Biblical Sexualities: part 2

"What is 'The Kinsey Scale?'

The Heterosexual-Homosexual Rating Scale, sometimes referred to as the “Kinsey Scale,” was developed by Alfred Kinsey and his colleagues Wardell Pomeroy and Clyde Martin in 1948, in order to account for research findings that showed people did not fit into neat and exclusive heterosexual or homosexual categories." (http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/research/ak-hhscale.html)

Bisexuality and Pan-sexuality

Bisexuality and Pan-sexuality, in Biblical terms are a bit harder to deal with because they are orientations never specifically mentioned. On the other hand, hey may also be the easiest to deal with, because they are rather nonspecific. What I mean to say, is that Bisexuality and Pan-sexuality are much more fluid that strict heterosexuality or strict homosexuality. People who identify as Bisexual claim to be attracted to both males and females; Pan-sexuals are attracted to people regardless of gender (consider it as being attracted to men, women, transsexuals, neutrois, the androgynous, etc.).

First let's deal with Bisexuality only; life is easier this way. Okay, to begin with, the Bible never actually mentions bisexuality. The problem is that the Bible discusses Heterosexuality favorably (arguably, as discussed in the previous edition), and Homosexuality unfavorably (as we will discuss in the next edition). Because Bisexuality spans both Hetero- and Homosexuality, it is a bit unfair to say that the Bible either condones or condemns Bisexual behavior. It would be arguably more accurate to claim that the Bible smiles upon those who engage in heterosexual behavior, yet frowns on those who engage in homosexual behavior. Therefore, could it be said that the Bible does not frown on Bisexuals who date those people of the opposite sex? On the opposite hand, few fundamentalists would disagree if I said that the Bible DOES frown upon Bisexuals who date those of the same sex.

So, as long as Bisexuals deny, discipline, and/or try to overcome half of their sexuality, they pass under the radar, because as far as anyone knows, they are functionally Heterosexual.

Now, Pan-sexuality is a slight bit harder to deal with. In an effort to better illustrate some issues that are exclusive to Pan-sexuality, let me tell two short, real (as in they've actually happened) stories. First, an example from my own life:

I was in a relationship with a man for over four years and most everything was good and pretty much normal. This was, until my boyfriend informed me that he has come to terms with his being transgendered. He was a woman in a man's body. She has now legally changed her name and begun hormone therapy. Hypothetically, had we continued dating, would that have constituted Homosexuality, because she is now technically female?

Another story, in which I will change the names to protect the innocent, begins with a friend of mine from school. Meagan began talking to this guy on the internet. She liked him and he liked her, and everything was fine and normal. This was, until Richard told Meagan that he was transgendered. He was born female, but had now been through the whole process of hormone therapy and is male except for the actual sexual reassignment surgery. Because Richard was born female, does his dating a woman constitute Homosexuality?

As food for thought, I would pose these questions. Are these events the same? Do they really constitute events of Homosexuality/ same sex Pan-sexuality? Is dating someone who is transgendered/neutrois defined under the blanket term of sexual immorality?

These people are not unlovable. In fact, they need the love of God just like everyone else, perhaps even more so. Perhaps there is a reason that there are people who are willing to seek love in any format. There is no sin in wanting to be loved.

Biblical Sexualities: part 1

So, I have a friend who likes to get on a soap-box about how the Bible condemns homosexuality. Now, I have read the Bible cover to cover (except for about half of psalms and proverbs). There were some interesting finds, familiar stories and long rambling lists. Here though, I would like to discuss the views of the Biblical stance on the spectrum of sexualities as we understand it today. Let's start with the easy one:

Heterosexuality

Genesis 2:24 and Mark 10:7 state that "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh." This passage is one of the most quoted in reference to the Bible's PRO stance on heterosexuality. The "reason" in question is found in the previous verse in Genesis: "The man said, 'This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called 'woman,' for she was taken out of man.'" Now, some people will also tell you that even though this particular woman was Eve, she was not Adam's first wife. Many cultures believe that Adam's first wife was a woman named Lilith, who was created at the same time as man, and not after from his rib. The legends surrounding Lilith tell of how she refused to submit to Adam and went as far to lie with Archangel Samael. One question that this raises is "Why did Adam have to have a new wife?" Aside from the fact that his first wife was a cheating whore, she was also the first feminist. So, does the Bible condemn feminists, whores, or women? Well, it's accepted that women are not condemned. The Bible does talk about promiscuous women and how they are foolish, sinful, and should be stoned to death, however, God commanded one of his servants, Hosea, to marry a whore, ergo it's possible that they can be redeemed. Several times throughout the Bible though, author's discuss women being subordinate to men, so who knows on the feminism note?

Anyway, we're discussing heterosexuality, not feminism. Many people never make it to the point of the Bible advocating heterosexuality, only the point of it condemning homosexuality. Paul, a disciple of Christ, tells the church in Corinth that "It is good for a man not to marry. But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. I say this as a concession, not as a command." (1 Corinthians 7:1-6) Now we're getting somewhere. Here, Paul advocates celibacy, which will be discussed in a later section of this discussion. The interesting thing though is that Paul promotes marriage only because of immorality. Why would he do this? Was the sexual immorality he combating homosexuality, as many people believe, or was is promiscuity? Honestly, which seems more likely in this context?

Do I really have to answer for you? Really? Okay, *sigh* it's promiscuity, prostitution, frequent unprotected sexual activities among multiple individuals which often results in spreading STDs, STIs, children that parents can't afford, and lots of mental trauma.

So, while Paul does set up a heterosexual model, he does so out of concession not only for health reasons, but also for the primary logical reason, that heterosexuality is the only childbearing model of sexuality that we have.

And there we go. It doesn't sound as great as it did in my head, but it'll serve for now. Open comments time!

Hiatus

Okay, so. . .

Even though I know no one actually follows this blog, I'd like to just say that I'm back from my school-year long hiatus. Having returned, I would like to start somewhere near where I left off, but that will have to also start a new post, so here we go!