It means it has to be understood for the time and place.
Biblical scholars have employed the social sciences to study the relational and gender patterns of the ancient Mediterranean world—the world that produced the Bible. Professor Mary Tolbert summarizes that research with the following words:
The single most important concept that defines sexuality in the ancient Mediterranean world, whether we are talking about the kingdoms of Egypt or of Assyria or whether we are talking about the later kingdoms of Greece and Rome, is that approved sexual acts never occurred between social equals. Sexuality, by definition, in ancient Mediterranean societies required the combination of dominance and submission. This crucial social and political root metaphor of dominance and submission as the definition of sexuality rested upon a physical basis that assumed every sex act required a penetrator and someone who was penetrated. Needless to say, this definition of sexuality was entirely male—not surprising in the heavily patriarchal societies of the Mediterranean.
In these societies sexual acts between men did happen, but they happened in order to show dominance of one group of men or a man over another, especially during times of war. It was not uncommon for men who had conquered a foreign army to rape them in order to show they were dominant and of a higher status.
“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” (18:22)
“If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them.” (20:13)
These verses are part of the Holiness Code in the Old Testament book of Leviticus (chapters 17-26) that attempted to spell out ways the people of Israel would act differently than their Mediterranean neighbors. In light of the previously mentioned sexual practices of Israel’s neighbors, it becomes clear that this prohibition in Leviticus was an attempt to preserve the internal harmony of Jewish male society by not allowing them to participate in anal intercourse as a form of expressing or gaining social and political dominance. These verses in no way prohibit, nor do they even speak, to loving, caring sexual relationships between people of the same gender.
2007-08-12 21:05:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by ZER0 C00L ••AM••VT•• 7
·
6⤊
4⤋
This Site Might Help You.
RE:
What exactly does "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination" mean?
The bible uses fornication often, it talks of sex and the like, yet in this passage it says lie. Have we just interpreted this text to fit our needs as a society to condemn homosexuals? Can we truly be sure that our translations are correct? Why would htis passage not say thou shalt not...
2015-08-19 03:28:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
OK
For starters, why would it be wrong to lie down with a person of the same gender, if it was alright to have sex with them? Thats like saying it isn't ok to eat Burger King, but McDonalds is fine.
I think you might be over-analyzing this, no offense.
And also, it says elsewhere in the Bible that homosexuality is wrong. In fact, it says this blatantly.
And as for what does "It is an abomination mean?" It means that homosexual intercourse is exactly that. An abomination.
Its a hard line, and I certainly don't hate or condemn gay or lesbian people because we're all human anyway, but its what God says so its what I believe.
I hope I was clear enough
2007-08-12 21:19:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by A-dawg 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
For some reason this question was pointed out to me and I will give it a shot though my interpretations of the Bible could probably get us both damned, but since a friend wanted this answered, you get an answer.
The Bible was originally a group of word to mouth stories passed on from generation to generation in several languages Aramaic, Yiddish, Greek, et al. and with the passing on of each story from one culture to another it is possible that something may have been lost or alrtered in the translation.
The quote you are playing with comes from Leviticus or Laws depending on whose Bible you are reading and there are scholars who find it derivative of the Code of Hamarabi. They think this because of the fact that Hebrews migrated in or about the time this part of the Bible was first written and they may or may not have picked up some influences from other cultures.
BTW, the Bible prefers the word 'Beget" to "Fornicate" as it to get together to have a child. Lie would imply that there is no way two men could beget anything by having sex with one another. Lie also is reference in the story of Ruth where Ruth lies next to her future husband and in this manner chooses him to be her mate. Thus lying with a man the way you lie with a woman could imply that men are not to marry other men. It is another interpretation of that law. However, the primary understanding of that quote is that men are not supposed to have sex with one another.
The laws go on to elaborate a bit by talking about lying with sheep and farm animals. Clearly the point there is to rule out anal sex. Put the two laws together and you get the idea that homosexual sex is pretty much against the rules. This should have been covered in your philosophy or cultural heritage courses, if not ask for your money back.
This is not a part of the Bible many religions focus on anymore, but the fact is it is in some if not most Bibles.
You may also find the stories of Onan and Sodom and Gamora of interest on this subject. They touch on the "what if" angle, such as what if I disobey.
And Yes, you can be sure of the translation if you can read Ancient Greek and Aramaic and if you have access to the ancient records. You probably have to go from English, to Latin, to Greek, to Aramaic, but it is doable.
And if I were guessing, I would guess they also chose not to use the word fornicate because these laws were to be taught to women and children and not to be used as a sex education class. Lie was specific enough for a child and respectful enough for a woman so as not to offend. There is no telling who may have figured this out or when but they made a conscious effort to clean up the language a bit.
Oh, and remember the Bible is only a small collection of all the stories out there, chosen by a bunch of guys 900 years after the fact. You could find stories more to your liking if you look hard enough.
2007-08-13 10:01:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by LORD Z 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Perhaps the same reason the writer in Genesis wrote "and Adam knew Eve". It was the word chosen.
As for the question about the possibility of interpretting it so as to fit our needs...I'd say that would be a valid argument....if...
if there weren't other injunctions against such behaviour. After using a concordance to find all verses, I'd begin to see a certain harmony in what is being said.
Does Scripture condemn homosexuals? Yes...and fornicators, and adulterers, and thieves and liars and many more behaviours that fail the moral code.
Which is important for us to understand...that the Bible doesn't TARGET homosexuality in and of itself. To say "well, I don't believe the bible because of it's stand on homosexuality" is anyone's perogative. I'm sure there is many a man cheating on his wife who would disagree with the Bible.
And the same could be said for anyone who has looked at the moral code built on Scripture, compared it to their life and decided they prefered the life they have. Remember, our personal choices is one liberty God has given us...but just because I choose not to live under the moral code does not invalidate the moral code, no more than if I decided I did not want to submit to our taxation system would my decision invalidate the authority of the IRS
2007-08-12 21:38:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by Last Stand 2010 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
Gee, I would have thought this would be obvious. How else do you "lie" with a female?
Yeah, maybe it means something different *roll eyes*. Maybe it means that the way you don't speak truthfully to a woman ( a normal course of behaviour ), you shouldn't do to a man, or "lie" with him.
LOL.
2007-08-12 21:10:24
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
That particular story book was first written in Aramaeic, then translated to Latin, then English (and other local languages)
Sure - there are going to be HEAPS of translation errors/variances/conveniences. Does it matter? no. Why?
1. You don't believe the Bible is the word of God - it is just a story book.
or
2. You DO believe that the Bible is the word of God and He meant it to GUIDE you - in which case a literal translation is irrelevant.
It IS important to baptists and the evangelists catholics etc to enable them to create a divided society. Just read some of the bigot responses above.
2007-08-12 21:11:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
It means exactly what it says.
1 Corinthians 6:9&10
Romans 1:27
We can not twist it to suit our cause.
2007-08-12 21:08:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by pestie58 the spider hunter 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
I think it's a condemnation of homosexuality. No sense in denying it. I think it's an ancient and unjustified prejudice that should not be perpetuated, but I don't try to spin it as indicating something else.
2007-08-12 21:09:11
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
That commandment is given in Leviticus 20:13 right in the middle of a long passage on sexual relationships which are prohibited. The terms "lie with" "sleep with" "uncover nakedness" and "have sexual relations with" are used interchangably.
In verse 18 it says "If a man lies with a woman during her monthly period..."
2007-08-12 21:10:56
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
No matter what Jesus said to be compassionate. I cried when I read some of the replies to this guys question. How could people be so hateful to another human being.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AgsbKt2lDElk6Lv5U0enkxPd7BR.?qid=20070812193900AAYY6eK&show=7&cp=1&tp=2#all-answers&tnu=52
2007-08-12 21:24:20
·
answer #11
·
answered by Lemon-Fresh Smurf 4
·
1⤊
1⤋