• remotelove@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If a man has intercourse with a man as with a woman, both commit an abomination. They must be put to death.

    How in the fuck does it take a significant amount of mistranslation or ignorance to read that as “gay is bad”? You can speculate all you want about temporal context, but there is not a scholar alive that actually knows what the actual context was. Sure, we can assume contextual clues, but that is about it.

    I hate to say this, but your analysis about “male” vs “man” and the silly confusion about “as with a woman” is just odd. I understand breaking down the meaning of a sentence into ultra-fine components, but damn…

    “If someone with a dick tries to fuck another person with a dick like a woman (put it in the butt), it bad. You die.” – Today, in our context, that is what it means.

    Books like the bible are written like an extended Nostradamus prophecy so they can be interpreted in any way that “scholars” see fit. Especially in this day and age, some things have to be taken literally.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because it is bullshit. The text is very clear what the rules were. The whole Mankind vs man thing is only an issue for people who haven’t bothered learning the language.

    • Veraxus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Not only do we clearly know the context, I explained it.

      If you want to talk about how morally and ethically repugnant that context is by our modern standards, be my guest. I agree with you.

      But Jewish and Christian scripture is not nearly as ambiguous as it’s portrayed to be by those who want to twist it for their own ends.