I Study the Bible

@CopperCicada does the New Testament also ban all non-procrative sex?

@CopperCicada and masturbation !!

@Reverend That is how I was raised. The reasoning was that God is love and love is life. So only sex that has the capacity to create life is non-degenerate. That cuts out a whole lot of sexual behavior. Heterosexual and homosexual. And with heterosexual couples not just oral and anal sex. The liimts go very far.

I have been told that this is not the majority view in Christianity. But it was the orthopraxy taught to me as being the most litteral, conservative and constrained approach to sexuality. Any personal choice outside that was then a personal concession and really one's own business and ethical burden.

For me, this made me miserable.

Now my view is that anything two people who love eachother do is not just ethically fine but a blessing. The only way I am able to not self-hate and have guilt about sexuality is to stop at the first part of what I was taught as the basis of sexual orthopraxy. God is love-- so any love is really Godly. And that includes how love is expressed.

Of course people will say that men loving men and women loving women is not Godly.

Well. I guess I'm agnostic about that. I can't help be, because I'm not having sex with men. I'm never having sex with men-- so I'm not sure why being taught the prohibitions against "what men do when they have sex with men" applies to me at all-- unless it applies to non-procreative sexual acts as I've explained above.

I've had enough people put their nose in my own sexuality as a straight monogamous male that I'm not going to do it to another. I've had my bed policed and my heart policed-- and I'm not doing it to others. And I guess I'm agnostic about it because as soon as you evoke Leviticus 18:23-- I can't help but seeing it apply to me as per the orthopraxy I was raised to hold true.

@CopperCicada I understand, it would leave someone feeling rather bitter to be raised that way. Though I would have to disagree with your view, any love is really God. The New Testament does reiterate same sex being an abomination, as well as heterosexual sex outside of marriage, but the bed of the married is undefiled between the two. I don't believe a person can defile the bed with his married spouse, (man and woman) meaning whatever sexual acts are between the two in love is perfectly biblical.

@Reverend Well. According to the orthopraxy I was raised with-- you have walked back many things. I respect that. You have walked back the same things I have. Perhaps for similar reasons. Perhaps for different reasons. We have lived different lives, so I suspect for different reasons.

When I take the textual tradition absolutely rigidly and literally, I can only come to the conclusion of the orthopraxy I was raised with. So pretty much the whole world has stepped out of the litteral textual tradition.

I am fine with that.
I don't judge it.

The only way I can recover my own spirituality is to seal my sexuality with love and commitment.

@Reverend I would just say that I think people have no idea how religious and ethical language critical of homosexuals can actually impact heterosexual people. People with empathy and compassion see themselves in the lives of those around them, and that includes queer people.

@CopperCicada sure, I don't hate or even dislike a homosexual and have no issue with them in general society. I just don't agree with their lifestyle. I've talked with some of them and they do take that as a direct attack on them but take it into reason when I explain to them that I accept them as a person and wish no ill on them, its what they do that I don't agree with.

And this is appreciated, but "hate the sin, not the sinner" is in the same neighborhood as "seperate but equal." Tolerance is putting up with something because there's no choice. Acceptance is an embracing of something. I understand some feel only the physical act constitutes the sin, but the "sin" is the manifestation of a person's heart. @Reverend

@Reverend I’d be the first to admit that stating one’s personal views is not necessarily hate speech.

That said, something I don’t understand about the direction of the world is that I was brought up to not talk about certain things and to not ask or comment about certain things. One did not talk about one’s sex life, and one did not ask about or comment about the sex lives or marriages of others.

Other things one didn’t talk openly about was faith, and generally politics.

I’m not even queer, and I can’t express how offensive I have found people’s questioning and comments.

I am not talking about close friends, mentors, family. I’m talking random people. And those questions have generally come from people of a fairly conservative world view and religious confession.

I’m not talking offensive like I’m going to get angry or something. No fist fights or angry letters. More like— Can we not? When did this become acceptable? Do I really have to listen to this?

I can’t imagine how I would feel if my answers elicited a negative response from the questioner as when people often speak to queer people. Especially if the questioner is a stranger...

I deal with people all the time where I dislike their lifestyles. Any number of reasons. But unless I am close to that person... or there in immanent danger to somebody.... I keep quiet. Maybe it is because you are a pastor, and such things are your business, but I would never ever comment on a person’s body, or their sexuality.

@CopperCicada I'm no pastor, I'm nothing more then a bible believer. I don't make it ky business to tell anyone how to live generally. If a question is asked I will answer it etc. But i never go about to condemn someone else. They have the option to live how they want just like myself. When I was growing up I attended a church alone as a child, it was the typical watered down Church and someone's sexual orientation was something that i don't remember ever discussed. Homosexual behavior was talked about but thats all and only once or twice. I don't even recall the church teaching about marriage. I was a child then though, so anything could have been possible. I'm only in my mid 30s so you have a little more experience then I do lol.

@CopperCicada Could be argued, but the text doesn't support that interpretation.

@Graylight Yes but it is not your business to tell someone they should not be allowed to believe homosexuality is a sin. I agree with treating all with respect, because we ALL have sinned and we all sin, and those that point the finger at homosexuals as if they are in a special class had better remember that, but it is not your place to tell people what they should be allowed to believe. It IS your place to try to convince people to agree with you using logic, but it is not your place to tell people what they should be ALLOWED to believe, especially if we try to use the legal system here. Using the legal system to control people's beliefs is unconstitutional.

@BabyLonia No verses on masturbation at all. Only what people misinterpret but the context doesn't support.

@SpiritualMan And your theology degree comes from where?

@Graylight Who cares? I have learned from the best. Some seminaries work hard to mess your faith up, no thank you to them.

@Graylight I learned a lot from a Michael Heiser on YouTube and his Naked Bible Podcasts, the guy has a PhD in Hebrew and Semetic languages, most theology professors grope to know what he knows.

@SpiritualMan A seminary is hardly required to obtain a degree. And study without analysis based on academic understanding is just opinion.

@Graylight I have done a lot of studying on my own. I don't need a piece of paper. The studies I have done very much count as academic with the sources I have used.

@SpiritualMan Well. The Bible does support the interpretation I mention.

It depends on how one approaches interpretation itself.

The logic behind the interpretation I present is that the Bible teaches that God created a natural order. And that violating that natural order incurs God’s wrath. What is that natural order? Well. When it comes to sexuality, that male and female animals come together to procreate. Any form of sexuality that is not intended to procreate is therefore degenerate. That is why homosexuality is degenerate. And by extension it would be why any heterosexual sex that is not intended to procreate is also degenerate. That view dooms queer people to guilt and contempt. And it dooms straight people to a whole lot of shame.

So as I was religiously educated, not only is homosexual sex degenerate, so is the use of contraceptives. Or pulling out. Ejaculating outside the vagina. Oral and anal sex. Having sex on a woman’s period. Having sex with a post menopausal woman. Knowing one of you is sterile. Having sex with the knowledge that conception is unlikely.

That’s the furthest extent that the notion of God creating a natural order can be taken.

I have been told that’s a heterodoxical view. I don’t know. Some form of it seems to be common. Some model of sex being degenerate if it fails to follow some natural order. Straight and gay.

@CopperCicada However you could also argue that sexual relations between men and woman are natural. I am attracted to a woman's 1: legs, 2: hair, 3: chest 4: face and mouth 5: backside, 6: even the neck or back of the neck, and not just her private parts....I take it that such attraction is natural because God programmed it into me. I like pretty feet, but I will NOT discuss foot fetishes here....which I do NOT have to any extreme....period...

@CopperCicada There are zero bible verses that say it is a sin to have sex with a woman after menopause. If it were, the bible would say so.

@CopperCicada I get your points on natural law, but it can be taken too far and twisted out of context with the plain teachings of the bible. Apparently procreation is possible between humans and angels (Genesis 6), but this was a grave sin so bad that it led to conditions on the earth that led to Noah's flood....so that is a HUGE message God wants to get across to us...

@CopperCicada Actually, the literal meaning in Hebrew is a prohibition against two men sleeping in a bed owned by a woman. That's it.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-specific-meaning-of-Leviticus-20-13/answer/Cynthia-Avishegnath

@LeopoldBloom Why would that be a sin if it is specific to a bed owned by a woman. The Hebrew word may have that connotation, but I would read it to mean that it is a sin for a man to lay with another man because a woman belongs in that spot instead of another man.

@LeopoldBloom The Greek word in the New Testament is arsenokoites, which means a man should not bed down with another man...however, darn you, now I need to do some more research, it is all your fault...I will get back on this later......