Random
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Homosexuality didn't exist in the bible until 1947

It was originally put there because the translators mistranslated the word from another language to English, they admitted it in 1964, supposedly there's original transcripts detailing meeting notes you can look up, I haven't done that though. The original word was (quite literally) boy m olester in the foreign language. The verses are literally protecting abuse victims by trying to dissuade people not to lay with boys, it also referred to other various acts originally in the verses. This mistranslation is what religious people cite to further their anti gay views.

Furthermore, relationships weren't seen under the lens of love but only for procreational sense, which makes sense since most people unalived when they were children, if you made it past 20 though, you would likely live a good portion after but before 20 was a rocky time for most people. Most people passed so it makes sense to "multiply" in an era where the life expectancy wasn't good.

But from my understanding they didn't think of relationships in the way we do now, it seems like biblical ages were transactional.

I should be clear though that even if it was in the original translation still doesn't make people right in the way they treat others, consenting adult relationships are wildly different than what's in the bible.
Top | New | Old
ElwoodBlues · M Best Comment
However, the notion of more than two genders has a LOOONG history!

Aristotle (fourth century BCE) had a different name for the three genders (Poetics 21): masculine, feminine, and “in between” (μεταξύ).

The Talmud, a huge and authoritative compendium of Jewish legal traditions, contains in fact no less than eight gender designations including:

1. Zachar, male.
2. Nekevah, female.
3. Androgynos, having both male and female characteristics.
4. Tumtum, lacking sexual characteristics.
5. Aylonit hamah, identified female at birth but later naturally developing male characteristics.
6. Aylonit adam, identified female at birth but later developing male characteristics through human intervention.
7. Saris hamah, identified male at birth but later naturally developing female characteristics.
8. Saris adam, identified male at birth and later developing female characteristics through human intervention.

Source: https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-eight-genders-in-the-talmud/

You can find other sources listing six or eight genders from Talmudic studies. Apparently six of them are mentioned "hundreds" of times; perhaps the other two don't get so many mentions?

SatanBurger · 36-40, F
Tastyfrzz · 61-69, M
The biblical world did not think in terms of:
-sexual orientation,
-equal romantic partnerships,
-lifelong same-sex marriages,
-personal identity categories like “gay” or “straight.”

Ancient sexual ethics were more focused on:
-purity,
-hierarchy,
-inheritance,
-family structure,
-tribal survival,
-and male honor

Let's face it. Gay people probably did not have a lot of kids. And if they did marry, their wives were probably not very happy.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@Tastyfrzz I already answered you saying exactly that too with your first response but I think you already commented before I typed lol, I won't repost it on this one but you are right. People double down because conservative arguments persist despite them misusing the language and its meaning though, despite mistranslations they don't seem to get historical attitudes were different. Biblical relationships were power dynamics that didn't really define any structure like that.
Alyosha · 36-40, M
Is that the prohibition in the Old Testament (Hebrew) or New Testament (Greek)?
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@Alyosha I'll have to find the conversation and ask, give me a few. I know the ai cited where I could find the original meeting notes where they said it was a mistranslation, it was some biblical preservation historical society something or the other.

But do let me go find the version it was.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@Alyosha New Testament (Greek) word:

The 1946 "Mistake"The story of the "acknowledged mistake" traces back to 1946 and the translation team for the Revised Standard Version (RSV) of the Bible. When translating 1 Corinthians 6:9, the 1946 RSV team became the first English Bible to translate the Greek word arsenokoitai as the modern English word "homosexual." Years later, a young seminary student wrote to the head of the translation team, Dr. Luther Weigle, pointing out a linguistic and historical issue.

The concept of "homosexuality" as an innate sexual orientation or identity was a 19th-century psychological concept. Ancient Greeks and Romans didn't have a concept of sexual orientation; rather, sexual acts were viewed more through the lens of power dynamics, exploitation (like older men exploiting young boys), or pagan temple rituals.

Dr. Weigle eventually agreed that using the modern word "homosexual" was anachronistic and an inaccurate translation choice. In 1971, the RSV updated the translation from "homosexuals" to "sexual perverts." However, the cultural impact was already made—other major new translations of the era (like the NIV and NASB) had already followed the RSV's initial lead and adopted the word "homosexual" into their texts.
Khenpal1 · M
they call it Greek 😂or Lesbo and still do . Not sure Greek Christians care about it.
CurrentName · 51-55, M
Maybe it wasn't until 1947 when the guys started to get like, extra gay demanding rights and such .
Someone in that meeting probably thought it was better to stop "the gays" now, before they turned the whole place purple and glittery.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@CurrentName I'll take purple and glittery any day. But I think the main thing with people is that if you have your entire identity wrapped up in a lifestyle and trad type stuff is a lifestyle technically, then your brain feels like it can't just walk it back. Cognitive dissonance protects from feelings of discomfort.

Think about what people have invested, if you are a trad household you teach your kids it's wrong, or maybe you had a child that was gay but kicked them out. Let's say your whole community was anti gay, it's a little hard to walk back knowing it will burn everything. Nobody would willingly alienate themselves from their entire community so you pretty much feel stuck.

That's why it's easier to just think of random justifications for something rather than admit anything, plus you will avoid any confrontation because it would hurt you.
Tastyfrzz · 61-69, M
Why did it become a big deal then?
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@Tastyfrzz I asked and this is what I got, mind you it's part of another question I had unrelated but it answers yours in the second part mostly:

The concept of "homosexuality" as an innate sexual orientation or identity was a 19th-century psychological concept. Ancient Greeks and Romans didn't have a concept of sexual orientation; rather, sexual acts were viewed more through the lens of power dynamics, exploitation (like older men exploiting young boys), or pagan temple rituals. Dr. Weigle eventually agreed that using the modern word "homosexual" was anachronistic and an inaccurate translation choice. In 1971, the RSV updated the translation from "homosexuals" to "sexual perverts." However, the cultural impact was already made—other major new translations of the era (like the NIV and NASB) had already followed the RSV's initial lead and adopted the word "homosexual" into their texts.

Why is it still a big deal?

If the translation team admitted a mistake, why do traditional Christians still cite the Bible against homosexuality, and why isn't the debate over?

Because conservative scholars and theologians argue that while the English word "homosexual" was a historically inaccurate word choice, the underlying texts still condemn the behavior.

Here is the core of the ongoing debate:

The Progressive/Historical View: Scholars point out that arsenokoitai likely referred to specific, exploitative ancient practices (like pederasty or prostitution)—not loving, consensual, monogamous same-sex marriages, which didn't exist as a social institution in that era. Therefore, applying these ancient verses to modern LGBTQ+ identities is a misuse of the text.

The Traditional/Conservative View: Scholars point out that arsenokoitai is a compound word (arsen meaning "male," and koite meaning "bed" or "lying"). They note that Paul almost certainly coined this Greek word by pulling those exact two root words directly from the ancient Greek translation of the Leviticus 18:22 prohibition. Therefore, they argue that Paul was making a blanket reference to the Old Testament law prohibiting male-male sex. In short: The "mistake" that was acknowledged was about applying a modern psychological label ("homosexual") to an ancient text. But traditionalists maintain that even without that specific English word, the original Greek and Hebrew texts prohibit the physical act. That is why it remains a massive, unresolved debate today, rather than a simple case of a typo being fixed.
Lostpoet · M
Only God can judge what's in the heart of men. I don't believe gay people go to hell either. But child molesters definitely do.
Crazywaterspring · 61-69, M
@SatanBurger Inaccurate? Like Hobby Lobby bibles?
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@Crazywaterspring Whatever bibles anti gay people quote as having cited that the bible specifically stated homosexuality was a sin. They cite the passage about thou shall not lay with another man but the original sentence in the bible itself translated to "boy molester" as in that's what it originally was quite literally. All the rest of the verses are talking about abuse victims and not to do things to them in different forms.

So whatever bible has that quote about not laying with men, that was the quote that was mistranslated but it seems to be in every church or so followers tell me.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@Crazywaterspring From 1947 to 1968 or 67 I don't remember, in the early 70s was when they said "oopsies we were wrong" and I think they mass produced all the bibles with that same passage.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@oldguy73 I don't think you can read.

 
Post Comment