Quran (7:80-84) - "...For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds.... And we rained down on them a shower (of brimstone)" - An account that is borrowed from the Biblical story of Sodom. Muslim scholars through the centuries have interpreted the "rain of stones" on the town as meaning that homosexuals should be stoned, since no other reason is given for the people's destruction. (Inexplicably, the story is also repeated in three other suras: 15:74, 27:58 and 29:40). Quran (7:81) - "Will ye commit abomination such as no creature ever did before you?" This verse is part of the previous text establishing that homosexuality as different from (and much worse than) adultery or other sexual sin. According to the Arabic grammar, homosexuality is called the worst sin, while references elsewhere describe other forms of non-marital sex as being "among great sins." Quran (26:165-166) - "Of all the creatures in the world, will ye approach males, "And leave those whom Allah has created for you to be your mates? Nay, ye are a people transgressing" Quran (4:16) - "If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both. If they repent and amend, Leave them alone" This is the Yusuf Ali translation. The original Arabic does not use the word "men" and simply says "two from among you." Yusuf Ali may have added the word "men" because the verse seems to refer to a different set than referred to in the prior verse (explicitly denoted as "your women"). In other words, since 4:15 refers to "your women", 4:16 is presumably written to and refers to men Now back to Christianity...
No biggie. I’ve read the Koran and the Bible several times so it was easy to unearth. Muslims are a huge part of European culture right now though so I’m wondering how long they will be tolerant of the practice here.
In France, I have that the impression that the gap between native and muslims tend to widden with time. There was poll that was published that said that 28 % of muslims thought the law of islam as superior than the one of the republic. That's a minority, but still more than one million people, if not two. I have already discussed with french muslims (only on the internet however) that thought that homosexuality should be punished by death. Between the leftists that want to "deconstruct gender norms" and those one, there is quite a discrepancy. Quite ironic when the first take side of the second. I gave up to discuss the matter with progressive, they're too dogmatic to be able to approach the issue. It's mostly true for western Europe, eastern europe stayed more homogeneous on a religious and ethnic point of view.
Belgium is the European country most likely to become majority Muslim and as such may be the first to introduce laws far less secular. Eastern Europe would be far more likely to oppose that violently.
It's possible there is taqiyah, but honnestly, I don't think that people care anymore to hide anymore their opinions, quite the opposite, there is clearly a sense of pride about that.
Merkel after realizing what a huge mistake she’d made in offering to take in so many Syrian refugees, tried to make the first European country they arrived in the one responsible. The Eastern European countries didn’t want any part of that. I personally think this is also a huge reason for Brexit and my British friends agree. But I’m getting off track.
He may have a point. 'Sodomy' literally means 'the sin of Sodom'. 'The sin of Sodom' is presumed to be homosexuality because of the story in Genesis where the men of Sodom tried to forcibly have their way with two 'men' who were also messengers of God. But those messengers were sent to Sodom because it was already a wicked place. So what, precisely, the 'sin of Sodom' was, it may not have actually or simply been homosexuality. It could just as easily be rape in general, inhospitality, pride, domination, war or something not even mentioned. Certainly the Bible indicates that God is no fan of homosexuality, but it doesn't necessarily define 'sodomy' as homosexuality, nor iirc, does it ever literally say that homosexuality in-and-of-itself is even a sin.
Not that I've seen. Keeping in mind that 'sin' is very precise thing. There are things God doesn't like, things that are unhealthy, unwise, and things that are likely to lead to sin, but not literally defined as sin. Like drinking, gambling and premarital sex, and so far as I can tell, homosexuality.
The men of Sodom referred to them as 'men.' They may not have been men, but they were percieved as men. I wouldn't say 'more likely', but at least as likely.
You made some good points, however, it was Paul who started the Christian religion,. He was the first to write about the Jesus character and he created most of the worship rituals. The main one that fell out was the proxy baptism of the dead but I think the Mormons still practice that. Paul made resurrection the main focus of Christianity and said that if the dead are not resurrected then he was just spewing BS. How many people have ever been resurrected from the dead on this planet? The idea is very popular in zombie movies but not in reality.
Technically, homosexuality activity is considered to be a form of sexual immorality. According to the biblical fairy tale, people who engage in sexual immoral activities will not be able to get into the golden cube = Revelation 21:8. The important thing to remember is that if you believe in some of it then you must believe in all of it or else you are not a true believer. But then, there has never been one true believer because not one person has ever been able to do what the Jesus character said a person of faith can do.
In the literal translation (YLT, direct trans from earliest credible document to english) of the Bible, Rev 21:8 says "8 and to fearful, and unstedfast, and abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all the liars, their part [is] in the lake that is burning with fire and brimstone, which is a second death.' Which version are you quoting? On what do you base "homosexuality activity is considered to be a form of sexual immorality"? Iirc, I've seen them listed together, but not actually equated. And would you please cite another source for "sexually immoral activities will not be able to get into [presumably: heaven]"? The one you cited seems to have been presumed by later translators (which I believe is precisely the point OP was making). FTR: there is scholarly debate as to whether 'whoremongering' refers to 'johning' or 'pimping' or both, leaving the possibility that it isn't the sex or the transaction that is damning, but rather the force involved in sex slavery.
Well that demonstrates the point that OP is making (and that I agree with) that the Bible does not actually define homosexuality as a sin, but rather humans have since translated it that way. I havn't read all of the YLT, but I've read enough to know that some things were altered from the ancient scripts that align with social/political agendas through the ages.
Paul effectively made Christianity a worldwide religion. However he seems to be kind of angry I’m his writings and views sex as suspect. Some psychologists say he was likely a non practicing homosexual based on his writings. You are correct. He did support proxy baptisms and this is clearly biblical but Protestants and Catholics say that this is not to be taken literally???
If you really wanted to know how the original story was written you would have to read the master copy, the Codex Amiatinus = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Amiatinus Do you read Latin?
Except even that is a translation from the ancient hebrew, mycenian greek, ancient greek and aramaic manuscripts. YLT is a direct translation from those earlier manuscripts to modern (or modern enough) english. Point taken though. How do I know YLT is an accurate translation if I don't speak ancient greek, ancient hebrew, etc? I don't. I've translated a handful of the more commonly mistranslated passages myself (via internet resources) and they line up. Until I start finding ones that don't some things require some faith. The trick is to allow faith to evolve with objective observation. For example, I used to believe the NIV Bible was entirely accurate. Its close on the big stuff, but fails in the minutia, as does KJV and etc. Perhaps YLT may as well. It hasn't yet.
That's correct. But, the current LGBTQ crowd doesn't understand these historical facts. They are simply trying to justify their sins.
