Changes

The choice of the word ''Sodomite'' to denote homosexual prostitutes is itself fitting, as often words both come from and or are translated into terms that denote what they are associated with. The name ''Sodom'' itself means ''burnt'', evidently referring to the judgment of the city, while the word ''whore'' is thought to be derived from a European girl, named Arlotta (or Arletta, also known as Arlette, Herlève and Herleva) who fornicated with Robert, duke of Normandy, and to whom William The Conqueror is believed to have been born<ref>Adam Clarke, commentary, Gn. 34:31</ref><ref>http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761579147/William_I_(of_England).html</ref> Likewise homosexuals themselves have appropriated "gay and "queer" to refer to themselves.  

The choice of the word ''Sodomite'' to denote homosexual prostitutes is itself fitting, as often words both come from and or are translated into terms that denote what they are associated with. The name ''Sodom'' itself means ''burnt'', evidently referring to the judgment of the city, while the word ''whore'' is thought to be derived from a European girl, named Arlotta (or Arletta, also known as Arlette, Herlève and Herleva) who fornicated with Robert, duke of Normandy, and to whom William The Conqueror is believed to have been born<ref>Adam Clarke, commentary, Gn. 34:31</ref><ref>http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761579147/William_I_(of_England).html</ref> Likewise homosexuals themselves have appropriated "gay and "queer" to refer to themselves.  

    

    

== Summation ==

=== Summation ===

Young, among others, concludes that on the basis of linguistic study, context and history, the "reinterpretation" of modern critics has strayed too far and and is fairly termed revolutionary and revisionist."<ref>Young, ibid pp. 133-135</ref>  The following summation, while not exhaustive, provides reasons for the position that no grammatical, categorical, cultural or motivation argument warrants relegating the Levitical injunctions against homosex to merely being prohibitory of idolatrous temple homosex, or belonging to the class of ceremonial laws (which are not the same), or are only motive-specific, but that instead they are universal and immutable.  

Young, among others, concludes that on the basis of linguistic study, context and history, the "reinterpretation" of modern critics has strayed too far and and is fairly termed revolutionary and revisionist."<ref>Young, ibid pp. 133-135</ref>  The following summation, while not exhaustive, provides reasons for the position that no grammatical, categorical, cultural or motivation argument warrants relegating the Levitical injunctions against homosex to merely being prohibitory of idolatrous temple homosex, or belonging to the class of ceremonial laws (which are not the same), or are only motive-specific, but that instead they are universal and immutable.