Until My Body Finds Rest in You, O Lord
From the Forum Magazine, Fall 2015 - view the full issue here
Contemporary discussions about human sexuality tend to focus on the physiological aspects of the kinds of sexual intercourse which are possible, whether same-sex or female-male. Transformation of one’s gender requires physio-mechanical changes before experience of the other sexuality is physically possible. These discussions do not lack in concerns for human love and companionship. No matter where you find yourself in contemporary debates about human sexuality, however, certain questions are seldom addressed. Is our our bodily life more than its sexuality? Is our identity totally bound up in our sexuality? Do our sexual desires and passions set the direction for our bodily life? Is embodied sexuality self- or other-directed? How does the Bible view embodied sexuality? And what are the implications of the biblical view of the body for our debate about human sexual intercourse?
This essay will focus on the Old Testament book of Leviticus because Leviticus discusses specific aspects of human sexuality: the post-partum womb (Lev. 12), menstrual blood, emissions of semen (Lev. 15), and (prohibited forms of) sexual intercourse (Lev. 18, 20), are taken up into a theology of intimate life with God. The debate about same-sex intercourse includes discussions of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:33, but seldom the other texts of Leviticus, and hardly ever the role human sexuality plays in the Pentateuch’s depiction of the relationship between God and the embodied sexuality of his people. This essay will describe, in broad strokes, the role of human sexuality in Genesis through Leviticus, with a strong focus on Leviticus 18 and 20, but will also draw on passages from elsewhere in Scripture.
Human Sexuality and Now: Restless
The embodied sexuality which confronted biblical Israel in Canaan and that of 21st century North America are astonishingly similar: both are highly sexualized, daily life is inconceivable without it, human sexuality is part of “world-making.” But there is also a crucial difference: in the ancient world sexuality belonged to what we would call religion, it had communal concerns. Contemporary views of sexuality are highly individualized.
Embodied sexuality in Canaan focused on fertility (family, rain, good harvests), and maintaining order against the constant threat of enemies, disease, and famine. Religious rites assured harmony between heaven (the gods) and the earth (the cycles of nature-humanity), a harmony based on the belief that everything shared in the divine in some sense. Because earthly fertility in part depends on successful divine intercourse, New Year’s ceremonies included ritual sexual intercourse between the king and a cultic prostitute. In a strange imitatio dei, heaven and earth come together to maintain proper world order for the next year, the natural cycle of nature, and thus fertility.
In that world embodied sexuality was about more than the physio-mechanical act of intercourse; it participated in keeping the created world safe from intrusion of disorder, of securing fertility for daily life. Embodied sexuality in the old world served a higher purpose.
Embodied sexuality in the 21st century is also about world-making, but not necessarily the world that is received. Maleness and femaleness are believed to be social constructs; they have no intrinsic value. Received femaleness and maleness are valuable only as elements one uses to create a world desired by the self. And, where the received body gets in the way of felt desire, medical technology is available to recreate: a female from a male and vice-versa. It can also rescue samesex couples from their infertility. This embodied sexuality serves the pleasuring self, creates a unique sexually embodied world among other kinds of sexual embodiments. (There is no right way to do it.) Twenty-first century sexuality does not seek to maintain in good order the received, that is, the created body; nor does it participate with the Creator in securing proper order and fertility. Rather, by recreating according to the self, it introduces disorder, restlessness, into created human sexuality.
What the old world sought to avoid, the threat of disorder and infertility, is in some ways embraced by 21st century sexuality. To paraphrase Paul: The creature become a creator creates unnatural, disordered worlds (Rom. 1:21-27). Embodied sexuality in 21st century North America does not serve a higher purpose.
Biblical talk about embodied sexuality is more like that of the old world in one crucial way: human sexuality is not about us, nor for us; it is part of a created order which God maintains but which human sinfulness (an unwillingness to accept what God has given) threatens by disordering what is received.
Human Sexuality in Leviticus
Any reading of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 must recognize the wider context, beginning with Genesis. God creates humanity in his own image, male and female. Embodied as such God instructs humanity to till (Heb., “serve,” `abad) the soil and to keep (Heb., šamar) the Garden. God creates female and male humanity to live in his presence according to his instruction (Gen. 2:15-17). Attempts to reshape the Garden introduced disorder in God’s garden-presence with the result that he expelled the female and male disorder-makers. There they became restless in their embodied sexuality (Gen. 3:7; cf. 2:25).
East of Eden humanity’s service of the soil would continue (Heb., “serve,”`abad; Gen. 3:23; 4:2), but an indifference to divine instruction emerged: “Am I my brother’s keeper?” (Heb., šamar, Gen. 4:9) In their restless wandering (Gen. 4:12, 14) Cain and his descendants began to create their own worlds and embody murderous and violent disorder (Gen. 4:8, 23; 6:11, 13).
Exodus defines God’s people, female and male, as a holy priesthood (19:5-6). Committed to him by covenant vow, they swore not to serve other gods (Ex. 23:24, 25, 33; Heb., `abad) and keep his commandments (Ex. 23:21; Heb., šamar). This holy priesthood, not the tabernacle, becomes God’s dwelling-place (“Have them make a sanctuary for me, and I will dwell among them.” Ex. 25:8; 40:34-35). By embodying the divine instructions of Leviticus (Lev. 1:1), Israel becomes a living temple (cf. 1 Peter 2:4). Failure to keep God’s instructions introduces disorder in the world God has organized (the desert camp). The intimate bodily phenomena discussed in Leviticus 12 and 15 remind Israel that only divine regulation keeps disorder at bay, in their bodies and in the community.
The prohibited forms of sexual intercourse in Leviticus 18:6-23 and 20:10-21 instruct God’s living temple how not to embody its sexuality. All prohibited forms of sexual intercourse—various forms of female-male intercourse, same-sex intercourse, and bestiality—are defined as “detestable” or “abominations” (Lev. 18:22, 26-29). Detestable behavior is that which introduces disorder into the world God has created. Any attempts to remake the divinely created sexual partnership of male and female (Gen. 2:24-25) is forbidden, for it defiles the presence of God (Gen. 3:8; Lev. 26:12; Deut. 23:14).
It is argued that the instructions of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 are no longer valid because they forbid activity linked to forbidden forms of worship, temple prostitution. If temple prostitution is not a concern in the 21st century, then Leviticus does not address non-cultic same-sex relationships. But, if ancient worship required certain sexual practices, so does the embodied sexuality of God’s people. A body dedicated as a living sacrifice to God (Rom. 12:12) expresses its sexuality accordingly. Thus Paul instructs the church that an improper exercise of human sexuality defiles the temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6:12-20; Rom. 1:26-27).
It is also argued that Leviticus prohibits a form of same-sex intercourse that reflects an unacceptable and demeaning hierarchy among the male sexual partners, i.e., one of the partners is passive, the other active and dominant. A more progressive and egalitarian attitude invalidates these prohibitions. Does it invalidate the other prohibitions too? The discussion about same-sex relationships includes views about the Bible that make allowances for such practices.
It is commonly believed today that the Bible is merely the product of a particular socio-cultural community whose ideas the modern world f inds unacceptable because they are patriarchal, oppressive of the poor, hegemonic, abusive of women, or because the traditional readings are deemed colonialist. Proper historical and sociological exegesis can rescue this historical product by stripping it of its patriarchal, oppressive, otherworldly idealism. Once rescued by deconstructive exegesis, the Bible as human construct is then placed in “dialogue” with the 21st century reader’s self-constructed world. In this model the Bible has no authority; its world is no different from ours.
It would be more honest simply to acknowledge the Biblical prohibitions and then dismiss them because they don’t fit in the reader’s world. Would this dismissal also include the notion that God created the body to embody his will? Will the modern reader’s self-constructed world allow for a deity? Can it allow for an “other” to determine the shape of embodied sexuality? And, if so, which divine instructions are acceptable and which not? Are they revelation? Human desire to be all it can be also produces restless Bible readings.
Our body, its sexuality, and God’s will
There is one more context to consider: the introductions to the prohibitions (Lev. 18:1-5; 20:1-5) and the stated consequences (Lev. 18:24-30; 20:22-24) of violating the instructions.
Leviticus 18:1-5 instructs God’s people to keep (Heb., šamar, v. 5) his instructions, not those of Egypt or Canaan. In this context the reader hears the prohibitions saying: Do not embody your sexuality as practiced in Egypt, nor as in Canaan, where other gods will tempt you to embody your sexuality. Here it is important to remember that the divine speeches of Leviticus are part of the Sinai instruction. As such God’s people is reminded that its words are not shaped by any earthly culture; they come straight from the ruler of heaven and earth. The cultures of the nations may not shape Israel’s faith and practice, including its sexuality, for God has separated them from the nations (Lev. 11:43-45; 20:2224, 26). Paul reminds the church of this separation in 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1.
The warnings that follow are clear: If you imitate these detestable sexual practices the land will be defiled and it will “vomit” you out as it did the nations before you (18:28; 20:22). The Canaanite practices defiled the land because after God, the Lord of all the earth (Josh. 3:11, 13), had entered the land the Canaanites found themselves in an alien holy space; their gods’ instructions … invalidated. The whole land was now a temple precinct, governed by instructions from Sinai. Because the Canaanite descendants of Adam and Eve violated God’s will, like their ancestors in the Garden, they too were expelled from God’s presence.
It is true that the nations embodied sexuality served religious purposes, but, as Paul would later say, they turned religion to their own purposes (Rom. 1:18-32). As explained above, the nations’ sexual life-force participates with the divine forces to secure order and fertility in the world against the constant threat of disorder (war, disease, famine). To that end, the nations would even sacrifice their children (Lev. 20:1-5).
For Israel the world is not under constant threat from dark forces; these do not exist. The creation is a thing, all its creaturely elements have been put in their proper order by the God who revealed himself to Israel. The flood narrative demonstrates that disorder in the world is linked to human disobedience (cf. Amos 3:1-10); there are no capricious outside forces. There is only human caprice. Among all others, human sexuality is also a created thing whose power stands in the service of its Creator, not the creature. Human sexuality serves within a God ordered world. This truth conflicts with the sexual practices of Canaan and other nations. This is why, in addition to the prohibited forms of sexual acts, Israel is forbidden from sacrificing its children to Moloch. A word about Leviticus 20:1-5.
The word translated as “children” in Leviticus 20:2, 3 and 4 is the Hebrew word “seed.” It can also be translated as “descendants” (Gen. 12:7), or, “semen” (Gen. 38:9). In the biblical world “seed” or “semen” does not have the power to keep the world functioning properly. To the contrary, it participates in human disordering of God’s world, including the individual human body. Human sexuality enables Cain’s descendants to grow by leaps and bounds east of Eden (Gen. 5; 11:1026), but only because blessed by God (Gen. 1:28; 9:1, 7). Nevertheless, all die amidst a vengeance sown by Lamech and the violence rampant in the days of Noah, the result of human disobedience. Human sexuality, no matter the orientation or practice, can only participate in a disordered world; it has no power to build a world, never mind redeem it from disorder.
Unlike the nations, God’s people does not arise by the power of its sexual life force: Sarah was barren, as was Rebekah, Rachel, Samson’s mother, Hannah, Ruth (Ruth 4:13) and Mary (Matt. 1:20). Israel’s mothers, unlike those of the nations, are not remembered for their fertility. God is remembered for opening their wombs, for bringing blessing into a world filled with human violence. Among God’s people “seed” and “semen” participates in the redemption God is working through the descendants of Abraham, especially the promised “seed” (Gen. 12:7; Gal.3:8). Offering the “seed” or “semen” of Abraham to Moloch by sacrifice, in order to secure fertility and keep chaos at bay, actually introduces chaos, for the sacrifice kills the promised seed. It is a use of “seed” that can only promote barrenness. This is not God’s will.
Moving towards Rest in God
Can the Church of Christ contribute to the debate about human sexuality? Of course, but its voice must coincide with that of its Lord. This includes the following: Your male or female body is not your own (read 1 Cor. 7:4!), they are God’s good and well-ordered creations. Let us receive them as such. Furthermore, our bodies have been bought at a great price, and are temples of the Holy Spirit. Unlike the world, we are committed by covenant vow not to construct our own worlds, neither economically nor sexually.
Although Christians are committed to keeping our bodies clean, and not to defile the temple of the Holy Spirit in any way, like Israel of old, we are easily seduced. Israel repeated prostituted (that’s the word in Hebrew) itself, surrendering its sexuality to other powers. For that they were exiled from God’s presence.
Christians are not different. The unrestricted, unruly, never satisfied, restless self, seduces us into surrendering our sexuality to worldly pleasures and desire. Christians engage in prohibited extra-curricular female-male sexual acts, prohibited same-sex acts (and who knows what other kinds of sexual acts), are conflicted about their sexuality and seek freedom from these conflicts in attractive worldly solutions. Like Cain of old, we too are restless wanderers, especially in our 21st century sexual wasteland. Until our Lord comes again, what shall we do?
Augustine, bishop of Hippo, who confessed his youthful sexual proclivities, wrote: “My heart is restless until it f inds its rest in Thee.” No human being can escape sexual restlessness and the desire to remake our given bodies. With God’s people of all ages—and we have not done it well at all—may the Lord help us to deny what the world considers restful sexual practices. Denial of the self is unacceptable in contemporary culture. It is, however, essential to a Christian discipleship which strives to offer our bodies as living sacrifices, holy and acceptable to God (Rom. 12:1-2). Doing so, we also begin to find and enjoy our rest in the God of our salvation.
(by Dr. Arie Leder, Professor of Old Testament Studies, Emeritus)
