Book Review - Sex and the Believer
Sodomy, Etc
Mr. Koniuchowsky writes:
The thing that is not so clear though to most believers is just what is sodomy? Just what is the TORAH definition of sodomy? The dictionary reconfirms the errors that many people make; even believers, who are just as confused about this issue as any other people group. Dictionary.com refers to sodomy as: “intercourse via the anus, committed by a man with a man or woman.”
That’s what most believers have been brainwashed to think and believe. But get ready for another Torah based shock! Sodomy in its most bare biblical definition is the sexual act that was practiced by the men of Sodom and Gomorrah, mainly homosexual sex including anal sex in the buttocks. Nowhere does YHWH declare that anal sex between a married man and woman is sin.
As stated earlier, once you open up the marriage bed, all kinds of perversions creep in.
Mr. Koniuchowsky continues:
Now it may not be the behavior of choice due to unsanitary consequences and due to the woman’s lack of persuasion towards that act. Nevertheless, in keeping with the fact that YHWH limits Sodomy to the acts practiced in Sodom and following the eternal principle of Hebrews 13:4 where the marriage bed (monogamous, or plural) is UNDEFILED, we must align our views with that of Abba YHWH. Period. Whether that “sits well” with some or not.
Now I am willing to give credit where credit is due; Moshe does admit that anal sex is unsanitary and that women are not naturally inclined to desire that kind of action, but those are both understatements as far as I am concerned. I have never heard a woman state that she likes it that way, and if she has told her man that it is only because she wants to keep him coming back and figures that any attention is better then none. The Internet is full of the medical repercussions of this lifestyle, so I won’t go into detail here. Suffice it to say that once this type of lust is embraced, the medical bills start to rise.
Beyond all of that is the next statement that follows: “The only valid sodomy law is one that prohibits anal sex between men.” Is this true? Is sodomy only a sin when between a man and a woman? I will agree with MK when he states, “The Scriptures do not use the word sodomy even once… Scripture merely refers to homosexual men as Sodomites.” As I mentioned earlier, the word uses to indicate intimate relations between men is the same term used to indicate intimate relations between spouses.
Let’s look up the term “sodomites,” because the word does not appear in the singular in the Bible. We only find this term used once, in 1 Kings 22:46, and Strong’s Concordance defines it as: a (quasi) sacred person, that is, (technically) a (male) devotee (by prostitution) to licentious idolatry: - sodomite, unclean.
By its very definition we see that this is an unclean action. Why, pray tell, would someone whose desire is to approach a Holy God want to engage in such unclean behavior? We also see from this definition that sodomy is associated with pagan practices. Anyone who has spent any time researching the occult can tell you that this activity is prevalent in cultic circles.
What is Mr. Koniuchowsky’s argument for married couples to engage in such activity? “In a monogamous marriage where the man has no choices, but desires anal sex, he is stuck.” Tell me, how would a man know that he desires anal sex unless he has already encountered it? Even if his only experience with this act were with a woman, he must have spoken to a man first who told him of its pleasures. Godly people should avoid this kind of talk as it is profane and we are to be holy. Sodomy is just surrounded by uncleanliness.
It seems to me that his whole argument hinges on his interpretation of Hebrews 13:4 (the marriage bed is undefiled at all times) and the fact that there is no clear-cut prohibition against this activity (sodomy within the marriage bed) in Torah. However, there are a few verses in Romans that actually do address this. Ironically, Moshe Koniuchowsky quotes these very same verses in this section of the book, but in reference to lesbian love.
For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. (Romans 1:26-27)
It is true that lesbian love can be considered an unnatural function of the female body, but it is also true of sodomy. I am not the only one who feels this way; Webster’s Dictionary defines sodomy simply, “A crime against nature.” Think of it this way: you have two doors next to each other; one is designed to swing both ways while the other only opens in one direction. After a little while you discover that the other door is not tight, and can be forced to go in the opposite direction. After forcing it for a while, it begins to open easily. Only now this is a problem because there was a reason for that door to only open in one direction, and now you have things coming through the door that shouldn’t; things that the door was designed to hold within. You have now damaged the door and it can no longer be used as “nature intended.” That is a crime against nature.
This is true regardless of whether one is male or female. It is the action itself that is unclean, unnatural and simply not enjoyable for women, but the author doesn’t seem to really believe that as he writes, “The advantage in a plural marriage is he can more than likely find a wife among his wives willing to indulge him. But who knows, some women actually like it more than men. Go figure?” Who knows, maybe she is only indulging him to prevent him from taking another wife? Some women will do anything to keep her man from turning to another. It is a degrading act; these women have very little self-respect.
Sodomy is unnatural relations. Why would anyone teach another to engage in unnatural relations simply because he desires it? That sounds very much like the, “if it feels good, do it!” attitude of the world around us. We are supposed to separate ourselves from the world and its ways. We are to be holy, untouched by the world’s profanity.
But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted. (1 Timothy 1:8-11)
Sodomy between married couples, is it sound teaching? Does Mr. Koniuchowsky offer any Scriptural proof for his bold statements? No, he does not. The natural way for a man and woman to have intimate relations are pleasurable for both parties involved, releases stress for both, and causes the couple to walk away feeling closer and more in love then before. Can this be said for this “other” way? It has been know to cause damage that is irreversible and does not cause the same pleasurable feelings in the woman; should a godly man give into desires that cause pain in his wife? I just can’t understand the logic in this kind of reasoning simply because Adonai does not say, “Oh, and by the way, don’t do that nasty thing with your wife either.”
Once the marital bed is opened up to this, the only thing left is polygamy with lesbianism; after all, there is nowhere that Adonai specifically states, “Women must not be intimate with other women.” Even the New Covenant writings are not that specific. The verses from Romans and 1 Timothy noted above are the ones most often cited. Since those verses can also be taken to mean sodomy, as shown above, there is a wide margin of room left here for new revelations that allow this activity within the polygamous marriage. This concerns me greatly.
But what concerns me more is the lack of understanding of the whole concept of intimacy displayed by the author. His teachings on masturbation, for example, suggest that this is good for women who are not feeling satisfied. He then suggests that she should do it in front of her husband so that he can enjoy it as well. Once again the impression is given that this book is not just all about sex, but that it is all bout sex for men. There is really no freedom found within this book for women.
And the author also insults his fellow man with statements such as, “There are only two kinds of men, when it comes to masturbation. Those who do, and those who lie about it.” Moshe then councils God’s people to, “feel free to masturbate and for crying out loud, STOP FEELING GUILTY AND UNCLEAN ABOUT IT.”
For this is the will of God, your sanctification; that is, that you abstain from sexual immorality; that each of you know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor, not in lustful passion, like the Gentiles who do not know God; and that no man transgress and defraud his brother in the matter because the Lord is the avenger in all these things, just as we also told you before and solemnly warned you. (1 Thessalonians 4:3-6)
So, I guess the real question here is, “What is sexual immorality?” Once we can clearly define those terms, we will have a much better idea of what Adonai expects of us. The phrase, “to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor,” seems to be the key, and most commentaries agree that the word, “tool” refers to male genitalia or, by extension, a wife. It is obvious that we are to avoid lustful passion, with the exception of that which we have for our spouse.
Judah had a son named Onan who was called upon to perform the duty of a brother in law to his brother’s widow (Levirate marriage). However, he decided not to complete the deed, and it cost him his life.
Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife, he wasted his seed on the ground in order not to give offspring to his brother. But what he did was displeasing in the sight of the LORD; so He took his life also. (Genesis 38:9-10)
Mr. Koniuchowsky would state that this demonstrates the need for a man to take his sisters widow, regardless of whether he is married or not. Allow me to remind the reader that this brother was obviously unmarried, but more importantly, allow me to point out that he spilled his seed on the ground, and that just may be what cause God’s wrath. We really have no way of knowing for sure.
Masturbation is all about gratifying ones own sexual desires and has no other purpose. Mr. Koniuchowsky refers to the seed of the men of Israel as the “blessed seed,” yet he councils men to spill this blessing on the ground simply because it feels good. Worse yet, he tells men that it is fine with Adonai if they want to deposit this same blessing in the most filthy, disgusting part of the human anatomy, when its intended location is right next door. His logic confuses and escapes me.