Are the widows and fatherless sometimes gay people?
Gay men and Lesbians:
‘Cursed is the one who perverts the justice due the stranger, the fatherless (or gay man), and widow (or lesbian).’ “And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ (Deut. 27:19 NKJV). There is some probability that the Hebrew and Aramaic words usually translated as the fatherless [orphan] (Heb. ya-thom, Aram. yath-ma) and the widow (Heb. al-ma-nah, Aram. Ar-mal-ta) also referred to a gay man and lesbian. Time will tell if my suspicion is correct on whether the definitions of a gay man and lesbian were deleted from these words like the definition of a “gay man” was deleted from the word eunuch. We know that Roman law also defined Eunuchs as gay men. Though the word eunuchs probably also referred to transgender persons. Modern day hijras (eunuchs) in India are gay and transgender persons.
Note: Ar-mal-ta (Widow) is the Biblical or Classical Aramaic pronunciation. Widow is pronounced ar-mil-tha in Chaldean and ar-mil-ta in Assyrian.
I have found a verse in the New Testament that looks like it is saying that a ar-mal-ta should take a wife if she doesn’t have self-control. The Greek New Testament translated the words “to take a wife” as “to marry” there. This is a biased translation because the generic words “to marry” could be used to say the presumably widow is to marry a man and not a woman.
“But I am saying to those [men] who don’t have wives, and to the widows (arm-la-tha – plural) [who don't have wives], that it benefits them if they shall be remaining like me. But if they are not enduring, let them marry. For it is beneficial [for them] to take a wife than to burn with desire.” (1 Cor. 7:8-9 Peshitta Text). The Aramaic language uses the words “to” or “and” to transfer the same subject matter onto the following person or persons. Compare 1 Corinthians 1:1: “[From] Paul, [the one] called and an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and the brother Sosthenes.” (Peshitta). This means: “[From] Paul and the brother Sosthenes, who are called and apostles of Jesus Christ by the will of God.” (also compare 1 Cor. 7:4; etc.) - So the Aramaic text does seem to say that if these females can’t endure, or don’t have self control, then they are to marry and take a wife. It looks like the word arm-la-tha would translate into “lesbians” here.
In my opinion, if Paul meant for arm-la-tha to mean “widows,” he wouldn’t have included that word in the first verse when the second verse is referring to the men in the first verse to “take a wife” rather “than burn with desire.” Paul would have said in the first verse something like this: “And to the widows, it is beneficial for them if they remain like me. But if they are not enduring, they shall marry.” And then in another verse or verses he would address the unmarried as: “But I am saying to those [men] who don’t have wives, that it benefits them if they shall be remaining like me. But if they are not enduring, they shall marry. For it is beneficial [for them] to take a wife than to burn with desire.” These renderings would support the traditional interpretation, but of course Paul didn’t word these verses like this. The wording he chose can definitely be interpreted as him exhorting the arm-la-tha (lesbians) to take a wife, based on the rules of Aramaic grammar.
I think I have found proof that the words ya-thom or yath-ma can also mean a gay man. The Hebrew and Aramaic text at Job 6:27 could be calling the so-called "fatherless boy" a "lover." The context seems to be referring to a gay male but that verse isn't translated correctly. Additionally, at other verses, there are some circumstantial evidence that sounds like these words are referring to a gay man.
"For also the gay male (orphan) ye would cause to fall (attack, slay) and ye would [even] grieve your lover." (Job 6:27). I agree and believe that the Greek LXX translated the first part of this verse correctly while the Aramaic Peshitta translated the second part correctly.
The Hebrew word tap-pi-lu can mean "ye would fall upon, attack, strike, slay, overthrow, etc." (2 Chron. 32:21; Ex.21:27; Psalm 106:26-27) but literally means: "ye would cause to fall" since it is in the causative Hifil form of the root word nafal "to fall." The Aramaic text along that line here says: ".. ye are behaving arrogantly (magnifying yourself) against the orphan (?gay male?) ..." - This Hebrew verb here does not mean "you would cast a lot (lots)" like many English translations have rendered it. That statement would have been yad-do-tha go-ral "you have cast a lot (lots)" (see Joel 3:3; Obadiah 1:11; Nahum 3:10).
The Hebrew conjunction and verb ve-thic-ru means "& ye would grieve" here. That matches the Aramaic Peshitta translation. The root word cara means: "to grieve, dig, pierce" but James Strong for some reason left out ca-ra's meaning of "to grieve." Aramaic has this same root word pronounced as cra, which appears at this verse, and it most definitely means: "to grieve, sadden, anger" (Dan. 7:15; 2 Sam. 19:2; Matt. 17:23). - The old Aramaic, Greek and Latin translations don't support many of the modern English reinterpretations of the last part of this verse; which was rendered variously as: "you would dig a pit, barter, sell, etc."
“You shall not afflict any widow or fatherless [child].” (Ex. 22:22 NKJV). Psalm 94:6 says this: “They slay the widow and the stranger, and murder the fatherless (orphans).” (NKJV). I have never understood why anyone would harm, afflict (oppress) or kill widows and the fatherless (orphans). The Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek and Latin texts of the Bible all say for believers to not treat widows and orphans that way. So in all of those great cultures, there would be great influence to not oppress them. However, if one understands the widows and orphans to mean lesbians and gay men, then these verses start to make sense. Greek Judaism and Greek Christianity are (or were) clearly homophobic along with Latin Catholicism. The Hebrew and Aramaic Biblical texts aren’t homophobic, though the meaning of certain verses have been corrupted while the text hasn’t been changed. If you add false religion such as Zoroastrianism, which falsely teaches that Gay men are demon possessed, then you see how religion has been used to oppress and kill gay people.
According to the New Testament, people that were demon possessed knew they were. So if gay people don’t see demons or feel possessed, then they aren’t demon possessed. People are born with a homosexual orientation without having any dealings with the occult. Some of these homosexuals are born to godly parents that include pastors, priests, rabbis, etc.
Contrarily, schizophrenic people are the ones that believe they are demon possessed. Schizophrenia affects heterosexual, bisexual and homosexual people. Apparently a schizophrenic gay person can fall prey to scam churches that believe they can cast out gay demons. These churches have no authority from the Bible because the Bible never says that people that are gay are demon possessed.
"Woe to those who enact evil (harmful) decrees, and the writers [who] write trouble (injustice - [Vg.]), to deprive the poor (weak) ones of judgment, and to withhold justice from the afflicted ones of My people, that widows (lesbians) may be their prey, and that they may rob the fatherless (gay men). And what will you do on the day of punishment, and in the desolation which will come from afar? To whom will you flee for help? And where will you leave your glory?" (Isaiah 10:1-3). We see from these verses that if the words "widows" and "fatherless" were meant, they weren't oppressed because of anything they did which may have been the result of not having a (foster-) parent or support. These particular persons are likely lesbians and gay men in this context. They had EVIL (HARMFUL) DECREES against them to make them a prey and to rob them.
Is the Bible Against Homosexuality? by Preacher Mattai © 2016. All rights reserved.
Sub Pages: LGBT