all 17 comments

[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

The middle-eastern cultures that wrote the old testament didn't have the concept of sexual orientation, so they don't speak of a loving homosexual couple.

The old testament condemnations are against taking the insertive role in homosexual sex. This is because is was seen as a crime against the power relationship, by reducing another man to the role of a woman.

[–]WoodyWoodPecker 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Butch or Femme?

[–]jet199 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You think they didn't understand sexual orientation but they did understand 21st century poststructural analysis?

[–]Gaslov 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Wrong. You shall not lay with a man as you would with a woman is definitely referring to the insertive role.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Wrong.

Okay.

You shall not lay with a man as you would with a woman is definitely referring to the insertive role.

Yes. As I said "The old testament condemnations are against taking the insertive role in homosexual sex".

[–]Gaslov 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You're the real fool here thinking I actually read your post before I replied to it.

[–]weavilsatemyface 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Sodom and Gomorrah was not destroyed because of anal sex. They were destroyed because they were violent, lawless hell-holes where the men felt that they could break the laws of hospitality with impunity.

I wouldn't take the story of Lot and Sodom and Gomorrah too seriously as a guide to morality. Remember that Lot, supposedly the one moral person in the two cities, offered his daughters to the mob to be raped.

[–]hfxB0oyA 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Didn't the residents rape an angel?

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah.

Well, no. But Lot's guests were angels. So they wanted to.

[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They possibly tried to. That is certainly the modern interpretation, but it is not clear that the ancient Hebrews saw it that way. Some biblical scholars have suggested that the link of Sodom with homosexuality came from the 1st century Jewish philosopher Philo.

According to the OT, god sent two messengers, angels, to visit Lot. The mob demanded that Lot bring them out so that they might "know" them, but the angels blinded them. The word translated as "know" can be understood in two ways: to be interrogated (presumably violently) or as a euphemism for sex. The original word is the Hebrew verb ידע ("yada"), which is used more than 900 times in the Hebrew Bible. Only a dozen or so of those times is the word meant as a euphemism for sex.

The OT and other Hebrew texts makes it clear that the sins of Sodom were arrogance, cruelty, lack of hospitality, dishonesty and uncharitableness. The people of Sodom were cruel and ungodly. Ezekiel 16:49–50 says "This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. They were haughty, and did abominable things before me; therefore I removed them when I saw it." (The word "abominable" there comes from the Hebrew word "toevah", which is better translated as "taboo" or "forbidden".)

Jeremiah and Isaiah similarly consider the sins of Sodom to be their cruelty and arrogance. The Book of Amos states that the Sodomites' sins were oppressing the poor and crushing the needy.

Biblical scholar Jay Michaelson emphasises that the sin was the violent violation of the rules of hospitality: "Homosexual rape is the way in which they violate hospitality—not the essence of their transgression. Reading the story of Sodom as being about homosexuality is like reading the story of an ax murderer as being about an ax."

Other Hebrew texts make it clear that the crimes of Sodom were economic crimes and bloodshed: they extorted money from travellers, punished victims of crime for the acts committed by the perpetrator, tortured visitors, tormented beggars and allowed them to starve, etc. The judges of the city were named as Shakrai ("Liar"), Shakurai ("Awful Liar"), Zayyafi ("Forger") and Mazle Dina ("Perverter of Justice"). Charity to the poor was a capital crime, and Hebrew texts describe women who gave charity to the poor being burned alive. According to the Book Of Jasher (omitted from the Christian Bible), one of Lot's daughters was burned alive for giving a poor man a piece of bread to eat. For the crime of giving a traveller a drink of water, another woman was stripped naked, covered in honey, and left to die slowly by being stung to death by bees.

It is notable that another Biblical story, that of the Levite's concubine, involves a very similar premise. A man visits another city. The men of the city attempt to rape him, and he offers his concubine to them in his stead. But this time the city men accept the exchange, and rape the woman to death. As punishment, the guilty tribe was almost wiped out. This suggests that the sin was rape, not homosexual sex.

[–]Gaslov 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

He offered her because that was the lesser of two evils, that's how bad homosexuality is.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The sex of the angels is much more incidental than it might appear. If Lot's guests were women, and a mob gathered wanting to rape them, you wouldn't conclude that the problem is heterosexuality.

It's much less about homosexual sex, and much more about hospitality.

Lot (and for that matter the old man of Gibeah, in the very similar story in Judges 15), was protecting his guests by offering his own property in their place. The Salient fact to the authors is that by offering his daughters, Lot will lose their bride price as they would be unmarriageable if they have been violated. It's not that the violation of women is fine and the violation of men isn't.

[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

No, he offered up his daughter to be raped because the so-called morality of the Bible is evil, and anyone who thinks that a Supreme Creator of the entire universe, who is as far beyond us as we are beyond a mite on the leg of a flea, gives a shit about what sort of consensual sex adults have in the privacy of their bedroom, is off their rocker.

The problem with religion is that every single word of it is written by ignorant people with issues who conveniently discover that god shares their emotional hangups. Mohammad was obsessive-compulsive, and lo and behold, it turns out that god cares about what direction you pray and which foot you step into the bathroom (toilet) with. The ancient Hebrew prophets were a bunch of uptight misogynists and raging homophobes, and just like magic, it turns out that god also is an uptight, woman-hating, violent homophobe.

If god really was against homosexual relations, why does virtually every single species of mammal have homo sex?

[–]Gaslov 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Animals also rape, so does that make rape ok now? What kind of dumbass looks at animal behaviour for moral guidance? This is why god commanded humanity to murder you fags.

[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Animals also rape, so does that make rape ok now?

According to the Bible, rape is fine. Notice that none of the Ten Commandments say "Thou Shalt Not Rape". Lot, the one righteous man in Sodom, offered to send his virgin unmarried girl children out to be raped by a mob, and god was fine with this. So when god rained fire and destruction over the city, killing hundreds or thousands of unborn children and innocent babies, Lot was saved.

When god told the Israelites to mass murder everyone in sight across the Promised Land, Moses told them they could keep the young virgin girls as sex slaves, and this too was fine.

In Judges 19–21, a Levite handed his concubine over to a mob of Benjamites, who raped the woman to death. The raping was fine, but the fact that she died was not, so the other 11 Hebrew tribes decided to wipe out the Benjamites as punishment. When there were only 600 male Benjamites left (the women and children presumably being dead by then), they felt remorse over almost wiping out the entire tribe, so they pillaged and massacred the city of Jabesh-Gilead, none of whose residents partook in the war, and kidnapped 400 young girls as wives for the Benjamites. The remaining 200 Benjamites still lacking women were then permitted to kidnap young girls from Shiloh, and god was all good with this.

Morality in the Bible is some really fucked up shit. Getting your ideas of what is moral and what isn't moral from the violent, hateful desert tribesmen who wrote it is not such a good idea.

[–]Gaslov 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

So you quote a tiny part of the bible and then completely make up a bullshit explanation for what you quote. That's no different than putting a fake description to a photograph to create outrage. No, the bible does not condone rape.

[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No, the bible does not condone rape.

Tell me you've never read the bible without telling me you've never read the bible. You're so ignorant about the Bible you actually think I made these up 😃

I'm sorry that the actual Bible doesn't match up to the imaginary "Little Golden Book Bible For Tiny Tots" in your head. You should read the Bible sometimes. You might learn something.

Why don't the Ten Commandments, both versions of it, include a prohibition against rape?

Why doesn't the Bible condemn the Levite who handed over his concubine to be raped? Why weren't the Levites punished for kidnapping 400 young virgins from Jabesh-Gilead? Why weren't the Benjamites punished for kidnapping 200 young virgins from Shiloh?

"They might have kidnapped them, but they didn't rape them. They wooed them with flowers and chocolates and candle-lit dinners and midnight walks along the beach until the girls fell in love before having sex with them" 🙄

Why was Lot considered a righteous man even though he tried to hand his virgin daughters over to a mob to be raped? Imagine being one of his daughters: "Dad, you said they could do what to us???"

Why wasn't Moses and Israel punished for kidnapping and raping young virgin girls from the tribes they massacred?