is a Bible passage that lists sexual activities that the ancient Israelites were forbidden from participating in.
 |
| Torah scrolls |
Thus far, at the time of this post's publication, I find nothing within official United Methodist law that makes it biblically acceptable for a believer in Messiah Jesus to participate in any of the sexual activities listed in Leviticus 18:1-30.
Yes, the book of Leviticus is a part of the Torah, which is labeled by non-Jews as the Law of Moses.
Yes, non-Jewish believers in Messiah Jesus say that they are exempt from the Torah.
Yet, I have yet to meet a member of the United Methodist Church who says that it is biblically acceptable for a non-Jewish believer in Messiah Jesus to participate in incest or in bestiality.
If non-Jewish believers in Jesus are not biblically exempt from Leviticus 18:9 or Leviticus 18:23, then what makes non-Jewish male believers in Jesus biblically exempt from Leviticus 18:22?
If members of the United Methodist Church have not wrestled with that question, then they should. I did so before I joined the UMC.
In my 28 January 2024 blog post Anguishing Over The Plight Of The LGBTQ Community, I write the following:
"One should acknowledge that the Tanakh (a.k.a. Old Testament) generally condemns one man sodomizing another man, but there may be a practical earthly reason for the condemnation. Science reveals that promiscuous sodomy is medically dangerous, just as heterosexual promiscuity is medically dangerous. Click here to read an example of the latter.
Here are links to some science articles that point out just how medically dangerous that promiscuous sodomy is:
Key Health Concerns for MSM (Men Who have Sex with Men)
Sexually Transmitted Diseases in Men Who Have Sex With Men
Gay and Bisexual Men’s Health Issues
Sex between men, not skin contact, is fueling monkeypox, new research suggests
What are the Risks of Anal Sex?
Why the monkeypox outbreak is mostly affecting men who have sex with men
‘High-Risk’ Sex Could Raise Odds for Crohn’s, Colitis in Gay Men
Anal Sex – 5 Reasons Why it is Not Good for Your Health
Scientists Find That Gay Men Are Twice As Likely To Have This Disease
If one is going to accept what science has to say about the origin of sexual orientation, then one needs to also accept what science says about promiscuous sodomy. Otherwise one will be a hypocrite."
Please note that my above-quoted statement pertains to sexual promiscuity. I end that same blog post with the following conclusion:
"As stated earlier, science reveals that promiscuous sodomy is medically dangerous. It would be bad for a community to be exposed to the dangers of risky sexual activity. Yet, when two people are committed to monogamy, they do not expose the community to the dangers of risky sexual activity. Thus, same-gender marriage has a public benefit as well as a private legal one.
Like it or not, marriage is a civil institution because it bestows certain legal benefits. Nothing in the Bible forbids members of the LGBTQ community from possessing those legal benefits.
If members of the LGBTQ community are sexually celibate or engaging in sex within the confines of marriage, then they are not risking harm to the general community. Harming the general community is what the Bible condemns."
In my comments, I do not say that non-Jewish male believers in Jesus are biblically exempt from Leviticus 18:22. Instead, I make a medical case for same-gender marriage as a way of protecting the public from the spread of diseases that are spread through sodomy.
At the same time, I point out the medical danger of promiscuity by heterosexuals.
In short, I side with the view that sexual penetration between two people should be limited to people who are married to each other. I side with that view because of what medical science says.
However, the fact that I side with that view doesn't mean that I believe that non-Jewish men are biblically exempt from Leviticus 18:22.
I realize that I am walking a religious tight-rope because of what the United Methodist Church currently says in its written social principles.
Yet, to quote from the preface of those social principles, "The Social Principles are not church law." [2020/2024 The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church, page 106]
So, no, United Methodist law doesn't require any UMC member to biblically exempt anyone from Leviticus 18:22.
If non-Jewish men aren't biblically exempt from Leviticus 18:9 or Leviticus 18:23, then I cannot conclude that non-Jewish men are biblically exempt from Leviticus 18:22.
Yet, it isn't my job as a United Methodist to dictate how God's sanctifying grace is to work within the life of any person who has made a public profession of faith in Messiah Jesus. It isn't my job to dictate how one is to live after one becomes a believer in Messiah Jesus.
However, as a caveat, I do have a duty to warn against any action that has the potential of harming another person, including an action that is notorious for spreading diseases.
