Biblically speaking

[david_x]

Don't worry about it.

Don't worry about what?

 

[Rebekka]

Biblically speaking, would it be a sin for 2 women who are both married to the same man to engage in sexual actions with one another?

I mean in another thread I heard that homosexual sex is condemned because it is outside of marriage, and homosexuals cannot marry, so I wondered how this would fall in place?

Genuinely curious to what people think?

Are you speaking of now or of biblical times? I'm confused, because in biblical times gay marriage was not a known concept. So I assume you mean now, since we do have the discussion to have or to not have gay marriage now. But that doesn't work either, because now we do not have legal polygamy, unlike biblical times. (Well, in the west anyway.)

So, there can't be 2 women married to the same man, and if you believe sex outside of marriage to be fornication then there is fornication and adultery (if the married man took a second woman for his concubine), or fornication for all three of them (if they were illegally married in a polygamous ceremony), going on already even if they keep it all heterosexual.

Where I live there is no legal polygamy but there is legal gay marriage, so if the two women had sex inside gay marriage and one believes that sex within marriage is morally acceptable then one can't object to them having sex, whereas one would condemn the threesome (gay or straight doesn't matter then) since we don't have polygamous marriage.

Anyway, if the argument is that homosexual sex is immoral only because sex outside marriage is immoral, then homosexual sex within marriage is not immoral. And there are several countries that have gay marriage.

 

[gengwall]

Are you speaking of now or of biblical times? I'm confused, because in biblical times gay marriage was not a known concept. So I assume you mean now, since we do have the discussion to have or to not have gay marriage now. But that doesn't work either, because now we do not have legal polygamy, unlike biblical times. (Well, in the west anyway.)

So, there can't be 2 women married to the same man, and if you believe sex outside of marriage to be fornication then there is fornication and adultery (if the married man took a second woman for his concubine), or fornication for all three of them (if they were illegally married in a polygamous ceremony), going on already even if they keep it all heterosexual.

Where I live there is no legal polygamy but there is legal gay marriage, so if the two women had sex inside gay marriage and one believes that sex within marriage is morally acceptable then one can't object to them having sex, whereas one would condemn the threesome (gay or straight doesn't matter then) since we don't have polygamous marriage.

Anyway, if the argument is that homosexual sex is immoral only because sex outside marriage is immoral, then homosexual sex within marriage is not immoral. And there are several countries that have gay marriage.

I disagree slightly with your argument about gay marriage. First, there certainly were gay relationships in biblical times so the lack of gay "marriage" in the bible even though there were gay relationships indicates that "biblically speaking", gay marriage is simply not a possible concept. You are mixing current culture with biblical teaching and the two, as I'm sure you will agree, do not mix. "Biblically speaking", there can never be two women married to each other and therefore it would always be fornication regardless of what they and society want to call their union.

Nowm, as far as polygamy goes, I do not believe God ever condoned polygamy and we know he condemned it for royalty. Never the less, it took place (and was rather rampant in OT times). What society does or doesn't allow now is rather irrelevant since the OP is somewhat hypothetical. I agree with all the others who have said that a relationship between the two wives would be fornication. I admit it gets a little tricky when it turns into a three-some. What I know scripture teaches is that one should not defile the marriage bed. In other words, even within marriage you can engage in sinful activities with your wife. I would say that one way or the other, there is some "defiling" of the marriage bed involved in a threesome, even if the man is married to both women. But I suppose that is debateable and I personally am left to ponder that one a while longer before becoming convinced of the right answer, that is, "biblically speaking".

 

[Rebekka]

I disagree slightly with your argument about gay marriage.

What do you think is my argument?

First, there certainly were gay relationships in biblical times so the lack of gay "marriage" in the bible even though there were gay relationships indicates that "biblically speaking", gay marriage is simply not a possible concept. You are mixing current culture with biblical teaching and the two, as I'm sure you will agree, do not mix. "Biblically speaking", there can never be two women married to each other and therefore it would always be fornication regardless of what they and society want to call their union.

The argument of the OP was not a biblical one, it was only asking what biblically could be said about the connection of marriage and ethical sex. It's asking what ethically can be said about sex inside marriage between people not married to each other, IF you agree that the reason why gay sex is wrong is that it takes place outside a marital context. At least, that is how I understood the OP, taking into account that the OP is an atheist.

The thing is, if it's only the non-married part that is immoral, then all you have to do is make gay marriage legal to have ethical (monogamous) sex.

The bible condemns not only non-marital sex but also homosexual sex (although there's room for debate there), so even if it takes place inside marriage it will not be alright.

Nowm, as far as polygamy goes, I do not believe God ever condoned polygamy and we know he condemned it for royalty. Never the less, it took place (and was rather rampant in OT times). What society does or doesn't allow now is rather irrelevant since the OP is somewhat hypothetical.

It's not irrelevent what society allows now, because the OP is specifically talking about homosexuality being immoral because it takes place outside marriage. That is a very weak argument if you live in a society where gay sex can take place inside a marriage, a monogamous one even. It doesn't make sense to have an argument that is completely out of date and therefore useless. If you want to condemn homosexuality it has to be for other reasons than their inability to marry, because it is quite clear that they can in several countries.

 

[gengwall]

What do you think is my argument?

The thing is, if it's only the non-married part that is immoral, then all you have to do is make gay marriage legal to have ethical (monogamous) sex.

The above is what I believe your argument to be and the reason it is invalid is that homosexual marriage is not a valid "marital context" biblically speaking. You are trying to impose a social/cultural context onto the bible that is impossible from a biblical standpoint. Therefore, your argument, while valid if we were engaged in a cultural gay marriage debate, is invalid if we are speaking biblically.

 

[gengwall]

Let's refocus. The main question of the OP is:

"Biblically speaking, would it be a sin for 2 women who are both married to the same man to engage in sexual actions with one another?"

Homosexual marriage isn't even in view so let's leave that out of the discussion.

 

[Rebekka]

Gengwall, I don't have an argument (read the IF in the post you quoted above!), I was only argueing against the argument that the OP heard of because it does not make sense IF gays can get married, which they can. The argument presented below (the OP) is not a biblical but a legal one. And it's precisely what you said (reread my first post) about gay marriage not being a valid marital context in biblical times that I was criticizing in the OP - in other words, it's comparing apples and oranges. If gay marriage is not a valid marital context (and I agree with that, as I said it in my first post, too), then you can't discuss it from a biblical point of view. It does not exist, biblically speaking.

I mean in another thread I heard that homosexual sex is condemned because it is outside of marriage, and homosexuals cannot marry, so I wondered how this would fall in place?

Genuinely curious to what people think?

 

[Rebekka]

Let's refocus. The main question of the OP is:

"Biblically speaking, would it be a sin for 2 women who are both married to the same man to engage in sexual actions with one another?"

Homosexual marriage isn't even in view so let's leave that out of the discussion.

Why, if it's in the OP?

 

[gengwall]

Gengwall, I don't have an argument (read the IF in the post you quoted above!), I was only argueing against the argument that the OP heard of because it does not make sense IF gays can get married, which they can. The argument presented below (the OP) is not a biblical but a legal one. And it's precisely what you said (reread my first post) about gay marriage not being a valid marital context in biblical times that I was criticizing in the OP - in other words, it's comparing apples and oranges. If gay marriage is not a valid marital context (and I agree with that, as I said it in my first post, too), then you can't discuss it from a biblical point of view. It does not exist, biblically speaking.

I believe you read the OP incorrectly. Yasic's observation of a discussion in another thread was the motivation to ask a related but different question here. You are addressing the question posed in the motivating thread. That is not the question posed here. The question posed here relates to polygamy and sex between wives of one husband - nothing more.

 

[Rebekka]

I believe you read the OP incorrectly. Yasic's observation of a discussion in another thread was the motivation to ask a related but different question here. You are addressing the question posed in the motivating thread. That is not the question posed here. The question posed here relates to polygamy and sex between wives of one husband - nothing more.

But it is relevant that the two wives are of the same sex, otherwise would it still be fornication if they had sex?

I don't know a lot about the legal aspects of polygamy (in biblical times, or now in muslim countries, as I assume they are similar), so I'm seriously asking:

Are two wives of the same husband technically/legally speaking strangers to each other or do they know each other (it's not a coincidence that the word "knowing" has a sexual connotation)? I mean, what happens if the husband dies? Do they stay together and take care of each other? If so, can we say that they're not married to each other?

 

[gengwall]

But it is relevant that the two wives are of the same sex, otherwise would it still be fornication if they had sex?

It may be relevant in the broader discussion of any two women having sex. But it is not relevant in the specific framework of this thread as put forth by the OP.

I don't know a lot about the legal aspects of polygamy (in biblical times, or now in muslim countries, as I assume they are similar), so I'm seriously asking:

Are two wives of the same husband technically/legally speaking strangers to each other or do they know each other (it's not a coincidence that the word "knowing" has a sexual connotation)? I mean, what happens if the husband dies? Do they stay together and take care of each other? If so, can we say that they're not married to each other?

Do they stay together? Possibly - it would be up to them. Are they married? No. Polygamy is not an individual marriage to multiple women, it is multiple simultaneous marriages to individual women. Although both women would certainly be widows of the same husband, they never had a biblically (or legally) binding relationship between themselves.

 

[Verv]

Because the women are not married to one another, it is the same as having sex outside of marriage which is wrong.

On the notion of plural wives, Christ spoke only specifically of the instance of a man marrying a woman, and I think that it is implied that polygamy is forbidden as He spoke of celibacy being the most righteous path and marriage being a concession to people so they do not burn in sin.

 

[gengwall]

Because the women are not married to one another, it is the same as having sex outside of marriage which is wrong.

On the notion of plural wives, Christ spoke only specifically of the instance of a man marrying a woman, and I think that it is implied that polygamy is forbidden as He spoke of celibacy being the most righteous path and marriage being a concession to people so they do not burn in sin.

It was Paul, but point well taken. As an aside - I have a series of blog posts titled "What Is Godly Marriage" that may interest some.

This, That, and the Other Thing: What is "Godly Marriage"
This, That, and the Other Thing: What is "Godly Marriage" - Part II

 

[Zebra1552]

Biblically speaking, would it be a sin for 2 women who are both married to the same man to engage in sexual actions with one another?

I mean in another thread I heard that homosexual sex is condemned because it is outside of marriage, and homosexuals cannot marry, so I wondered how this would fall in place?

Genuinely curious to what people think?

That's polygamy, and while the Bible doesn't directly call it a sin, there's some evidence that God didn't really smile on the situation because of the problems it caused (especially with Solomon).

 

[yasic]

I just wanted to thank everyone who contributed and let everyone know that I have in fact read all the posts in this thread. I wanted to know what peoples take on this issue was and am quite content with your answers and (much to my surprise) I cannot think of any follow up questions or comments with regard to any of your answers*.

So thank you all.

*not including topics other than my OP which I feel we should save for another thread.