Now I finally get it
-
This post did not contain any content.
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/
-
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.
-
That's my secret. I'm always high.
Damn.....I'm always low.
-
Damn.....I'm always low.
Like a junkie cosmonaut, beneath a green sheet of glass?
-
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.
wrote last edited by [email protected]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.
-
Damn.....I'm always low.
do you guys live in the same building?
-
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, 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.
-
Damn.....I'm always low.
I'm always.. Just okay
-
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.
wrote last edited by [email protected]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.
-
Like a junkie cosmonaut, beneath a green sheet of glass?
hey hey hey like gettin low
-
This post did not contain any content.
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.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Or have very big balls like stones.
-
This post did not contain any content.
What i interpreted is basically if you have gay sex your sentence is to smoke a bunch of weed
-
This post did not contain any content.
Yeah, and then Paul and Sosthenes took even that away.
-
This post did not contain any content.
needs moar jpeg
-
This post did not contain any content.
Everyone asks why are you gay? But I want to ask, "Why are you boxer?".
-
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.
-
do you guys live in the same building?
So there I was. Barbeque sauce on my titties.
-
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.
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.
-
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"?
