You know what's going to make this all the more sad? The reason Christians despise gays could all be linked to a possible mistranslation in the Bible.
The founder of the Protestants, Martin Luther, was one of the first to translate the Bible into a common man's language: German. Here was his take on Leviticus 18:22
"Du sollst nicht beim Knaben liegen wie beim Weibe; denn es ist ein Greuel."
Tip for translation, all nouns are uppercase in German Language. So you have "Du" (you) "Weibe" (woman) Greuel (abomination). So that only leaves one... Knaben.
Let's go to Google images, put in Knaben, let them give us some photos and--- huh... well those aren't grown men at all are they? They're kids... boys to be specific.
Now let's analyze Leviticus 18 as a whole. Notice in the rules there are no transitional jumps in the English version, it talks about incest line by line, then Leviticus 18:21 talks about kids and 18:23 talks about animals. So what sense does it make for us to go from children to grown men to animals? None.
However, if we go from kids, to kids, to animals then there's no transition jump...
To further prove the point let's go back to the Bible Luther translated, the Latin one. Leviticus 18:22 says "cum masculo non commisceberis coitu femineo quia abominatio est"
Ah masculo, it clearly means man... or does it?
I did a search through the entire Latin Bible for this word and it only occurs 3 times. Very few for it being synonymous with males. So here are the three times:
Leviticus 18:22
Leviticus 20:13
Leviticus 27:6
The first two are both infamous anti-gay lines and are unreliable to disprove the line, however the last one is very damning, especially taken with context. This chapter doesn't talk about sex, instead it discusses how much "God tax" one should basically pay and it breaks it down into different subsets of people.
27:6
Latin: ab uno mense usque ad annum quintum pro masculo dabuntur quinque sicli pro femina tres
English: From one month until the fifth year, for a male shall be given five sicles: for a female three.
Okay, so that's an odd coincidence, we're talking about boys here... so what I still haven't proved that grown men is a POSSIBLE use for masculo...
well two other lines in this same chapter make that theory go right out the window: 27:3 and 27:7
27:3
Latin: si fuerit masculus a vicesimo usque ad sexagesimum annum dabit quinquaginta siclos argenti ad mensuram sanctuarii
English: If it be a man from twenty years old unto sixty years old, he shall give fifty sicles of silver, after the weight of the sanctuary:
27:7
Latin: sexagenarius et ultra masculus dabit quindecim siclos femina decem
Enlgish: A man that is sixty years old or upward, shall give fifteen sicles: a woman ten.
So, as we see here, when we're talking about adult males in Latin the word masculo is not used, and instead seems to be replaced by masculus. Which by no coincidence occurs with far more frequency in the book.
Oh, and you think it's coincidence that a good chunk of these organizations who had demeaned grown-up homosexuality have been rocked to their very foundations by pedophilia scandals? The Catholic church, the boy scouts, college sports... If I were a fundie, I think that'd be called a 'sign'? Of course I'm no fool, child predators are everywhere, but there's a difference between a one off being discovered and a mass cover-up like those examples. If only the the Bible these groups cherish had a line against pedophilia that would make them see it as a sin--- oh wait... it did, it just was replaced by the so-called crime of homosexuality.
So even though, yes there are idiots in the pulpit and the pew who lash out at others because of their misguided beliefs; I'll remain as a Martin Luther, or a Fredrick Douglass. Those who will see the inherent flaws of those within religion present and prior, point them out, and hope that is but enough to untaint religion from it's use in the works of evil.
Even if that does change things, it won't be the last time such a revelation needs to be made.
You know what's going to make this all the more sad? The reason Christians despise gays could all be linked to a possible mistranslation in the Bible.
The founder of the Protestants, Martin Luther, was one of the first to translate the Bible into a common man's language: German. Here was his take on Leviticus 18:22
"Du sollst nicht beim Knaben liegen wie beim Weibe; denn es ist ein Greuel."
Tip for translation, all nouns are uppercase in German Language. So you have "Du" (you) "Weibe" (woman) Greuel (abomination). So that only leaves one... Knaben.
Let's go to Google images, put in Knaben, let them give us some photos and--- huh... well those aren't grown men at all are they? They're kids... boys to be specific.
Now let's analyze Leviticus 18 as a whole. Notice in the rules there are no transitional jumps in the English version, it talks about incest line by line, then Leviticus 18:21 talks about kids and 18:23 talks about animals. So what sense does it make for us to go from children to grown men to animals? None.
However, if we go from kids, to kids, to animals then there's no transition jump...
To further prove the point let's go back to the Bible Luther translated, the Latin one. Leviticus 18:22 says "cum masculo non commisceberis coitu femineo quia abominatio est"
Ah masculo, it clearly means man... or does it?
I did a search through the entire Latin Bible for this word and it only occurs 3 times. Very few for it being synonymous with males. So here are the three times:
Leviticus 18:22
Leviticus 20:13
Leviticus 27:6
The first two are both infamous anti-gay lines and are unreliable to disprove the line, however the last one is very damning, especially taken with context. This chapter doesn't talk about sex, instead it discusses how much "God tax" one should basically pay and it breaks it down into different subsets of people.
Let's take a look. I'll bold some key words here.
27:6
Latin: ab uno mense usque ad annum quintum pro masculo dabuntur quinque sicli pro femina tres
English: From one month until the fifth year, for a male shall be given five sicles: for a female three.
Okay, so that's an odd coincidence, we're talking about boys here... so what I still haven't proved that grown men is a POSSIBLE use for masculo...
well two other lines in this same chapter make that theory go right out the window: 27:3 and 27:7
27:3
Latin: si fuerit masculus a vicesimo usque ad sexagesimum annum dabit quinquaginta siclos argenti ad mensuram sanctuarii
English: If it be a man from twenty years old unto sixty years old, he shall give fifty sicles of silver, after the weight of the sanctuary:
27:7
Latin: sexagenarius et ultra masculus dabit quindecim siclos femina decem
Enlgish: A man that is sixty years old or upward, shall give fifteen sicles: a woman ten.
So, as we see here, when we're talking about adult males in Latin the word masculo is not used, and instead seems to be replaced by masculus. Which by no coincidence occurs with far more frequency in the book.
Oh, and you think it's coincidence that a good chunk of these organizations who had demeaned grown-up homosexuality have been rocked to their very foundations by pedophilia scandals? The Catholic church, the boy scouts, college sports... If I were a fundie, I think that'd be called a 'sign'? Of course I'm no fool, child predators are everywhere, but there's a difference between a one off being discovered and a mass cover-up like those examples. If only the the Bible these groups cherish had a line against pedophilia that would make them see it as a sin--- oh wait... it did, it just was replaced by the so-called crime of homosexuality.
So even though, yes there are idiots in the pulpit and the pew who lash out at others because of their misguided beliefs; I'll remain as a Martin Luther, or a Fredrick Douglass. Those who will see the inherent flaws of those within religion present and prior, point them out, and hope that is but enough to untaint religion from it's use in the works of evil.
Even if that does change things, it won't be the last time such a revelation needs to be made.