The thing that bothers me with that explanation, is that if “where the Torah is concerned, every word counts” than why didn’t they use the word ‘boy’ instead of the more ambiguous ‘male’? Seems an intentional choice to refer to men and boys together.
If it meant men, it would use the same word twice (like the mediocre translation above). It specifically uses a different word to indicate a different meaning. איש at the beginning of the verse, and זכר in the second part of the verse.
Legitimate scholars all agree that this is not referring to the type of gay relationships that generally exist today. They disagree only with the exact meaning that was intended.
The word ילד would be insufficient. It does not include נער, or עלם, which would be the more likely scenario (not to mention עול, which would be unthinkable). זכר is the more obvious choice.
Okay let me get this straight for my own understanding:
In South Park, the Vatikans said “the bible states it’s not forbidden to fuck young boys” and the original Hebrew wording literally states that this is forbidden.
As in: “stoned shall not be the gay, but the one that gropes children”?
the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people’s stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.
I’m a bit pedantic about words and their meanings ;)
The thing that bothers me with that explanation, is that if “where the Torah is concerned, every word counts” than why didn’t they use the word ‘boy’ instead of the more ambiguous ‘male’? Seems an intentional choice to refer to men and boys together.
They did
The word zachar is is any male 13 years old or older that is not married that has functional equipment
https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/196414?lang=bi
Or did you expect them to write it in English?
Edit I got my words mixed up I don’t speak Hebrew.
No, you are correct.
If it meant men, it would use the same word twice (like the mediocre translation above). It specifically uses a different word to indicate a different meaning. איש at the beginning of the verse, and זכר in the second part of the verse.
Legitimate scholars all agree that this is not referring to the type of gay relationships that generally exist today. They disagree only with the exact meaning that was intended.
No, I’d have expected them to say ילד if they only wanted to mean man with boy and not man with any form of male.
The word ילד would be insufficient. It does not include נער, or עלם, which would be the more likely scenario (not to mention עול, which would be unthinkable). זכר is the more obvious choice.
You really are missing the forrest by staring at trees.
The key context between ish zachar and yéled is that an ish is of mental and sexual maturity, an zachar is of sexual maturity and a yélid is neither.
So if a zachar is off limits for being too immature it’s implied so is an yélid.
If you don’t understand the context of that I can’t help you.
Okay let me get this straight for my own understanding:
In South Park, the Vatikans said “the bible states it’s not forbidden to fuck young boys” and the original Hebrew wording literally states that this is forbidden.
As in: “stoned shall not be the gay, but the one that gropes children”?
You realize SP is satire right?
Yes the original wording explicitly forbids adult men from fucking males that have not themselves reached full adulthood
The wording roughly would be man should not fuck adolescent male it is abhorrent
I mostly see it as an exaggeration rather than satire.
Satire
the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people’s stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.
I’m a bit pedantic about words and their meanings ;)