Same-Sex Pairings in Luke 17:34-35

  • Thread starter Thread starter Baho
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Baho said:
Edit: It should be noted that a lot of translations to include the RSV2CE state “two men” for 17:34, vice just “two”.
Click to expand...
Some translations read two men as the verse uses two masculine definite articles, ὁ ho:

ὁ εἷς παραληφθήσεται ho heis paralephthesetai ‘the man who will be taken’
ὁ ἕτερος ἀφεθήσεται ho heteros aphesthesetai ‘the other man who will be left’
Baho said:
verb to grind is used in a sexual context within the Bible
Click to expand...
This is correct. The Hebrew verb is טתן tachan, and it occasionally connotes sexual intercourse, typically with the implication that such an act is degrading (Job 31:10). The Septuagint translates tachan in Job 31:10 a little less idiomatically using the verb ἀρέσκειν areskein ‘to flatter, to please’. In the other three OT verses mentioned in your post, the LXX translates using ἁλήθω aletho which is the same verb as in Lk 17:35.
Baho said:
blogs
Click to expand...
I read through the ‘Bible-Thumping Liberal’ blog that was mentioned by another user, and I examined the author’s analysis. It’s certainly a creative interpretation, but I don’t think it’s especially sound as he’s feeding very particularised definitions of words which have no supporting context.

That, and he makes some extremely odd statements about Bruce Metzger (an editor of the Nestle-Aland NT critical text, and also translator for the RSV and NRSV) supposedly ‘engineer[ing] the suppression of the presence of gays and lesbians in Luke 17’. And he claims that the ‘Q community’ - the community that authored the hypothesised text shared by Matthew and Luke - was some sort of LGBT haven.

I could likewise interpret Lk 17:37 by claiming that, here, σῶμα soma ‘body, corpse’ refers to a living body, and that the ἀετοί aetoi ‘eagle, vulture’ are the winged angels of God who are descending to rapture up the living bodies of believers. Which, of course, is highly nonsensical because there is little to no supporting context.
 
“Maximian said:
It is only in the last century or so that it was assumed that people would have a bed to themselves if they did not have a sexual relationship. In the days of big families it was perfectly normal for brothers or friends to share a bed.

Indeed, even in the 1970’s and 1980’s there was a British male comedy duo, I think it might have been Morcambe and Wise or LIttle and Largee, who regularly shared a bed on their TV sketches, with no sexual connotation at all.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Baho said:
Its why kids who go to Catholic school leave the faith or fall inactive at such high rates.
Click to expand...
Actually, this is usually because many Catholic schools don’t teach the faith or have a culture that is hostile to it. This is not universally true, but it has been the unfortunate reality of the last several decades.

-Fr ACEGC
 
Creative question, but definitely reaching for some justification that isn’t there. Show me how someone interprets the Bible, and I’ll show you their mind.
StudentMI said:
It can also lead one into questioning the Faith which is never good.
Click to expand...
Not if you’re actively trying to sow doubt. But if someone has that doubt anyway (or if we do, involuntarily), then we follow the Berean example (Acts 17:11) to strengthen the faith, either in ourselves or for others.
 
I really didn’t expect anyone to get upset about it honestly. I was trying to read some takes on the section as a whole because of the eagle verse that follows when I found that some people take it that way. As a convert there are a lot more left leaning Catholics than I had anticipated so I wanted to see what folks here thought. In my mind, if people can be nice to one another and explain their take on why it doesn’t mean that then one day when someone else is googling they’ll stumble upon this thread instead or one pushing an agenda. Seems like a safe and fine thing to do in that case.
 
I tell you, on that night there will be two people in one bed; one will be taken, the other left.
And there will be two women grinding meal together; one will be taken, the other left.”


Grinding meal is preparing meal to be made into bread.
 
Anesti33 said:
Well, it does matter, because if it is about homosexual pairs in flagrante delicto then we need to somehow explain how one of each went to Heaven. And we know that is not what happened. So it matters that Luke intended us to know it was about innocent friends/coworkers.
Click to expand...
Or important for us to know that even if two people, that man judges to be sinners, are lying side by side, God knows the truth about those men, that the rest of the world does not.

Maybe God wants us to know one can repent, be saved and receive salvation while the other is not. Notice he said lying side by side he never said exactly what they were doing, what was in their heart or mind, you just know one was saved while the other wasn’t.

Maybe it was important for someone to know if they repented, was saved and received salvation but was still in a sinful situation they could not get out of (not committing a sin but just in the situation for whatever reason) God will still find them to and save them when He returns. They can be at peace knowing God will always find His children, no matter where they are.

It definitely teaches us, God’s judgement is not man’s.
 
Last edited:
Baho said:
I really didn’t expect anyone to get upset about it honestly
Click to expand...
Honestly I reckon the reactions that are coming off as unexpectedly “upset” are mostly just people being shocked by how nonsensical that interpretation of that passage is. I doubt anyone is really thinking that you buy into it or are defending it… it’s just the level of absurdity and over-reach, in that blog’s apparent attempt to turn an obvious and historically straightforwardly understood verse (every historically literate person knows that households used to share beds, including male relatives; and it’s always universally been understood that the women in this passage are grinding grain) into some kind of reverse-engineered LGBTQ++ ‘hidden message’ wherein it’s not grain being ground but groins… is just, again, the only word I can reach for is “absurd”.

And I think it’s the energy with which people are feeling the shock of that surrealism, that’s provoking the, er, impassioned? reactions.

It’s just… again, so absurd. See, even I’m caught up in it. Not intending to direct anything at you. Just… the idea that was conveyed by someone else, which you shared with us to get our thoughts: the only thought I have is: so absurd.

Edit: I think the Michael Scott gif in @(name removed by moderator)'s post above mine, says it all.
 
Last edited:
As others have mentioned, there are groups who, to justify some pet sin, will pick every Bible verse condemning that sin and find some alternate translation that suits their ideology. It’s not uncommon amongst the “gay Christian” community.

Also, I’ve seen no translation that renders it “two women” in one bed. What translation is that? I’ve only seen “two in one bed”, or “two men in one bed”, which means “two people” like “mankind”, “sons of men”, etc. just means “people”.
 
Lol was literally reading this thread wondering if there was a word for that. Eisegesis. You learn something new every day!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top