Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by bhsup, Feb 14, 2007.
Did Jesus ever condemn homosexuality?
I have heard that the "homosexual sex between two men" definition of sodomy was not used until the (IIRC!) 12th century.
To my knowledge, no, not directly. He made refrences to 'obey the law' in which the proscription against homosexuality was found but this section also included the rules for how you should sell your daughter into slavery and what should happen if she is raped (marriage, FWIW).
@HC: Makes sense. That was when the Inquisition began against the Cathars and the Inquisitors got some really kinky (and frankly disturbing) ideas into their head on what the Cathars allegedly did.
Not exactly, even if we're only talking about unbetrothed virgins. Deuteronomy 22:28-29 does say he has to marry her and can't divorce her, but I don't think that actually means that she had to marry him -- rather, it means that he couldn't refuse to marry her. As counterintuitive as it sounds, in the society of the day a raped woman could be viewed as "damaged goods," and might not be able to find a husband. Her unmarriagability was a potential consequence of the guy's action, so this passage is basically saying he can't run away from the consequences of his action.
This is supported (implicitly) by Exodus 22:16-17, which says:
Now this is just for having sex with a virgin, not necessarily raping her. It stands to reason, then, that there would have been a similar right to refuse marriage in cases of rape. (Unless there's was the woman was thought worse of if she was raped than if she consented, which is both counterintuitive and contrary to the text.)
In short: that's a stretched reading of one passage that's completely uncharitable and almost certainly false. Which is hardly the way to deal with other people's sacred texts.
/end off topic
It is not a sin, why would Jesus condemn it? It was a Jewish Law of the pre-Babylonian empire. I doubt it was ever enforced much. About the time they started to allow the sacrifice of babies to Baal, things were pretty much falling apart.
As far as I know the pop definition is pretty narrow. I am sure a lot of people do not even know what the matter is. Homosexuality is either sodomy or an attractive relationship. I thought we were going with the least offensive. mea culpa.
It was not called 'sodomy'. There was no word for the modern conception of a loving homosexual relationship.
As far as I can tell, the misuse of the word "sodomy" is a homophobic conspiracy. I wrote a rather detailed post here.
Me too, it's very insulting to the gay community.
Moderator Action: Please do not suggest that comparisons between two general groups of people are insulting to either group. Such posts are considered trolling, especially when we have members that belong to both groups in question. - Truronian
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Black Panther Party didn't exist in the 1800s, but that doesn't mean that slavery didn't exist. Pro-homosexual movement isn't necessary for the existence of persecution of homosexuals.
Jokes aside, I don't really see a big and meaningful difference between these two.
I also find it offensive -- i.e., I agree completely with electric on this point. Furthermore, I cannot think of a single reason why either electric or I or anyone else who finds it offensive should have to explain exactly why we find it offensive.
I find people who find comparisons between being religious to being gay offensive, offensive. Would you please stop complaining about it to avoid me being offended.
Thanks in advance
I could be mistaken, but doesn't the description of man laying with other man occur in the description of Sodomy?
Anyhow, I do believe that until recently oral sex was also considered sodomy? I could be mistaken about this as well.
OK, point taken. But I'm also offended that at least once an hour I have to be reminded that June is National Gay and Lesbian Pride Month when I try to watch a program on my local fund-raising (er, PBS) station.
Imagine being a hard-core easily offended atheist in America having to deal with what he loathes 24/7. One month aint so bad if you consider it in that light. Maybe the solution is to be less easily offended.
By the way, Comedy Central has Friends commercials once every half hour, so I'm in more pain than you or any hard-core atheist.
Why do atheists get offended by religion?
Not many hobbies I reckon.
Why do religious people get offended by everything?
I'm not offended by religion, acts and thoughts of (some) religious people offend me.
Nature of the beast.
This is a discussion forum, and refusing to discuss isn't very good for, you know - discussion.
Plus people around here are curious.
I beg to differ.
I once had to choose between those two and changing beliefs turned out to be possible, the other not so much.
You should try it
I don't think so. I haven't read the relavent section of the Bible in a long time, but I think the only refrence to sexual indecency was in Gomorrah where the villagers wanted 'to know' the angel and Lot's daughter, basicaly implying they wanted to have sex with them.
Certainly the acts and thoughts can... though thoughts are just opinions and really shouldn't...
However, I am talking about the folks who actively seek to ban Christmas Trees in public places, etc.
Separate names with a comma.