ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 5033
Apr 26 11 6:27 AM
Propaganster wrote:SpiritRhythms wrote: re: " That being said, was the Bible, as Darrell suggests, translated anywhere near adequately?" I'm in agreement on this, and here's why: Beyond this, languages evolve to describe advances and new social realities. As such, the earliest languages had a far more limited vocabulary than language which appeared later in history, and which were often based on these earlier languages that became obsolete.For example, and sorry to expose such a thing to our more religiously inclined members, but at the time the Old Testament was written, the hebrew language had no word for 'homosexuality.' This is why any time the Bible touches upon the subject, it is described (a man shall not lay with another man in the manner he does with a woman, or something to that effect). Notice, also, that while there is some concept of the 'gay man' there is absolutely nothing at all about lesbians. A modern explanation for this would be that, as women were (are?) viewed as sex objects or, sorry, 'baby factories' and men as sperm providers, lesbianism was tolerated more than gayness. Attraction to a woman is 'natural' while attraction to men, especially by other men who are meant to view women as the recipients of their seed, are 'unnatural.'But that explanation is bogus, because I doubt societies were hypersexualized back in minus 1000.The truth is probably much simpler - fixed marriages and male dominance. It's not that there we no lesbians, it's that society didn't care. Girls had no sexual orientation because they were basically considered the property of their fathers until mariage, at which point the husband became the owner, and what the ladies had to say on this was unimportant. "You marry that guy, you do not refuse hs advances, and we shall have many grandchildren thanks to legalized rape." Now, I'm exaggerating, I'm sure some parents were good enough to select a man their daughter liked and everything, but it was also so 'important' for the daughter to be married that, obviously, many fixed weddings were quite the nightmare for women.
SpiritRhythms wrote: re: " That being said, was the Bible, as Darrell suggests, translated anywhere near adequately?" I'm in agreement on this, and here's why:
" That being said, was the Bible, as Darrell suggests, translated anywhere near adequately?"
Interact
Share This