Neon Genesis Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 Genesis 38 is probably one of the most bizarre stories in the whole book. In this story, Onan's brother dies, so he has to marry his brother's former wife. God then commands Onan to have anal sex with his brother's wife, but he refuses to do so because it won't be his child, so God puts Onan to death for not having anal sex. 8Then Judah said to Onan, ‘Go in to your brother’s wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her; raise up offspring for your brother.’ 9But since Onan knew that the offspring would not be his, he spilled his semen on the ground whenever he went in to his brother’s wife, so that he would not give offspring to his brother. 10What he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death alsoSo, what was the point of this story? It's so weird because it's a random break that takes place in the middle of the story of Joseph and his brothers but has nothing at all to do with that story. Why does it suddenly break from the main narrative like that and what's the whole meaning of this bizarre plot? That God likes anal sex? How come you never hear this story preached on from the pulpit on Sundays? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snakefoot Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 Where do you get anal sex out of that? More like pre-ejaculation withdrawl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shyone Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 Where do you get anal sex out of that? More like pre-ejaculation withdrawl. I'm with you. It even implies there was no penetration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neon Genesis Posted January 8, 2010 Author Share Posted January 8, 2010 Where do you get anal sex out of that? More like pre-ejaculation withdrawl. It was the whole "go into" euphemism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cracked Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 I can't understand why God couldn't do the job himself. He screwed that cute little virgin "Mary". Why not this woman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shyone Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 Where do you get anal sex out of that? More like pre-ejaculation withdrawl. It was the whole "go into" euphemism. I was hoping it was a euphemism for swallowing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snakefoot Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 Where do you get anal sex out of that? More like pre-ejaculation withdrawl. It was the whole "go into" euphemism. Well, I still do not see how you get anal sex out of that. Nonetheless, if I correctly recall my Middle Eastern anthropology (or is it social studies?), husbands and wives did not sleep together in the literal sense and had separate sleeping arrangements. So, that phrase means to go into her tent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight-mindwanderings Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 I always thought this was the passage used to speak against contraception and sometimes masturbation. Like it was carefully left in there to fuck with people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snakefoot Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 I always thought this was the passage used to speak against contraception and sometimes masturbation. Like it was carefully left in there to fuck with people. Or keep them from fucking with themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ephymeris Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 This passage has been twisted to rail against masturbation but I always understood it to be a story warning you not to disobey god (and consequently the local customs). It's not the spilled seed that ticks off god so much as the fact that Onan refused to do his duty of providing a male heir for his dead brother, thus leaving the widow unable to own and keep her dead husband's possessions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shyone Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 This passage has been twisted to rail against masturbation but I always understood it to be a story warning you not to disobey god (and consequently the local customs). It's not the spilled seed that ticks off god so much as the fact that Onan refused to do his duty of providing a male heir for his dead brother, thus leaving the widow unable to own and keep her dead husband's possessions. Should this life shaking lesson be taken seriously by the fundamentalists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OpheliaGinger Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 The message is: God is kinky and if you refuse his demands, he will kill you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neon Genesis Posted January 8, 2010 Author Share Posted January 8, 2010 So God is a sadist in the BDSM roleplay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lunaticheathen Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 *sings "Every Sperm is Sacred" a la Monty Python's Meaning of Life* But, yeah, I don't see the anal sex part of this - seems to be more about inheritance, and Onan simply didn't want his brother's widow to have kids that would compete with his own wives'. The joys of ancient goatherd polygamy. The "spilling his seed on the ground" part has been conveniently used to restrict masturbation and contraception by many christians, which is something I always want to hit them in the face for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Net Eng Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 So God is a sadist in the BDSM roleplay? No, no, no!! He just likes to watch!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShackledNoMore Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 Where do you get anal sex out of that? More like pre-ejaculation withdrawl. It looks like the big penalties for early withdrawal started long before they came up with IRAs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ Fuego ♦ Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 Warning: non-sarcastic answer follows The tradition was that if the husband died without having kids, his brother would "marry" the widow and have sex with her, but any offspring would be considered the brother's. This was often considered a threat to the inheritance of one's children, so many guys didn't want to do it. Onan was enjoying the sex, but keeping her from becoming pregnant so he could have the best of both worlds. My own take is that this story was included by religious leaders to keep the fear of god element in there, since this practice was considered law in the tribal days but they knew how guys think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neon Genesis Posted January 9, 2010 Author Share Posted January 9, 2010 Why is this passage randomly inserted in the Joseph and the coat of many colors narrative? It just feels out of place because it randomly interrupts the narrative and has nothing to do with the rest of the story. Is this because of that whole four-document hypothesis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts