Posted by jonathon on August 30, 1999 at 13:59:32:
I am familiar with the sources you are citing,
let me see if I can lend something here. your second time
son in law argument is weak because David asked the question.
A better point would be that Malachi 2:14 and Proverbs 2:17 use
covenant like Jonathon and David to mean marriage for a man and a
woman. (Check John Boswell's later book)
Next is for your other skeptics
This is the one that seems most convincing:
Lev. 18:21-22 and Lev.20::13 are often cited as proof that
'it' is a sin. These verses I was surprised to learn are literally
mistranslated as mankind and scholars know it. The actual word zahchahr
should be translated male. This implies boy. In Gen. 17:10,12,14,23-27, one
can clearly see that the word is contrasted with man to mean boy in Hebrew.
Apparantly when used in certain contexts this word means boy.
(Prof. Robin Scroggs appears to have caught on to this with regard to Romans 1 as well.
The Greek follows a similiar pattern. Prof. Boswell apparantly never figured this
out before he died.)
For more proof see Lev. 6:18, 29, 7:6, 12:2, also Judges 21:11-12.
The phrases in the KJV like all the males among the men
or all the males among the priests show age distinction.
Joel 3:3-8 makes the boy argument even stronger.
Deuteronmy 23:17 proves the sin was both male and female prostitution;
however, Lev. also mentions sacrificing sons and again likely pedastry.
I say likely because this is more than the opponents who were dishonest to
all of us when they mistranslated the literal words in Leviticus as mankind.
nowhere else in the entire bible is it translated as such. This is close to
academic dishonesty on scholars part. The Jonothan and David relationship may well
disprove the Adam and Steve slogan that everyone has heard.
However, aberrant behavior such as men wearing womens garment is clear condemned.
The word sodomy and sodomite are made up words by sholars and never appear in the
Hebrew text, these words should be translated the actual word for male prostitute in Hebrew
Ancient culture, language and historical context all appear to support the the notion that
adult male relationships were not mentioned as a sin in the old testament. Miscegination with
angels (Jude 1:6-7, Gen 6:4) seems to be the best expanation for Sodom and Gomarrah. The new testament
translation appears to be off too. When Esau sold his bithright he was called a fornicatior, proving the
word means 'to sell' in the root. The word for lust(forbidden desire) appears to be a reference to temple
prostitution as well.Worshiping the creature is clearly the devil (as in Romans 8:38-39), not man.
They were disobedient to parents indicating Romans 1 was discussing children. The better translation for
timothy and corinthians verses is adulters, whoremongers (those who pay), call boys (palace sex slaves wore "soft"
royal clothing) and male prositutes.
I hope this helps those who are confused or angry about this issue.