The Pope is coming to UK to campaign against equality: Does this make him a respectable leader of faith or a bigot?

[Strix]

What do you think?

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8492597.stm

Making an analogy between homosexual acts and murder (explicitly forbidden by the 10 commandments and the law of the land) is rather too extreme don't you think? How about this:

'Your argument would indeed work if you replaced the word 'gay' with something else that the Bible clearly states is not acceptable such as '....judging others.

There's all sorts of things the bible states are unacceptable much more clearly than it pronounces on homosexuality.

Motes and beams.

"So what we seem to be saying is it is open to interpretation as to what is exactly meant. I for one find it hard to believe that the original text of the Bible used the words intercourse or sex."

Yes, exactly!

The word is "know", which in Hebrew can be as much of a "nudge nudge wink wink" euphemism as it is in English.

Indeed as said about 1% of the time it's really clear that that's what the writers meant it to mean.

However in that particular sentence a Catholic translator took it upon himself to decide that the Hebrew texts (or the French translation that he was using, Chinese Whispers going on here) meant the word "know" in a euphemistic manner and fiddled with the words to make a point.

Yet again BadgerPaws has hit the nail on the head.

It is absolutely infuriating that many many people chose to marginalise homosexuals on the basis of this (wrongly interpretated)text. what a bunch of arse (no pun intended)

choose even

Badgerspaw - what Bible are you quoting? (just being nosy)

Having not worked myself as a Bible translator, I can't provide you with the evidence used by the translators which brought them to decide which word to use. I'm afraid that internet articles on the matter are extremely innacurate and I would need to see some scholarly material before accepting any interpretation explanation. There are too many differing opinions on the internet, and absolutely no control over what is said.

I would really appreciate any scholarly evidence anyone may have for this, but in the absence of that, I would prefer to trust the educated and researched translation that is in front of me.

No offence to anyone - as you can probably tell, I am simply quite interested in the Catholic Church's stance on this and don't actually have an opinion on the matter myself.

So to sum it up the translator of that edition of the Bible had two choices.

1. Use the correct translation, know, and leave it up the the readers to decide whether the Hebrew text is being euphemistic.

2. Decide that the Hebrew text is being euphemistic and take that decision away from the readers by using the word "intercourse".

Catholic interpreter in the 1980s decides to roll with approach 2.

The Bible has been used to marginalise women too. There are huge swathes of the Bible not even included in the accepted version you see today.

I always place my faith in the NT. Jesus said a lot about adulters, murderers, cheats, thieves, hypocrites and so on. If homosexuality was such a big sin, don't you think he would have mentioned it?

Sorry can I just point out AGAIN that it is not only the Catholic Bible that is implying intercourse or sex, but several different Bibles so can we please stop referring to this as a 'Catholic' interpretation.

Also, the following line about the daughters certainly implies that a sexual act was intended.

I thought the 10% was the masons

Rhubarb - St Paul mentions it can be assumed it was in Jesus' teachings.

Ah now BP that is unfair. The Bible has been translated many many times. The JWs claim theirs is the most faithful translation, but the truth is that the language the Bible was written in isn't spoken today. So it was translated into Latin and then into English. Some words could have several meanings and it really was hit and miss whether you had the original meaning or not.

Yes the Pope at the time tried to ban all other versions, but he didn't suceed and there are now different versions of the Bible to buy. It is still translated today but the difficulties remain.

Sorry - NAK - above line should read
'St Paul mentions it, so it can be assumed that it was mentioned in Jesus' teachings'

St Paul never met Jesus. Please read my link from earlier - please? It explains St Pauls texts there too - again it boils down to translation and whether St Paul was writing in general terms or specifically for a set of people.

But once again, St Paul was NOT a disciple of Jesus, he NEVER met Jesus and only met a couple of the actual disciples who regarded him with mistrust.

Here is my link

Here is my link

Here is my link

Here is my link

Here is my link

Rhubarb - I know that Paul did not meet Jesus but he studied his teachings conscientously.
I will read all your link when I get a chance but I'm afraid I don't really trust the source - no offence intended - I'm sure there are good ideas on there but not really what I would call scholarly evidence. Sorry I can;t really concentrate - getting harrassed to make dinner but will try to pop on again later

LOL at links

Just to let you know, most homophobic people aren't religious at all... you can throw bible quotes to each other all night....seriously homophobic people have never picked up a bible or been inside a church....

It's not catholics you need to worry about....

Well I've also studied Jesus' teachings thank you very much and I can't find any mention about homosexuality in there at all. I think it would have been mentioned.

How do you know this DP?Where do you get these 'facts'?

For anyone that's interested, Karen Armstrong's biography of the bible is superb (and rigorously researched). Very interesting reading on the development of the bible.

You know daftpunk all the homosexuals I know grew up in church. My best friend from childhood grew up in the same church as I did. He was active in the chur h and loved by everyone. When he turned 18 he came out. Everyone in that church except me and one of the deacons completely turned their backs on him. That included his parents. Real Christian like behavior.

ah! I think dp is referring to her BNP buddies?

Noddyholder;

In all the years I've been mixing with catholics, I've never heard one of them say anything particularly negative about homosexuals.....

I can't say the same for some of the non-catholics I've known....

I believe that is not about Catholics being homophobic, there are plenty of Catholic gays, some very religious, it is a pitty this Pope is also kicking against his followers.

I have friends who are gay, and I have seen them passing each other details on which Catholic church to attend that is "accepting" of gays. And the stupid idea of the church to blame homosexuality in "depraved" choices is not helping at all.

They can't stop being gay to be accepted by the church, some pretend not to be to gain that acceptance. I'll say that if I were in the same predicament I would choose another church.

It is not that bad in Europe though...

So if none of your catholic friends hold these views why can't you see the light? Unless of course hatred=better catholic?