Teknevra

joined 3 weeks ago
MODERATOR OF
 

This is something I've worked on and shared with another subreddit and have edited after comments and discussion.

Leviticus, LGBTQ+ Inclusion, and the Fear of Extinction

The two most cited verses against LGBTQ+ inclusion—Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13—sit within a holiness code that governed Israel’s survival as a distinct people in the ancient world. But before we even discuss what those verses say, we need to ask a more foundational question:

Why were these laws written?

The Politics of Purity and the Fear of Extinction

Leviticus is not a universal moral handbook. It is a priestly document, composed in the wake of national trauma. Most scholars believe it reached its final form during the Babylonian exile, after the people of Judah had been ripped from their homeland, their temple obliterated, and their leaders either executed or dragged away into captivity.

Imagine what that does to a people.

Imagine losing everything—your land, your way of life, your place of worship, even your sense of identity. Your entire world has crumbled, and you are now at the mercy of a massive empire that neither understands you nor cares about your survival.

It is in this context that the priests—trying desperately to preserve their people—codify laws that will set Israel apart, keep them distinct, and ensure their survival. These are not laws made from a place of power; they are laws made from trauma, from grief, from a desperate fear of extinction.

This is why the command to “be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28) was not just a broad theological statement—it was a directive tied to survival, a matter of life and death. It shaped not only Israel’s creation story but also the laws that followed. The purity codes of Leviticus were written by the same priestly tradition that wrote Genesis 1:1-2:4a. For them, fertility was not merely a blessing—it was a necessity. If Israel did not multiply, it would disappear.

Every law regulating sexuality—whether it be against intercourse during menstruation (Leviticus 15:19-24), male-male intercourse (Leviticus 18:22), or sex after childbirth (Leviticus 12:1-5)—served this singular aim: ensuring reproduction.

This also explains why female same-sex relations are not mentioned in Leviticus at all. Women’s sexuality was primarily regulated in relation to men; as long as a woman was fulfilling her primary duty of childbearing, whatever else she did was of no concern.

At the same time, the priests writing these laws would have seen firsthand the way empire used sexual violence as a tool of war.

Sexual Violence, Power, and the Ancient World

In the ancient world, conquering armies routinely raped men as an act of domination and humiliation. This wasn’t about desire; it was about power. To be penetrated was to be subjugated.

Evidence of this practice has been documented across numerous civilizations, including Ancient Persia, Egypt, Greece, the Amalekites, China, Rome, and the Norse, as well as later conflicts such as the Crusades and wars in Latin America, Africa, and the Balkans (Sivakumaran, Sandesh. "Sexual Violence Against Men in Armed Conflict." European Journal of International Law, vol. 18, no. 2, 2007, pp. 253-276). The widespread nature of these practices across empires that directly conquered or interacted with Israel and Judah makes it highly probable that the priests writing this had either witnessed or even experienced such violations.

Babylon’s military machine did not just conquer Israel’s land—they sought to destroy their spirit, to render them powerless, to remind them who was in charge. And so, in an effort to maintain their people’s dignity and prevent them from replicating the brutality of empire, the priests wrote into law a prohibition against male-male sex—not as a statement about identity or orientation, but as a rejection of the violent, humiliating practices of empire.

In Deuteronomy 21:10-14, for instance, rather than raping captured women, Israelite men are commanded to give them dignity—taking them as wives, mourning their losses, and treating them as people rather than property. Likewise, Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 can be understood not as a blanket condemnation of same-sex relationships, but as a prohibition against the use of sexual violence to assert dominance.

So when fundamentalists read Leviticus and say, “See? The Bible says homosexuality is an abomination,” they are ignoring the why of the passage. And in ignoring the why, they turn it into something it was never meant to be.

But the best evidence that we no longer read Leviticus as a binding moral document? We already ignore most of it.

  • We do not follow the kosher dietary laws.
  • We do not keep the laws of ritual purity.
  • We do not execute those who work on the Sabbath (Exodus 31:14).
  • We do not avoid mixed fabrics (Leviticus 19:19).

And why? Because Christ fulfilled the law—not by throwing it away, but by showing us the heart of God behind it.

Jesus and the Purity Codes: Defying the System that Excluded

And this brings us to Jesus. Because the fundamentalists who wield Leviticus as a weapon rarely ask:

What did Jesus do with these laws?

Jesus did not come to abolish the law (Matthew 5:17), but he also broke purity laws constantly. Not in some vague, symbolic way, but as a direct act of defiance against a system that turned people into untouchables.

  • He touched lepers (Mark 1:40-42), when the law declared them unclean.
  • He ate with sinners and tax collectors (Mark 2:15-17), when the law demanded separation.
  • He healed on the Sabbath (Mark 3:1-6), when the law said work must cease.
  • He allowed a bleeding woman to touch him (Mark 5:25-34), when the law said she should be cast out.

In other words, Jesus refused to let the law be used as a tool of exclusion. Every single time he encountered someone who had been labeled unclean or cast aside, he stepped toward them instead of away. He saw not their "impurity," but their suffering, their dignity, their worth.

And perhaps the most radical example?

Jesus and the Eunuchs: A Third Way of Being

In Matthew 19:12, Jesus makes an astonishing statement:

“For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.”

Eunuchs were the sexually nonconforming people of the ancient world—castrated men, gender-nonconforming individuals, those who did not fit the male-female binary. And while Leviticus 21:17-20 says that eunuchs cannot enter the priesthood, Jesus not only acknowledges them—he affirms them.

Jesus says, “Some people do not fit the traditional categories. And that’s okay.”

And if that weren’t enough, Isaiah 56:4-5 proclaims that eunuchs—formerly excluded by the law—will one day be given a name greater than sons and daughters in God’s kingdom.

This is the trajectory of Scripture. It is not a book that locks us into the past. It is a book that moves us forward.

Reading Leviticus Through the Lens of Christ

The holiness codes of Leviticus were born from trauma. They were an attempt to preserve a people who feared extinction, a people who had seen their home destroyed and their dignity erased by empire. They were concerned with survival, with separation, with drawing lines to keep their fragile community intact.

But Jesus came not to build higher walls, but to tear them down.

Jesus saw those who bad been cast out, those who had been called unclean, those who had been told they were outside the bounds of holiness. And he brought them in.

So when we read Leviticus, may read it with eyes that see its history, its struggle, its purpose. And then let us read it through the eyes of Jesus—who saw the suffering that legalism inflicted and chose, again and again, to heal.

[–] Teknevra@lemm.ee 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

@theomorph@lemmus.org

Any progress or updates?

3
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by Teknevra@lemm.ee to c/open_christian@lemm.ee
 

Last night I read a comment from someone on Youtube regarding how, if Homosexuality is an unchosen orientation, then pedophilia can also be classified as an unchosen sexual attraction or orientation.

I'm irritated with the constant comparisons between Homosexuality and Pedophilia.

If it's TRUE that pedophilia is in fact an innate "orientation" or sexual attraction whatever then society should do everything to keep those individuals from expressing those attractions and therefore harm children(which I agree with 100%) .

They followed the same logic that if pedophiles are able to recognize their attractions are wrong and go to therapy, then so should homosexuals go to therapy, because its just a sexual deviant of the same sort.

Does anyone else on here get so annoyed with this like irritated?

I guess I'm on here just venting.

 

Hello friends, I'm in my mid 20's and this is my first time exploring religion.

I was raised in a somewhat non-religious family.

I started wanting to explore my personal beliefs more a few years ago and became agnostic.

Within this last year I have started exploring Christianity a lot more.

I even started regularly attending church 10 months ago.

I love the church, I love the community, and I love the teachings of Jesus and wish to live like him.

The only thing holding me back from fully converting, getting baptized and taking communion is actually the bible itself.

I have such a hard time "believing" in it.

Especially as a very scientific person.

I can't get past a lot of the stories in the OT like the talking burning bush, or Noah's arc, or all of the mysteries and miracles.

I believe strongly in evolution, I believe dinosaurs existed, and the miracles just feel fictitious as I thumb through my bible.

This cognitive dissonance is my biggest hurdle because it makes me question if what I believe in and love about the NT is even real.

I know, the whole point is to just have faith in it; but I am REALLY questioning myself.

I don't know if I can ever believe in it, but I have loved the journey I have been on in the past year. It's like the closer I get to wanting to be baptized, the more I struggle in belief.

I want to be Christian, but at times I feel like my brain just can't do it, almost as if it wasn't built to be religious.

Is this normal for late in life Christians?

Should I just stick it out and contintue to do what I'm doing and hope God eventually guides me into having a stronger faith?

With how much I struggle with this inner battle, I feel like getting baptized or taking communion would be heretical at this point.

 

Before I say anything, I wanna apologize for ANOTHER political post and the length!

I’m sick and tired of other “Christians” giving us a bad reputation.

Trump manipulated Christians (mainly Evangelicals) into voting for him, and I'd add that it's also about consumerism.

Evangelicalism, being so closely tied to American patriotism, sees a “strong” white billionaire as the ultimate symbol of leadership.

I become enraged when I see other “Christians” go on and on about family values, love, and appreciation when they can’t even appreciate their neighbour or hold up their family values.

What happened to helping the poor and needy?

Sitting with sinners?

I understand that the increase in crime is scary and the opposition to abortion, but you need to look beyond that because America isn’t a Christian nation- It’s a nation where you’re free to be Christian.

If someone chooses to get an abortion, they have the right to do so, even though we disagree.

It’s heartbreaking to see that many of my fellow brothers and sisters became so hateful.

Why can’t we just learn to tolerate each other?

[–] Teknevra@lemm.ee 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

@yxf@lemm.ee

No idea.

It's a post from the Subreddit.

That's why there is a Reddit Link.

 

Every time I’m on social media and it’s a Christian majority comment section or niche , whenever they comment on anything about Muslims it all becomes over simplified and explained through racist Islamophobia. I’ve realized that during the Gaza genocide , a lot of Christian accounts have been not only fervently Zionist , but also using Islamophobia to explain away the situation in Palestine. I’ve seen this now with Syria too. With the recent massacres of Syria’s minorities , there have been a number of Christians explaining away Syria’s situation through using Islamophobia rather than talking about the geopolitical situation on the ground , foreign involvement , the oppression of the dictatorships et cetera. It’s as though the actual politics on the ground mean nothing to these people and for these Christian Islamophobes any and everything that happens in the so called « Muslim world » (even if non Muslims are doing the actions) is only explained away as « this is what Islam commands (injustice oppression darkness etc) » or « it’s a religion of war mongering and killing » and this includes situations where Muslims are also the victims of these atrocities.

For these Christian Islamophobes , when the victim is a Muslim , they secularize or christianize the victims. For instance , if it’s a shi’i minority being persecuted and there’s 1 or 2 Christian’s who got killed along with the shi’i or whoever the minority is, the Christian Islamophobes will make generalizing statements as though the victims were mostly Christian or leave out that the victims are even Muslims. Or they will use the name of the sect completely leaving out that this sect is Muslim too. On the flip side, when they secularize it, these people will remove the religious affiliation of the victims while only describing the religious affiliation of the perpetrators which in effect creates an image of Muslims as the perpetual bad guys and Muslims as never the victims of atrocities.

And the crazy part is that whenever anyone mentions Israel’s involvement in the situation of anywhere where there’s a large Muslim population it’s , « Israel has nothing to do with it ». Or they say stuff like « you all like to blame the west » despite the overwhelming evidence of the west’s involvement in the given situation.

 

I 23f have recently started gymnastics classes. Ive been jealous of how people can push their bodies to their physical limits and just think gymnastics is really cool. I don't however like the typical female leotard, and think it's wayyyy too revealing compared to the (typical) male uniform. I can't even understand how we managed to convince girls that wearing leotards and having to worry about shaving was better than full body suits. Anyways

I just feel sad about not being able to share in my excitement about this new hobby with the rest of my family because they don't think gymnastics is a girl's sport, especially not a woman's sport. Id begged to be put in gymnastics but wa always met with "a respectable girl doesn't do gymnastics" or something along those lines.

Especially during Ramadan I don't feel I can bring this up and it's just sad that even when wearing 'as modest clothing as possible', gymnastics is still too sexualised in our community.

I want to enjoy the limits of this human form Allah SWT has given me, I want to appreciate it in all it can do. I don't think that's something I'd be damned for, but it hurts knowing that it's looked at in contempt by the majority of people.

 

Demonizing Islam

I'm like so over it.

I hate to see that more and more people start to demonize Islam as a dangerous religion.

They take Quran verses out of context and start spreading misinformation without even checking the facts.

They see some garbage on the TV about terrorism and immediately point the finger at the whole religion, as if a normal Muslim person living in a country is a threat for everyone around them.

It has come to the point of which I'm afraid to even say that I'm a Muslim.

In my country, there is an upsurge of right-wing parties.

Even the media seems to be extremely one sided.

For the past few months or so, all I've been hearing on the media has been

"A Muslim has done XYZ"

or

"The suspect was screaming 'Allahu Akbar'"

and so on.

Sometimes when I'm outside I start to feel uneasy because some people look at me and my negative thoughts start to creep in:

"Are they maybe judging me because I look like a Muslim? Because I look like a foreigner? Maybe because of my beard?"

It's becoming so exhausting. I already suffer from a mild social anxiety, but with the way things are going, it's only going to get worse. I hate it, I really really hate it.

 

Some brothers argue about the Supper, because they consider that the bread and wine are not symbols or representations of the body and blood of Christ, but should be understood literally, as it is written in the Bible.

Something similar happens with offerings: many maintain that they are not a command or an act of obedience, since it is not explicitly ordered in Scripture.

According to this perspective, the offering should be given voluntarily, when they feel happy and grateful, without any obligation.

 

A small group from my church is Opinions on street evangelism? planning to go out soon to do street evangelism and I kinda agreed without really thinking about it. I suppose I felt like I just should've

The thing is that I'm not sure if I like the concept. I think that if God wanted someone to come to him then he'd set pieces in place to draw them in. Trying to go out to random people and just going "Hey do you know God? You should repent now!" Feel more like interfering and forcing God onto people

Like I've seen a few clips of those "Christian Youtubers" who do things like that and honestly I get embarrassed from watching. If you're gonna approach someone and take time out of their day then you should respect them and know when to stop.

Plus I'm pretty introverted aeound strangers and I don't like going up to people unless I have to😭

 

I’m not even joking. Every day before taraweeh he gives a little 5 minute talk about a verse he read or a story he’s researched.

Yesterday he came out with this. He said that before the non Muslims were open and direct with stopping us practice our religion. Now they are more “covert” so they use “hidden tactics” like stopping you praying Salah.

Bro what 😂😂😂😂

3
submitted 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) by Teknevra@lemm.ee to c/progressive_islam@lemm.ee
 

On International Women’s Day, there was a post that went viral on Instagram, about how Islam honors women with hadith, and Quraan verses that prove that.

This is an example of hadith mentioned in the post:

Islam honours Women:

  • A mother is a gateway to paradise, a daughter is a path to mercy, and a wife is a garment of love
  • "The best of you are those who are best to their women" ~ Prophet Muhammed
  • “Whoever has three daughters, cares for them, and is patient with them, will enter Paradise"~ Prophet Muhammed
  • "The best of you are those who are best to their wives"~ Prophet Muhammed

Notice how there is a pattern?

All of these are extremely indirect and focus on what men get rewarded when they treat women well.

This is not fitting the context at all, in my opinion.

I have also heard this talk so much whenever the notion of feminism in Islam is brought up, and I just think that it’s the wrong take and wrong arguments.

I’m actually starting to hate this perspective that is completely centered around men.

It emphasizes how women should be submissive and only serve as a way for men to earn more rewards.

But how about we actually start talking about women now?

What do you guys think?

I’m curious.

[–] Teknevra@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago

There you go.

Welcome to the team, @theomorph@lemmus.org

[–] Teknevra@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

So, would you be interested in modding, or....

[–] Teknevra@lemm.ee 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

A couple of times online

[–] Teknevra@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (6 children)

@theomorph@lemmus.org

I found this one:

XWiki

Also, there's also the option of making a website, putting all of the Wiki information on it, and then federating the website (perhaps by using Wordpress, Loforo Plume, WriteFreely, etc.?)

I would consider doing this, but honestly, I don't have enough time or energy to maintain it.

I already manage multiple other Communities.

If you want, you're more than welcome to join the mod team, and help.

[–] Teknevra@lemm.ee 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Honestly, none.

I'm more of an Agnostic, possibly Pagan, although I've never really fully delved into Paganism all that much.

Although, if I had to choose, I feel like I would probably choose Islam, although I'm not sure why.

Honestly, if any Christians/Muslims/Jews wish to take over their respective Communities, then feel free to contact me.

I have no hate towards any of the religions, it can just be somewhat difficult juggling so many different communities by yourself.

[–] Teknevra@lemm.ee 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

Thx for the info.

Hey, quick question, how many subs does this community have, according to you?

According to lemm.ee, progressive_islam has 39 subscribers, but when I check from another instance, it only shows 1 subscriber.

view more: next ›