fredv3b Wrote:However as to the question of the bible. I think the book of Leviticus is easily dealt with. There is so much in that book that Christians ignore, e.g. eating shellfish and pork, allowing menstruating women into Church, etc., etc. that frankly its just plain irrational to pick certain verses to follow and others to ignore.
Most of the other references in the bible simply don't refer to homosexuality per se, but condemn a particular aspect of it (e.g. male prostitution) or contain a word of debatable translation.
Leviticus has long been wrongly translated. It's not about homosexuality. The true translation is that man should not lie with a boy as with a woman. In the Middle East and Southern Europe it was very common for men to have a young man as a sexual plaything. Leviticus is really a condemnation of paedophillia.
The story of soddom and gommora isn't about homosexuality, either. It's about rape. Rape is bad. I don't think anyone would argue with that.
Translation is a huge issue. Most bibles used by the churches today have been translated through at least two of Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin & Greek before getting to English, French, German or Italian.
Try converting the wombling song to Greek and back via Google and see the results. Now tell me translations can be trusted.
![[-]](https://gayspeak.com/images/duende_v3_local/collapse.png)
•
marshlander Wrote:The question asked for my "perceptions of religion" and I have tried to convey the drift of what they have become over many years not only of struggle and debate, but also for my first quarter of a century a lot of prayer, fasting, study and yes, faith.
You've no idea how much your story saddens me, and how similar it is to my own story. I grew up in the CofE, but the High Church wing of the CofE is just as radical and Fire and Brimstone as any church. It took me to the age of 24/5 to start sorting out my life. Once I did, and started getting counselling, and like you spending most of it dealing with "the religion thing", I made progress. It took a breakdown for me to force me to deal with it. If often say that dark day on a January afternoon when I broke down in the middle of teaching a school lesson was the best thing that ever happened to me.
It's not for nothing the CofE is known as The Conservative Party at Prayer.
•
Sox, I have absolutely no desire to make you sad and apologize if my words have had that effect. Having said that, I believe what I believe and don't wish to withdraw anything other than the effect my words have had on you.
I also feel a lot of sympathy for you, Kitschcamp and Marsh. I was lucky in that only one of my parents was religious, so questioning my early religious beliefs was not such a painful experience.
•
•
Posts: 2,418
Threads: 41
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
Mood: None
Marshy, I appreciate that you have had a difficult experience with your former religion, it was your feelings about religion in general that saddened me.
marshlander Wrote:To my mind Paul is also easily dealt with. As Saul he persecuted Christians with the greatest zeal. According to the story he was struck blind one day and heard voices. Thereafter his zeal was redirected to convert unbelievers and strengthen the faithful, even if he did a lot of that by telling them off. How much would we accept the judgement of anyone who behaved like that today?
To be honest I don't think that argument cuts much ice with actual Christian believers
kitschcamp Wrote:It's a social meme. How many wars have been fought over exactly who was a prophet and who was a son of god, and which prophet did what?
To be honest I have always wondered how often Religion was just the pretext that was used. and was for the usual power, territory and wealth.
kitschcamp Wrote:The story of soddom and gommora isn't about homosexuality, either. It's about rape. Rape is bad. I don't think anyone would argue with that.
I thought that it was about hospitality to strangers. Lot, who is saved from Soddom, offers his virgin daughters for rape instead of his guests. If rape is the correct translation, your point about translation is well taken. However ....
kitschcamp Wrote:Try converting the wombling song to Greek and back via Google and see the results. Now tell me translations can be trusted.
I think that tells you more about Google than it does about the Bible 
Conflict of Interest:- I was vaguely raised C of E and I miss my faith.
Fred
Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans.
•
Translations always lose something, unless the translator is highly skilled. Subtly of phrasing and dual-meaning words can be horrible to translate, especially if the context isn't taken into account properly. Take "row"
They had a row.
What does that mean? It could just as easily follow from:
1. Have they planted many potatoes?
2. What's wrong with Geoff and Steve.
And those don't even take account the third meaning of row, as in something you do in a boat.
•
We are still fighting over politics and religion, mankind will never stop arguing over these issues until the end of the human race. Many people are now questioning why we need religion, as we understand more and more about us, and our universe. Do we really need the control and the ideaology of religion.
The church hardliners will not let us live in peace, they seem to fear gay people. Same sex marriage is a commitment and a bond by two people who love each other, it should not be feared but honoured by the church. It will not lead to all marriages being from same sex couples, also it will not stop men and women from producing the next generation of humans.
Regarding the bible, a great library of books. Writen over a period of 2000 years, by at least forty writers. Translated from many different languages. censored by each ruling government or ruler, and church over that period.
Do we really know what is fact or fiction, its a group of peoples ideas and thoughts which we now call religion.
•
Ask people today about "what does religion say about Homosexuality" and you're bound to get pretty much the same answer across the board, and it's almost guaranteed to be from a Judeo-Christian point of view.
But there are many more religions in the world, and have been, than just the Abrahamic faiths that have not condemned homosexuality.
Ancient Egypt embraced it as a natural part of life. Ancient China encouraged it between women (though granted, discouraged it between men. Wonder if that's where the modern-day double standard got it's roots?)
Ancient Greece is rather famous for it's homosexual acceptance, even to the point where soldiers were encouraged to have relationships with one another because it was felt they would fight harder for a lover. These were often soldiers who would, today, identify themselves as 'straight' I'd imagine.
The point is, just because one group of religions that are prevalent in "western societies" looks down on an act does not mean that such acts have been universally condemned and oppressed.
We're just mostly talking American/Europeans who are here, so we have a very -centric view of the world and history in general.
Nothing ever changes quickly or easily, but look around you and realize that the world is changing. Gay marriages are becoming legal in some countries and states. Other states are only on narrow margins between the two. DADT is being challenged (and don't find me too ironic if I say I hope to G-d it gets repealed).
Yes, it sucks being in the middle of change when you're in the group being singled out for harassment, discrimination and unfair lack of rights. But the answer to the problem isn't to turn the intolerance on others, but to embrace tolerance for *everyone*... even those who don't agree with you.
When people ask me about my view of homosexuality according to my faith, my answer generally is:
The Bible condemns homosexuality once. It exhorts charity and love towards the poor, the fatherless and the widows over 400 times. I think it's clear which one I should be paying more attention to, and that's my actions towards others, not who people fall in love with.
•
I assume you are including Islam as one of the Abrahamic faiths? I have had some very long discussions with Muslims who consider homosexual acts haraam. One scholar went so far as to say that since we only number about 2.5% of the population our needs don't count.
There are branches of pretty much all religions that condemn homosexuality, even Buddhism, just as there are individuals within most religions who see injustice in the party line.
Yes, attitudes are changing, thankfully, but I don't see religious organisations at the head of the queue to afford equality of opportunity to glbt people. On the contrary, it is the religious lobbies that are putting up the strongest battles against fairness for all of us. Britain can hardly be called a religious society these days, but hardline religious organisations are making change a more difficult process than it needs to be for a cause which will have no effect whatsoever on their freedoms to do anything except their wish to continue to discriminate.
•
marshlander Wrote:I assume you are including Islam as one of the Abrahamic faiths? I have had some very long discussions with Muslims who consider homosexual acts haraam.
Yes, and I'm well aware of the Islamic view of homosexuality.
But as I said, there have been religions and cultures in ancient times that had either a neutral or favorable view of homosexuality. All that's happening is we're getting back to that view.
Yes, I imagine there are very vocal religious organizations that are railing against this with all their might. Let them. Recent history is proving that they are failing in the long run.
That's not to say sit back and do nothing. Voting is the most powerful tool anyone has in this day and age. Ultimately, more people are coming to terms with homosexuality as a reality rather than some abhorrent practice. The "common person" is beginning to recognize that there is no justice in denying rights to a segment of the population because of their sexuality any more than there was because of someone's race.
The change may be slow, but compared to other major social changes, it's coming along relatively quick and easy.
Not quickly or easily enough, as I mentioned, for those who are at the heart of the debate, but at least you know you can look forward to the day when there will still be a vocal minority who can no longer deny you your rights.
•
|
