Imagine believing your morally justified telling some 13 year old queer kid they’re an abomination because of some fucking verse in your copy of the Goatherd’s Guide to the Galaxy.
So wasn’t the old testament superceded by the New testament of Jesus Christ? That’s literally the whole thing of Christianity. The old testament is basically Judaism isn’t it?
It’s about time someone made some sense from this hateful and damaging book. Next time I decide to eat some gummies, I’ll be sure to do so with an open-minded male friend. Let’s rock and roll.
The bible have some kinky tales that not even
myselfmy friend have ever seen in a FamilytTherapy video.All humans decent from Adam and Eve, yet they only had 3 sons.
Yeah, they boned neanderthals. Duh
Motherfuckers
Gen 5:4 “After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters.”
800 years? He had other sons and daughters, with who? His mom? His brothers? I know Christians love incest but 2 brothers can’t have kids AFAIK. So he had sex with his mom?
Problem is Genesis was written before the religion it was written for decided it was a monotheist religion that believed it was the only truth. So Yaweh created Adam and Eve, who had a couple of sons, one killed the other, but then that other went out and joined up with the other people made from other gods or titans or whatever, somehow convinced some of them to join his clan for a god that loved them, but then hated them because they sought knowledge (via eating fruit lol they really didn’t want their followers to be able to figure out shit to the point of even misdirecting them for how one obtains knowledge).
Where it falls apart even considering the original context is Noah’s flood, because that did apparently wipe everyone out except one mating pair per species, so how did Noah’s descendents repopulate the world without other populations to hook up with?
When I was about six, and discovered science and space, I got really into it. Pretty soon, the religious stuff I was hearing in Sunday School wasn’t jiving with the real science I was learning.
Where was Heaven? Where was Hell? Have scientists seen it? Do they know where it is? How can there be such places? If things like ghosts aren’t real, then how are these creatures real? I had another 100 unanswerable questions, easy, but they were unanswerable because there are no answers, because the entire thing is bullshit.
I knew that the minute my frustrated father finally just blustered “Nobody knows the answers to your questions. You just have to have FAITH!” And even at 6 or 7, that was it for me. I heard that for exactly what it was - it’s all nonsense, we all know it’s nonsense, but we’re going to pretend it’s real, and call it FAITH.
Well, not me. I remember becoming an atheist at that very moment in time, and I’ve never heard anything to change my mind.
Personally, I did change my mind from atheism to agnosticism just because a lack of evidence isn’t a proof and you can’t prove a negative. Established religions reek of control and manipulation, but I had to also conclude that it was naive to have faith that there isn’t anything more to whatever this reality is beyond what we can tell with science.
At the very least, there’s future scientific discoveries we can only guess at, but there’s also unknowable things, at least given the limitations we currently have as beings of this reality.
The proposed existence of unknowable things, however, isn’t an argument for the religious explanation. Claiming something is unknowable but then also supposing it might be this specific thing is contradictory. Draw the line at saying “we can’t know” not “you can’t prove it doesn’t exist”.
Also, that slippery scope where the same stance of “you can’t prove it doesn’t exist” applying to things like unicorns, space teapots, superheroes, midichlorians…
Yes, the only conclusion you can logically draw is that it’s impossible to know if they do or don’t exist. Instead of seeing the world as a set of ideas that either resolve to true or false, I see it as a set of ideas that resolve to true, false, or unknown.
Which also “resolves” a bunch of language paradoxes that depend on the only options being “true” or “false”. Like “this statement is false”. It also works on the halting problem, though still doesn’t make it trivial to solve (it just defeats the paradox proof if you allow a third option for paradoxes instead of insisting it only returns true or false).
Fucking thing’s got plot holes big enough for a sperm whale to swim through comfortably and yet it’s regarded as 100% literal truth by most lunatics governing us and most of the mouth breathers that voted for them.
That’s why Jesus was sent to retcon most of it and replace it with “just don’t be a dick”.
They nailed him to a tree for that.
There is nowhere information that God created Earth as first planet and first human there, there is information he created planet and things or at most a galaxy but there is no information nowhere that it was first planet or first galaxy. He just found empty spot in space. It’s pretty possible to do it if you could manipulate matter how you want and have unlimited energy source. That’s just terraforming to be honest.
He had a wife called Eve. Surprised you missed that small detail.
Just fyi. The original Hebrew version is anti pedo not anti gay. I’m certain this link won’t be popular, but . https://jewishstandard.timesofisrael.com/redefining-leviticus-2013/
The thing that bothers me with that explanation, is that if “where the Torah is concerned, every word counts” than why didn’t they use the word ‘boy’ instead of the more ambiguous ‘male’? Seems an intentional choice to refer to men and boys together.
They did
The word zachar is is any male 13 years old or older that is not married that has functional equipment
https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/196414?lang=bi
Or did you expect them to write it in English?
Edit I got my words mixed up I don’t speak Hebrew.
No, you are correct.
If it meant men, it would use the same word twice (like the mediocre translation above). It specifically uses a different word to indicate a different meaning. איש at the beginning of the verse, and זכר in the second part of the verse.
Legitimate scholars all agree that this is not referring to the type of gay relationships that generally exist today. They disagree only with the exact meaning that was intended.
No, I’d have expected them to say ילד if they only wanted to mean man with boy and not man with any form of male.
You really are missing the forrest by staring at trees.
The key context between ish zachar and yéled is that an ish is of mental and sexual maturity, an zachar is of sexual maturity and a yélid is neither.
So if a zachar is off limits for being too immature it’s implied so is an yélid.
If you don’t understand the context of that I can’t help you.
Okay let me get this straight for my own understanding:
In South Park, the Vatikans said “the bible states it’s not forbidden to fuck young boys” and the original Hebrew wording literally states that this is forbidden.
As in: “stoned shall not be the gay, but the one that gropes children”?
You realize SP is satire right?
Yes the original wording explicitly forbids adult men from fucking males that have not themselves reached full adulthood
The wording roughly would be man should not fuck adolescent male it is abhorrent
I mostly see it as an exaggeration rather than satire.
The word ילד would be insufficient. It does not include נער, or עלם, which would be the more likely scenario (not to mention עול, which would be unthinkable). זכר is the more obvious choice.
Also Leviticus is old testament. So this is less relevant/generally superceded by newer text.
Only for Christians. I would assume this still holds for Jewish people, as well as some christians who still holds to the Old Testament due to Jesus saying that the old text will not be superceded.
For reference, here’s that verse, Matthew 5:18:
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Thats the KJV, here’s a NKJV:
For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.
Here’s a bunch of other translations:
https://biblehub.com/matthew/5-18.htm
Absolutely tons of branches/denominations use this to justify upholding whatever their particular interpretation of whatever law they perceive from the Old Testament, the Tanakh/Torah.
‘The law’ is literally what Torah means in Hebrew, the Torah is the first five books of the Old Testament, The Tanakh broadly is the entire Hebrew Bible.
Because the New Testament is better? The NT is especially sexist towards women. Like:
- they need to be quiet (1 Cor 14:34-35)
- they can’t divorce but men can (Matthew 5:32 and 19:9) and it implies she has no autonomy since his act alters how she is viewed
- also 1 Timothy 2:9-15 is quite the ride, with dressing modestly to worship God, be quiet, fully submit, no teaching a man, be quiet again, men came first, women sinned first, and only birthing children can save them.
Holy shit. Those are just a few.
But it is true the Old Testament is quite the doozy.
We gotta go back to the good Old Testament for one of my favs (Genesis 19):
Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house. They called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.”
Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him and said, “No, my friends. Don’t do this wicked thing. Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don’t do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof.”
Then later his wife was turned to salt cause she bad (because of course only women do bad things, didn’t yiu know? /s). Then his daughters, who had been spared what you read above, wound up getting their dad drunk and fucking him in a cave to continue the bloodline.
Now, realize this whole story is being told cause Lot was the right God-loving soul they just HAD to save before Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed. Everyone else was “worse?”
The lesson I was taught when I was younger was that Lots daughters were evil and this was in zero way Lots fault (the incest). He apparently didn’t raise them to be that way. You know, with his attitude of “please fuck my daughters and spare the rest.” Somehow their actions were in no way reflective of his character as a father.
Also we ignore the part where he tried to give them away to be raped by an entire town.
Lot’s offer to the mob was meant to be an allegorical lesson on obligations to guests. Basically a hyperbolic ‘this is how far you have go to protect guests in your house.’ In the modern age it would be a hotel clerk holding off a mob with a shotgun or something like that.
I’m not sure if the cave incest had a lesson behind it, but the impetus was his daughters thought they were the last people on earth and were trying to restart the population themselves. I don’t think they were meant to be seen as evil for it.
Thanks for reminding me of one of so many reasons I abandoned the family from my childhood and all their toxic abusive apologists in our schools and churches.
Incredible you’re in here defending throwing your own children to mob rape.
I will tell you from experience that in religious schools and churches they LOVE to obsess over the tiny line of Lots wife looking back and turning to salt, while pretending the other shit didn’t happen or avoiding the topic, or giving it a simple “he was weak or scared” or making it some kind of non-literal thing when convenient (and then other times angrily demanding the Bible is literal).
Allegory or not, Lot is a piece of shit, and it’s unsurprising that a man who would offer his daughters to a mob for rape would also raise them to think sleeping with him is okay. Its reflective of his character; the way they think.
Also, he knew what they did and let it happen. If he was THAT passed out drunk to not remember or know, he was not erect. He fucking knew and let it happen.
Let’s pretend this is merely a story to teach a lesson. Wow. That’s the best they got? This is the kind of guy that is worth saving from the town before destruction? This is what these religions held up at the time as the primo example of someone to save and keep alive? They have no better way to teach lessons about fearing God, much less morality.
Fucking pathetic for anyone to even attempt the apologetics on this.
You’re nine kinds of warped around the axle about this and being pretty nasty to someone who seems to be chill.
Also, as an agnostic atheist raised in some ugly fundamentalism: you’re applying modern views that are out of context to the period. Women and children were basically property. A similar modern view would be towards livestock.
That doesn’t make it okay. This God was just okay with that? Hahaha. Fuck that.
I was also raised in that shit. Of course I’m fucking warped by it.
This shit is fucked up and ANY defense of these scriptures is automatic red flag for hateful bigotry.
You’re trying to chew on the wrong people. No one here is defending anything. Context is being provided.
Organized religion is mostly a poison, especially the fundamentalist version. Also, I get the rage. That shit ate my family.
That being said, I think it’s important to be as accurate as possible in our criticism. Lot’s daughters were offered for gang rape as his visitors were male aspect angels. Warped perspective given modern views. It’s about the duty to visitors and the evil of Sodom. I don’t know the historicity of Sodom and Gomorrah, but the story is almost certainly mostly fictional.
What’s really fucked up is trying to apply Bronze Age morality to the current age and cramming it down children’s throats.
You’re so angry about this shit, but, maybe you should make sure you’re directing that anger at appropriate targets.
In not sure how you see that as a defense. I think you might be projecting your own issues on others.
Well no fucking shit. My own issues are called “the fucking Christian abusers who used this shit against me and anyone else to stave off any responsibility for anything.”
If it hadn’t affected me negatively I’d probably not give a shit what some people’s scripts say.
Everybody must get stoned!
Bob Dylan, Rainy Day Woman.
https://www.songlyrics.com/bob-dylan/everybody-must-get-stoned-lyrics/
What i interpreted is basically if you have gay sex your sentence is to smoke a bunch of weed
that tracks with my lived experience
Can I do it the other way round? Like how people ask for forgiveness before doing the sin
That’s my secret. I’m always high. 😎
Damn…I’m always low.
Like a junkie cosmonaut, beneath a green sheet of glass?
hey hey hey like gettin low
I’m always… Just okay
do you guys live in the same building?
So there I was. Barbeque sauce on my titties.
needs moar jpeg
Iirc Oregon or Colorado legalized pot and gay marriage at virtually the same time. I remember the memes of a freaked out preacher yelling “NO NOT LIKE THAT!!” lol. Good times.
Or have very big balls like stones.
Everyone asks why are you gay? But I want to ask, “Why are you boxer?”.
Yeah, and then Paul and Sosthenes took even that away.
