11
u/Street_Peace_8831 7h ago
If they can keep interpreting the bible to mean whatever they want, so can everyone else.
12
u/Mother-Attention2600 11h ago
Jewish people would already be having gay marriages where they throw pebbles at each other as a loop hole. Most of their stuff is based on tricking god.
20
u/butt_err 10h ago
I mean to be fair it’s as close to correct as their interpretation. So there’s that.
5
u/joeshmoebies 8h ago
Is it? The actual translation seems pretty harsh to me (sorry that the right-to-left language pasting is so hard to follow):
• וְאִישׁ (və-’îš): And a man
• אֲשֶׁר (ă-šer): who
• יִשְׁכַּב (yiš-kaḇ): lies
• את-זָכָ֔ור (’eṯ- zā-ḵār): with a male (zākār means a male or man generically, not age-specific)
• מִשְׁכְּבֵי֙ אִשָּׁ֔ה (miš-kə-ḇê ’iš-šāh): the lyings of a woman / as one lies with a woman
• תֹּועֵבָ֖ה (tō-w-’ê-ḇāh): an abomination
• עָשׂוּ (עָשׂוּ / ’ā-śū): have done / committed
• שְׁנֵיהֶם (šə-nê-hem): both of them
• מֹות יוּמָתֻו (mō-wṯ yū-mā-ṯū): they must surely be put to death
• דְּמֵיהֶם בָּם (də-מê-hem bām): their blood is upon them
6
u/EarthTrash 7h ago
Why does it use two different words for men? Does it actually mean two adult men, or something else?
5
u/BuildingArmor 7h ago
I think the first term refers to a man, someone who has come off age and is expected to act as such, while the second is more broadly just male - any age, not even necessarily human depending on the context of course.
There's obviously nuance beyond that, but broadly speaking I think that's the difference.
0
u/joeshmoebies 7h ago
I have no idea so I asked Gemini and this is what it said:
The distinction between 'îš (ish) and zāḵār (zakar) in Leviticus 20:13 comes down to how Biblical Hebrew differentiates social/legal status from biological category.
'Κ (אִישׁ): Translates to "man" or "husband." It refers to a person as a legal, social, or household entity—an adult male member of the community. In Levitical legal formulas, 'îš is standard phrasing used to introduce the subject bound by the law (e.g., "If a man does X...").
Zāḵār (זָכָר): Translates to "male." This is a biological term denoting sex rather than social role or age. It is the counter-word to nəqēḇāh ("female") and applies to humans of any age, as well as to animals (such as sacrificial animals in Levitical offerings).
Because 'îš generally refers to an adult man accountable under Mosaic law, starting the law with 'îš establishes who is legally responsible for initiating the action.
By using the broader biological term zāḵār for the second figure, the text emphasizes that the sexual act is prohibited regardless of the other party's specific age, marital status, or social position, as long as they are biologically male.
There was more but this was the gist of it. I'm not a Hebrew scholar or a bible expert so that's the best I've got.
1
u/butt_err 7h ago
2
u/joeshmoebies 7h ago
I care so little about the topic that I put the first query into google and the second into chatgpt. Do you think I'm going to watch a video on it?
6
u/Cool-Signature-dude 10h ago
That is just like Christians saying the reference to 'pride' in the Bible is referring to LGBT people.
3
2
u/ZucchiniMaleficent21 11h ago
Don’t go laying the table with a friend. Nor laying turf in the garden. Nor even laying down some wikkid licks in the studio.
3
3
u/unkz0r 14h ago edited 11h ago
Not to be that guy. But the verse says:
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; theirblood is upon them.
https://www.esv.org/verses/Leviticus+20:13/#
Edit:
Not saying the joke is bad, just the verse is not correct. Dont need to downvote me lol
20
u/perplexedscientist 13h ago
Okay, so gay sex only when standing. Gotcha.
9
2
u/IThinkItsAverage 11h ago
Clearly the Bible didn’t take into account my knees and lower back, smh my head
1
u/Alarming_Ad3204 11h ago
With a crowd holding stones gathering around, waiting for you to tire and lay down.
8
u/killbawqs 13h ago
Deuteronomy has a few verses about killing newly married women for not being virgins or committing adultery.
Famously, in the New Testament's book of John, there's also a little verse about sinners throwing stones.
8
u/jws1102 12h ago
Modern Christians find the New Testament to be problematic. They want their violent, selfish Old Testament god.
5
u/lemoinem 11h ago
Then they should go back to judaism. They don't use all this new testament nonsense!
-3
u/Aguywhoexists69420 11h ago
The whole point of Jesus’ experience with the adulterous woman isn’t him saying “adultery is good actually and should be celebrated”
The point is to explain that all have done wrong and who they are shouldn’t be defined by their actions, but rather their actions should be defined by who they are, which is a belief most Christian’s I’ve seen hold dearly
5
u/microwilly 11h ago
I also want to point out that sleeping with your neighbors wife, your father's wife, your stepdaughter, and a mother and daughter at the same time is also worthy of death.
4
4
3
u/SweevilWeevil 10h ago
So it's cool if you fuck another dude so long as it's done differently from how you fuck a woman. Sounds pretty easy to me 🤷🏽♂️
3
u/Cogs_For_Brains 11h ago
Lol its all just a game at that point. There are 900 different english translations of the bible alone, not even counting other languages. You can pretty much look until you find the specific wording that backs up pretty much any argument someone is trying to make. (Almost like thats the point of the joke...)
5
u/Sexy-timeFlowers 10h ago
Remember, if you don't like the words your Bible says you can rewrite it to fit your own narrative!
0
0
u/DatE2Girl 10h ago
The most stupid thing about this is that jesus whole point was that leviticus doesn't have to be followed anymore to be a believer. Only the 10 commandements were left to be followed from the old jewish rules after jesus.
2
u/jakeStacktrace 9h ago
Then why is Leviticus still included in the Christian Bible? Shouldn't that be removed?
1
1
u/HumbleGauge 2h ago
Jesus said you should follow all the laws until heaven and earth pass away:
Matthew 5:17-20
Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
2
u/Hawco 9h ago
I recall a religious ethics professor explaining that successive Bible translations have misinterpreted many original meanings from the text, where this passage used a different word for “another man” which typically was used to mean “boy.” So according to the original text, it forbids a man laying with a boy, not explicitly another man.
2
u/BuildingArmor 7h ago
I think that's a bit of wishful thinking that people use to soften it.
The exact same word is used when saying that god created man and woman, it's used when it's talking about men specifically over the age of 20, it's used to refer to the male animals going onto the ark.
And, of course, that's not the only line in the bible that is anti-homosexuality.
1
u/WatchForSlack 9h ago
Yeah, plus this part of Leviticus comes from a time when the Israelites were making contact with the Greek world and finding out how they ran things and reacting to it
1
1
0
0
0
u/LoanDebtCollector 10h ago
It's been 3049 0 days since I've spit out a drink reading something funny.
0
17
u/Odd-Promotion2743 11h ago
Me when I don't know what a joke is