Because a straight reading of the part imo does make it about wasting seed insted of procreating and the interpretations I can find go with that interpretation.
History? Mesopotamian history? It wouldn’t be an individual’s personal reaction to one of the english translations of the text.
There’s a great deal of information, especially from greek and persian sources that describe the rules and laws of the region during biblical times. Like the septanguit was a major greek translation that entered judean laws and customs to greek analysis.
And then we have early roman history that conquered the region and documented the rules of local religions/cults.
Again, it isn’t derived from a vibe check of plain text like when SCOTUS overturns human rights.
I read it in Finnish. And the different versions I checked (for English too) do try to follow the intended meaning instead of straight up literal translation. Don’t know about “SCOTUS” stuff.
The understanding of it talking about masturbation is pretty damn old and there’s a reason even scholars disagree about this stuff.
I get it. I had meant ‘modern’ more than anything and ‘english’ was the convenient assumption.
I was trying note along the idea of how we only know Spartan history from Athenian accounts of Sparta, not Spartans. If all we had was specifically a christian interpretation of the texts then yeah, conclusions can be as varied as the reader. If we interpret the bible through contemporary historical observations the importance of the lessons and stories of the bible are provided context.
The christian traditions around the bible and the historical context through which the bible was written and interpreted are very different.
But that isn’t to undermine or remove the fact that there is a long tradition of interpreting these passages as to include masturbation. (If not the concept of sodomy at large.) But to me that’s likewise as understandably contexualized.
History? Mesopotamian history? It wouldn’t be an individual’s personal reaction to one of the english translations of the text.
There’s a great deal of information, especially from greek and persian sources that describe the rules and laws of the region during biblical times. Like the septanguit was a major greek translation that entered judean laws and customs to greek analysis.
And then we have early roman history that conquered the region and documented the rules of local religions/cults.
Again, it isn’t derived from a vibe check of plain text like when SCOTUS overturns human rights.
I read it in Finnish. And the different versions I checked (for English too) do try to follow the intended meaning instead of straight up literal translation. Don’t know about “SCOTUS” stuff.
The understanding of it talking about masturbation is pretty damn old and there’s a reason even scholars disagree about this stuff.
Just saying.
I get it. I had meant ‘modern’ more than anything and ‘english’ was the convenient assumption.
I was trying note along the idea of how we only know Spartan history from Athenian accounts of Sparta, not Spartans. If all we had was specifically a christian interpretation of the texts then yeah, conclusions can be as varied as the reader. If we interpret the bible through contemporary historical observations the importance of the lessons and stories of the bible are provided context.
The christian traditions around the bible and the historical context through which the bible was written and interpreted are very different.
But that isn’t to undermine or remove the fact that there is a long tradition of interpreting these passages as to include masturbation. (If not the concept of sodomy at large.) But to me that’s likewise as understandably contexualized.