempt to lead gay men against religion. It is another thing to be a rebel with factual errors. People are better off not following misinformation.


    Aren't you assuming that the only way gay men have sex is anal?


    I'm assuming? Ancient culture assumed that. I have a reputable book in my library on this topic ....


    Homosexuality and Civilization by Louis Crompton