ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Biblically Homosexual

Updated on May 10, 2015

The Holy Bible - Sadly Misunderstood and Used for Hatred

Source

What the Bible Really Has to Say

In today's society, it appears that there is nothing more dividing than the debate over same sex marriage! People from either side are giving out their opinions, be it loudly on a street corner, or monetarily against or for supporters of same sex marriage. One side of the political debate is all about equal rights, and the other side about protection of marriage. Each feels that they are the one who is right.

Religious objection to same sex marriage, and homosexuality in general, is not new. The Bible is the most quoted book from both sides - for and against. But, what does it really say?

Today's hub is just the beginning. I will discuss the 6 admonishments of homosexuality in the Bible in a hub of their own each. I will then discuss the apparent acceptance of love in all it's forms in the Bible, and then other religions.

Personal note/disclaimer: I do not claim to be a religious scholar, nor a theologian. I am merely interested in what religions have to say on homosexuality, and what can be found out there in the wide world of the internet, and research as to what was actually meant by the Bible.


Sodom and Gomorrah

Sodom and Gommorah (Paraphrased)

Genesis 19 - Angelic visitors visit Lot in Sodom, angering the male locals who wish to know who these visitors are. They demand that Lot show them the visitors so that they may 'know' them. Lot instead offers his virgin daughters to the angry male crowd.

Firstly, this passage uses the term "yada" for "to know". Many translations of these verses takes "to know" as "to know sexually", and it is assumed that the Angelic visitors are male. Yada is not necessarily meant in the way in which is has been translated into English. It is widely accepted by Christians that the sins of Sodom were homosexuality, as the men of Sodom wished to have sex with (and possibly forcefully) Lot's visitors. We have Sodom and this belief to thank for the term "sodomy" describing anal sex - though, usually now used in legal circles to describe non-consental anal sex. However, it wasn't necessarily the sin of Sodom.

Remember that the Bible, whilst considered by Christians to be the word of God, was written by men - on instruction from God. Recall that it has also been translated from Aramaic through Greek, into English. Mistakes will be made, as each is entitled to his or her own interpretation. So, what we may consider to be the word of God may be a coloured slightly by the interpretation of such translators.

What Does Jesus Say?

It is said later on in the Bible, Ezekiel 16:49-50 to be exact, that Sodom's sin is pride, greed, idleness and refusing to help the poor. Homosexuality is not mentioned anywhere.

16:49 Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.
16:50 And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good

This is from Jesus himself. The abomination of Sodom was not necessarily homosexuality, but idleness, pride, gluttony, and the kicker - refusing to help the poor. That, from what I can see, would have annoyed Jesus and his Father greatly. So, in order to prevent it happening all the time, the city was destroyed as a warning to others.

Many may argue that the 'abomination' alluded to in verse 16:50 is homosexuality as Leviticus alludes to it as an abomination in its list of sexual laws. However, this relies on two things to be assumed: 1 - that the "yada" of Genesis is correctly translated into "to know sexually" - which given the rest of the biblical use of 'yada' is "to know" could not necessarily be the case, and that the angelic visitors were male.

The abomination may not be the same-sex relations, if the assumptions of Yada and male angels are correct - but the fact that the angry mob wished to force themselves upon the visitors - therefore making it rape - which is always an abomination (at least to the civilized world).

Would offering your virgin daughters to the angry mob for them to do with as they pleased not be an abomination in itself? Offering them to be forcfully sexually assaulted by a mob of men? Much like the concubine was later on in Judges? If sexual assault, and offering one's daughters to be knowingly assaulted with your consent is not an abomination - perhaps the threat was not sexual in nature, and Yada is incorrectly translated?

It is not mentioned by name - which given that 'homosexual' and 'homosexuality' as words did not exist pre-1900s it actually shouldn't be in the bible if translated correctly - nor is it even subtly hinted at through mention of "men lying with men" in Ezekiel being the actual abomination - therefore we cannot be sure of which abomination Jesus is speaking.

Conclusion

Something in the assertion that Sodom and Gomorrah is only about the homosexuality that has been interpreted within Genesis 19 is bothersome. It is completely overlooked by those who use this passage to declare homosexuality an abomination, that Lot is happy for his daughters to be sexually assaulted by the angry mob, if the word "Yada" is really meant as "to know sexually". Homosexuality is a bigger sin than sending your daughters out into an angry sexually charged mob?

By using this verse to condemn homosexuality, one must be careful to realise that they are are then condoning offering the sexual assault of their daughters. It pays to be aware of usage out of context.

Regardless, it is still used to condemn homosexuality. Perhaps the sin of Sodom include the perversions of the angry mob, but is it really an appropriate verse to use to condemn a minority?

It doesn't really make you look any better.

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • American Romance profile image

      American Romance 4 years ago from America

      You forgot to add that God said if a man lie with a man he will believe a lie and be DAMNED!...............When God himself damns someone it can't be a good thing????

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 4 years ago from New Zealand

      American Romance - I understand that but you didn't read my hub properly - I was only discussing Genesis 19 in this one. Leviticus, 1 Corinthians, Romans etc come later.

      If you wish to read about Leviticus - I will be posting on that tonight (in my time zone - New Zealand).

      There is too much information and explanation to cover all 6 admonishments in one post. Leviticus is a particularly lengthy one due to two verses. And an explanation for both.

      Please join me later today for further discussion. But all I can say about it now is - yes, it was damned at the time of Leviticus - for a good reason. That reason is no longer valid. Join me this evening to find out.

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 4 years ago from New Zealand

      Ah, and another thing I remembered - I may just have to re-do this hub, or do another...Part Two of Genesis. In using this Chapter as a condemnation, as well as condoning rape - where the daughters are offered up as replacement to the Angels. But further on in Genesis, you are all perfectly okay that Lot's daughters tricked him into impregnating them? Hmmm, using a chapter to condemn homosexuality that then condones both RAPE and INCEST....doesn't make any sense.

    • blaise25 profile image

      Fehl Dungo 4 years ago from close to you...

      Excellent presentation and insights. I think there are lots of passages in the Bible that we should not take too literally. There are reasons for everything. I'm not against homosexuality or how people view it. I'm bisexual. As long as we don't hurt anyone or step on anyone's rights, the world will be a beautiful place.

    • Austinstar profile image

      Austinstar 4 years ago from Somewhere in the universe

      I'm totally flabbergasted that you took the time to read and write about some very odd verses in the Bible. Most of the "blessed" Christians just ignore the weird parts or interpret it however their particular church wants them to interpret it. They never bother to think for themselves.

      Imagine a world where it's ok to rape young women as a 'reward' for NOT raping male 'angels'. WTF? I never understood this passage and obviously never will.

      Thanks for trying to explain it anyway. Good luck with this series of hubs. I'll be checking them out for sure.

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 4 years ago from New Zealand

      Blaise - thank you for your comments. I have be slack and will be getting back to the Biblical Homosexuality series....Genesis and Leviticus were the one I had the most information on....now, I have to get cracking with the rest....damn you work, you get in the way of my hubbing!

      AustinStar - I figured at 16 or so that if I was going to argue with people who condemned my friends (at the time I was an angsty caught up in my own drama to realise I was gay...I wasn't thinking about boys or girls...) to Hell just for being gay, that I needed to know what I was talking about. Even to the extent that I own two Bibles, and several books from the local Christian store in regards to the apparent Biblical view on homosexuality.

      I think that if they had translated "yada' correctly when copying it, this verse wouldn't be used. Every other mention of "yada" in the Bible has been translated to "to know" bar the Genesis one which was translated as "to know sexually" for some reason. Even when later in the Bible, Jesus himself speaks of Sodom and Gommorrah's sins and not one of them was homosexuality.

      I think even later on, they are happy to pop a concubine outside to be raped and she is, then left bleeding. WTF? Gays are bad, but rape of a woman, particularly a lowly woman is just fine? Funnily enough as well this book which details rape, incest and other things we don't want our children to read - yet it is able to be sold to children???

      I will try to get back into these hubs - work got in my way.

    • The0NatureBoy profile image

      Elijah A Alexander Jr 4 years ago from Washington DC

      Since I have not studied any of the other languages the bible is written in, like most Christians, I find it very interesting that "yada's" translation doesn't mean a sexual encounter. [However, I now wonder if that's the word used for Adam's impregnating Eve.] You have enlightened me, a philosophy {lover of wisdom}, both with the meaning of "to know" as well as the more accurate definition of "sodom" as anal sex. Thanks for your research, now I know why Revelation 11:8 sat the USA is "spiritually" called {defined} Sodom, molestation of boys is rampant here .

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 4 years ago from New Zealand

      TheoNatureBoy - thank you for your comments. My apologies for some reason HP put your comment in spam - I have approved it now!.

      From what I know of - Sodomy is often the term used to describe when someone has been forced to have anal sex. Perhaps it is still the term used for "anal sex" - but it is usually used in legal terms now. It's just "anal sex" otherwise - something both homosexual males, and heterosexual couples partake in and enjoy.

      Yada is the one that stuck with me - it had two slightly different translations - to know, and to know sexually. However, only once was it ever translated with the second one - in Gen. Nowhere else was it translated to mean sexually. Could it be translator bias? Possibly. Could it be meant to be that way? Also possible. It's just a little weird to use the same word in similar situations but only translate it that way for that verse. Besides - the word Homosexual was not around in Biblical times, so it's use in other verses in the Bible is also questionable.

      My problem with these verses is mostly that they have been taken out of context - both historical context and the context in which they were written in. They make sense for the time they were written if you understand the history, and context. They were written at the point in time where they were necessary. They are no longer.

    • The0NatureBoy profile image

      Elijah A Alexander Jr 4 years ago from Washington DC

      I had missed the fact that "sodomy" is used for "forced anal sex" and not any anal. Thanks for pointing that out to me also.

      To answer "Could it be meant to be that way" I say yes. My reasoning is everything that happens is repeated exactly the same way cycle after cycle (Ecc. 1:9) and to recognize truth one has to put forth an effort, one can't just read and understand it's true is the intended order, therefore, I believe, it's an ingrained part of existence.

      Sometimes, the truth is only revealed when some things are taken out of context, other times what is intended to be comprehended require the context, to know which to use require "spiritual discernment" has been my findings. That's why there is so much confusion in Christianity, people say they are "spiritually born" but haven't any idea of what is required to be, therefore they are deceiving themselves and others, but, that is also a part of existence's ingrained design.

      Peace.

      Elijah

    • Insightful Tiger profile image

      Insightful Tiger 4 years ago

      Actually, you make a good point! I have often wondered why it was ok to offer his daughters over the male angels. However, the angel were male because it says so in verse 5 of Genesis 19.

      I also found it interesting that among the "sins" of Sodom. Homosexuality was not listed as one of them.

      I liked that you are a true seeker of knowledge and you used the Bible to back up you opinions. Some people make it a habit to say "the Bible says this and that" and they never offer any scriptures to back it up.

      Well done! I look forward to reading more of what you have to say on this matter.

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 4 years ago from New Zealand

      Insightful Tiger - Thank you for your comments.

      I've been really busy of late, so have only gotten around to the Leviticus verses - another hub. I will try and get the rest of these done (there were 6 verses but two in Lev, so another three hubs I think!).

      I hope I can live up to what I started!

      Thanks again

    • Abby Campbell profile image

      Abby Campbell 3 years ago from Charlotte, North Carolina

      Hi again, Jacqui.

      I guess I should have read "Part 1" before reading "Part 2." I have already commented... very lengthy... in your other post. But, I have to say "Kudos" to you for a well-written hub. You certainly make one think. Though I didn't have a bias one way or another on homosexuality, I wanted to read your thoughts on these articles as I have had and still have friends who are gay. Being from a family with many who are devout "Christians" and seemingly hate homosexuality, I figured I might be enlightened for better discussion with them. ;)

      This particular hub really makes you think. Though I never studied the topic thoroughly, I know how to rightly divide "The Word" as I also use my concordances to find true meaning. You have done well, my friend. ;)

      As I mentioned in your other hub, I have been going through a "soulshift" for some time now. Something always struck my heart when it came to certain things the church was teaching. (I now know that was God nudging me because He actually lives in me.) Since my soulshift, I have gotten rid of much brainwash and started thinking more critically while listening to my heart. I was very shocked when I found that the Bible doesn't line up 100 percent to the original manuscripts. After all, isn't the Bible "divinely" written? LOL. Now I know that certain words and phrases were added to what was missing so that we could make some sense of it. However, we do need to remember that those words were written thousands of years ago. We can't literally believe that our interpretation is right on target. Can we? Nor can we believe that every single allegory should be taken as truth? Can we? How do we determine this?

      I strongly believe that God lives in each one of us, and He will make it known to our hearts what is right and true... and even false. After all, He lived in and guided those long ago that didn't have a "Bible."

      I didn't see any continuations on this topic in your hubs after Part 2. From the sounds of it, you have more parts planned. I do hope you continue writing on this as you have made us see things we may have never seen before. Great job, Jacqui!

    • MsDora profile image

      Dora Isaac Weithers 3 years ago from The Caribbean

      Jacqui, glad to meet you. I believe with you that "God lives in each one of us, and He will make it known to our hearts what is right and true." There is still a possibility that He will speak through the Bible; we have to keep our minds open to His interpretation, not to the preconceived ideas of others. Good that you're searching there.

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 3 years ago from New Zealand

      MsDora, thank you for your visit, and your comment. I agree, one must have an open mind as to the preconceived ideas of others. Again, thank you for visiting!

    • profile image

      DJ Anderson 2 years ago

      Hi, Jacqui,

      I saw your forum. It will be interesting to see if anyone steps out on that limb.

      I consider myself a Christian, but I do not believe anyone should force their beliefs on others. I have gay friends who have struggled with their sexuality for fear of be ostracized from friends and family. What a shame to have that kind of pressure riding on one's back. I do not believe it is my job to judge. My job is to support my friends, regardless

      of their sexual preferences.

      While claiming to be a Christian, I do not believe the Bible is without

      much misinterpretation. The Bible is riddled with contradictions and glaringly obvious discrepancies that simply cannot be explained.

      I enjoyed your translation because you have brought up valid questions. I read most of the comments but do not think this one thing has been brought up by you or your readers. Angels are supposed to be neither male or female...sexless. Yet, in Genesis it speaks of how the 'sons of God came down and took the daughters of man for their wives'.

      There are inconsistencies throughout the Bible, and keep in mind that King James re-wrote the Bible to bring the Church of England to fruition in 1604. Nothing like writing one's own Bible.

      Your hub is most insightful. My hat is off to your for taking on some challenges that most of us would tippy toe around.

      Great job!

      DJ.

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 2 years ago from New Zealand

      Thanks DJ.

    • krillco profile image

      William E Krill Jr 2 years ago from Hollidaysburg, PA

      Jesus came to free us from the burden of the Law, narrowing it all into two rules: love God, and love your neighbor. Most verses (allegedly) proscribing homosexuality are more to do with idol worship (temple prostitutes), if one takes the time and effort to genuinely study Scripture instead of text-proofing and cherry-picking. Those who condemn homosexual behaviors should keep in mind that if they have tattoos, eat lobster, or have mold in their home, they are certainly going to hell. They can also own slaves, beat their children and their wives. P.S....I have my own theory about 'yada'...that it means a broad knowing based in a sixfold intimacy, not just sexual....

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 2 years ago from New Zealand

      DJ - I recall something about that actually - re the angels. But I hadn't thought about it whilst writing and researching the hub. Thanks!

      Krillco - sounds like an interesting theory - you'll have to share it some time!

      I recently had a discussion re Leviticual laws with a Christian against SS marriage here on HP -was interesting.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      Actually, Jesus taught, "For from inside, out of the heart of men, come injurious reasonings, sexual immorality [πορνεῖαι.] All these wicked things come from within and defile a man."-Mark 7:21,23 (Bracket mine.)

      Further along in the Christian Greek Scriptures we find, “Φεύγετε τὴν πορνείαν. πᾶν ἁμάρτημα ὁ ἐὰν ποιήσῃ ἄνθρωπος ἐκτὸς τοῦ σώματος ἐστιν· ὁ δὲ πορνεύων εἰς τὸ ἴδιον σῶμα ἁμαρτάνει.” -1 Corinthians 6:18

      "Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin that a man may commit is outside his body, but whoever practices sexual immorality is sinning against his own body."

      “ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἄδικοι θεοῦ βασιλείαν οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν; Μὴ πλανᾶσθε· οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται οὔτε κλέπται οὔτε πλεονέκται, οὐ μέθυσοι, οὐ λοίδοροι, οὐχ ἅρπαγες βασιλείαν Θεοῦ κληρονομήσουσιν.” - 1 Corinthians 6:9,10

      “Or do you not know that unrighteous people will not inherit God’s Kingdom? Do not be misled. Those who are sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, men who submit to homosexual acts, men who practice homosexuality, thieves, greedy people, drunkards, revilers, and extortioners will not inherit God’s Kingdom.”

      "Their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; likewise also the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full penalty, which was due for their error." -Romans 1:26,27

      Notice that those passages utilize conjugations of the key phrase πορνεία. Precisely what is πορνεία?

      The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon

      πορνεία

      Strong's Number: 4202

      Transliterated Word - Porneia - Phonetic Spelling - por-ni'-ah

      Definition:

      Illicit sexual intercourse -

      1.1 adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.

      As you can clearly see, with just a rudimentary comprehension of the Koine Greek concept of πορνεία , it's clear what exactly is and is not normal human sexual conduct in our Creator's sight.

      Does this mean that those with homosexual or bisexual inclinations must forever be a slave to their lust? Not at all! Unalike irrational beasts, human beings are more than capable of adapting their sexual behavior and limiting it to its proper place. (Even those struggling with sexual deviations have benefited greatly from medical advances designed to help them regain their good health.)

      Withal, there are many loyal to God who refuse to engage in any kind of porneia. They happily prefer to remain celibate until such time as they find a fitting heterosexual partner to marry and build a natural family with, as our loving Creator originally purposed. Such ones not only enjoy the benefits of having a clean conscience but the wonderful blessings reserved for those who persist in maintaining a close, personal relationship with the Sovereign of the Universe, Jehovah God. (Psalms 83:18; Psalm 97:10; Psalm 145:20; 2 Samuel 22:26; 1 Samuel 2:9)

      http://bit.ly/1ckFtZt

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 2 years ago from New Zealand

      Joseph, thank you for taking the time to reply, and in particular provide the greek translation to many verses. I shall be referring back to this comment when I manage to get the other hubs on the other verses completed.

      Thank you also for the polite way in which you conveyed your point in regards to the 'natural order' of things in your last paragraph - many people cannot achieve politeness when advising a similar notion.

      However, what you may not have realised is that this hub is SOLELY on the Genesis verses - that being Sodom and Gomorrah. The other verses will have their own hubs in time (I have a small child...!).

      I would go into the translations of Arsenokoitai and Malakoi to mean homosexual (when that word didn't even exist back then.....and there was already a commonly used word to mean sexual acts between males - paiderasste.) - but I may just leave that for the hub (or I'm re-writing it lots).

      I can see that you and I can agree to disagree that homosexuality is not as condemned as one would think. And I am happy to continue to converse with you should you wish to continue. I wish to thank you again for the time and effort you took to reply, and hope you will continue to read my hubs, as I will take a look at yours (also - thanks for the follow!)

    • profile image

      Elijah Alexander Jr 2 years ago

      Bro. Joseph O Polanco,

      Your scriptures are true as you presented them, however, one must remember scriptures are not to non-believers who are not able to comprehend spiritual things but only to the "born again" per John 3:1-8. Also it must be remembered, everyone spiritually born judges not the world but write scripture to exalt and encourage those who are.

      True, homosexuality is "missing the mark," or a sin against one's own body, but we must remember a Roman ranking officer requested of Jesus to heal his sick lover [see the meaning of the translated word] and even stated he was not worthy to have him enter his house and asked him to only say the word that it be done. Jesus did not condemn him nor his lover but did as he had been asked. Are we, because we claim the "new birth," now in the position to do what our example of "righteous living," Jesus the anointed, did?

      One thing must be remembered when we compare the man animal to the others, man's pleasure lust of the sexual activity is also a change form the natural purpose for sex. Few to none of the other animals have sex for pleasure except man -- the ones I know of are in physical captivity like most man are in a mental / spiritual captivity -- therefore you should have included "sex for pleasure" in the list of "1.1 adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc." I'm not disagreeing with you but if you are going to judge do it to it's righteously, don't leave out the sins most Christians follow just because you still lust for sexual pleasure rather than only for reproduction. You will notice the instructions to the "sons of god" in Genesis 1:26-28 is "be fruitful and multiply:" or don't you realize the Genesis 1 man are what Genesis 6:2 call "sons of god" and all of Adams descendants except Enoch are called "daughters of man"?

      Do you know that the reproduction cycle for man is about 13 years? From conception to births 9 months and the child should nurse until they replace their "milk teeth" at about 12 -- the reason Jesus said at that age "it is time to be about my father's business" -- and leave the nest allowing the mother's milk to dry up and some time later she ovulates again. That was the way of the "sons of god" and will be the way of this of us who follow "the prophet like unto Moses" into Armageddon's "Safe Haven" while the rest of the world spills a "red sea of blood" in the Battle of That Great Day of God Almighty" as the false prophet fights against the dragon against the beast against the false prophet. We are in the closing days of the world/civilization so we need to transcend our attachments, even to immediate family (Mat. 19:29), to prepare to enter everlasting life follow "the prophet like moses" leeds us into.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Jlpark

      I am both humbled and gratified by your warmth and kindness :)

      I look forward to discussing this and other biblical themes with you further :)

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Elijah

      Thank you kindly for your reply :)

      Now, you reference:

      "a Roman ranking officer requested of Jesus to heal his sick lover"

      Can you show me where precisely this is recorded in the Bible?

    • The0NatureBoy profile image

      Elijah A Alexander Jr 2 years ago from Washington DC

      Bro. Joseph,

      The passage is Luke 7:1-10 but in verse 7, when the centurion is speaking to Jesus about his slave (by way of his friends), saying "But only speak the word, and let my servant be healed," the centurion uses the word pais. Greek writers from Plato to Plutarch used the term thus: "The junior partner in homosexual eros is called pais (or of course, paidika) (Dover, Kenneth. 1997. Greek Homosexuality. pp.85).

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Theo

      The same noun παῖς is also found at Luke 2:43 where we read, "καὶ τελειωσάντων τὰς ἡμέρας, ἐν τῷ ὑποστρέφειν αὐτοὺς ὑπέμεινεν Ἰησοῦς ὁ παῖς ἐν Ἰερουσαλήμ, καὶ οὐκ ἔγνωσαν οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ." That is to say, "When the days of the festival were over and they were returning, the boy Jesus remained behind in Jerusalem, and his parents did not notice it." Are you alleging that Jesus was "The junior partner in homosexual eros"?

    • The0NatureBoy profile image

      Elijah A Alexander Jr 2 years ago from Washington DC

      No, that is not what it means, it means in his case that the recognized his wisdom therefore it was in that vain his parents called him "παῖς", junior partner because of his wisdom. It doesn't always mean that but because the centurion had made the statement that he was not worthy to have him enter his home does. He was making it known that he was someone who "sinned against his body."

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Theo

      "It doesn't always mean that but because the centurion had made the statement that he was not worthy to have him enter his home does. He was making it known that he was someone who "sinned against his body."

      Or his humility obligated him to express himself that way with the Son of God. It appears you're clutching at straws ...

    • The0NatureBoy profile image

      Elijah A Alexander Jr 2 years ago from Washington DC

      Bro. Joseph,

      "παῖς" only means "junior partner" but many Greek writers used it to mean in homosexual relationships. In the case of the centurion, he recognized Yoshua as a holy man, I believe, therefore he felt his lifestyle wasn't worthy to invite him into his home. That is what his words suggest to me. If you want to say Jesus would have judge him and not healed his lover if the centurion let it be known then you have no knowledge of what the mind of god is like, higher than man's as heavens above the earth.

      You appear to be misled by social teachings of WJWD.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Theo

      " I believe, therefore he felt his lifestyle wasn't worthy to invite him into his home."

      What you may or may not believe is not what's in question. It's what you can definitively prove and, seeing as how παῖς has multiple definitions, you've yet to prove definitively that the Centurion's servant was actually his gay lover.

    • The0NatureBoy profile image

      Elijah A Alexander Jr 2 years ago from Washington DC

      I DID NOT indicate παῖς has multiple definitions, I explained, in a round about way, its definitions only mean "junior parter" and in my first post I indicated many Greek writers used it to indicate homosexuality. I was not aware παῖς was used to describe Yoshua age the age of 12 until you pointed it out but the definition is only "junior partner." The centurion words proved it, because anytime a person consider's one a "prophet" or "holy man" they usually invited them into their homes in those days.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Theo

      If you recall, I shared with you Luke 2:43 where παῖς is used to describe Jesus as a young boy and also hinted earlier that παῖς has multiple definitions -

      Strong's Definition

      :a boy (as often beaten with impunity)

      :or (by analogy) a girl

      :and (generally) a child

      :specifically a slave or servant (especially a minister to a king; and by eminence to God): - child, maid (-en), (man) servant, son, young man.

      Thayer's Definition

      1. a child, boy or girl

      1.1. infants, children

      2. servant, slave

      2.1 an attendant, servant, spec. a king's attendant, minister

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 2 years ago from New Zealand

      If we are to argue over definitions - why then are we using one definition in Genesis of "yada" - "to know" - as "to know sexually" whereas in the rest of the Bible is it "to know" - translation bias perhaps? Particularly when it is noted that the angels were also sexless.

      Just my two cents

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @JL

      It appears that the passage you're referring to is Genesis 19:5 which reads, "ויקראו אל־לוט ויאמרו לו איה האנשים אשר־באו אליך הלילה הוציאם אלינו ונדעה אתם׃" That is to say, "And they kept calling out to Lot and saying to him: “Where are the men who came in to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we may have sex with them.”"

      This rendering of the term yada is identical to what we find at Judges 19:22, "המה מיטיבים את־לבם והנה אנשי העיר אנשי בני־בליעל נסבו את־הבית מתדפקים על־הדלת ויאמרו אל־האיש בעל הבית הזקן לאמר הוצא את־האיש אשר־בא אל־ביתך ונדענו׃" or "While they were enjoying themselves, some worthless men of the city surrounded the house and were pounding on the door, and they kept saying to the old man who owned the house: “Bring out the man who came into your house, so that we may have sex with him.”"

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 2 years ago from New Zealand

      Yet, I gather there are plenty more yada in the Bible than just the two. Why, and how are these different?

      Could it not be that the people wished to know who they were?

      Given that none of us were actually there and don't actually know what was said, or meant - nor were any of the people who have translated the Bible from Aramaic, through Greek and Hebrew into English (and numerous other languages) - there is more than one area where the bias of the translator can skew the meaning entirely. For example - using the wrong "there" or "you're" can change the ENTIRE meaning of a sentence through a spelling mistake.

      The reason I mention this is because these verses are often quotes to stop those who are homosexual from having the same rights as everyone else - Verses subject to huge translator bias is a tricky thing to be basing the hatred and mistreatment of humans in the 21st century. I don't mean you - but I do mean those who quote Sodom and Gomorrah. In fact, basing laws on the holy book of ONE religion in a population of numerous religions or lack thereof is unjust, but to base it on possibly mistranslated verses as well.....

      Now, i can't comment on the rendering as you have provided it in a language I cannot read (I'm gathering either Greek or Hebrew...which in itself is subject to translation bias - there aren't always ways to accurately say something when translated from another language - therefore one has to interpret it in the way THEY personally see it).

      Anyway - thank you for your reply.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      "therefore one has to interpret it in the way THEY personally see it"

      Or, as with most words in most languages, they could just take context into account. The context of both these Hebrews passages makes clear that yada here relates to sexual intercourse.

      In fact, the Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon, among others, includes the definition "know a person carnally, of sexual intercourse" as one of the many definitions of yada.

      Regardless, while homosexuals need to be lovingly made aware of God's just standards on sexual conduct, no one should use this as an excuse to treat anyone with brutality or violence. This is certainly not sanctioned by our loving Creator :)

    • The0NatureBoy profile image

      Elijah A Alexander Jr 2 years ago from Washington DC

      Bro. Joseph,

      My definition came out of a greek dictionary I found in the Georgia University's Library in Atlanta in 19778. It said παῖς means "junior partner" then went on to say "often used by writers to denote sex slaves" as you described above. I had forgotten that until another friend wrote what my first post quoted.

      It may very well be as jlpark said, and I know is true today because to many people have began to question certain things in the Bible that there are so many words changed in modern Bibles that they are almost of no use for research. Look at the online Bible's Matthew 19:29 and you will see how the KJV I usually use has deleted what I have inverted in [brackets]. "And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold [in this generation], and [in the nest regeneration] shall inherit everlasting life" or something like it. I've also noticed both the Strong's and Young's concordances do not say what they were saying when I used he frequently in the 1970s before I became the nomad per John 3:8.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      @Theo

      As with most ancient languages, as time progresses our understanding of them advances. That's why it's best to keep up with the latest developments instead of relying on outdated information.

    • The0NatureBoy profile image

      Elijah A Alexander Jr 2 years ago from Washington DC

      @Joseph,

      That would be true except the United States of America's government, controlled by "Lucifer" (Isaiah 14) who Revelation (chapters 13 & 17) calls "the beast," wanted to keep the "dumb down" so they could bring the conditions of 1930 Germany into being all over the world. They thought they had enough of us ready so they could implement it using George "Dubya" and Barack "O" but it hasn't worked and, according to prophecy, it will not. You noticed how Isaiah indicated "The Zionists" or Lucifer are going to fall to our level, didn't you?

      We are within 14 years (per parable of the fig tree & Psalms 90:10) of the end of this world and there has to become a time of peace (Revelation 7) for sealing the Spiritual Jews who survives it (Isaiah 7:15-22 & Matthew 24:13) so 50% will be spiritual adults enough to live in "Armageddon" while "The Battle Of That Great Day Of God Almighty" ends the world with the beast fighting against the dragon against the false prophet against the beast (Revelation 16:13-16).

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 2 years ago from New Zealand

      Thanks Joseph.

      Context is usually the problem. Much like Leviticus, Romans and Corinthians - the verses used to condemn homosexuality are usually removed from ALL context except for the verse in which they are using. They are cherry picked from their social, cultural and historical context.

      Much of the need for the verses, at the TIME of writing, made sense - for example Leviticus - a tribe trying to forge an existence in the desert - most Levitical laws were for health and safety - long hair for sun protection, no pork etc in relation to bad storage conditions and food poisoning, no touching a menstruating woman (again, health and safety), and no non-reproductive sex - have to have more kiddies to make a tribe bigger.

      What they don't see when they remove it from context, is that they no longer follow the laws of the Leviticus, yet expect us as homosexuals to do so. Why do they not? Because they no longer apply after the writing of the NT and the arrival of Jesus.

      Pauls verses are explainable as well.

      However, Jesus himself states the sins of Sodom, and homosexuality is not amongst them. Their rudeness, haughtiness, greed, and inhospitality however is.

      Thanks for the discussion. However you two, whilst civil, aren't really on track with this hub. Maybe you should each write one on something you have been discussing here, and continue there? You are welcome to continue here, but it doesn't seem to fit any longer.

      Thanks again.

    • Joseph O Polanco profile image

      Joseph O Polanco 2 years ago

      "Because they no longer apply after the writing of the NT and the arrival of Jesus."

      While that may be true of specific laws given to the ancient nation of Israel, many principles are still in effect. Remember my earlier post on Christ's admonition against sexual immorality and what this entailed?

    • profile image

      Sanxuary 2 years ago

      You use only a few passages in the Bible. Still I do not believe that on a planet that should be called purgatory that God is promoting his believers to go out and kill homosexuals. Still I do believe he condemns it in terms of ones purpose in terms of ones spiritual growth. We judge ourselves and we were not made the judge of others but we build our lives by following the wisdom of God. We often declare certain things to be evil but never consider their existence to begin with. Perhaps selfishness exist to empower us to save our own souls first. Then with that maturity we can become unselfish enough to build relationships with others. There is a reason for everything spoken of in the Bible but a reason much greater then simply saying this is good or this is bad because it said so. No matter how you attempt to change the meaning of something to meet your own purpose it was never there to serve you only to begin with. We live such short lives and each generation starting out as infants insures that most of us are not going to attain spiritual maturity before our death. What that means in its entirety is anyone's guess. So keep on guessing and hope the bar is low enough for someone to pass this great test. Maybe it's a bell curve.

    • Say Yes To Life profile image

      Yoleen Lucas 2 years ago from Big Island of Hawaii

      jlpark - some world religions accept homosexuality. Here's a link:

      http://www.religionfacts.com/homosexuality/compari...

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 2 years ago from New Zealand

      Thanks for that SayYes. The filter decided your comment was spam for some reason, so I've changed it so you can see it now.

      I am aware of some that do, but I will check it out when I get a chance.

      This hub is focused on the Christian religion as it is one of the religions that is followed by a large number of people, and is trying to change laws to be Biblical to prevent certain things like SS marriage. Hence the focus.

    • The0NatureBoy profile image

      Elijah A Alexander Jr 2 years ago from Washington DC

      JLPark,

      Now that the Pope has said they are to accept GLBTs I believe that is going to began changing soon, and once the "son of man" enters the seat of power there will shortly come o whole new world focus on all things established to create monetary profits, as most things are designed to do.

    • Hanavee profile image

      Brian Gray 2 years ago from Pennsylvania

      Please read the book "Homosexuality, The Bible, The Truth - The Bible Does NOT Condemn Homosexuality." Anti-gay bigots will never take the time to read this book, because they are afraid of it. This book represents forty years of scholarly research using every tool available - language, ancient history, ancient documents, archaeology, geology and more - and this book proves with irrefutable and verifiable fact what the title states.

      I hope that you will read the book and arm yourself with the truth. The bigots like to misinterpret the Bible, and it is a sad fact that most people will never get the opportunity to study all of the subjects necessary to properly interpret the Bible, but know this, all of the passages in the Bible that have ever been abused to bash gays have been thoroughly examined and discussed with full and complete explanations. The Bible NEVER condemns homosexuality, and at long last, here is a scholarly book that proves it.

      Brian

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 2 years ago from New Zealand

      Havanee - thanks for that. I need to get that one and have a read. Hopefully it's on kindle!

      Joseph - your comments were removed as they do not pertain to the hub, and have been discussed in depth between us elsewhere. Please refrain from those posts. If you wish to comment further please ensure it pertains to the hub. Thank you. (I'm on a phone so will look at other comments from all hubbers later on and give any non hub related the same treatment.)

    • Hanavee profile image

      Brian Gray 2 years ago from Pennsylvania

      jlpark,

      I believe it is on Kindle, since it is available in E-form. Like I said, every passage in the Bible that has ever been misinterpreted and abused to persecute homosexuals is in this book...and much more. For example, most people do not know that during the time of Jesus Christ, there was no such thing as an anti-homosexual teaching anywhere. That all began centuries later during the reign of Emperor Constantine in the 4th Century. Also, some have wondered about the prophet Daniel, and there is an entire chapter that gives the reader an entirely new look at Daniel. You won't believe the amount of information that is available from ancient texts to help us understand someone we thought was a mystery. The famous love story of Jonathan and David is covered with so much more detail and evidence. You'll have concrete answers to the many questions about their relationship. One of my favorite chapters is the one titled "The Evolution of Sexual Mores." It traces the history of anti-gay prejudice, when it began, where it began and why it began, and this chapter traces all of the permutations of this prejudice from the beginning to the present. It will amaze you how anti-gay bigotry began, and it will amaze you further at the atrocities that have been committed down through the annals of history, all begun and sponsored by the Church.

      Please feel free to read the book, then quote it freely to counter the bigots who troll the internet looking for places to spread their poison. I always say, ignorance breeds hate, and the cure to ignorance is education. We who have had the blessings of good education have to turn around and lend a hand to making this world a better place for our having been here.

      Thanks in advance for all you do with the material in my book.

      Brian

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 2 years ago from New Zealand

      Thank you Brian. I'll take a look on my kindle sometime soon. I need to be doing some more reading on this, and pick up my Bible again to refresh myself. Thanks for giving me the push!

    • Hanavee profile image

      Brian Gray 2 years ago from Pennsylvania

      jlpark,

      Go ahead and read the book. Every biblical passage is included in the book, along with the original language, the pronunciation of the original, and the correct translation. It's all there so that people who do not have a Bible can still read all of the references. I think you'll enjoy the experience.

      Let me know once you read it what your thoughts are.

      Brian

    • peachpurple profile image

      peachy 23 months ago from Home Sweet Home

      I didn't realized the bible did say anything about homo

    • peachpurple profile image

      peachy 21 months ago from Home Sweet Home

      I didn't read any lines in the bible about homo yet

    • krillco profile image

      William E Krill Jr 21 months ago from Hollidaysburg, PA

      The word 'homosexual' does not appear in the Bible. That word was not really invented or used in the the mid 1800's. The word in the Bible translated into English as homosexual really is a word that refers to pagan temple prostitutes (who were both straight and gay/lesbian) in the Biblical/Gospel language of Aramaic. When translated correctly, the whole message is altered profoundly, and one can see that homosexuality is not condemned. But, of course, if you are a conservative, fundamentalist Christian, you will have plenty of arguments and explanations to contradict this.

    • Hanavee profile image

      Brian Gray 21 months ago from Pennsylvania

      krillco,

      Sounds like you might have read the book, "Homosexuality, The Bible, The Truth - The Bible Does NOT Condemn Homosexuality." If you haven't already, you might want to get a copy and read it, because it proves that what you just said is actually correct.

      Brian

    • profile image

      Krillco 21 months ago

      No, I have not; this is coming from decades of my own critical Scriptural study from a progressive, historical perspective.

    • Hanavee profile image

      Brian Gray 21 months ago from Pennsylvania

      Krillco,

      I think you would enjoy the book. It represents forty years of intense scholarly research, and proves with irrefutable and verifiable fact what the title states. Every passage EVER abused to condemn gays is thoroughly treated in this book.

      Brian

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 21 months ago from New Zealand

      Hanavee - please do not use my hub as a place to push your book. I have allowed the previous comments, but I do not wish to have any more of said comments.

      Any further posts like this, and I will delete them (and the previous ones I've allowed). This is NOT the place for it, even though the subject matter is similar. I do not appreciate you using my hub in this manner. (and Yes, I'm reading it)

      Krillco - thank you for your comments.

    • Hanavee profile image

      Brian Gray 21 months ago from Pennsylvania

      jlpark,

      I am not here to "push" my book, but to help people understand the truth, since there is entirely TOO much at stake with regards to the lives of LGBT people who have been persecuted for far too long. I know all too well the critics who surf the internet looking for places to employ their anti-gay, and very educated skills. They are very wrong, but you are not going to defeat them without proper education. Kindly remove ALL of my posts.

      Brian

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 21 months ago from New Zealand

      BRian - perhaps "push" was the wrong word. My apologies. Perhaps I should have said "promotion". However, in your posts to Krillco, you speak only of the book, and how if Krillco read it, they would find that what they were saying was truthful. You also recommended it to me a number of months ago - I have downloaded it, and I am reading it (when I get a chance).

      This hub is the beginning of several, based on the 6 verses used often to condemn LGBT. However, I have a toddler...I haven't had a chance to finish the rest yet.

      I know all too well the lives at stake of those who are persecuted, Brian. I speak often online with the critics and types you speak of. I am also educated, and have some idea what I am on about. I know they are very wrong, and will defeat them in my own way, as I have the education to deal with them. I am also a married, gay woman with a child - so have been the subject of persecution or fought against it for those like me who aren't strong enough yet to do it themselves. In the fight for marriage equality in my county. Being gay and a woman. Having a child in a gay relationship - "children need a mother and a father" etc etc (even concerns by my own family members initially).

      If people wish to read more about it - there are several comments where it is mentioned - I am leaving them be. They can also research many other books, which I will happily link them to if they wish, or they can do their own research and find their own books.

      Basing all of one's information on ONE book is not balanced, nor helpful to a cause. So I wished to stop the promotion of ONE book, without addition of other books on the topic. My apologies if it came over a little harsh - I was typing quickly, with a whiny toddler trying to sit on my lap (I was trying to do what I had to do online quickly while waiting for her dinner to heat through!). Again, thank you for your understanding, and my apologies

    • Hanavee profile image

      Brian Gray 21 months ago from Pennsylvania

      jlpark,

      Sometimes I may just be taking the easy way out by telling people to read the book, but, I deal with so many websites and blogs daily, and I have been doing so for many years now. Thus, sometimes I think I just don't have the time to post much more than that simple directive. In defense of the book, I spent literally forty years searching for the answers, and I read literally every book on the subject. Being a student of Theology, Hebrew and Greek, I was equipped to begin my research, but over the forty years that I spent researching, I had to also supplement that with studies in Latin, Ancient History, Ancient Cultural Ethics and much more. It is never my intent to brag on my book, but one incident always stands out in my mind. A number of years ago, I was reading a diatribe by a homophobe who was nailing one of the prominent pro-gay Theology writers with an online rant that was actually right on. The reason that he was getting away with his arrogant rant was because he had found flaws in the pro-gay theologian's "facts," facts that turned out to be flawed by a certain amount of suppositions. If we were to argue the case for the statement "The Bible does not condemn homosexuality," and we were to argue it before the Supreme Court, then only facts would suffice. We would never use such terms as "let's suppose this means..." or "this could mean..." I have cringed when reading some of these books, especially when I come to places where the writer has made mistakes that would be obvious to a scholar, even if they are not clear to a casual reader. Thus, I spent forty years involved in intense scholarly research to make sure that no anti-gay critic could ever do that to my book. The proof is in the reviews I have had from university professors and theologians who are using my book for their lectures. I have faith that my book will help us end the bigotry, because I have yet to have one of those arrogant anti-gay bigots find a leg to stand on. Those forty years were a work of love, and if it is all I leave my LGBT brothers and sisters, so be it, but there is simply so much material in there that it is often impossible for me to do much more than tell people to read it and feel free to quote from it in their efforts to help the cause. I am a scholar by degree, so I was taught to be extremely academically critical of anything I read, and as much as I wish that there would be books out there that make mine unnecessary, if such were the case, I would never have written mine. I faced a very terrible struggle with my sexual identity, especially being raised in the Fundamentalist faith, the son of a preacher and one myself. Thus, "hoping and wishing" would not suffice. I had to have absolute and correct answers for my Christian soul, and since all of those other books never gave me that complete assurance, that forty-year academic journey led to the publication of this book. Feel free to quote any passage of it anytime anywhere.

      Brian

    • The0NatureBoy profile image

      Elijah A Alexander Jr 21 months ago from Washington DC

      In realizing how the same thing which causes lustful cross gender sex is the same which causes lustful same gender sex, opposite attractions brought on by the Eve being woven from Adam metaphor, I could see no place in the Bible which suggested same gender sex was condemned by the Bible anymore than cross gender sex for pleasure. I thank you, JLPark, for your labor of love for your fellow man.

    • Mel Carriere profile image

      Mel Carriere 20 months ago from San Diego California

      The Bible has been interpreted in a myriad of ways, hence the reason we have so many different religions with different theologies. I agree with you that the unwillingness to help others would have incensed Jesus much more than a perceived sexual deviancy. Interesting hub.

    • profile image

      peter565 17 months ago

      A piece of advice, instead of trying to convince people the bible don't have a problem with gays. You may as well try get people to leave Christianity all together. Christ hate gay people. There is even a passage saying if you see gay people, you should drag them out onto the street and have them beheaded. The real Christianity is a savage and evil religion, it is just fortunent, most people today, have their own sense of right and wrong independent from the church, as a result, most people either ignore or don't know of these more disturbing passage.

      There are plenty more horrible passage, for example if a girl is not a virgin, you should stone her to death or burn her on the stake. if a person refuse to be a Christian, you should have stone to death, if your mother refuse to be a Christian, you should strangle your mother to death. If somebody refuse to obey a priest, you should stone him. The list goes on.

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 17 months ago from New Zealand

      Peter - thanks for your comment. Whilst I personally am an agnostic-atheist I'm not writing these hubs to turn people away from Christianity. Yes, I'm not religious for reasons of my own, including some of those you mentioned (condoning of rape etc).

      But this series of hubs isn't to turn people away from their faith - as I would never try to do that - it is more to make those who see these verses think on the actual meaning of them rather than the cherry picked version.

      I understand your concern and your suggestion - but my job is to educate, not to ask people to abandon faith.

    • profile image

      peter565 17 months ago

      Na, that isn't me. My intention is to encourage people to abandon Christ. FYI: I never like Christ since I was a boy. In fact, when I was in fourth grade me and my friends once go out at night and spray paint the wall of a church saying "Long live Lucifer" (So glad we didn't get caught, otherwise we would be in so much trouble)

      In fact I think moving away from Christ, is very important for the west. The west fall to the dark ages, because the emergence of Christ and the Catholic Church seized power. To was saved by the arrival of what the bible consider as "the antichrist". according to the bible the anti christ is just anything that contradict christ for example if I say "the earth is older then 5000 years old" or "evolution is real creationalism is false" that is me been an anti christ. And of course the anti christ the bible say is the evil bad guy, but you really think about it, is the anti christ the bad guy? No, he is the good guy. The age of Enlightment is antichrist and it saved Europe. In fact there is a paper published by Colombia university, which prove how antichrist ideology, mostly from Asia flow into the west in mass, during the 17th century, these ideas challange the bible and by the influence of these new ideas, allow the rise of the age of enlightment. One can even say, these non western influence is in fact the biblical reference as "the first beast of the antichrist" after all, according to the bible, the first beast come from the sea. And if these ideas are from Asia, didn't they come to the west, via the sea?

      A lot of westerns that grew up in Asia, abandon Christianity, because in Asia (except by the communist) teach tolerance to those who are don't disturb peace between people and society, this is how Asia have been as far back as history recorded. yet, the bible teaches people to be savage murders.

      Other westerns that live in Asia, become what I refer to as Selective christians, they only choose certain aspect of Christianity that don't contradict this Asian value to follow and abandon the rest.

      By the way, there is this paper published by Colombia University that is very interesting and the rise of age of enlightment http://www.learn.columbia.edu/nanxuntu/html/state/...

      Base on this paper, you can see, the anti christ is the real lord and savior, not Christ

    • jlpark profile image
      Author

      Jacqui 17 months ago from New Zealand

      That's fine Peter, but that's not appropriate for this hub. I'm not into encouraging people away - just educating.

      I've left your comment here, but can we please stick to the subject.

    • profile image

      peter565 17 months ago

      Well, the problem with gay discrimination is because (1) Christ hate gays and according to it, you should behead a gay person (2) despite it have been 300 years since the dark ages, there are still many religion nuts, in the west. (3) A lot of people in the west still don't have a full understanding of the concept a person should respect and tolerate people's behavior, as long as it doesn't disturb peace between people and society.

      The best way to help resolve the issue of gay discrimination, is to (1) convert people away from Christianity (2) Encourage people to the value that one should respect and tolerate people for their difference, as long as it doesn't disturb peace between people and society. This way, even if they don't approve homosexuality, they won't discriminate against you. This would not only solve the problem of gay discrimination, but solve a lot of other problems too.

      For example, prior to 1980s in Europe and prior to 1990s in Asia, people tend to see women who are unwed mothers as unmoral sluts. But despite both culture view unwed mother in such manner, the treatment is very different. In some western nations, such as Ireland, there was actually a law giving the church the authority to arrest women who are unwed mother and throw them into church run private prison and stay there for life, their baby is confiscated by the church upon birth, because these children are baster child, if the church can't get the baby be adopted, they just leave the baby there and let them starve to death and then bury them in a mass grave. (I mean you are a mum yourself, how would you like it if this happened to your baby?) In Asia, the worse you get for been unwed mother, is some desperate housewife gossiping about you behind your back calling you a slut.

      Both cultures use to look down on been unwed mothers as not moral, but why the different treatment? Because there are too many people in the west still don't have a mature understanding that people have the right to be respect and tolerated for their action, regardless of how others felt about it, as long as it don't disturb peace between people and society. In addition the western believe of been unwed mother is not moral, is influence by the bible who teaches if a priest's daughter is not a virgin, you must burn her own the stake, if she is not the daughter of a priest drag her out onto the street and stone her to death and there are still many religion nuts in the west.

    • profile image

      peter565 16 months ago

      Just got this wild idea in my head. What would you say if New Zealand becomes a part of Japan? I mean, Japan, (1) Christianity, Muslim, Judaism, which all worship the same god, but different name [Yehwha in Judaism, Christ in Christianity and Allah in Muslim], is not the mainstream religion in Japan, most Japanese are either pagans or Buddhist, these religions are independent of Christ. (2) East Asian culture, have a long history of believing in as long as they don't cause harm to people or society, one should respect and tolerate people for their difference, even if you disapprove of their action and because it has been so long, it even influence most western Christians that goes there, eventually, adopt this attitude and prioritized it above the bible. They don't discriminate against gays because the bible says it is a sin and the bible teaches you should drag a gay person out onto the street and have them beheaded, at most they restrain themselves from the homosexual action, but if other people want to be gay, they are very tolerating. If any western Christians who cannot agree with this Asian value, they are going to have a hard time, but most westerners who came, are able to convert, at least to such extent, those who grow up here, most abandon Christ and the bible. (3) Japan has a much larger population than New Zealand, so, there will be a lot of Japanese influence on New Zeland, once New Zeland becomes a part of Japan. and you won't worry about right wing Christian religion nuts politicians, because with a larger population, there will be more member in Parliment who are from Japan then from New Zeland, [of course if New Zeland become a part of Japan, New Zeland people, would become Japanese citizen and can run for Japanese political office.] so, even if right-wing religion nuts, won seats in parliament that represent various district of New Zeland, consider Japan's larger population, without a doubt, most politicians would be Japanese and with more Japanese moving to New Zeland after the two nation join, chances are some of the people that represent certain district of New Zeland in the parliament, would have be Japanese. (4) With Japanese as the majority, it would put some pressure on Christian religion nuts and get them to shut up, right now, they take up way too much percentage of the population, so they say what they want, but, once become a part of Japan, they will be an extreme minority, especially after Japanese people started moving to New Zeland [and trust me, there will be a lot of Japanese moving here, because Japan is very crowded, it has a population of 127.3 million, I image the Japanese government would want to develop New Zeland manufacturing industry and increase jobs here, so more job for New Zeland people and more Japanese can move here. Not to mention, if New Zeland becomes a part of Japan, there will also be a lot of New Zeland people moving to Japan, for work, university or marriage and when their children who grow up there, well...for the New Zeland isn't exactly their hometown. So that will dramatically decrease the religion nut's ratio in society if they go to Japan, they are an extreme minority and Japanese would hate you for gay discrimination because they see your action as causing disturbance to social harmony (because it turns fellow countrymen against one and other, due to reason other than suppressing those who cause harm to society or others.) and causing harm to others through hate speech. So, gay discriminator will have no choice but to shut up or risk getting bashed up by gangsters on the street, getting fired from their job or even getting arrested by police and be found guilty by the court on various crime ranging from [defamation, causing social instability through hate speech etc.], there would be more Japanese emerging in New Zeland cities, so gay discriminator would increasingly felt pressured to shut up, the only place they would still have a higher ratio, is in New Zeland country.

      In fact, I know some of the discriminating speech against gays in the west that religion nuts are saying (e.g. when they go around waving big signs saying "god hate fags" and protest), are illegal in some Asia nations, on the ground of "defamation" or "causing social disturbance via

      instigate" I don't believe this sort of action been conducted by Asia government is inappropriate because freedom should not include behavior causing serious harm to others or disturbance to society and this sort of behavior could cause serious harm to others, through discriminating speech or hate speech. In the west, I think Christian religion nuts, take up such a high percentage of the population, the government felt using such radical methods to suppress religion extremist group might cause more problem. The FBI is already worried about the emergence of a Christian version of the Taliban, on US soil, after the legalization of gay marriage in the US last year, there was already some radical Christian groups that want to become a Christian version of Taliban and was spreading rumor saying "the great Christian persecution is coming", if the west started arresting gay discriminators, like they do in Asia, I think it would help push even more extremists, to join a Christian version of Taliban and might lead to civil war, so most western government, are taking a softer approach towards this problem, unlike Asia, who just throw these Christians in jail, if they dare to say stuff like these.

    Click to Rate This Article