Actually, one could argue that Scripture and Talmudic literature does not prohibit "homosexuality" since "sexuality" is a much later idea that does not exist in their understanding of human psychology and behavior. What is prohibited and permitted are certain forms of sexual activity. Biblically we do not know what forms of male/male physical intimacy was permissible. What we have is a prohibition against male/male anal intercourse that is most likely related to the honor/shame system. In Late Antiquity the binary "natural/unnatural" appears in discussions of human sexual behavior. It is important to note, however, that this binary was not a product of empirical observation of the natural world, but that it reflected culturally based philosophical assumptions.
Thank you, Lewis, for your incisive corrective. The fact that "sexuality" as we understand the term was not on our ancestors' (forgive the anachronistic metaphor) radar screen is important to note. In rabbinical school I learned that the Biblical "honor/shame system" relating to sexual acts reflected, instead, anxiety over power relations within a culture demanding equality among males. Thus, "dominant" and "submissive" sexual roles were reserved for males and females respectively. To my post's larger point: The Torah explicitly bans sexual relations between males; the contemporary State of Israel affirms LGBTQ+ rights. As always, I am grateful for your erudition and insight.
Actually, one could argue that Scripture and Talmudic literature does not prohibit "homosexuality" since "sexuality" is a much later idea that does not exist in their understanding of human psychology and behavior. What is prohibited and permitted are certain forms of sexual activity. Biblically we do not know what forms of male/male physical intimacy was permissible. What we have is a prohibition against male/male anal intercourse that is most likely related to the honor/shame system. In Late Antiquity the binary "natural/unnatural" appears in discussions of human sexual behavior. It is important to note, however, that this binary was not a product of empirical observation of the natural world, but that it reflected culturally based philosophical assumptions.
Thank you, Lewis, for your incisive corrective. The fact that "sexuality" as we understand the term was not on our ancestors' (forgive the anachronistic metaphor) radar screen is important to note. In rabbinical school I learned that the Biblical "honor/shame system" relating to sexual acts reflected, instead, anxiety over power relations within a culture demanding equality among males. Thus, "dominant" and "submissive" sexual roles were reserved for males and females respectively. To my post's larger point: The Torah explicitly bans sexual relations between males; the contemporary State of Israel affirms LGBTQ+ rights. As always, I am grateful for your erudition and insight.