Sexual Ethics in the Bible

by GinnyTosken 5 Replies latest jw friends

  • GinnyTosken
    GinnyTosken

    I have been reading Why Christianity Must Change or Die by John Shelby Spong. I found his discussion of sexual ethics and the Ten Commandments both interesting and funny and thought I'd share. This comes from a chapter called "A New Basis for Ethics in a New Age":

    . . . The full text of the final commandment says, "You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is your neighbor's (Exod. 20:17). Please note that there is no written prohibition anywhere in the Torah against coveting your neighbor's husband!

    The reason for this was that a husband was not property, but a wife was. The neighbor was a male. His assets were listed in descending order of value. His house first, his wife second, his slaves third, and then his ox, his ass, and his other possessions. . . .

    How do you like that?! The wife coming in second behind the house! I suppose we women should be grateful that we were at least ahead of the ox and ass.

    Later Spong discusses the sexual ideas from the Bible that are largely ignored compared to those accepted as law:

    In a pamphlet that was as unusual as it was devastating to that attitude toward scripture, Professor Walter Wink, of the faculty of the Auburn Theological Seminary in New York City, documented the inconsistent biblical attitudes toward all human sexual practices. The Bible, he wrote, condemned the following sexual activities, which we also condemn: incest, rape, adultery, and intercourse with animals. But the Bible also condemned, Dr. Wink continued, the following practices, which we today generally allow or at least do not universally condemn: intercourse during menstruation, celibacy, marriage to non-Jews, naming sexual organs, nudity under certain conditions, masturbation, and birth control. Granted, some Christians today still condemn one or more of these things. The biblical voice of God, however, is regarded as uncertain on these matters today, whereas in the past the Bible was assumed to be quite clear and debate was, therefore, not allowed.

    The Bible, Dr. Wink went on to say, also "regarded semen and menstrual blood as unclean, which most people living today do not." In this analysis we can see just where and how sexual attitudes have changed and that whenever these changes have occurred, the literal biblical attitudes are set aside.

    Finally, Dr. Wink noted that the Bible permitted these behaviors that we today condemn: prostitution, polygamy, levirate marriage, sex with slaves, concubinage, treatment of women as property, and very early marriage (for the girl aged eleven to thirteen).

    He went on to say that "while the Old Testament accepted divorce, Jesus forbade it." In conclusion, Dr. Wink observed that "of the sexual mores mentioned here, we only agree with the Bible on four of them and disagree with it on sixteen."

    Ginny

  • LDH
    LDH

    Ginny, I have that book and I love it. Great post. It's a great read, huh?
    Lisa

  • GinnyTosken
    GinnyTosken

    Lisa,
    I very much like John Shelby Spong's work. I had read two other of his books before this one and always wondered how he managed to remain a Christian while facing the difficult truths about the Bible, such as that the synoptic Gospels clearly conflict with each other. I like his reminder in this book that our conceptions of God as influenced by the Bible are not the same as the force in the universe many call God. It kind of reminded me of Norma Desmond in the movie Sunset Boulevard: "I'm still big--it's just the pictures that got small."

    I especially liked this paragraph in the chapter "On Saying the Christian Creed with Honesty":

    Many of us can continue to be believers only if we are able to be honest believers. We want to be people of faith, not people drugged on the narcotic of religion. We are not able to endure the mental lobotomy that one suspects is the fate of those who project themselves as the unquestioning religious citizens of our age. We do not want to be among those who fear that if we think about what we say about God, either our minds will close down or our faith will explode. We are not drawn to those increasingly defensive religious answers of our generation. Nor are we willing to pretend that these ancient words still have power and meaning for us if they do not. We wonder if it is still possible to be a believer and a citizen of our century at the same time.

    Ginny

  • trevor
    trevor

    Ginny,

    The reason that a man's house is listed before his wife is that if
    he loses his house the wife has no use for him. How many men
    get to keep the house if their wives leave? A wife will fight
    to keep the house but how many will fight to keep a husband who
    doesen't have a house.

    No sour grapes here - I've never been divorsed( can't even spell it) but
    then I have a nice house.

    As for the man's ass being last on the list - well you've gotta save your ass.

  • JanH
    JanH

    Ginny,

    In this mouth-and-foot-disease days, I guess it's not that impressive coming out slightly more valuable than the cattle and the ass.

    I think the key to the sexual ethics of the Bible is the rivalry between competing cults in pre-exilic Palestine. The one cult that eventually came out on top was a syncretistic combination of the worship of Yawheh, a tribal God, and the sky god El. The deity "El" is actually named a number of times in the OT, but in our Bible versions these occurrences are hidden by translating it "God".

    Like most sky gods, El was not really an object for much worship. There did, however, exist a cult for Yahweh and his wife Asherah (or perhaps Asherah was a generic name for a goddess). But who was Yawheh?

    We also know that Yahweh is called Lord, which is Ba'al. Names are important. To find out more about the culture and especially religion in an ancient civilization that we don't have direct access to through written documents (they came later), it is illuminating to look at the place names and person names that comes from this region. The OT gives us a number of place names connected to Asheroth and Ba'al. Quite notably, we have a number of personal names, like Saul's sons Ishbaal and Meribbaal and the judge Jerubbaal, that doesn't easily fit into the theory that Ba'al was a foreign, pagan god.

    Most likely, the schims that came, possibly during or right after the exile, was between different religious communities and religious leaders. What came to be associated with Ba'al worship was the fertility cults. Their opponents had to distinguish their Yahweh cult, and what was sacrificed was any use of sexuality in sacred rites. Yahweh's wife Asherah was also abandoned, and Yahweh remained a lonesome male god -- brutal, blood-thirsty, mysogynic and a-sexual.

    - Jan
    --
    "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen"
    -- Albert Einstein

  • GinnyTosken
    GinnyTosken

    Trevor,

    Your comment reminds me of something Lewis Grizzard said. (He's been married and divorced about three times, I think.) He said he didn't think he'd get married again--he'd just find a woman he didn't like and buy her a house.

    Ginny

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit