1. So Abraham said to the oldest servant of his house, who ruled over all that he had, "Please, put your hand under my thigh, and I will make you swear by the LORD, the God of heaven ...that you will not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, ... but you shall go to my country and to my family, and take a wife for my son Isaac." ... The LORD God of heaven, ... spoke to me and swore to me, saying, "to your descendants I give this land," ... So the servant put his hand under the thigh of Abraham his master, and swore to him concerning this matter. (Gen. 24:2-4, 7, 9 NKJV). Abraham is asking the steward of his house to place his hand on his genitals and swear to him by the LORD, that he will get a godly wife from among his own family and land. The statement "under my thigh" means "under my thigh bones (thighs, loins). The word ya-rek "thigh, loin" is grammatically singular but it is best translated in the plural for the reader to grasp the meaning of this expression. In one place, the Greek translation (LXX) also translated the singular Hebrew word "thigh" as "thighs" or "thigh bones" (Gen. 46:26). I also think "waist" would be a good translation for ya-rek in this expression and others (Gen. 24:2, 9; 46:26; 47:29; and Ex. 1:5) because Bible verses often speak of a "loin-cloth, girdle" being on the loins (i.e. waist). When someone says the following euphemism to another: "put your hand under my thigh[s]" or "put your hand under my waist;" that means that person is asking the other person to put his hand on his generative parts (private parts) which are the adjurer's source of progeny and symbolize his offspring. This act was to help the swearer remember his agreement, oath and duty. The steward was to get a wife for Abraham's offspring, Isaac. Additionally, Abraham also had his son Joseph swear by his private parts (Gen. 47:29). Joseph was swearing to bury his father in Canaan and also to have Abraham's offspring (i.e. himself) buried there (Gen. 50:24-26; Ex. 13:19; Joshua 24:32; Heb. 11:22).
Stewards were often gay men who managed the house and affairs of his lord (see Judith 12:10). A gay man would also be able to get a wife for his master's son because he was allowed to communicate and be around women in that culture where the sexes were separated. This particular gay steward puts his hand on Abraham's private parts and swears an oath. Abraham wouldn't have asked a heterosexual to do that. This also calls into question Abraham's sexuality. He was likely bisexual.
Dr. Lamsa translated the Aramaic word kha-ṣa as "girdle" here. Kha-ṣa does have the meaning of "loin-cloth, belt, girdle" when accompanied with the word "loins" (Ezek. 9:2; Matt. 3:4). However, the Aramaic translator would have meant the meaning of "thigh, loin" here in Genesis because he translated from the Hebrew word ya-rek "thigh, loin."
There are several reinterpretations of this text. One interpretation is that the steward held only Abraham's circumcised penis because one must hold a sacred object such as a Torah scroll or phylacteries when taking an oath. If that was the case then Abraham likely would have had Eliezer, his steward, hold a religious scroll, since he was religious. Also, someone doesn't need to hold a "sacred object" to make an oath or swear. Swearing in the name of the LORD would have been sufficient. Moreover, if Abraham wanted Eliezer to swear while holding only his circumcised cock, then Abraham could have said to Eliezer: "put your hand on my circumcision" or "put your hand on my flesh (penis)." Or, Abraham could have said "put your hand on my eggs (balls)," or something similar, if he intended for his steward to hold only his testicles while adjuring him.
I also don't believe trying to understand this expression literally. There would be no need for Abraham to ask Eliezer to put his hand under his thigh to show that he is under his authority. Abraham already knew this and he didn't use objects along with an oath to symbolize something outside the contents of the oath. Abraham used objects in his oath-taking (swearing) to give a symbolic meaning of something in the oath. For example, when Abraham swore to Abimelech that he wouldn't deal falsely with him or his posterity; he also rebuked Abimelech because his servants seized a well that he had dug. Abraham gave Abimelech seven ewe lambs to remind him that Beer-Sheva (well of the seven [or oath] belongs to him (Gen. 21:22-32). Moreover, the Bible uses the word "thigh" in this example and also in the plural, in expressions that refer to the private parts. In the plural, (Exodus 1:5 KJV) reads: "And all the souls that came out of the loins (hence: generative parts) of Jacob were seventy souls ..." Furthermore, Midrash Rabbah and the opinion of Tosefot in the Talmud Shevuot 38b both interpret Genesis 24:2-9 to mean that Abraham made his steward swear with the Milah (organ of circumcision). And hence both of those witnesses are more close to what I believe in, namely, that Eliezer held onto all of Abraham's package while making an oath.
I believe the Peshitta Old Testament translated the Hebrew word re-a sometimes as rahma "lover" or khow-ra "friend" for a reason; and hence it gives the correct understanding of when the Hebrew word re-a carries the meaning of "lover" or "friend." According to the Peshitta, re-a's first meaning is "lover, sexual partner;" and that is the meaning of its first occurrence in the Bible. Secondly, the word "lover" can be used in the construct state (i.e. "the lover of") in expressions such as "lover of God," "lover of tax-collectors," etc. It's connected with words that the reader or hearer wouldn't consider the "lover" to be a "sexual partner." A "lover of God" would be someone "who loves (likes) God" and hence could be considered a "friend of God." Along that line, the word "lover(s)," was also the word chosen to refer to "allies," and hence "friends," of a king or nation.
According to the Peshitta Old Testament, the Hebrew word re-a doesn't mean "lover" in the common expression (Ex. 11:2, etc.): "[every] man from his friend [neighbor]," "[every] woman from her neighbor," or any like expression. The Aramaic word khow-ra was used for the translation. This is predictable since the word "brother" can refer to a "husband" in a marriage but doesn't carry that meaning in the phrase "every man his brother" (Ex. 32:27, etc.). At Judges 14:20, the Hebrew text says: "And the wife of Samson was given to one of his friends who was his groomsman (Literally: "a friend to him")." The expression "a friend to him" means "his groomsman" according to the Aramaic Targum. Since the word re-a means "groomsman" here, that's why the previous expression means "one of his friends" instead of the literal meaning of "one of his lovers." Context determined this. The Aramaic Peshitta again did not use the word "lover" or "friend" here but the word "groomsman."
I want to stress that context and other words determine what a Hebrew word means. Did you know that re-a[h] "lover" and ro-eh "shepherd" are sometimes spelled exactly the same way in the Ashshuri Masoretic Hebrew text; but are pronounced differently? That is because Hebrew words and their conjugations can be spelled more than one way (with or without the vowel letters vav "o or u" sound and the yod "i or e" sound). However, a Hebrew writer could let us know which meaning is meant by at least spelling this word one time with the vav "o." Otherwise, we know when the Hebrew word means "shepherd" by the tradition of pronunciation, translation witnesses and other words used in the verse such as "tent, sheep, flock, etc." For (Gen. 38:12), the disputed word is expressed with a pronoun: i.e. ".. he and his lover Hirah .." Thus the meaning of "shepherd" likely isn't meant. Providing an "animal" later as "payment," which was requested, isn't enough justification to interpret the word "lover" as "shepherd" (Gen. 38:20 LXX). This is especially so because there is no variant spelling or any indication that the previous occurrences of re-a "lover" in the story mean "shepherd." Again, the Aramaic Peshitta and Targums further illustrate that the word in question is "lover" not "shepherd" every time, in this story.
Having all this in mind, I'm going to show a couple clear homosexual relationships from the Hebrew and/or Aramaic Bible where the Aramaic Bible specifically has the word "lover(s) in the text. I 'm not going to give all of them because that would be exhausting plus I want to later show other homosexual relationships in the Bible that used other words to indicate their relationships. Additionally, it should be noted that there is another Hebrew word o-ha-vim "lovers" which is sometimes translated incorrectly as "friends." The Aramaic text indicates this. So when you are reading the English Bible, just keep in mind that the so called "friend" or "friends" may actually be a "lover" or "lovers."
2. It came to pass at that time that Judah departed from his brothers, and visited (turned aside to) a certain Adullamite whose name was Hirah. ... Now in the process of time the daughter of Shua, Judah's wife, died; and Judah was comforted, and went up to his sheepshearers at Timnah, he and his friend (lover) Hirah the Adullamite. – When Judah saw her [Tamar], he thought she was a harlot, because she had covered her face. Then he turned to her by the way, and said, "Please let me come in to you"; ... So she said, "Will you give me a pledge ... -- And Judah sent the young goat by the hand of his friend (lover) the Adullamite, to receive his pledge from the woman’s hand, but he did not find her. (Gen. 38:1; 12, 15-17, 20 NKJV). Judah turned aside to stay or live with Hirah the Adullamite. "Visited" isn't the Hebrew word used and isn't necessarily implied. Furthermore, the Aramaic text says that Hirah was the "lover" of Judah. That means Judah was bisexual and Hirah was gay. Later we see the effeminate (or gay) Hirah delivering a kid of the goats to a female (i.e. Tamar). In the patriarchal culture, men and women were separated from each other in society. But this story narrates that it was okay for a homosexual (or a man that doesn’t have any sexual desire for a woman) to associate with and be around a woman alone without suspicion.
3. “Then Aḅimelech came to him from Gerar with Aḥuzzath, one of his friends (lovers), and Phichol the commander of his army.” (Genesis 26:26 NKJV). The Hebrew text literally says that Aḥuzzath was [one] of his lovers (me-re-e-hu)." That same understanding is expressed in the Aramaic Peshitta, which translates this verse as "... with Aḥuzzath, his lover [singular], ..." It would be odd for Aramaic to use the words "one of" in conjunction with a plural noun when there is no itemization of the plural noun. Additionally, Aḥuzzath is the only "lover," so that's why the Aramaic says: "... with Aḥuzzath, his lover ..." Furthermore, the Hebrew word kha-ve-raiv "his friends, companions" would have been the better word to express "friends.")
The name "Aḥuzzath" means "possession (property) of [Aḅimelech]." Aḥuzzath is the feminine construct of the feminine word a-ḥuz-zah "possession, property." His name suggests he is Aḅimelech's husband or boy; and hence one of his lovers. Women and gay men were considered "property" or at least fell under that definition. Aḥuzzath's name is similar to other females or cities that have the meaning: "something of." Joshua lists a couple cities called Baalath "wife of [so-&-so]" (Josh. 19:44) and Khelqath "portion of" (Josh. 21:31).
Thus, Aḅimelech and Aḥuzzath were in a homosexual relationship. Aḥuzzath came along with Aḅimelech similarly to how a wife may tag along with her husband. Phicol was the bodyguard.
1st Note: Me-re-e-hu literally means "from his friends (lovers)" or "[one] of his friends (lovers)" every time. It's not a separate word or listing as James Strong puts it in his Concordance. It's from the words min "of, from" and re-a "lover, friend." The "n" drops off when connected to a noun and since the first letter of the word re-a "lover" is a guttural, the "i" vowel turns into an "e" vowel. An example of the word min attached to a non-guttural word would be mi-sa-ri-se "[one] of the eunuchs of the king ..." (Esther 4:5).
2nd Note: As stated above, me-re-e-hu always means "[one] of his friends (lovers);" even though the King James Version and the Peshitta sometimes translate it singular as "friend, companion" or "groomsman" at Judges 14:20, etc. The KJV says: "But Samson's wife was given to his companion, ..." The Hebrew text literally says: "But Samson's wife was given to [one] of his friends, ..." This is supported by the Greek LXX which has that correct literal translation there and at other places. The friend there happened to be a "groomsman;" so that explains the Peshitta translation.
4. Then the daughter of Pharaoh came down to bathe at (in) the river. And her maidens (na-ar-o-they-ha-her girls, girlfriends) walked along the riverside; and when she saw the ark among the reeds, she sent her maid (ama-thah – her female servant) to get it. And when she opened it, she saw the child, and behold, the baby wept. So she had compassion on him, and said, “This is one of the Hebrews’ children.” Then his sister said to Pharaoh’s daughter, “Shall I go and call a nurse for you from the Hebrew women, that she may nurse the child for you?” And Pharaoh’s daughter said to her, “Go.” So the maiden (al-mah - young woman) went and called the child’s mother (Exodus 2:5-8 NKJV). The first underlined word maidens is not the best translation for the Hebrew word na-ar-oth (girls [from infancy to adolescence], girlfriends). It is a word for endearment here. Miriam was one of the "girlfriends" or "girls" of Pharaoh's daughter. This word is not to be taken literally because Miriam is also called a al-mah (a young woman up to twenty-five years of age). A Al-mah (yound woman) is the next Hebrew word in line to describe a female that is no longer a na-ar-ah (girl).
The second underlined word maid comes from the Hebrew word a-mah, which means a female servant. It doesn't always refer to a female that is a "slave," but also as a female worker or a female that provides services (see Ruth 3:9, 1 Kings 1:13, etc.). The Bible also gives references of where an a-mah (maidservant or handmaid) was used for sex (see Gen. 21:10-13; Ex. 23:12; Ruth 3:9).
No where in the Bible does it say that Miriam got married to a man. In fact, Miriam does have some masculine characteristics of power. It was Miriam and Aaron that spoke against Moses to try to take over as leaders of the congregation of Israel. Numbers 12:2 says this: So they said, “Has the LORD indeed spoken only through Moses? Has He not spoken through us also?” And the LORD heard it. (NKJV). Lesbians were seen helping and being around women. In this case, Miriam was seeing, washing and guarding the naked daughter of Pharaoh.
Note: The Hebrew word na-ar-ah has the primary meaning of a "girl (from infancy to adolescence)" but can also mean a "young woman" in a supporting context. This is corroborated by the fact that the word na-ar-ah was translated sometimes as tli-tha (girl) and a-laym-ta (young woman) in the Aramaic Peshitta Old Testament. One of those words in the Aramaic Bible was chosen for the translation to be more precise in describing the person's age group.
5. "And they raised their voice and wept again; and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law [goodbye], but Ruth was joined to her." (Ruth 1:14). The Hebrew words da-ve-qah bah, translated as "clung to her" (NIV) here, can have several layers of meaning that fit the storyline in the Book of Ruth. That text can also be saying that Ruth remained (stayed) with her [Naomi] (see Ruth 2:8, 21, 23; 2 Sam. 20:2). Additionally, that statement can be saying that Ruth's soul "was joined to her," that is, Ruth "was attracted to her" (see Gen. 34:3; Ps. 63:8). Furthermore, it can be saying that Ruth "was joined in love" to Naomi (see 1 Ki. 11:2). Finally, if that statement is taken to be written after the fact of the events in the Book of Ruth, the author could also be saying that Ruth "was joined in marriage to her" (see Gen. 2:24; Rom. 7:3).
The verses that could show that Ruth and Naomi had a sexual relationship and were married are the following. (Ruth 4:15-16) says: "... For your daughter-in-law (bride), who has loved you, has borne him. She who is better to you than seven sons. Then Naomi took the child and laid him in her bosom, and she was his rearer (upbringer, nurse). And the female neighbors gave him a name, saying, 'a son (or grandson) was born to Naomi.' And they called his name Oḅed. ..." Though the word love can be non-sexual in meaning, it can also designate sexual love. As we will see from other verses, I think the female neighbors meant both the emotional love and the sexual love. They portray Ruth as the man, or husband, in the relationship, who gave Naomi a son; who was also her grandson. I have no problem understanding the word "son" as having a dual meaning here.
(Ruth 1:16) has Ruth saying this: "And Ruth said: 'do not entreat me to leave you, or to turn back from following after you. For where you will go, I will go. And where you will lodge, I will lodge. Your people will be my people, and your God, my God. Where you will die, I will die, and there I will be buried. May YHWH deal thus with me and may He do thus more, if anything except death shall separate you and me." - "... and she lived with her mother-in-law (wife)." (Ruth 2:23). We see from these verses that Ruth and Naomi lived together. Ruth also wants to be buried with her wife Naomi like a husband and wife are buried together.
The Book of Ruth portrays Ruth, and sometimes Naomi, with some manly characteristics. (Ruth 1:16) has Ruth literally telling Naomi "do not meet with me [for entreaty or attack]." At (Ruth 1:18), Naomi saw that Ruth was "being strong (obstinate, firmly resolved, persistent, stubborn)" to go with her; so she stopped telling her [to go]. Boaz told Ruth this: "... for all [the men] in the [city] gate of my people are knowing that you are a valiant woman." (Ruth 3:11). The Hebrew words e-sheth kha-yil can also be translated as "a woman of strength (valor)." The last word is usually ascribed to men, as in :"a mighty man of valor." So Ruth was manly.
At (Ruth 2:14), we see Ruth hanging out and eating with men without any suspicion, instead of eating with the women. She was also working and gleaning after the men instead of only with the women.
The word cal-lah can mean: "a bride, wife [as if completed] &/or daughter-in-law." The word kha-moth can mean: "a groomess, wife [as joined in marriage] &/or mother-in-law." Usually those root words are used together in heterosexual relationships [i.e. the groom (kha-than) and the bride (cal-lah)]. But what about when you have two females in a lesbian relationship? Well, you can keep the word cal-lah for the bride but you would have to use the feminine equivalent to the word "groom, husband, father-in-law, etc.;" which would be the word kha-moth "groomess, wife, etc." If it's not already obvious, the word kha-than doesn't always refer to a "groom" or "newly married man" or "one about to be married." It can refer to a husband who has been married for a long time (see Ex. 4:25-26). It's from the verb kha-than "to be joined in marriage." Following how nouns are made from verbs, its first meaning should be "a man joined in marriage" or "a husband, bridegroom." An "in-law" meaning would be secondary and determined by the context. The feminine for kha-than would of course carry the same meanings but refer to the "female." The writer of the Book of Ruth likely chose the words s/he used to let us readers know that Naomi was both the mother-in-law and wife of Ruth. Ruth was both the daughter-in-law and the wife of Naomi. Since they were "joined in marriage" (Ruth 1:14), they could also be designated as na-shim "wives," similarly like the woman who was joined to a husband (Rom. 7:3), was called at-tha "a wife."
Ruth likely was a lesbian who married one of Naomi's sons to raise a child or children. When her husband died, she married Naomi and also Boaz. Her husband was to provide her a child and a livelihood, protection, etc.
1st Note: The following are some verses where the word "love" or "lover" implies "sexual love" or a "sexual lover." (Ps. 88:18 ; Song 2:4; 8:7; Ezek. 16:36-37; 23:5; Hoshea 2:5, 7, 10, 12-13; 3:1; etc.).
2nd Note: The active feminine participle Kho-then-eth means "a female being joined by marriage, wife" or "a female-in-law (as being joined by marriage)." It appears only one time in the Bible and means a "mother-in-law" there at (Deut. 27:23). It's from the verb kha-than "to be joined by marriage, etc." It's the feminine counter part of the word kho-then "father-in-law, son-in-law." As far as Biblical usage, Kho-then-eth "wife, female-in-law" is not the normal feminine counterpart of kho-then though. The Hebrew word kha-moth "wife, female-in-law" is its normal counterpart and is Kho-then-eth's synonym. It carries the same various meanings for the different contexts. All or most Hebrew synonyms have all the same different contextual meanings from what I've seen.
Interestingly, the words kho-then "father-in-law" and kha-than "groom, husband" are spelled exactly the same in the Hebrew Bible; but voweled differently. One is left wondering if kha-than is a later pronunciation to distinguish between "groom, husband." and kho-then "father (son) -in-law." Further wonderment ensues because kha-than is also given as the pronunciation for "son-in-law" [10x] in the Bible.
6. SUPPORTIVE HOMOSEXUAL VERSES:
"Old wine gladdens the heart and more (or better) than it is the love of a lover." (Yeshua the son of Sira 40:20) This verse is written by a man (i.e. Yeshua) and the word rah-ma (lover) is in the masculine spelling, and hence means "male-lover." The assumed original Hebrew text says "[wine] and strong drink gladden the heart, and more than both of them is the love of beloved ones." Do-dim "beloved ones" is also masculine grammatically.
The Greek text says something similar, but just remember that it isn't reliable because the Greek Old Testament has a bias toward gay people. It says: "wine and music rejoice the heart, and above [them] both is the love of wisdom" (Wisdom of Sirach 40:20 LXX).
"There is not a greater love than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends (or lovers)." (Jn. 15:13). This verse has multiple layers of meaning because the word nash, though grammatically masculine, refers to both genders. A female example is at (Lk. 8:46). Hence, it can mean "a man" or "a person." Nash "person" also often follows the word cul "every" [i.e. cul-nash - "every person, all" (Lk. 1:63; 4:15; 6:47)]. - The Aramaic word rah-ma can also mean either a "friend" or a "lover." If the Aramaic text only meant "friend," then it would have used the word khow-ra "companion, friend."
So this verse is also saying: "There is not a greater love than this, that a man lay down his life for his lovers." A reference to either male-homosexuality or heterosexuality. The word "lover," though grammatically masculine, can include females. Or this verse can be understood as also saying: "There is not a greater love than this, that a person lay down their life for their lovers." This is a reference to any person with any sexual orientation or gender identity. Please note that the only reason why the pronoun "his" is in the statement is because the word nash "man, person" is grammatically masculine. Since the word nash "person" includes both genders, the pronoun "his" or "its" also includes both genders (i.e. her or their).
GIDON (GIDEON) AND PARAH (PURAH):
"And if you are afraid to descend [alone], you and your boy Parah (Purah), go down to the camp. .... he and Parah his boy descended to the end of the [company of] fifty (or armed) men who were around the camp." (Judges 7:10-11). Parah was likely the armor-bearer of Gidon, but definitely his battle-companion. Such groupings were between homosexual lovers in Yisrael and the surrounding nations. (Sira 37:5) mentions "a good male-lover who fights against the enemy and holds the buckler (round shield)." The Aramaic word rah-ma "lover, friend" is used there. That word means the "male lover" or "sexual partner;" and in other contexts, the word can have a dual meaning of both "lover" and "friend." Thus, perhaps this verse can also refer to a "friend" who is fighting. However, if the Aramaic text only meant "friend," then it would have used the word khow-ra "companion, friend."
Parah is Gidon's boy (boyfriend). The word "boy" is a term of endearment and shouldn't always be taken literally. Since Jewish men had to be eighteen years old to fight, Parah would have been technically a young man. Hence, the Aramaic text calls Parah the "young man" of Gidon here.
There is an issue of the correct pronunciation for the name of Gidon's boyfriend. I think his name originally was pronounced Parah (f.) a female young ox, heifer, cow." That would give it the same spelling and pronunciation for that Hebrew word; with the letters "P-R-H." The Greek LXX and Latin Vulgate transliterated this name as "Phara." We can back track on what the original translators understood as this word's pronunciation. Often the hard "P" sound was transliterated as "PH" when it begins the name of a person, city, etc. Often the final "H" sound is deleted or left out in the transliteration. So it looks like the translators understood this person's name as "Parah." Interestingly, the Aramaic Peshitta translated Gidon's boyfriend's name as Pera "Fruit." I don't know if it has any relation to how homosexuals are sometimes called "fruits." - Yes, I'm joking on my previous point. The word "fruit" can also mean "the offspring, increase (NKJV)" of both humans and animals (Deut. 28:4, 11, etc.).
Pa-rah (female cow offspring, heifer) is likely from the verb pa-rah "to bear fruit, be fruitful." From that verb we get the noun par [P-R] "male ox offspring, bullock." Hebrew would just add the "h" at the end to make par "bullock" feminine (i.e pa-rah - "heifer"). James Strong erroneously thought pa-rah & par were from the verb pa-rar [P-R-R] "to break (-asunder), etc." Words where the second and third letters are the same often make two letter nouns by deleting the final letter. However, they are not the only type of words. Words that have a middle "n" or end in "h" can also do the same. Another way to make a noun from a verb that ends in "h," is to delete the "h" and add a yod "i" at the end. That's where we get the word pri (fruit, offspring), from the same verb root. Pa-rah's unique pronunciation is to distinguish that it means: "the ox offspring (fruit)" or "a heifer."
Gidon's boyfriend has a feminine name; whether it was pronounced "Parah" or "Purah." The final "h" in Hebrew words indicate the word is feminine. Also, when the word is used in statements, the word will be accompanied with verbs with feminine pronouns (i.e. through conjugations). Purah / Porah (f.) means "a branch, [leafy-] bough, foliage." It's two or three (Peorah) pronunciations are always spelled with four letters (P-A-R-H) in the Bible. The Aleph (A) is silent and there is a "u" or an "o" sound/vowel marking inserted in between. Gideon's boy's name is only spelled with three letters (P-R-H); which gives more credence to it's correct pronunciation as "Parah," and not "Purah."
The word "heifer," whether it's the word pa-rah or the synonym word eg-lah, also refers to a female "girlfriend" or "wife" in the Bible (Hos. 4:16; Judg. 14:18; Jer. 46:20).
DAVID AND JONATHAN:
"Also Jonathan David's beloved [friend] (hab-bi-wa – beloved) was a counsellor, a man of understanding, and a scribe;..." (1 Chr. 27:32 Lamsa) The word [friend] is not in the Aramaic text. Jonathan is the beloved of King David. There are a few other verses that need to be mentioned to show the bi-sexuality of David and Jonathan.
“…the soul of Jonathan was knit (joined) to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul (or himself).” (1 Sam. 18:1 Lamsa, NKJV). This verse says that the soul of David was drawn to the soul of Jonathan. Jonathan's soul longed for, delighted in, was attracted to, desired after, took pleasure in and became one with the soul of David (See similar Gen. 34:3, 8). The "soul" can also be understood as the "heart or seat of feelings and emotions" here. Hence that statement could be translated as: "Jonathan's heart was set on David" or "Jonathan had feelings for David." Dead Sea Scroll Tobit uses the word "heart" and a verb synonym for the above expression and says: “…and he [Tobiah] loved her a lot, and his heart was joined very much to her.” (Tobit 6:18 DSS). Peshitta Tobit similarly uses a verb synonym for this expression at (1 Sam. 18:1) when describing Tobiah’s love for Sarah: “…and he [Tobiah] loved her, and his soul was exceedingly joined to her.” (Tobit 6:18 Peshitta Text). Separately, for the last part of First Samuel 18:1, the verb "to love" and the words "as himself" are the same words used at Ephesians 5:33 - "...and he [ the husband] shall love his wife as himself." Finally, "... and Jonathan, the son of Shaul, desired greatly in David." (1 Sam. 19:1).
Note: Dead Sea Scroll Tobit contains the original Aramaic text. For Peshitta Tobit, it is stated at the end of the book that some of the material is from the Septuagint Version (Greek Old Testament) and some of the material is from another Version, as remembered.
The Author of the book of Samuel later states: “And Jonathan took off the robe that was on him and gave it to David, with his armor (mad-daiv), even to his sword and his bow and his belt.” (1 Sam. 18:4 NKJV). Jonathan took off his outer robe and then all his clothes underneath. The Hebrew word mad means a “vesture (as measured)” and is from the verb ma-dad “to measure” At Judges 3:16, Ehud fastened a dagger “…under his clothes (mad-daiv) on his right thigh.” Mad refers to all types of clothes (see also 1 Sam. 4:12) and armor, including the tunic. Underwear [or trousers NKJV, breeches (KJV)] was not worn by the general public except for the priests. This means Jonathan ended up standing before David naked. Some people also believe David reciprocated, meaning they exchanged garments. This means both of them didn’t have any problem getting naked before each other.
Here is another verse that shows David and Jonathan’s relationship: “I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; you have been very pleasant to me; your love to me was wonderful, surpassing the love of women.” (2 Sam. 1:26 NKJV). The love of women is referring to the love that is experienced between men and women, which included sex. David was equating Jonathan to a female. He apparently felt Jonathan’s love toward him surpassed that of women. Also, David didn’t have to use the word “women” in his statement. He could have said “…surpassing the love of friends;” if nothing homosexual was meant. Therefore I believe their relationship was also sexual based on all of the Biblical verses.
And Shaul (Saul) said, I will give her to him, and she shall be a stumbling-block to him. And the hand of the Philistines shall be upon (against) him. And Shaul said to David, you shall be my son-in-law today by both of them.” (1 Sam. 18:21 Peshitta). The source Hebrew text has bish-ta-yim “by two,” (see Isa. 6:2) from the preposition be (by, with) and shta-yim (two). The Aramaic text adds the word “them” and translates the Hebrew text as “by both of them.” It wouldn’t be correct to translate bish-ta-yim as “in the one of the twain (two)” (KJV). The Hebrew text would have been written differently if the King James interpretation was correct.
Saul was referring to his daughter Mical, who loved David (see 18:20) and his son Jonathan, the beloved of David, with his statement; “by both of them.” He wasn’t referring to his other daughter, Merab, who was given to Adriel (see 18:19). The Greek Old Testament also suggests Saul was referring to Mical and Jonathan; not by its translation, but by its deletion of these Hebrew words. The Greek Translation has a bias toward gay people and either doesn’t translate the Hebrew or Aramaic text correctly or just deletes words in the translation.
There are two ways to say “by two” in Hebrew. The masculine spelling is bish-na-im “by two,” while the feminine spelling is bish-ta-yim “by two.” It wouldn’t be appropriate for Saul to use the masculine spelling because his daughter is female. But the feminine spelling I believe was appropriate for Saul to use to designate his daughter and effeminate son Jonathan. Thus, bish-ta-yim could be translated here as: "by two [of my] feminine ones." The words "female" and "women" in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek also mean an "effeminate man" and "effeminate men."
Note: The following are some Biblical references where you may never have considered that the word "women" could dually refer to "effeminate men" (Num. 31: 9, 15, 18; 1 Sam. 2:22; 30:2-3; Isa. 3:12; Jer. 51:30; etc.). Num. 31:18 and 1 Samuel 30:2-3 could have more meaning than how they are usually translated. Numbers 31:18 could say this: "& every child among the women and effeminates (na-shim) who have not known the bed of a man (i.e. slept with a man), preserve for yourselves." The word taph could refer to either a "male" or a "female" child. For 1st Samuel 30:2-3, the adjectives describing "women" are masculine grammatically [from small (or young) to great (or old)]. That's fine for Hebrew grammar because masculine singular or plural words can also include females or feminine words. However, if "women" are only meant, we know that they can have adjectives that are grammatically feminine [i.e. Hebrew women (Ex. 1:19); foreign women (1 Kings 11:1); etc.]. So the issue is, why are the words "small" and "great" grammatically masculine at 1 Sam. 30:2? I think the reason is because the word na-shim refers collectively to "women, trans-women and effeminate men."
“Then Saul’s anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he said to him, O you son of the rebellious young woman, do I not know that you are choosing the son of Jesse to your own shame and to the shame (disgrace) of your mother’s nakedness (or naked husband)?” (1 Sam. 20:30 Hebrew Text). The Hebrew word ba-khar means “to choose, pick.” Sometimes it can be used in the sense of choosing one thing over another (Job 36:21; Ps. 84:10). Presumably, King Saul is saying that Jonathan is “choosing” David, his husband and lover, over himself and over his mother or father. Ba-khar is also the word used for “choosing” a wife (see Gen. 6:2).
The words "mother's nakedness" may be literal, or it may mean a "mother's naked husband," just like the opposite words, "father's nakedness," means a "father's naked wife" (Lev. 18:8). Revelation 3:18 augments those words a little with a similar meaning of: "the shame of THY NAKEDNESS ..." Saul was giving a visual expression of shame and saying that his son Jonathan was choosing David to his own shame and to his mother's or father's shame (disgrace). David could inherit their kingdom. Also, the SHAME would have been doubly bad if Jonathan was sleeping with his father's former lover. The people knew David was formerly King Shaul's armor (weapon)-bearer. 1 Samuel 16:21-22 says that Shaul "loved [David] GREATLY" and that he became his "weapon-bearer." David also "found favor (grace) in his eyes." Sometimes someone finds "grace" in the eyes of another because the other person is attracted to and loves that individual (Est. 2:17, etc.).
NOTE: My translation corrects the Hebrew word na-av-ath (perverse [crooked] woman of) to read na-ar-ath (young woman [damsel] of) to match the Hebrew text in the Dead Sea Scrolls. That would be a correction of one Hebrew letter. The Resh and Vav are written very similar in the Dead Sea Scroll script. The phrase: “the rebellious young woman” is literally in Hebrew “young woman of the rebellion.” The Greek Old Testament agrees that the Hebrew text originally said “young woman, damsel” but translates that phrase in the plural as: “deserting damsels”
JUDITH AND HER MAID:
"And she (Judith) sent her parastatis who was standing by her store-rooms (wine cellars), and she called for Uzziyah, Khowri and Carmi, the elders of the city." (Judith 8:9 ). Smith's Syriac Dictionary defines the Aramaic word prast-wi-tha as a "waiting-woman;" but I don't believe that is correct. This word doesn't look Aramaic and it is clearly the Greek word parastatis. Parastatis literally means "one who stands by" and hence: "a helper, assistant, supporter, defender; in the line of battle, a comrade on the flank." It is from the composite word parastas "standing by, pillar, door-post, etc." This word has several layers of meaning so it is hard to translate with just one word. But we do see that this is the correct Greek word because the Aramaic text afterwards tells us that Judith's maid was "standing by" her store-rooms.
The Greek LXX translated this word prast-wi-tha (Greek loan word) as habras "a delicate, soft, graceful, pretty, luxurious &/or splendid woman." I think this word is implying that the maid is Judith's lover. I only know of a couple other places that this Greek word is used in the whole Greek LXX, and in both of those places, I suspect that lesbianism is involved. Miriam is referred to as one of the "beautiful ones" of Pharaoh's daughter (Ex. 2:5 [2x]). Rebekah's "young women" are called her "beautiful ones" (Gen. 24:61 LXX). Maybe Rakhel's "manliness" had something to do with her being "barren" (Gen. 25:21-22).
"And she called to her girl and she went down to the house where she was staying on the Sabbath days and on the feasts. And she pulled off the sackcloth that she had put on and put off the garments of her widowhood.”(Judith 10:2) The Aramaic word tli-tha generally means “a female child, girl, [from seven to twelve years of age].” In Bible times, female servants were also sexual partners, and this was not considered adultery. The story has Judith calling her female servant “a girl” here because the maid was the beloved of Judith. In verse seventeen, the “maid” is called a “young woman [i.e. a youth up to twenty-five years of age - a-laym-ta]." So the word “girl” is not to be taken literally. Again at (Judith 10:10), Judith calls her maid “her girlfriend” or “her girl.”
Note: Parastatis is the feminine verbal noun pronunciation, meaning: "a female who stands by, an assistant, defender, comrade, etc." The masculine pronunciation, which has the same meanings as it's feminine counterpart, is parastates. The older version of Liddell & Scott's Greek-English Lexicon lists them among the conjugations under the word parastas.
Is the Bible Against Homosexuality? by Preacher Mattai © 2016. All rights reserved.
Sub Pages: LGBT