FreeThinkerNZ Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Does the bible prohibit same sex relations between females or it is only males who are apparently abominable? As a bisexual woman I want to make sure I am potentially included. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
◊ crazyguy123 ◊ Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 I've never seen a place in the Bible that actually stated that sex between females is a sin, but I did find some interesting apologetics on it a while back. Romans 1:26-27 puts this invalid assumption to rest: “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.” Clearly, this passage puts lesbianism on equal ground with male homosexuality. Lesbianism is described as women exchanging natural relations (with men) for unnatural relations (with women). According to the Bible, being a lesbian is just as sinful as being a homosexual male. Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-lesbian.html#ixzz2yCgMggON Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srd44 Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 You're safe... as long as you don't bring any animals into your bedroom fun!! Lev 18:23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted April 7, 2014 Author Share Posted April 7, 2014 Thanks Guys. Gay men are mentioned more times than women... I guess the writers couldn't get their heads around female sexuality let alone female homosexuality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
◊ crazyguy123 ◊ Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Thanks Guys. Gay men are mentioned more times than women... I guess the writers couldn't get their heads around female sexuality let alone female homosexuality. Well, according to scripture, women were nothing more than sex slaves and baby-makers, so their sexual interests didn't even matter and were probably not worth mentioning. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Thanks Guys. Gay men are mentioned more times than women... I guess the writers couldn't get their heads around female sexuality let alone female homosexuality. Or even back in the Bronze age the men thought girl on girl was hot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted April 7, 2014 Author Share Posted April 7, 2014 Thanks Guys. Gay men are mentioned more times than women... I guess the writers couldn't get their heads around female sexuality let alone female homosexuality. Well, according to scripture, women were nothing more than sex slaves and baby-makers, so their sexual interests didn't even matter and were probably not worth mentioning. In much of the xian community, nothing's changed ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deidre Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Yes, homosexuality is a "sin" according to the bible, but polygamy was ok. Gee, ya think a bunch of dudes compiled the Bible or what? (only men can marry more than one woman at one time) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pantophobia Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 The word that we translate as "homosexual" in the bible may have been closer to "homosexual prostitute" back in the original writings. The idea that a word means the same thing with the same connotations today as it did back in the Bronze Age is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deidre Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Lol that's true. To "know" someone back then now means to have had sex with him/her. I should start bringing that phrase back..,did you "know" her, I'll ask my make friends. You know....knowwwww her. hehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deidre Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Male friends not make. Lol I don't know how to edit. :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
◊ crazyguy123 ◊ Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Male friends not make. Lol I don't know how to edit. :/ After you get to 25 posts, the word "edit" will then appear at the bottom of each post you make, allowing you to edit what you want to edit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thereisnoperfect Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Barely any mention of homosexuality at all, really. It's like 6, 7 passages? And many readers think that some of those are about sex acts as part of idolatry, as with temple prostitutes. Others hinge on very suspect translations. To the extent that the bible has consistent moral messages, it's much clearer about justice and how we should treat the poor--but strangely, those don't get brought up as much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miekko Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 The Talmudic rabbis were at some point not entirely sure on whether a wife indulging in lesbian sex in fact committed an act of adultery or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 In my studies in this area, I found it interesting that "Paul", instead of using an already existing word for homosexuality, decided to create his own word, arsenokoites, to describe homosexuality. This only further muddies the water and it is understood to only refer to male homosexuality, if you want to even describe it that way. From what I understand, it appears that Paul took the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew words in Leviticus regarding men lying with men. It literally means male bed liers from what I understand. Numerous websites explore its meaning and its translation throughout the history of the church. This is another example of a situation where if god wanted us to understand the rules, he should have made it clear and not subject to misunderstanding and misinterpretation. I say do as you will, I think the only arguments Christians can make is that it goes against the biblical definition of marriage and that any sexual activity outside of marriage is a sin. To me that is all they have. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xtify Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Barely any mention of homosexuality at all, really. It's like 6, 7 passages? And many readers think that some of those are about sex acts as part of idolatry, as with temple prostitutes. Others hinge on very suspect translations. To the extent that the bible has consistent moral messages, it's much clearer about justice and how we should treat the poor--but strangely, those don't get brought up as much. There is also the possibility that Jesus himself was gay (if he existed at all). Mark 14:51-52 talks about a naked young man in a linen cloth that was with jesus when he was arrested. Also, his relationship with John was particularly affectionate. John was described as the 'disciple whom jesus loved', and at one point he was laying on his chest (John 13:25). If Jesus actually was gay, it would be quite ironic that, not only does the church today disregard his advice on just about everything, they actively campaign against homosexuality. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest afireinside Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Thanks Guys. Gay men are mentioned more times than women... I guess the writers couldn't get their heads around female sexuality let alone female homosexuality. The Bible pretty much condones female homosexuality when you think of the Kings with multiple wives. You think that the Godly kings wouldn't have expected same sex relationships in their harem and they were permissible by God in the OT. Besides I was a concubine I'd be a lesbian for sure, no fat lazy guy with an overgrown beard is gonna satisfy me sexually, I'm happy to say most would have and nowhere is that mentioned in the Bible. For some reason men are different!. I guess there was a lot of self denial going on in the Bible times. "I'm not gay, see I'll prove it by being homophobic in my literature". Was it Peter that talked about burning with lust for men hmmmm he seems to know a bit about same sex attraction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest afireinside Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Oh and John seemed to be quite touch feely with Jesus, he constantly referred to himself as being loved by Jesus. I think homosexuality is just the whipping boy of Christianity and it's so lame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted April 7, 2014 Author Share Posted April 7, 2014 In my studies in this area, I found it interesting that "Paul", instead of using an already existing word for homosexuality, decided to create his own word, arsenokoites, to describe homosexuality. This only further muddies the water and it is understood to only refer to male homosexuality, if you want to even describe it that way. From what I understand, it appears that Paul took the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew words in Leviticus regarding men lying with men. It literally means male bed liers from what I understand. Numerous websites explore its meaning and its translation throughout the history of the church. This is another example of a situation where if god wanted us to understand the rules, he should have made it clear and not subject to misunderstanding and misinterpretation. I say do as you will, I think the only arguments Christians can make is that it goes against the biblical definition of marriage and that any sexual activity outside of marriage is a sin. To me that is all they have. I agree, it is all they have. Which brings me to another point. Underlying the bible's homophobia, is a lot of sexual repression. Sexual activity outside marriage is prohibited. Why was it necessary to control sexual activity in order to control people generally? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xtify Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 In my studies in this area, I found it interesting that "Paul", instead of using an already existing word for homosexuality, decided to create his own word, arsenokoites, to describe homosexuality. This only further muddies the water and it is understood to only refer to male homosexuality, if you want to even describe it that way. From what I understand, it appears that Paul took the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew words in Leviticus regarding men lying with men. It literally means male bed liers from what I understand. Numerous websites explore its meaning and its translation throughout the history of the church. This is another example of a situation where if god wanted us to understand the rules, he should have made it clear and not subject to misunderstanding and misinterpretation. I say do as you will, I think the only arguments Christians can make is that it goes against the biblical definition of marriage and that any sexual activity outside of marriage is a sin. To me that is all they have. I agree, it is all they have. Which brings me to another point. Underlying the bible's homophobia, is a lot of sexual repression. Sexual activity outside marriage is prohibited. Why was it necessary to control sexual activity in order to control people generally? Paternity was something that couldn't be confirmed until DNA tests were invented. As a man, the only way to be sure a child was your offspring was to marry a virgin and keep her in the house away from other men. Men in those times didn't want to support other mens' children or leave property to anyone who wasn't in their bloodline. But that only explains the control of women, not the control of homosexual behaviour. I'm not sure about that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironhorse Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 Yes, homosexuality is a "sin" according to the bible, but polygamy was ok. Gee, ya think a bunch of dudes compiled the Bible or what? (only men can marry more than one woman at one time) There is not a scripture that condones polygamy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xtify Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 2 Samuel 12:7-8: Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul; And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted April 8, 2014 Author Share Posted April 8, 2014 In my studies in this area, I found it interesting that "Paul", instead of using an already existing word for homosexuality, decided to create his own word, arsenokoites, to describe homosexuality. This only further muddies the water and it is understood to only refer to male homosexuality, if you want to even describe it that way. From what I understand, it appears that Paul took the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew words in Leviticus regarding men lying with men. It literally means male bed liers from what I understand. Numerous websites explore its meaning and its translation throughout the history of the church. This is another example of a situation where if god wanted us to understand the rules, he should have made it clear and not subject to misunderstanding and misinterpretation. I say do as you will, I think the only arguments Christians can make is that it goes against the biblical definition of marriage and that any sexual activity outside of marriage is a sin. To me that is all they have. I agree, it is all they have. Which brings me to another point. Underlying the bible's homophobia, is a lot of sexual repression. Sexual activity outside marriage is prohibited. Why was it necessary to control sexual activity in order to control people generally? Paternity was something that couldn't be confirmed until DNA tests were invented. As a man, the only way to be sure a child was your offspring was to marry a virgin and keep her in the house away from other men. Men in those times didn't want to support other mens' children or leave property to anyone who wasn't in their bloodline. But that only explains the control of women, not the control of homosexual behaviour. I'm not sure about that one. Makes sense about paternity. I think this explains why male/female marriage was invented, and perhaps the ban on homosexuality is a logical consequence of that? Yes, homosexuality is a "sin" according to the bible, but polygamy was ok. Gee, ya think a bunch of dudes compiled the Bible or what? (only men can marry more than one woman at one time) There is not a scripture that condones polygamy. It must be exhausting trying to keep up with every one of the bible's hundreds of rules on social conduct. Don't you ever feel like breaking out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironhorse Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 2 Samuel 12:7-8: Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul; And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things. Do you think that scripture condones polygamy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted April 8, 2014 Author Share Posted April 8, 2014 2 Samuel 12:7-8: Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul; And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things. Do you think that scripture condones polygamy? Do you think it condones misogny? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts