Muslim Judicial Council issues short fatwa on homosexuality

[Gyre]

Pigeon chess

 

[Craig_]

Look up my post on water legally having to be served. Even the section number is included...

I'm sure you're smarter than this. I told you I don’t have access to my computer with it on so you need to post it here. Or an extract of it. But it's fine, I'll check layer today.

 

[Neptuner]

Only when you're closed minded to other interpretations of the bible

This is not about accepting or rejecting interpretations per say, look at Tutu's understanding which is diametrically opposed to what the bible explicitly states.

and the ongoing transformation of religions.

Ok...

Tutu accepting homosexuality is not in contradiction to the bible or his religion.

It's not? the bible is quite explicit on this...

It may contradict your interpretation of the bible,

If this matter was vague or doubtful then perhaps it would hold water. But in this instance the bible's verses are explicit on the matter, if you interpret the bible to be doubtful regarding homosexuality then clearly you distorting the verses to suit a new desired meaning and as we can see the new meaning opposes condemnation and punishment but rather interprets it to accept homosexuality by using other verses of acceptance out of context.

and it may contradict the majority of Christian interpretations,

Ok, as it left very little room for misinterpretation but we can see in Tutu’s case fear of political backlash was a motivator

even within his own church, but that is not the religion and he was not rejected for his interpretations, he was respected.

He was respected by people for distorting what he deemed the word of god? it would be deemed vain if he misconstrued the verses due to fear or favour...

Now ask yourself this if Tutu's god explicitly forbids homosexuality and he misconstrued this prohibition into acceptance, what does this mean in principle?
It means he has meddled in his own god's affairs, so in essence those who follow him in this would indirectly accepting him as god...

He was an Anglican bishop and as such was part of a denomination that is accepting of homosexuality in many parts of the world, even if it's not everywhere.

Provide proof his bible accepts homosexuality, other than mirroring his distorted interpretations. You are aware interpretations are not proof in itself? quote chapter and verse please.

So no contradiction, he was not a lone voice in the church.

Not being alone does not really do much to strengthen an argument, you've taken the position that he is not contradicting the bible then please substantiate. The below references are insufficient to say the least. But I got the gist of it which really appeals to a target audience and does not discuss the core of what we debating.

Homosexuality and the Anglican Communion - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So where is the contradiction to religion?

What Does the Bible Say About Homosexuality?

The Bible says nothing about 'homosexuality' as an innate dimension of personality. Sexual orientation was not understood in biblical times.

www.hrc.org

Again, interpretations of the bible.

 

[Neptuner]

How would you know what the original teachings were?

You can't

The earliest manuscripts of the old testament is atleast 1000 years after Moses. It's not complete and the authors are unknown and we have nothing to independently verify its authenticity.

The earliest bible is not available in the original Hebrew, rather Greek ...

The new testament authors are seemingly not direct eye witnesses to Jesus's gospel, so that's another problem.

St Paul compiled the scripture which was a generation after the disciples...

This is all irrelevant to the bishop misconstruing the verses due to political backlash.

 

[saturnz]

St Paul compiled the scripture which was a generation after the disciples...

thats probably the most generous description of what happened

 

[C4Cat]

This is not about accepting or rejecting interpretations per say, look at Tutu's understanding which is diametrically opposed to what the bible explicitly states.

It's not? the bible is quite explicit on this...

Please show where in the bible it explicitly states that homosexuality is unacceptable to god. The original bible would better of course, since we know it has changed many times of the centuries for political reasons and also that much was lost in translation.

Please also tell us how it is that you do things the bible explicitly forbids, without so much as blinking your eye, but get all uptight about homosexuality.

Provide proof his bible accepts homosexuality, other than mirroring his distorted interpretations. You are aware interpretations are not proof in itself? quote chapter and verse please.

The bible barely mentions homosexuality at all. It just wasn't an issue

 

[Neptuner]

Please show where in the bible it explicitly states that homosexuality is unacceptable to god.

You deflecting, you failed to provide the proof requested. Here:
Leviticus 18:22
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.
Now explain to me how does Tutu reconcile his god's mercy with this verse, please enlighten me... please articulate don't post several websites

The original bible would better of course, since we know it has changed many times of the centuries for political reasons and also that much was lost in translation.

Lets not delve into changes, you take your pick on any version. Point of discussion is not the origin or changes of the bible. You can even look up which bible Tutu frequented.

Please also tell us how it is that you do things the bible explicitly forbids, without so much as blinking your eye, but get all uptight about homosexuality.

This is not about me contain yourself now, don't get all emotional now

The bible barely mentions homosexuality at all.

LOL You clearly in denial or just misinformed. I'm leaning toward latter.

It just wasn't an issue

Why do you think that is? LOL

 

[ponder]

Please show where in the bible it explicitly states that homosexuality is unacceptable to god. The original bible would better of course, since we know it has changed many times of the centuries for political reasons and also that much was lost in translation.

Leviticus in the old testament which goes back to the jewish torah.

 

[C4Cat]

You deflecting, you failed to provide the proof requested. Here:
Leviticus 18:22
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

That is an incorrect translation of Leviticus 18:22
The original Hebrew was:
וְאֶ֨ת־זָכָ֔ר לֹ֥א תִשְׁכַּ֖ב מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה תּֽוֹעֵבָ֖ה הִֽוא:

translated in common English versions as:

"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." King James Version
"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination." Revised Standard Version and English Standard Version
"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination." New American Bible

1) Lesbianism is perfectly acceptable according to this, so homosexuality is not outright condemned by the bible.
2) It says "thou shalt not..," or "You shall not" - so if it is a woman reading the verse does that mean she should not lie with a male as with a female?
3) What does lie with a male as with a woman specifically mean? Is it a prohibition of penetrative sex specifically? mishkav zakur or “lie with a male” is also used in the bible to distinguish women who are virgins from those who are not, which indicates it refers to penetrative sex so what about other forms of sexual pleasure between men aside from anal sex? Is it a prohibition on two men sharing a bed? What about two men simply being in love?

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Heretical teachings do not change the original teachings.

According to Islam, any re-interpretation of the Quran from the Arabic version is Haram and strictly forbidden. Suggest you go try tell Islam it needs a reformation.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

If you read the bible.
You would know you are spouting nonsense.
You are intentionally poisoning a debate.

Which are the original languages of the bible? And I can point out many mistakes in the Greek and Hebrew translations to other languages. So, is everything in the bible correct then?

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Heretical teachings do not change the original teachings.

Which are the original teachings then?

The King James version of the Holy Bible was completed in 1611 by 8 members of the Church of England.

There were (and still are) no original texts to translate. The oldest manuscripts we have were written down hundreds of years after the last apostle died. There are over 8000 of these manuscripts, no two alike.

The King James translators used none of these, anyway. Instead, they edited previous translations to create a version their King and parliament would approve.

So, 21st century Christians believe the "Word of God" is a book edited in the 17th century from 16th century translations of 8000 contradictory copies of 4th century scrolls that claim to be copies of lost letters written in the 1st century.

 

[Gyre]

Which are the original teachings then?

The King James version of the Holy Bible was completed in 1611 by 8 members of the Church of England.

There were (and still are) no original texts to translate. The oldest manuscripts we have were written down hundreds of years after the last apostle died. There are over 8000 of these manuscripts, no two alike.

The King James translators used none of these, anyway. Instead, they edited previous translations to create a version their King and parliament would approve.

So, 21st century Christians believe the "Word of God" is a book edited in the 17th century from 16th century translations of 8000 contradictory copies of 4th century scrolls that claim to be copies of lost letters written in the 1st century.

They believe the word of the word of the word of the word of the Word of God

 

[Gyre]

Leviticus in the old testament which goes back to the jewish torah.

But why are Jews not executing/punishing homosexuals in Israel?

 

[ponder]

But why are Jews not executing/punishing homosexuals in Israel?

They're a bit more enlightened than their neighbours.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory#West_Asia

 

[Gyre]

They're a bit more enlightened than their neighbours.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory#West_Asia

I know that, but how can they be if the Torah is central to their core belief? Obviously Israel should be wrong like Tutu is?

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Leviticus in the old testament which goes back to the jewish torah.

Of course. The book in which most laws about menstruation, killing of women and killing of police officers, hospital staff and anyone else that work on the Sabbath are ignored but the single text calling homosexuality an abomination is trumpeted.

 

[berrypi]

Let each one express their opinion.. and that is it.. their opinion. Ya'all out trying to prove "your" opinion is correct... anyone here study any of these texts over years? no? yes? no? but you all know better? best you all sit down.

If its your opinion... good! stand for what you believe in, but it doesnt make the other person wrong either....

"opinions.... disproving facts since 1000BC"

 

[daveza]

Of course. The book in which most laws about menstruation, killing of women and killing of police officers, hospital staff and anyone else that work on the Sabbath are ignored but the single text calling homosexuality an abomination is trumpeted.

Cherry-picking 101.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Let each one express their opinion.. and that is it.. their opinion. Ya'all out trying to prove "your" opinion is correct... anyone here study any of these texts over years? no? yes? no? but you all know better? best you all sit down.

If its your opinion... good! stand for what you believe in, but it doesnt make the other person wrong either....

"opinions.... disproving facts since 1000BC"

The problem starts when someone's opinion starts affecting me, my way of life, or someone else's way of life and their opinion is enforced as if it comes from some divine being and is not up for discussion but requires strict obedience or consequences for not adhering to the opinion start getting implemented.