As for the ‘interpretations’ of Lev. 18 : 22: Jews of the Second Temple period probably interpreted it rather differently from many Christians (and others, of course, including many liberal Jews) today. This is not something which should surprise, or worry, us unduly.

Why do I not accept being gay? I don’t know. Maybe it’s the Holy Spirit in my life or maybe its my upbringing in the rural South in a Southern Baptist family. My faith is very important to me, and I do wish that I could have a family. But as I’ve begun to accept that my attractions probably won’t ever change, that has brought some peace and freedom. I’m on here seriously searching for answers because I don’t think I’m getting them in real life.

Maybe Warren’s and Mark Yarhouse’s Sexual Identity Therapy (SIT) is what you are seeking. Don’t know. Ask Warren. Regarding spiritual issues, you might try giving those 10 points of George Barna’s a look. Maybe something there will click. Beyond that, it is a matter for you and God to sort out through much prayer and meditation. Is the Spirit giving you no peace about where you are in life? Is there something you are supposed to be in obedience about that you are not? Only you can know that.

One more point: ‘finding something abhorrent’ is no substitute for logical analysis, especially in a jurisprudential context.

True, but I suspect the Jewish scholars would’ve protested that their abhorrence was a product and result of the logical analysis — thus, it did not prejudice the analysis, because it came after it, and not before it. That is, they thought it was logical that male/male anal penetration was dissimilar from male/female anal penetration; that the former was wrong in a way that the latter was not wrong; ergo, they were “logically compelled” to abhor the male/male kind but not the male/female kind.

Hint: The objection to male/male anal was probably NOT based on perceptions that it was in some way unhygienic — else male/female anal would logically also have been prohibited — but on perceptions that the male “bottom” was willingly turned into a pseudo-woman by the male “top,” which isn’t an issue with male/female anal where the female is the one being penetrated. (Also, as I’ve written, they may have suspected homosexuality in general of being a “Gentile vice” to be shunned by Jews, but that doesn’t explain why they thought that male/male anal was sui generis, in a category of specific awfulness all by itself — worse than all other homosexual acts, and also worse than heterosexual anal.)

I’m not sure whether the ancient Jews ever took up the hypothetical possibility of “pegging”, where a woman uses a dildo on a man — but if they had considered it, I can only assume they would’ve condemned the practice. Again, primarily on the grounds that it symbolically inverts “divinely ordained” gender roles, and possibly also because they might’ve considered it a “pagan goyim thing”, but not primarily because Buttholes Are Dirty.

I am still unsure how to define heterosexual and homosexual to any degree of certainty for everyone. Having said that, what degree of change or modification, from how you feel now, would you find acceptable to live the quality of life you want to?

As for the ‘selective’ prohibition on anal intercourse: well, that’s something that we can usefully dispense with, on the grounds that a ‘gender-neutral’ approach makes more sense.

Well, I generally agree that sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and that the potential health risks of anal sex are going to apply whether it’s a man or a woman being penetrated.

But on the other hand, when considering questions like “How did Jews of the Second Temple period interpret Leviticus 18:22?”, we can’t just impose our modern preference for gender parity. I mean, if they found male/male anal sex abhorrent, then arguably they should’ve reacted the same way to male/female anal sex, but the reality is that there was apparently a double standard.

However, side-by-side with promoting ‘chastity’ is the constant ‘change’ speak. Courage annual conferences are replete with therapists, social workers, counselors all beating the drum about ‘how this happened’ and how to ‘change’ it. It’s a bit mind-boggling to be sure. You’re never quite good enough is the not so subtle message. If only, if only ….

Geez, where do you guys live? Where I live, things are still pretty str8.

Eddy, have you been “smoking the drapes”, or what? If your world is normative, no wonder str8 folks are scared, and me too!! 🙂

However, I think it’s important for Christians who are debating “what does Scripture say about homosexuality” to research the Jewish interpretations — because even though the Jewish interpretations may also disapprove of homosexuality, they don’t necessarily “disapprove in the same way” that Christianity does. (For the same reason, I recommend the documentary Trembling Before G-d to conservative Christians — because although Orthodox Judaism strongly disapproves of homosexuality, and that disapproval is the main theme of the movie, the perspective is a bit different from what Christians are used to.)

And when conservative Christians accuse gay-affirming modrin lib’ruls of playing word games and twisting “the plain and obvious meaning” of Scripture, I think it makes a fairly powerful rebuttal that Jewish scholars from two millennia ago — i.e., Jews roughly contemporaneous with Jesus and St. Paul — were even then arguing over the correct interpretation of Leviticus 18:22 and of the Sodom story in Genesis 19.