Re: Lev. 18:18, 22 (LXX)

On Thu, 8 Sep 1994, John Moody wrote:

> If I am following Greg's argument correctly, then he obviously sees a 
> problem I don't.  Homosexuality in this passage is contrasted with 
> relations with a woman.  The issue is not whether they are 
> married; that issue is taken up elsewhere in the text.  The issue is 
> simply one of the sex of the partner.  It seems perfectly logical (to me, 
> anyway) that the writer would prohibit all same-sex relations, and then 
> be more specific in dealing with licit and illicit opposite-sex relations.

Well, what I'm trying to do is show that what you assume to be the 
"issue" at issue in this passage, is in fact, not at issue.  The fact 
that the issue is not one of the sex of the partner is that sex with 
females (from thElus) is not contrasted with sex with males (from arsEn), 
according to what would be the best way in the Greek to render an idea 
like the one you mentioned.  If it seems *logical* to you that the writer 
would prohibit all same-sex relations, then you have failed to provide an 
argument to defend your interpretation of this passage.  You seem to rely 
entirely on your preconceived expectations about the passage, which is 
not "logical" at all.  What is more likely is that a writer from such 
a distance in time and space would have a completely different attitude 
toward sexuality and gender vocabulary than either you or I would.  So 
interpretation should be historically contextualized, regardless of 
whether we would then want to agree or disagree with the moral import of 
the passage (as many Christians, for example, would want to disagree with 
OT tolerance of polygamy, or expect more rigorous punishment for rape 
than Moses gives [i.e., marriage]).

> ___________________________________________________________
> John L. Moody			Palm Beach Atlantic College
> jmoody@goliath.pbac.edu
> ___________________________________________________________

Greg Jordan