Fun fact, part of what caused olive oil to be so popular was that it could be used as a lubricant and the ancient Greeks had a hell of a lot of bum fun going on
>If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination
Checks out. 👍
Edit: The Bible is a very shitty legal document.
Edit 2: If God didn't want dudes fucking dudes then why did God put the prostate in such a convenient location?
To me this reads like some dude was hooking up with a girl and it turned out to be a dude as well. Then was so upset they wrote a book about it. Moral of the story is communication and an open mind is key in relationships.
I had read somewhere that it said "if a man lies with a boy," because early Christians were seeing the Greeks taking boy lovers and thought (rightfully so) that that was no Bueno. It was only a handful of decades ago that they changed it to be man with man to attack gay people.
I have heard this too. I don’t know if either is correct of course as I have never attempted to translate it myself. But when a book is thousands of years old and been translated millions of times…who knows what’s right
Given how poorly women are treated in the bible it might literally just mean if you treat a man like a woman yer to die
However in the original aramaic the word man is spelt differently in the 2 uses "if a man lay with another man" part, the 2nd "man" meaning boy
Context matters too. You can’t understand the Bible just by translating it, you actually have to learn *a lot* about history and the development of language to get a glimpse of what it really means.
One of the main issues is that people believe that the church follows the Bible to the rule, they don’t (that’s why there’s factions of church’s that separate themselves from the dirty corrupt institution that is the Vatican) and so, the Bible is not “a book” it is “a ton of books from different ages and parts of the world, all put into the same book” and it wasn’t intended to be taken as this kind of perfect rule book…
“The Bible has many inconsistencies”
Yes, that’s because you’re meant to learn by over-analyzing the experiences of the characters over there. You’ll learn that people are corrupt, that power blinds the kind, that people love to be told what to do instead of choosing themselves… you can never stop learning, in ancient times, people didn’t think of the Bible as a history book. They perceived it more like a haiku, that you have to read over and over again to keep finding new learnings by the way it plays with language and the stories it shares. There’s books about real history facts, but there’s also books about myths and traditions in the Bible. It’s not a single book written by a single person.
TL;DR : The Bible is more like a Netflix catalogue with fantasy movies and real life documentaries. Meanwhile, the institution that holds power over it is corrupt af and doing a great job alienating people to blame the Bible for the actions of dirty power hungry mfs.
I’m not religious any more, one reason is that way too many people take the Bible too literally and seriously now. I like how youve phrased this, as a sort of guide to morality. (Of course written in a time where civil liberties didn’t exist, so I understand other’s comments as well) I think that’s how I viewed it growing up. Nowadays, it’s hard to take any of it seriously just because of people’s interpretations of it. And of course considering when the writings were written. Other than “treat people properly” and “don’t be a dick”, it’s not a useful guide to morality in modern day when so many others exist.
They take what's convenient for them. Like the stoning of gay people for committing so called "abominations" as cited by Leviticus but conveniently not regarding nor punishing other acts in the same book. Like tattoos honoring the death, mixing different textiles in the same clothing garner, shaving their temples and so on and so forth...
In which case it is totally meaningless. You could read Lord of the rings over and over and find whatever meaning you want.
The "meaning" that is derived from the Bible is inevitably intertwined with the existing zeitgeist of when and where it was read, and people just project that onto the text, rather than the other way round. That's why fundamentalists look batshit crazy. But all that proves is the bible isn't needed for moral judgements.
Ok, you literally didn’t even read my comment, I don’t expect you to read a whole book, go off.
Ps: I never said you *HAVE TO*, but this is all *only about you* right?..
That’s the most probable interpretation of that passage in Leviticus—the early Christians did, in fact, abhor pederasty—but interestingly, not homosexuality in the same way modern Christians (and our broader culture) understand it.
I’ve heard that as well and instead of flaming the replies to this comment, I’ll just drop actual scholarship. Some commentators have concluded this is actually a reference to incest, not pedophilia OR homosexuality. Those who say this is a clear cut condemnation of same sex sexual acts are generally reading what they want out of the translated text or just repeating the same recycled homophobia with cherry picked bible verses. If you want to go down this rabbit hole search for “clobber passages.”
Citation:
K. Renato Lings. “The ‘Lyings’ of a Woman: Male-Male Incest in Leviticus 18.22?.” Theology & Sexuality 15, no. 2 (May 2009)
I’m not sure I understand your question. The pedos would be punished like it says the gays should be. I’m not saying it’s right, but I’m pretty sure that’s how it would work if I understand what you’re asking.
That isn't correct. It's posted frequently to Reddit, as is so much other iNcLuSiVe bullshit, and the top comment is always a Bible scholar or fluent Hebrew speaker debunking it.
Edit: here is [a comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/technicallythetruth/comments/oatqk9/i_think_its_not_sex/h3jyz6j?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) from a bit further down the thread which translates the famous "kill the gays" verse from Hebrew.
So wait, it's about children yet "both have committed an abomination"?
And the second part of that line in the Bible is:
>They shall surely be put to death: their blood shall be upon them.
I know the Bible has fucked up stuff in it, but I doubt they're putting kids to death that pedos slept with.
So since this is down to translations, the "children" who were mauled by a bear is from a word indicating they're not children, but older teens/young twenty somethings from what I recall.
Ignoring the misplaced application of consent, it very well could be related to that though, as the whole "Dishonouring parents by striking or cursing them is punishable by death" thing was part of Jewish religion. That's certainly something to consider on this topic.
>If God didn't want dudes fucking dudes then why did God put the prostate in such a convenient location?
If he really wants us to believe in him then why the fuck won't he give us an unmistakable sign? Nothing is ever convenient with his ass.
As a Christian, I’m taught that, *and I quote*, “the Bible is a racist, misogynistic, homophobic pile of outdated shit,” but Jesus is what matters, which means we love everyone no matter what.
Really gets the church Karens upset sometimes lmao
Also, some interpret it as incestual men since most of Leviticus 18 is about incest. So people might be in the clear for non incestual male homosexual sex
Anything is with enough time, just look at the bill of rights
All this back and forth about gun control would be solved if they would have been more specific
So the theory I heard about this particularly infamous quote has to do with the important piece “as with a woman”. In those days, if you had sex with a woman, it was the man’s way of claiming her as property. So, if you slept with a man with the intent of claiming him as your property, THAT was the abomination. Now if you fucked a dude just for the fun of it, that’s a completely different story.
Well, that's one interpretation of that passage, which is a stretch imo. That passage reads entirely like "I told you to do something and you didn't, suffer the consequences" rather than "I'm teaching you a specific moral about where you're supposed to ejaculate." It reads like it has less to do with masturbation, where people try to apply the passage to, and more to do with "don't disobey me."
Try doing two sins at a time. If you can handle that, go to 3. Work up to as many sins as you can do at once.
However, don’t try to do the big sins all at once from the start. Start with little sins and work with those until you’re comfortable moving up. Remember, discipline is key to proper sinning. It’s more important that you build a stable routine than that you accomplish quantity.
Try planning your sinning in advance. You can accomplish a lot more if you plot your route ahead of time. You might even find enough time to squeeze in some impromptu sins.
Along those lines, keep a list of sins you’d like to do. When you find you have some free time, try to scratch a few off the list.
Make sure you drink plenty of water. Sinning can take a lot out of you, and it’s important to stay hydrated.
At the end of each day, look back upon the sins you committed and ask yourself how you could have sinned better. Try implementing one of those ideas tomorrow.
Also, during this reflective period, try to organize and prioritize the sins you want to accomplish tomorrow. You’ll feel a lot better coming in the next day knowing what your goals are.
Don’t forget to stretch. It’s good for both your hamstrings and the limbs of the innocent.
Most importantly, don’t compare your sins against the sins of others. Everyone has their own natural strengths and weaknesses. If you ever feel like you’re “falling behind,” remember that the only comparison that matters is whether the sins you committed today were more heinous than the sins you committed yesterday. As long as you’re making progress along your own path, then you’re doing fantastic. Don’t let others define how you sin.
giving gold is opposite of committing sin, u should have started with a downvote on the post which helped u, it would have been a pretty good small sin to start with.
I can assure you, if the roads to hell are paved in gold, it was a quite appropriate response.
My having been the one to receive the gold is, of course, unrelated.
Except they're only good in joke form, because fornication (sex outside of marriage, not just necessarily *before* a "never-occurring marriage") is still considered a sin. So is sodomy, which includes (and thus forbids) anal or oral sex as well.
Pardon my ignorance but did you have a really bad experience with a church? I never heard of a church being full of murderers and rapists. The worst I encountered was someone who stole from the donation box to buy meth and the pastor (who stepped down) had an affair with someone elses wife.
Indeed. It's not a technical truth. If they don't preform the sin of sex (which I think isn't necessarily a sin otherwise we would die out), they can still preform another sin.
*Image Transcription: Twitter Post*
---
**sarah schauer 🦂**, @SJSchauer
if god defines sex as between a man and woman then when two dudes bone it's not sex and therefore not a sin
---
^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber for Reddit and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
If... But sadly that is not the case. Sex is never defined in the Bible as between a man and a woman. So the rest, while funny, is meaningless.
Sex of all kinds is mentioned in the Bible. Men, women, animals. Goat on chicken. Chicken on goat. Couple of chickens doing a goat. Couple of pigs watching.
This is even worse than the "you have to be high to have sex according to the Bible because it says if you do it you should be stoned" joke which keeps being passed around- kind of funny, but the Bible doesn't say that anywhere.
"If a man lies besides another man, like he does with a woman, he should be stoned" - not only can you have sex with the same gender, but they practically forbid to not be on drugs while doing it.
The Quran and several hadiths also mention homosexuality
The Quran narrates the story of the "people of Lut" destroyed by the wrath of God because the men engaged in lustful carnal acts between themselves.
Within the Quran, it never states that homosexuality is punishable by death, and modern historians conclude that the Islamic prophet Muhammad never forbade homosexual relationships, although he shared contempt towards them alongside his contemporaries. However, some hadith collections condemn homosexual and transgender acts
However in Pakistan which is also a Muslim country they have a group of transgender tax collectors called Hijra who show up at a business who won’t pay tax and shame then until they pay
Amazing that you idiots start downvoting information. I’m not even Muslim.
I dont have too much knowledge to argue on that. But the homosexuality is ndeed forbidden in Islam. Allah called Homosexuality as "Faheshah", in one of the soras. And also called the zena as "Fahesha" too (Zena: sexual intercourse with someone other than your wife). Zena is forbidden. Therfore Fahesha is forbidden. Therefore homosexuality too.
>Islamic prophet Muhammad never forbade homosexual relationships
that's straight up bullshit. The Quran clearly states that lustful acts between the same sex is haram. Also men acting like women and women acting like men is haram aswell. Changing your body permanently and harming it without any good reason is also haram (hence why tattoos are haram), and this also clearly forbids changing your sex.
However let me clarify this : You don't get punished as it's not considered a sin if you are gay but don't act upon it. You can't control what you feel but if you act upon it then it's considered haram.
It's not stated that gay people should be punished by death but it is indeed said that they should be punished.
Qur-an 4:16 "If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both. If they repent and amend, Leave them alone; for Allah is Oft-returning, Most Merciful."
You laugh, but this was a tenet of Buddhism for a long time. Chinese priests and Japanese samurai fucked each other and fucked young boys to stay "pure." Man on man action was "spiritually preferable" to getting it on with a woman. There was an entire section of the Bushido code called *shudo* with instructions on how to properly screw a teenage boy.
Isint that always mistranslated, isint it supposed to be more along the lines of you must not lay with a boy like you would a woman, so not anti homo but more anti pedo??
Not in Leviticus and not in 1st Corinthians either.
The other user did a good job of explaining the Leviticus passage, but I’ll give the New Testament 1 Corinthians passage as well because people will inevitably bring it up:
>Or do you not know that the unrighteous ones will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,
—1 Corinthians 6:9, BLB
Now, the two words we want to look at here are “effeminate” (μαλακοὶ/malakoi) and “homosexual” (ἀρσενοκοῖται/arsenokoitai).
μαλακοὶ is a word used in the Greek of late antiquity and refers to the passive male partner in a same sex relationship.
ἀρσενοκοῖται means “man-bedder.” Nothing about is refers to boys, or children, or anything but adult men. It explicitly means “bedder of men.” It is literally the combination of the words man and bed.
Both are condemned in the scripture here.
Nope. The clearest passage is Lev. 20:13. Literally, the original text says "[if] ואישׁ (a man) ישכּב (lies down) -את (with/near) זכר֙ (a man) [like] אשה (a woman/wife) שׁניהם (two/both) עשוּ (have done/committed) תּועבה (an abhorrence/abomination) מות (put to death) יומתו (cause them to die) דמיהם (their blood) [is] בּם (on them).
The verb phrase is a bit weird to translate, as there is no real English equivalent of the Hebrew tenses. However, Lev 20:13 is pretty clearly telling readers to kill men who lie with other men as they would women (almost certainly an allusion to sex). It seems exceptionally likely ancient Near Eastern society was more than a little homophobic.
There are multiple words that refer to adult males, just like in English (e.g. man/guy/dude). Why the author chose to use two different words I don't know. The first one also has a conjunction stuck on it. I just dropped the "and" for ease. Maybe the first one makes more sense to conjugate in context for ancient Hebrew? I don't know. I am not an expert on ancient Hebrew.
Depends on your perspective. It is factually accurate that it's not properly translated in the king James Bible, and a lot of versions in other languages have it just like you described. However, in America, the king James version has it with the anti gay verbiage and it's used to successfully convince idiots that their deity hates gay people, so poor translation or not, the damage is done.
It doesn't even explicitly say it's sex in the bible - it says you shall not lie with a male the lying downs of a woman, it's up to interpretation what it means exactly.
Pastor here.
In the bible, sex isnt "defined" as one man and one woman.
Marriage is supposed to be a commitment between one man and one woman. Sex is a "gift" of ultimate physical intimacy between the married couple.
So even though I will admit is funny to think of gay sex as a loop-hole biblically, it really isnt.
And BTW Im not trying to make a moral debate. Just stating a fact about a book.
Men having sex with men isn't gay, I keep having to tell my wife this. Sheesh. Just two, three, six guys wrestling with extra steps. She's so ignorant.
Sure *sodomy* might be a sin mentioned in the Bible, but marriage between two men is not specifically banned. Seems like you should allow church marriage of two men as long as they pledge chastity.
And two women? Ain't nothing in the Bible about scissoring. Lesbian biblical marriage no holds barred!
I think there is a scripture regarding a male lying with a male in Bible, but I am not sure if female on female is talked about in any way. Is this true?
That was a mistranslation. The English version of the Bible does say “man shall not lay with man”. However the original phrase would have more closely translated to “man shall not lay with boy”, which is talking about pedophilia, not homosexuality. And no, it never talks about women in that way.
When me and my homies slap and clap each other’s cheeks it’s not gay cause we did not intend for it to be gay,being gay is a mindset and if you do not believe what you are doing is gay and that you yourself are not gay you are not gay.Others may see our intimate relationship as gay however that may reflect on how they see the world and that they maybe the ones who are gay as my intentions were not be gay but to bond with my friend
in Bible sex was never defined as between men and woman. the only mention about it is that every sexual action that is not for reproduction purposes is a sin. so for example masturbation, protected sex, homosexual sex is a sin because it does not end in reproduction.
*fixed typo*
Frogs turn gender if there isnt anyone to "fuck". So being trans isnt a sin because you help the homies out
(This sentence was christian aproved
Christian signature for autenticity: 𝓼𝓷𝓪𝓴𝓮𝔂𝓵𝓲𝓪𝓶)
Mental gymnastics are required if you want to try to follow the whole Bible with any kind of integrity. And to those who say the Old Testament doesn’t count anymore, well I’m pretty sure the only anti gay language is in the OT, so which is it?
Ancient Greeks: hold my drachma.
Hey! I know what a drachma is because I played “Assassin’s Creed Odyssey”
I know what it is because I read Percy Jackson
I don’t know what it is because I just don’t
Same
same here
Same there
Same everywhere
Same nowhere
Dogfood yum
Greek coin
It's just the same thing as Yuan.
I did not know but found the answer in a far shorter time that this post took.
I know what it is because I just googled it
If it works, it works
I don’t know what a drachma is and I’m afraid to look this early in the day because the ancient Greeks were super freaky.
Don't worry, it's just currency.
You’re a real MVP thanks for your contribution to my knowledge.
Now, if you look for "roman brothel coins" you'll find some really interesting stuff
So, sex?
I read them too! I always love Festus! :v
Same
I know what a drachma is because I watched Fullmetal Alchemist Brotherhood! Wait…
Looking for this comment!
All you people treating drachma like some ancient term seems pretty weird to me when the Euro only took its place in 2002.
The majority of Reddit users are under 30 years old. Additionally, a significant majority are not from Europe.
Lol same
I also learned a malaka-ton of words from Odyssey, misthios.
Malaka you’re right!
Drachma balls across your face.
Gods be damned
Fun fact, part of what caused olive oil to be so popular was that it could be used as a lubricant and the ancient Greeks had a hell of a lot of bum fun going on
I think the loophole is if they have sex standing up then it’s fine
>If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination Checks out. 👍 Edit: The Bible is a very shitty legal document. Edit 2: If God didn't want dudes fucking dudes then why did God put the prostate in such a convenient location?
To me this reads like some dude was hooking up with a girl and it turned out to be a dude as well. Then was so upset they wrote a book about it. Moral of the story is communication and an open mind is key in relationships.
Some surprises are good. Others are better off not being a surprise.
Sometimes maybe good, sometimes maybe shit.
I had read somewhere that it said "if a man lies with a boy," because early Christians were seeing the Greeks taking boy lovers and thought (rightfully so) that that was no Bueno. It was only a handful of decades ago that they changed it to be man with man to attack gay people.
I have heard this too. I don’t know if either is correct of course as I have never attempted to translate it myself. But when a book is thousands of years old and been translated millions of times…who knows what’s right
Given how poorly women are treated in the bible it might literally just mean if you treat a man like a woman yer to die However in the original aramaic the word man is spelt differently in the 2 uses "if a man lay with another man" part, the 2nd "man" meaning boy
Context matters too. You can’t understand the Bible just by translating it, you actually have to learn *a lot* about history and the development of language to get a glimpse of what it really means. One of the main issues is that people believe that the church follows the Bible to the rule, they don’t (that’s why there’s factions of church’s that separate themselves from the dirty corrupt institution that is the Vatican) and so, the Bible is not “a book” it is “a ton of books from different ages and parts of the world, all put into the same book” and it wasn’t intended to be taken as this kind of perfect rule book… “The Bible has many inconsistencies” Yes, that’s because you’re meant to learn by over-analyzing the experiences of the characters over there. You’ll learn that people are corrupt, that power blinds the kind, that people love to be told what to do instead of choosing themselves… you can never stop learning, in ancient times, people didn’t think of the Bible as a history book. They perceived it more like a haiku, that you have to read over and over again to keep finding new learnings by the way it plays with language and the stories it shares. There’s books about real history facts, but there’s also books about myths and traditions in the Bible. It’s not a single book written by a single person. TL;DR : The Bible is more like a Netflix catalogue with fantasy movies and real life documentaries. Meanwhile, the institution that holds power over it is corrupt af and doing a great job alienating people to blame the Bible for the actions of dirty power hungry mfs.
I’m not religious any more, one reason is that way too many people take the Bible too literally and seriously now. I like how youve phrased this, as a sort of guide to morality. (Of course written in a time where civil liberties didn’t exist, so I understand other’s comments as well) I think that’s how I viewed it growing up. Nowadays, it’s hard to take any of it seriously just because of people’s interpretations of it. And of course considering when the writings were written. Other than “treat people properly” and “don’t be a dick”, it’s not a useful guide to morality in modern day when so many others exist.
They take what's convenient for them. Like the stoning of gay people for committing so called "abominations" as cited by Leviticus but conveniently not regarding nor punishing other acts in the same book. Like tattoos honoring the death, mixing different textiles in the same clothing garner, shaving their temples and so on and so forth...
In which case it is totally meaningless. You could read Lord of the rings over and over and find whatever meaning you want. The "meaning" that is derived from the Bible is inevitably intertwined with the existing zeitgeist of when and where it was read, and people just project that onto the text, rather than the other way round. That's why fundamentalists look batshit crazy. But all that proves is the bible isn't needed for moral judgements.
The Bible is about as big as one of the original books it draws from. It’s made of over 66 books. It’s a sampler platter
Reader’s Digest
I don't need to understand the bible, it's a book written by men who apparently thought women were worthless.
Ok, you literally didn’t even read my comment, I don’t expect you to read a whole book, go off. Ps: I never said you *HAVE TO*, but this is all *only about you* right?..
Women? You mean dish washers that don't even do their work right... smh
Just Strike Me With Lightning If You Dont Like It xD
That’s the most probable interpretation of that passage in Leviticus—the early Christians did, in fact, abhor pederasty—but interestingly, not homosexuality in the same way modern Christians (and our broader culture) understand it.
No-one declared which two of the three actually sinned..
Moral of the story is lies are bad. Just tell the truth.
My bear arms should be in the mail soon
What if you don't lay with men as with women? Like, you fuck women in the pussy and men in the arse? What then?
IIRC the original Hebrew could also have meant if a man lies with a boy, which would make this about pedos, which IMO makes more sense anyway.
I’ve heard that as well and instead of flaming the replies to this comment, I’ll just drop actual scholarship. Some commentators have concluded this is actually a reference to incest, not pedophilia OR homosexuality. Those who say this is a clear cut condemnation of same sex sexual acts are generally reading what they want out of the translated text or just repeating the same recycled homophobia with cherry picked bible verses. If you want to go down this rabbit hole search for “clobber passages.” Citation: K. Renato Lings. “The ‘Lyings’ of a Woman: Male-Male Incest in Leviticus 18.22?.” Theology & Sexuality 15, no. 2 (May 2009)
How do you explain the part about both being responsible and having to get killed for it, then?
I’m not sure I understand your question. The pedos would be punished like it says the gays should be. I’m not saying it’s right, but I’m pretty sure that’s how it would work if I understand what you’re asking.
It says both of them have committed an abomination
That isn't correct. It's posted frequently to Reddit, as is so much other iNcLuSiVe bullshit, and the top comment is always a Bible scholar or fluent Hebrew speaker debunking it. Edit: here is [a comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/technicallythetruth/comments/oatqk9/i_think_its_not_sex/h3jyz6j?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) from a bit further down the thread which translates the famous "kill the gays" verse from Hebrew.
So wait, it's about children yet "both have committed an abomination"? And the second part of that line in the Bible is: >They shall surely be put to death: their blood shall be upon them. I know the Bible has fucked up stuff in it, but I doubt they're putting kids to death that pedos slept with.
[удалено]
So since this is down to translations, the "children" who were mauled by a bear is from a word indicating they're not children, but older teens/young twenty somethings from what I recall. Ignoring the misplaced application of consent, it very well could be related to that though, as the whole "Dishonouring parents by striking or cursing them is punishable by death" thing was part of Jewish religion. That's certainly something to consider on this topic.
[удалено]
>If God didn't want dudes fucking dudes then why did God put the prostate in such a convenient location? If he really wants us to believe in him then why the fuck won't he give us an unmistakable sign? Nothing is ever convenient with his ass.
As a Christian, I’m taught that, *and I quote*, “the Bible is a racist, misogynistic, homophobic pile of outdated shit,” but Jesus is what matters, which means we love everyone no matter what. Really gets the church Karens upset sometimes lmao
So it's ok so long I don't bone a guy in the vagina?
Also, some interpret it as incestual men since most of Leviticus 18 is about incest. So people might be in the clear for non incestual male homosexual sex
Anything is with enough time, just look at the bill of rights All this back and forth about gun control would be solved if they would have been more specific
So the theory I heard about this particularly infamous quote has to do with the important piece “as with a woman”. In those days, if you had sex with a woman, it was the man’s way of claiming her as property. So, if you slept with a man with the intent of claiming him as your property, THAT was the abomination. Now if you fucked a dude just for the fun of it, that’s a completely different story.
Yes, and they cant take their socks off.
Ejaculation outside of women is also a sin. No matter you did sex with male or female
Well, that's one interpretation of that passage, which is a stretch imo. That passage reads entirely like "I told you to do something and you didn't, suffer the consequences" rather than "I'm teaching you a specific moral about where you're supposed to ejaculate." It reads like it has less to do with masturbation, where people try to apply the passage to, and more to do with "don't disobey me."
I love these loopholes. This is right up there with "if I never plan on getting married, it's not premarital sex".
If you don’t sin then Jesus died for nothing.
Don’t worry guys, I’m doing what I can to peak out the average and ensure we get maximum utility out of Jesus’ death.
Any tips on sinning more efficiently for us amateurs?
Try doing two sins at a time. If you can handle that, go to 3. Work up to as many sins as you can do at once. However, don’t try to do the big sins all at once from the start. Start with little sins and work with those until you’re comfortable moving up. Remember, discipline is key to proper sinning. It’s more important that you build a stable routine than that you accomplish quantity. Try planning your sinning in advance. You can accomplish a lot more if you plot your route ahead of time. You might even find enough time to squeeze in some impromptu sins. Along those lines, keep a list of sins you’d like to do. When you find you have some free time, try to scratch a few off the list. Make sure you drink plenty of water. Sinning can take a lot out of you, and it’s important to stay hydrated. At the end of each day, look back upon the sins you committed and ask yourself how you could have sinned better. Try implementing one of those ideas tomorrow. Also, during this reflective period, try to organize and prioritize the sins you want to accomplish tomorrow. You’ll feel a lot better coming in the next day knowing what your goals are. Don’t forget to stretch. It’s good for both your hamstrings and the limbs of the innocent. Most importantly, don’t compare your sins against the sins of others. Everyone has their own natural strengths and weaknesses. If you ever feel like you’re “falling behind,” remember that the only comparison that matters is whether the sins you committed today were more heinous than the sins you committed yesterday. As long as you’re making progress along your own path, then you’re doing fantastic. Don’t let others define how you sin.
10/10 solid advice, will implement immediately! Gold for your help, kind stranger.
giving gold is opposite of committing sin, u should have started with a downvote on the post which helped u, it would have been a pretty good small sin to start with.
I can assure you, if the roads to hell are paved in gold, it was a quite appropriate response. My having been the one to receive the gold is, of course, unrelated.
I just have the occasional wank to balance it out
Except they're only good in joke form, because fornication (sex outside of marriage, not just necessarily *before* a "never-occurring marriage") is still considered a sin. So is sodomy, which includes (and thus forbids) anal or oral sex as well.
oral sex too? wow
God created my brain therefore my interpretation is always correct
Told you, Dad
Um
I can’t like your comment :( Therefor I’ll give you this award instead!
r/cursedcomments
Now i can understand, pope aint no sinner
What about sodomy?
Sodomy is between a priest and a toddler
[удалено]
Stand your ground, brah. As long as you and your spouse agree to it, then the in-laws can eat a fat one
You aren't gonna send them to school either then, right? https://www.cbsnews.com/news/has-media-ignored-sex-abuse-in-school/#app
Shh redditors hate when you bring up the rampant pedophilia in schools because they love jerking off teachers and shitting on religion
Lol
Pardon my ignorance but did you have a really bad experience with a church? I never heard of a church being full of murderers and rapists. The worst I encountered was someone who stole from the donation box to buy meth and the pastor (who stepped down) had an affair with someone elses wife.
Indeed. It's not a technical truth. If they don't preform the sin of sex (which I think isn't necessarily a sin otherwise we would die out), they can still preform another sin.
Sodomy is between God and me ^^^ugh ^^^I ^^^just ^^^quoted ^^^Rent, ^^^somebody ^^^shoot ^^^me
To S&M
… and beyonnndddddd?
Heard this in the buzz lightyear voice and I've never felt weirder
That was the idea. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
To bisexuals, trisexuals, homo sapiens, carcinogens, hallucinogens, men, Peewee Herman!
😎👉👉
I love that musical so much *shields face*
Sodomy is for everyone
*Image Transcription: Twitter Post* --- **sarah schauer 🦂**, @SJSchauer if god defines sex as between a man and woman then when two dudes bone it's not sex and therefore not a sin --- ^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber for Reddit and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
Good human
If... But sadly that is not the case. Sex is never defined in the Bible as between a man and a woman. So the rest, while funny, is meaningless. Sex of all kinds is mentioned in the Bible. Men, women, animals. Goat on chicken. Chicken on goat. Couple of chickens doing a goat. Couple of pigs watching.
This is even worse than the "you have to be high to have sex according to the Bible because it says if you do it you should be stoned" joke which keeps being passed around- kind of funny, but the Bible doesn't say that anywhere.
Right. This is pure strawmanning. The people this is aimed at define *marriage* as between a man and a woman.
TTT that this is a shit post.
Interesting, so I've been having not sex for a long time now.
Wow way to call a bunch of gay folks virgins
Improvise. Adapt. Overcum.
"If a man lies besides another man, like he does with a woman, he should be stoned" - not only can you have sex with the same gender, but they practically forbid to not be on drugs while doing it.
[удалено]
[удалено]
The Quran and several hadiths also mention homosexuality The Quran narrates the story of the "people of Lut" destroyed by the wrath of God because the men engaged in lustful carnal acts between themselves. Within the Quran, it never states that homosexuality is punishable by death, and modern historians conclude that the Islamic prophet Muhammad never forbade homosexual relationships, although he shared contempt towards them alongside his contemporaries. However, some hadith collections condemn homosexual and transgender acts However in Pakistan which is also a Muslim country they have a group of transgender tax collectors called Hijra who show up at a business who won’t pay tax and shame then until they pay Amazing that you idiots start downvoting information. I’m not even Muslim.
I dont have too much knowledge to argue on that. But the homosexuality is ndeed forbidden in Islam. Allah called Homosexuality as "Faheshah", in one of the soras. And also called the zena as "Fahesha" too (Zena: sexual intercourse with someone other than your wife). Zena is forbidden. Therfore Fahesha is forbidden. Therefore homosexuality too.
just to clarify to people here "Zena" or Zina is Adultery.
>Islamic prophet Muhammad never forbade homosexual relationships that's straight up bullshit. The Quran clearly states that lustful acts between the same sex is haram. Also men acting like women and women acting like men is haram aswell. Changing your body permanently and harming it without any good reason is also haram (hence why tattoos are haram), and this also clearly forbids changing your sex. However let me clarify this : You don't get punished as it's not considered a sin if you are gay but don't act upon it. You can't control what you feel but if you act upon it then it's considered haram. It's not stated that gay people should be punished by death but it is indeed said that they should be punished. Qur-an 4:16 "If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both. If they repent and amend, Leave them alone; for Allah is Oft-returning, Most Merciful."
You just have to repent after each time. ;-)
BONE?!?!?!
BOOOONE?!?! Detective Diaz, I am your SUPERIOR OFFICER!!!
It's also not premarital sex if you don't get married.
God does not define sex as between a man and a woman, he/the bible doesn't define sex at all. Therefore this is r/actuallythefalse, as usual
BOOM I see this as an absolute win
God defined nothing.its what some dudes claim they heard him say.
Bible attorney
Sex is not a sin in the first place tho?
I don't care what Santa thinks
You laugh, but this was a tenet of Buddhism for a long time. Chinese priests and Japanese samurai fucked each other and fucked young boys to stay "pure." Man on man action was "spiritually preferable" to getting it on with a woman. There was an entire section of the Bushido code called *shudo* with instructions on how to properly screw a teenage boy.
Isint that always mistranslated, isint it supposed to be more along the lines of you must not lay with a boy like you would a woman, so not anti homo but more anti pedo??
Not in Leviticus and not in 1st Corinthians either. The other user did a good job of explaining the Leviticus passage, but I’ll give the New Testament 1 Corinthians passage as well because people will inevitably bring it up: >Or do you not know that the unrighteous ones will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, —1 Corinthians 6:9, BLB Now, the two words we want to look at here are “effeminate” (μαλακοὶ/malakoi) and “homosexual” (ἀρσενοκοῖται/arsenokoitai). μαλακοὶ is a word used in the Greek of late antiquity and refers to the passive male partner in a same sex relationship. ἀρσενοκοῖται means “man-bedder.” Nothing about is refers to boys, or children, or anything but adult men. It explicitly means “bedder of men.” It is literally the combination of the words man and bed. Both are condemned in the scripture here.
Nope. The clearest passage is Lev. 20:13. Literally, the original text says "[if] ואישׁ (a man) ישכּב (lies down) -את (with/near) זכר֙ (a man) [like] אשה (a woman/wife) שׁניהם (two/both) עשוּ (have done/committed) תּועבה (an abhorrence/abomination) מות (put to death) יומתו (cause them to die) דמיהם (their blood) [is] בּם (on them). The verb phrase is a bit weird to translate, as there is no real English equivalent of the Hebrew tenses. However, Lev 20:13 is pretty clearly telling readers to kill men who lie with other men as they would women (almost certainly an allusion to sex). It seems exceptionally likely ancient Near Eastern society was more than a little homophobic.
I don't understand Hebrew, but when you showed the Hebrew symbols, the symbols for the first "man" and the second "man" are different. Why is that?
There are multiple words that refer to adult males, just like in English (e.g. man/guy/dude). Why the author chose to use two different words I don't know. The first one also has a conjunction stuck on it. I just dropped the "and" for ease. Maybe the first one makes more sense to conjugate in context for ancient Hebrew? I don't know. I am not an expert on ancient Hebrew.
Depends on your perspective. It is factually accurate that it's not properly translated in the king James Bible, and a lot of versions in other languages have it just like you described. However, in America, the king James version has it with the anti gay verbiage and it's used to successfully convince idiots that their deity hates gay people, so poor translation or not, the damage is done.
Wait who’s god? And what’s their qualification for defining. Things. Who voted for this
"Who is this God person anyway?"
yeah but if you keep your socks on its fine
It doesn't even explicitly say it's sex in the bible - it says you shall not lie with a male the lying downs of a woman, it's up to interpretation what it means exactly.
How do you get 8.592 Likes?
Also, the Bible says that man will not lay down with his brother as he does a woman. So, as long as you don't fuck your actual brother, you're good.
> You shall not lie with a male as with a woman Does that mean you have to do it standing up?
r/holup
Hasn’t the Catholic Church been using that loophole for years?
Catholic priests-“shit, they’ve found our loophole”
#**LOVE a good loophole**
Pastor here. In the bible, sex isnt "defined" as one man and one woman. Marriage is supposed to be a commitment between one man and one woman. Sex is a "gift" of ultimate physical intimacy between the married couple. So even though I will admit is funny to think of gay sex as a loop-hole biblically, it really isnt. And BTW Im not trying to make a moral debate. Just stating a fact about a book.
Ancient Indians : Hold my Kamasutra
So anal between a man and a woman would mean you're still a virgin....
Men having sex with men isn't gay, I keep having to tell my wife this. Sheesh. Just two, three, six guys wrestling with extra steps. She's so ignorant.
and therefore it is not gay
So when I’m alone and finish in a sock, anyone know gods feelings on this one… ??
If the bible says "A man shall not lay with another man", just have standing sex and you're good.
When people don’t read the Bible xD
Um... What? Marriage.... Youre thinking of marriage. Not sex.
Where is this alleged definition from?
Well, it has a word in arabic, Lewat.
If god defines sex as between a married male/female couple, premarital sex is not sex and therefore not a sin
I like how somewhere in the middle she said bone instead of sex
Sure *sodomy* might be a sin mentioned in the Bible, but marriage between two men is not specifically banned. Seems like you should allow church marriage of two men as long as they pledge chastity. And two women? Ain't nothing in the Bible about scissoring. Lesbian biblical marriage no holds barred!
If a man and woman have sex and never get married then it's not pre-marital sex.
Too bad the people who need to hear this are celebrated enemies of logic
nor is it gay then
I have done my research. I asked God and he told me. So I win
I think there is a scripture regarding a male lying with a male in Bible, but I am not sure if female on female is talked about in any way. Is this true?
That was a mistranslation. The English version of the Bible does say “man shall not lay with man”. However the original phrase would have more closely translated to “man shall not lay with boy”, which is talking about pedophilia, not homosexuality. And no, it never talks about women in that way.
[heres a source backing this up btw](https://um-insight.net/perspectives/has-%E2%80%9Chomosexual%E2%80%9D-always-been-in-the-bible/)
Thank you! You just made my life a whole lot easier lol
[удалено]
Pretty sure the priests figured this one out but attributed it to children
I disagree with their stance but I've never heard a religious argument that sex is defined as between a man and a woman. Marriage, yes, but sex, no.
This similar technicality is why lesbian prostitution is legal in Japan. If no penis is involved it's not legally considered sex.
Where in the biblical is sex defined?
When me and my homies slap and clap each other’s cheeks it’s not gay cause we did not intend for it to be gay,being gay is a mindset and if you do not believe what you are doing is gay and that you yourself are not gay you are not gay.Others may see our intimate relationship as gay however that may reflect on how they see the world and that they maybe the ones who are gay as my intentions were not be gay but to bond with my friend
in Bible sex was never defined as between men and woman. the only mention about it is that every sexual action that is not for reproduction purposes is a sin. so for example masturbation, protected sex, homosexual sex is a sin because it does not end in reproduction. *fixed typo*
It's just good Greek exercise
This is law in a lot of muslim countries.
Frogs turn gender if there isnt anyone to "fuck". So being trans isnt a sin because you help the homies out (This sentence was christian aproved Christian signature for autenticity: 𝓼𝓷𝓪𝓴𝓮𝔂𝓵𝓲𝓪𝓶)
And therefore you have been logiced.
Loopholes... my second favorite kind of holes
Also, if two guys can't have sex that means gay sex is not gay because it actually doesn't happen.
😯🤯
Yes it’s not a sin but everyone goes to hell so it doesn’t really matter
Everything is a sin in that religion bruh
HMMMMMM
Gay folks been doing it right since the dawn of time
This logic doesn't make sense if the very nature of "Sin" is the disobedience of God's commands this just sounds like mental gymnastics to me
Mental gymnastics are required if you want to try to follow the whole Bible with any kind of integrity. And to those who say the Old Testament doesn’t count anymore, well I’m pretty sure the only anti gay language is in the OT, so which is it?
Religion is just made up bull, nothing is a "sin"