• Flax@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    Ah yes, I’m sure “males who bed with other males” is referring to a butterfly.

    Romans 1:27 speaks of “lust for one another”. Mutual lust is an aspect of a sexual relationship. Are you trying to tell me that homosexual men don’t lust after each other?

    The word ἀρσενοκοίτης can be related to what’s written in the Septuagint in Leviticus 18:22

    “καὶ μετὰ ἄρσενος οὐ κοιμηθήσῃ κοίτην γυναικός· βδέλυγμα γάρ ἐστιν.”

    There is absolutely zero mention of children when there could be. That’s just a vague theory which isn’t as probable as showing what the text actually says and has been interpreted to do so

    If these texts seem clear to you, it is because you are injecting your cultural homophobia into them. This is the opposite of “taking the Bible seriously.”

    Where did my “cultural homophobia” originate?

    And these “scholarly revelations” about the meaning of these verses in the Bible did not predate the LGB movement. They mysteriously popped up after. Isn’t this not injecting cultural values into the text? Why can’t we inject cultural Chinese values into the text and claim that the “eye of a needle” is actually a gate or some unfounded rubbish.

    • Zloubida@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      Romans 1:27 speaks of “lust for one another”. Mutual lust is an aspect of a sexual relationship. Are you trying to tell me that homosexual men don’t lust after each other?

      In my mother tongue, lust and desire are very different things. It’s normal to desire your significant other, not to lust after them. It may not be the case in English, but it was in Greek.

      There is absolutely zero mention of children when there could be

      Yes, but that’s why I spoke about culture. There were no need to explicitly speak about children, as the involvement of children was the norm. On the contrary if Paul spoke about adult relationship too, it would have been logical for him to say that explicitly, and he didn’t.

      And these “scholarly revelations” about the meaning of these verses in the Bible did not predate the LGB movement.

      That’s normal, science and culture evolve, and out understanding of the Scriptures have to evolve too. Just like everyone thought that the Bible taught that the Earth was the center of the universe. It was logical for everyone that, say Isaiah 40:22 was geocentric. And we discovered that Earth was not the center of the universe, and we stopped to take these texts literally. It will be the same with the texts about homosexuality, as our understanding of sexuality changed.