Aswad
Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GotSteel
I've got to compliment you on some impressive narrative crafting, my problem with it is that Biblical scholars actually changed the passage to make the meaning more clear in the NLV version and it doesn't say anything about pedophilia.
The issue isn't pederasty, either (although it could have been mentioned, had Leviticus been penned way later on). In that regard, I think xssve misses the point, though he touches on it: penetration is the key, along with the implications of the passive, receptive role.
It's all about mounting a man in the manner of prison rape, military rape and all the other varieties of "subjugation by penetration" games that mammalian males engage in as part of their dominance games. That's the act that is outlawed. Forcing yourself on a woman is fine (unless it's illegal or in a socially unacceptable format), because the idea is for her to submit anyway, so subjugating her is par for the course. Forcing yourself on a man, not so much.
There are other concerns that may have played into it, of course. Anal sex is fairly effective at spreading disease, and the Torah is full of directives that are concerned with public health. Many directives are concerned with cultural isolation. Food restrictions are an example, and if you've tried cooking for a social event where strict vegans are in attendance, you probably have an idea of how much extra effort is involved in being a good host to both groups. Other sexual practices are also restricted because they have played a part in the social lives of the adjacent Canaanite culture, such as incest, orgies, zoosex, gay sex, lesbian sex, prostitution and various other entertaining ways for people to have a good time. That means a good Jew would have to recluse himself from Canaanite social events, or break the law, or be rather uncomfortable. In this way, they did not, as a people, get absorbed into the Canaanites, and the Canaanites were prevented from having a major impact on their culture. That, in turn, allowed them to individuate as a group, providing time for their culture to develop in its own direction.
Of course, my memory isn't what it used to be, so the timeframe may be off. I certainly know far too little about the Persian empire to gauge which elements there may have played a part, for instance. They did, after all, have a pivotal role in unifying those religions that became Judaism, since such unification was a requirement for autonomy under Persian rule.
Either way, it's clearly not particularly applicable to the current situation, and certainly not to people that happily mix synthetic and natural fabrics (obviously prohibited) or eat pork (also prohibited) and so forth. And even less so to people that adhere to much of the NT (usually selectively ignoring the point about how the OT is explicitly stated to remain in full effect).
A culture of hatred, not the religion that denounces those cultures, is the modern "theology".
Incidentally, biblical scholarship is not particularly unified, but I'm inclined to think that the translation itself is adequate. The trick, as usual, is to understand that there is a difference between hearing, knowing and doing. One key point is reiterated in a number of religions: for those with ears to hear to open their hearts to that which cannot be spoken. In essence, to look beyond the words themselves to the core of what is an idea, whose form flows free of the momentary interpretations that are rendered into such words as one generation might use as a signpost along the way for those that do not yet grasp it.
The bible is to religion what porn is to sex: a two dimensional snapshot of an androcentric idealization that usually serves little purpose beyond inspiration and masturbation. Not that the bible is all that great for the latter, unless you're good at origami.
Pardon the meandering.
The point to take away from all this is: cocksucking is very Christian. 
Health,
al-Aswad.
_____________________________
"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.
|
RE: COCKsuckin is unChristian - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread