I did give the Hebrew word and added the Greek parallel in parens.
![]() |
How far back do you want to go? We can trace the text back well over 2,000 years now and can see no changes other than things like word spelling changes, a missing letter here or there, and that sort of thing.
No other ancient document can boast of an accuracy even remotely close, and so much evidence to back it up by means of tens of thousands of manuscripts from varied sources.
You should study the evidence. It would boggle you mind to see how accurately the documents have been copied.
BTW - your reference to "translation" is not relevant. The original text was copied, and then subsequently translated. We do not need to depend upon the translation - we can go back to the original language.
Really? I can see only one case in which that could be true - the victim of homosexual rape. Past that,
Or do you have your own definition of homosexual
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Homosexual
Adjective
1. sexually attracted to members of your own sex [ant: bisexual, heterosexual]
Noun
1. someone who practices homosexuality; having a sexual attraction to persons of the same sex
WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Prison rape has everything to do with power/control and very little, if anything, to do with sex.
***ADDED -- Gang rape during gang initiation of both females and males is the same kind of thing. There are many instances of rape of males and females and even children during war, after a country has been conquered, etc.
Ignoring your claim to be able to read the minds of others, the definition of "homosexual" does not contain any reference regarding why they do it, therefore your claims are not germaine to the definition of the word.
Added to that, a male who was not interested in another male would be unable to perform a sex act on another man.
This is outright HOGWASH. There are tons of variant readings in the manuscript tradition and many of them are substantial.
That anyone claiming to have studied that history of the Bible and its transmission could say such a thing is just embarrassing. There is a massive cottage industry devoted to the problems associated with the Bible's transmission, and there are catalogues of the variant mss. Readings.
The manuscript traditions is a MESS!
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:29 PM. |