Journal of Biblical Literature

Journal of Biblical Literature

This article deals with the history of asexuality and the stakeholders responsible for demystifying the book of Leviticus and specifically the verses 18:22 and 20:13 of that book. The author based his arguments on the philological analysis that laws focuses mainly on the male-to-male sexual contact as a whole. He tried to assess the Israelites’ outlook on homosexuality involving male counterparts, and compare this view with that of other Mediterranean tribes at the time.

The author attempted to compare the legislation of the Israelites in the Holiness code to what is referred in other ancient Mediterranean and near eastern cultures and was able to get clear contrasts. For instance, just like elsewhere, in Israel the differences between active and receptive sexual responsibilities were based on gender[1]. However, in other cultures, issues such as status and age were major contributors to defining the sexual role appropriate for a certain person, while this used not to be the case in Israel. Male to male sexuality was encountered in several ways in ancient Greece and Rome, but the set of what was expected as not the same in the two countries. For instance, sexual intercourse between slave and master was viewed to be improper, yet it was considered right in Rome. However, in Greece the differences were seen in that they took sexual intercourse to be between males and the involvement of two people of similar social class. In Rome, the law required that the active and passive roles in the relationship needed that the two men be from different ranks socially. The author attempted to provide an inference on why sexual associations involving males was considered among the ills of sexuality that were dictated in Leviticus 18 and in chapter 20 of the same book[2]. It is notable that the author was not of the opinion that the forbidden actions had an association with idol worship. It was therefore not discernible whether the actions were in line with moral or physical acceptance. In his opinion, anything that went contrary to the laws of nature was a threat to the purity associated with the Israelites.

In Greece, sexual relationships that existed between older men and younger free citizens were viewed to be right thus it was accepted[3]. They carried themselves in affectionate and predagogicaland; most of the time it lasted for several years. The men were just from the same class, although the active and passive roles could be accorded to the adult and young men based on their respective ages. It was condoned in Rome for a free citizen man of any age to accept to be in relationship with a passive man. It was also wrong for men of the same social class to have a relationship. The article was written by a group of members by the name of society of biblical literature. This group has expertise on the bible and related field.

Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 are viewed to have narrow and precise purview. They only considered one issue and this includes anal intercourse between two men; one of whom is a free citizen from Israelites. The major system of social values within which such laws needs to be understood is the construction of gender of maleness in a society where respect and shame are foundational social values. For instance, this means that sexual role of a man is to the active penetrator, but the role of the passive that is penetrated leads to shame to a man who participates in it.

References

Menzies, Allan. Review of theology & philosophy, Volume 1. New York, NY: Otto Schulze, 2009.

Olyan, Saul. Journal of Biblical literature, Volume 102. University of California, 2006.

Society of biblical literature. Journal of Biblical literature, Volume 102. California: Scholar’s Press, 2003. Retrieved from http://www.nclive.org/?q=loginpage&url=”http://search.ebscohost.com/direct.asp?db=

Last Completed Projects