Why Not? (1)
You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination. Leviticus 18:22
Abomination – The contemporary view on the choice of homosexual relations is a thorn in the side of religion. Since the culture is moving in the direction of “the right to love whomever you wish,” any religion that retains prohibitions about homosexuality is considered archaic, bigoted and repressive by those outside the religious paradigm. Islam is no different than traditional Christianity on this issue. Of course, contemporary religions of the West are attempting to remove this thorn by reinterpreting the sacred texts so that homosexual relations are allowed. Whether successful or not, this move is clearly motivated by the current cultural view, not by the intent of the original authors. Nothing, absolutely nothing, could be clearer from the text of Leviticus. Male homosexuality is forbidden to those who call themselves followers of the ancient god, YHVH. Such practices are an abomination.
The Hebrew word here is to’evah. It is literally “a thing of horror,” something unconscionable. In modern slang, it is “gross.” To be to’evah is to be abhorrent to God and Man. Consider the underlying implications. Homosexuality is not condemned because there is something defective in the act, something harmful or violent or self-absorbed. It is condemned because, for this culture, it is disgusting, unthinkable, revolting and repulsive. Feinstein notes that this sort of sexual prohibition “is at its core an appeal to the emotions.”[1] In other words, just like the very thought of eating pork should cause emotional distress (perhaps a turning of the stomach), so the very idea of sex between two males should cause violent emotional reaction. Why? Because the idea is completely and utterly foreign to the culture. The prohibition against male homosexual behavior is culturally based. If you belong to the culture established by YHVH in the covenant, then you will find this kind of activity revolting. You would never consider it as even a remote possibility. It would make you sick.[2]
Once we recognize the cultural emotional foundation of this prohibition, we also understand why some contemporary religious circles desire to incorporate homosexuality. Contemporary religious circles simply do not share the same cultural orientation. They do not teach, endorse or practice the way of life of ancient Israel. Homosexuality is no longer abhorrent. It is just “another choice.” There is no emotional disturbance built into the acculturation process. This helps us also understand why legislation concerning homosexuality will continue to be advocated by the society at large. Put simply, we aren’t Israel. We are Babylon and in Babylon lots of things no longer make us sick.
Topical Index: homosexuality, abomination, to’evah, Leviticus 18:22
[1] Eve Levavi Feinstein, Sexual Pollution in the Hebrew Bible, p. 113.
[2] It is interesting to note that there is no such prohibition about lesbian sexual relations. Why? Is it because, in the culture of Israel, such relations simply did not occur? Is there something about the ancient society of Israel that simply made such relations impossible?
Soooooo, if it is cultural then eating pork and fornication can be rewritten? They’re acceptable in today’s culture. Does YHVH desire His written instructions to change with cultures or cultures to mold to His instructions?
Dear Bill;
You are right,God’s culture doesn’t change. when cultures make other laws they are no longer God’s culure.
God’s cultures do not change? Then the Jews should be stoning adulterers, and taking their unruly children to the gates of the city to be stoned to death, and they should be breaking into Catholic Churches and museums across the globe and burning their idols of worship? Shall I go on? How about, from the Mosaic law God’s “culture” evolved into a more loving culture that was able to remain in their faith but also trade and be friends with others? What if God’s culture included Temple worship, but they no longer had a temple? Have they changed? To Christians, “turn the other cheek” replaced an “eye for an eye”- are they no longer part of God’s culture? Perhaps you think they never were- that’s okay, you can think that. But to think that God doesn’t give His Children laws progressively as they grow or evolve, or the world changes around them, then I guess God failed and He has NO culture whatsoever. I need you to think a little deeper than that…. just a little. We don’t have to agree, but at least make sense… please?
Oh, Bill. Haven’t you been reading? In the case of Leviticus 18, we find a string of phrases that all have the same form: “Do not do X. It is a Y.”
In Leviticus 18:22, X is “a man having sex with another man” and Y is to’evah.
Five verses earlier, in Leviticus 18:17, X is “marrying a woman and her daughters or granddaughters,” and Y is zimah. While the nuances of zimah are difficult to discern, the word is clearly negative — “depravity,” according to the NSRV, “shame” in the NAB, and “wickedness” in the KJV.
In Leviticus 18:23, X is bestiality and Y is tevel, another negative word whose nuances are elusive. (The NRSV has “perversion,” the NAB “abhorrent,” and the KJV “confusion.”)
Leviticus 20 is similar, both in terms of the context and the pattern, though the details differ. (Tevel is used for a man who has sex with his daughter-in-law, among other differences.)
There are different words used for different things… It was considered To’evah for Egyptians to eat with Hebrews…
In any event, they were laws given to the Hebrews, not to everyone. They didn’t sneak into other kingdoms hunting homos and stone them…. Only in their lands was it to’evah.
And if you are a Kosher Jew, then no, don’t eat pork- unless its from a Chinese restaurant, then somehow its okay.
If you believe homosexuality is an abomination because of what it says in Leviticus, then you’d better start living your religion and stoning gays & lesbians to death; or patiently read the material and find some understanding so you don’t have to commit murder on behalf of ancient Hebrews.
Lesbians: The absence of a direct prohibition by statute or judgement may be because there is no man involved. When Eve (Havah) contravened, liability was ascribed to Adam.
Although there are statutes prohibiting male homosexual acts, for reference I always try to assign it under authority of one of the 10 words (commandments). For me this fit under the statement (word): “I am YHWH your Elohim, who brought you out of the land of Egypt; out of the house of bondage.” As well as, secondarily: “You shall not murder [unjustifiably kill]” Sodom’s sin was not homosexuality but, as a community, they were murdering travellers who came to their city. Even the passive or non-concenting party to a homosexual act is to be acted against: And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death, and you shall slay the beast. (Lev.20:15)
We were created in the image of Elohim (Gen. 1:26-27; 1Cor. 11:7). This Image of Elohim is an invisible image of attributes, which make up the Godhead (Col. 1:15; Rom. 1:27). “What may be known of Elohim is manifest in them [mankind] his invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead…” (Rom. 1:19) In Rom. 1:26-28 it is stated that those who fail to perceive these things may fall into the errors of Homosexuality, etc. Elohim’s invisible attributes manifested in man and made clearly seen is in the Torah, in Gen. 1:26, 27: Then Elohim said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness… So Elohim created man in His own image; in the image of Elohim He created him; male and female He created them. “Our image”, “Our likeness” and “male and female” appear to be parallelism. These feminine and masculine (and family) attributes are represented in the Tanak by the Father (Jer. 31:9; Mal. 1:9; Is. 63:16; 64:8), the Mother (Is. 66:13 ) and the Son (Prov. 30:4; Ps. 2:2, 7, 12). [This is not an endorsement of the false Trinity doctrine. The Father and Mother is one entity with the Son manifesting the essence of the Father (and sometimes as the Mother? Matt.23:37) as an image and / or voice: Either as (the angel of) YHWY or Yeshua] The “Bride” of the Son may be a further expansion of this family and fulfillment of the promise of inheritance (we, as children of Elohim inherit eternal life).
One can therefore conclude that those practicing homosexual acts do not understand and follow the example of the family of Elohim and therefore cannot be incorporated. In addition the “active” partner causes the liability to be killed (either physical, spiritual or both) of the “passive” partner. Hasatans does not have families and especially lacks the “loving-kindness” element contributed by the Father (we would have expected this to come from the “Mother”!). This complexity highlights for me the importance of meditating on the first “Word”: “I am YHWH your Elohim…” Sh’ma Yisra’el
Just a comment on your statement about human beings created in the image of Elohim. “This image of Elohim is an invisible image of attributes, which make up the Godhead.” Please listen to my analysis of the Genesis 1:26-27 passage in the audio “Being Human.” While Christian doctrine popularly supposes that this verse is about attributes, there is nothing in the text itself or in the Hebraic worldview that would support such a reading. In fact, attribute theology is a product of a Greek philosophical metaphysics, not an Hebraic view. Furthermore, any discussion of the “invisible attributes” of God must address the incompatibility of via negativa models when it comes to human being (see my book on God and Time). I show that the Genesis 1:26-27 passage cannot be understood in terms of static attributes and ontological categories but rather is a description of the dynamic quality of relationship, particularly those relationships that exist in verbs, i.e., in acting rather than being.
Finally, while it is true that Christianity has claimed invisible attributes that make up the “Godhead,” there is virtually no biblical support for this claim apart from reading the doctrine INTO the text. The translation you cite from Romans introduces vocabulary not actually found in the Greek text but rather is a part of the Trinitarian view.
Thank you,
Do you mean the audio “who is man”… I will start reading God-Time tonight.
It is difficult to convey Hebrew thought having a Greek upbringing, even if you meant it to be Hebraic.
As I understand it the Aramaic explanation preceded the Greek and reflects the original Hebrew.
Aramaic: 3 (three) K’NUMA in 1 (one) PARSOPA
Greek: 3 HYPOSTASIS in 1 PROSOPON
Latin (the switch happens, probably Jerome): now 3 PERSONAS in 1 SUBSTANTIA
Today’s English: 3 Persons in 1 Essence
Better Translation? 3 individualities /manifestations / emanations in 1 uniqueness /absoluteness / unity
I do not see attributes as an essence but as manifestations and they are understood to be dynamic to the level that humans cannot (are not supposed to) always cognitively distinguishing which is which. E.g.: We know there is Wisdom, Understanding and Knowledge, but would attribute Wisdom to the Ruach (female) but it is apparently a manifestation of the Father, which then through the working of the Ruach within your heart / core, brings you to knowledge (of the Son which is the Torah incarnate). I can read scripture and think (philosophy) till my brain smolder but nothing will happen. I need to pray to the Father to reveal to me his instructions. He then through choice and loving-kindness will pour out a Wisdom revelation upon me. I must then be “clean” so that the Ruach can interact within me to give me Understanding. The Knowledge that results from this is what I need to live according to Torah.
My personal understanding is that the “Spirit” of the Godhead is the Tree of Life and probably looks more like a tree (or whirlwind) than a “man” but this cannot be seen with physical eyes. It can only be seen in the spirit. The relationship between the 3 K’numa must be intricately dynamic, especially to balance “Gevurah” and “Chesed”: Manifestations, which to humans must seem TOTALLY incompatible in one “Parsopa”. [Mark 8:23 And He took the hand of the blind man, and took him outside of the village: and He spat on his eyes, and laid His hand, and asked him, what he saw. 24 And he looked and said, I see sons of men, AS TREES that are walking. 25 Again He placed His hand on his eyes, and he was restored and saw everything clearly.] The prophets who entered heaven in visions, was being shown images they would understand.
I see the invisible attributes everywhere in the Tanak: “the Name; Will; Wisdom; Understanding; Knowledge; Loving-kindness; Judgement / Power; Glory; Victory; Majesty; Foundation; Kingship / Shekinah; etc., especially in Psalms and the writings of Slomo. Job 38-41 is a beautiful example of the fast moving dynamic interactions of the manifestations of YHWH (so fast that the Godhead is at first invisible to Yov): Then YHWH answered Yob, OUT OF THE WHIRLWIND; and the chapter continue to expound giving a representation of visible and invisible attributes, in fact the visible items is probably what Paul refers to in Rom.1:20. In the end Yov declares HAVING BEEN REMINDED OF CREATION: “I had heard of You by the hearing of the ear, but now my eye sees You! Wherefore I abhor my words, and repent, seeing I am dust and ashes. (Job 42:5-6)
The translation I cite from, is from the Aramaic. The Godhead is explained as a Tri-unity, which is different from Trinitarian, which see 3 distinct persons, but all 3 with the same agenda.
Just a final question, what is your view on the original language in which the New Testament was written? The evidence for Hebrew and then translated into Aramaic first and only thereafter into Greek seems quite convincing.
Without replying to all that you wrote (since I am leaving for Israel shortly), it seems clear to me that the epistles (most of them) were written in Greek. No one seriously counts that. As for Matthew, I believe written in Hebrew and then translated. Mark is a question. Luke probably Greek and John probably Hebrew.
Thanks
I certainly don’t believe in the “trinity” nor do I believe God is a giant mass of gases and no matter. But I am totally interested in what you are saying and I will look further. Thank you.
Who are we listening to? Our current (abhorrent by the way) culture? or to Christ?
One verse “overlooked” by many, is this: “I AM the LORD — I change not.” Yes, the God we worship, the God who made us, the God we love with all of our heart-soul-mind-and strength (notice please the Hebrew dashes!) is the God who (is anyone listening?) does NOT change.
God destroyed Sodom and Gonorrhea by fire. Remember Lot’s wife? And our “culture” today? By excluding God, “exchanging” (if you will) “a godless government” for God (humanism at its worst) we have “sown the wind” and are now “reaping the whirlwind.” We are always one generation away from paganism. Remove God from any culture or community and voila! — the animals emerge from their respective lairs. It does become a “jungle out there..” Just ask Lot.
Where is my only hope? O, how the mighty have fallen! The once mighty screaming eagle is now but a twittering sparrow! It is because the God who never changes, the God, the only God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of Israel, the covenant-keeping God is — and always will be — still on the Throne. And His (blessed is His Name) is a throne of grace and of mercy.
There is one man in this land who will (gladly, freely) still “bow the knee.” Why? It is because, my dear friends, – His love endures forever. Blessed IS the Name of the LORD.
Amen Carl!!! I am with you all the way.. I work at night in a grocery store and I see all the broken and lost souls, I even work with a lot of them.. Many don’t know or deny the fact that there is God.. They can only see Abba in me.. I pray each and everyday to be the light of Yeshua to all who see me.. I speak of Abba and proudly and willingly bow myself to HIM.. So all of us together bowing to our Father could start our own “wave”.. Wow!!! That would be so amazing.. Can you imagine??? Abba Bless all of you!!
I first have to start off by saying that I completely agree with homosexuality as being an abomination in His eyes. I don’t think that His instructions ever change. With that said maybe it’s just me but I don’t put too much weight on any single mitzvot.
I should explain, if all the mitzvots are connecting points for then if someone is homosexual they can technically do 611 other ones (611 not 612 because they can’t be fruitful and multiply). That’s not to say I’m speaking for God saying He doesn’t care about this one but the other abominations a lot of people that aren’t gay also break – a quick google search will provide a list of it. The only thing that Yeshua says is an abomination (which he says twice) is “the love of money” so people that can’t stop thinking about a raise so they can buy the next cool thing, love your amazon account, or deal with issues by spending money, same boat. Also another on this list is, “a heart that devises wicked plans” so anyone that is into ‘end of the world’, ‘ fema camps’ or thinking about Revelation and all the things that anti-christ could do, or into ‘fear porn’ same boat.
My point is that I think that the Christian church picks a fight with homosexuality and has a stance with it rather then any other abomination (lets say lashon hara) because it only effects 2% of the church (statistically speaking). So if they (homosexuals) get upset and leave – it’s not big impact on the revenue that comes in. Also the battle of homosexuality to someone that isn’t homosexual is a very crude battle. i have to say if you have a ring on your finger, probably not battling too much with that sin. But lashon hara, speak about that one and almost everyone has a battle with it daily if it’s in the office or just merely because you are reading the news. Or desecrate the Sabbath which just about every modern church person does. Give them the day (even though it’s not Sunday but just for the sake of argument) if you buy or sell anything you’ve desecrated it. Not even close to keeping it. None of this is defending the sin but I don’t find any abomination it to have more weight then any other abomination.
What I’m trying to say is that I don’t think that I don’t have any ‘better’ standing with God with all the ‘big deal’ sins I’ve committed, through that though I still don’t think it prevents someone doing the other 612 (or 611).
If righteousness is “correctly relating” then, to me, anyway, homosexuality is, first and foremost, incorrect relating with oneself. If the command emphasizes relating with others (loving others) as you relate to (love) yourself, then it will follow that you are going to incorrectly relate to others at the same point that you are incorrectly relating to yourself already. To correctly relate to myself is to correctly understand who I am in creation, and that includes who I am sexually. I understand homosexuality to be a self-identity disorder (chaos) in creation, that secondarily may involve others. Confusion is a fruit of wrong choices, but wrong choices are driven by confusion about what love is. I think there is a real problem in society in that we don’t have a good understanding of HOW to demonstrate love correctly to those who are confused. I am afraid we react in such a way that they are left even more confused. I have yet to see a best seller titled “How To Love A Homosexual”. Perhaps we throw stones because we are just as confused as they are!
This is a very touchy topic, and this topic is on the list of things I just don’t understand. I’m sure all families have to deal with this now days. I have some on my side of the family as well as on my wifes side of the family. My struggle is how do you deal with it. We were invited to a ceremony that my wifes cousins “two females” just had recently. They consider themselves married. They have adopted a child together. We didn’t attend the ceremony due to we felt like if we went then we were agreeing with there decision. When we have family gatherings, and they are there no one really speaks much about there decision. We just tip toe around the circumstance and eat and fellowship. Her parents are very hurt over there decision, but that’s there daughter and they love her regardless. But how do you speak with a person who has feelings for the same sex. I don’t understand, is it something that they are born with? I have never had feelings for a male in a sexually way. So when a male speaks in this manner I just don’t understand how. but this is something I hear being said. Is this something that a child is born with? When you hear some of the males as well as females say that they have always felt that way from childhood, how do you deal with it? What do you say? How do you all deal with this problem?
Keith
Honestly, Keith, i believe it IS, has BECOME something people are born with these days. In the 60’s and 70’s we began migrating to a more chemical prevalent society, from our sunscreens, to the use of plastics and heavily scented fabric softness.
All these things contributed to our bodies being inundated w/endocrine interrupters, creating 1st and 2nd generation sexual deviations that have become genetically imprinted (and, more importantly, spiritually).
Only the Holy Spirit can correct this, and one will not gravitate to that correction if they are treated like second class citizens, at best, and corrupt sinners, at best. They know they are being looked down upon and disregarded, their beings disrespected by others.
No greater adhesive then the bond between abused and rejected individuals who have found each other.
Keith, your family is blessed to have you. You are trying to understand, and you want to do good. Not for the first time am I reminded of a quote attributed to St. Francis of Assisi: ” Preach the gospel at all times. And if necessary, use words.”
If I understand Skip correctly today, eating pork should be as repulsive as homosexual acts…for those in God’s culture. Concerning those outside of God’s culture, Paul said, “What have I to do with judging those also who are outside?” (1 Corninthians 5:12).
There are lots of reasons why men and women develop gay tendencies. Psychological, emotional, instructional, even physical. A lot can go wrong with our “normal programming” due to genetic degradation. Epigenetics leaves the door wide open for all kinds of developments. There is so much we do not know about health and what is “normal.” As I’ve told my wife, there but for the grace of God go I.
HOWEVER…giving in to homosexual desires, to me, is no worse than losing one’s temper. We all have pulls in the wrong direction. What we need is self-control.
You don’t necessarily have to understand why people have same-sex attractions. What’s important is that they understand that you, even while NOT condoning their behavior, are willing to show compassion and friendliness. How can we do any less toward those outside of God’s culture?
Hi Keith — I think this is what I’ve heard Skip say when someone brings up the “true nature” of homosexual feelings: no one is denying that those feelings may be real, and from a very early age; but feelings are not really the issue here. We all have feelings that are not appropriate. It’s not the feelings that are the problem, it’s acting upon those feelings. When we are followers of Torah, we learn to rein in feelings that YHVH tells us are an abomination to him and do not act on those things. (Therefore, I don’t kill my husband or children when they makes me crazy. 🙂 )
Now the big issue is whether the person acting up homosexual feelings believes he or she is a follower of Yeshua. Christianity, of course, would just say “repent, go and sin no more” — but then if you do sin again, you just repeat the process. Torah observance demands a walk, a lifestyle, that is continually growing in a positive Torah-observant direction. Not that we can’t and don’t fall, but if we sin with the intention of counting on God’s grace, I wonder if we don’t push that grace to far.
I have read all the above statements. Our creator initiated the Biblical plan of relationship and ordained the union of man and woman with the command to procreate . In time through our UNBELIEF in His spoken Word we allowed the fallen angel to dominate our beliefs.Thereby creating havoc and confusion and greater UNBELIEF . Not discerning any longer the simple loving command through obedience to His Word we continue to seek our paradise in vain.
We see by FAITH all throughout the Old/New Testaments the thread of redemption. Hebrew chapter 11 is mighty in testimonies of saints who walked by FAITH and overcame the ” father of lies”.
As Jesus told the tax collector Zacheus….” You must be born again.” The Holy Spirit ( a person in the Godhead) now is your Paraclete and you are no longer in a state of fixation and hardness of heart against His written Words. My point is as in Romans CH 1 man chooses to NOT RETAIN GOD IN THEIR KNOWLEDGE and therefore God gives them over…to do those things that are of the ” father of lies”.
We must share the gospel of redemption , also as I work for gay men and conversed with both….one man with adament spirit stated ” but what if there isn’t a God” !!
And I replied ” Then I guess you can do whatever you want! ” ….that is exactly what he wanted to hear.
But I pray for his eyes to be open ….and I treat him as Jesus would… with a love that reveals non judgmental mindset but clearly speaking / living my convictions of His Word.
This is my first comment on TW…I usually read other comments and keep mine to myselfI would like to add to the conversation that it seems to me WE (Americans and the church) have re-written in many ways what it means to be homosexual (culturally) which only adds to the confusion when the Bible seems to make it about sexual relations. What I mean is that we are continually re-defining being male and female based on our culture I.e boys like blue, girls like pink, (seriously when was the last time you went to a baby shower or saw a nursery for a boy that was pink?), boys like action figures, girls like dolls, etc. Per Brene’ Brown, for men to conform to norms they must show emotional control, make work their primary goal, pursue status and violence. Society (from a real life example) often times assumes if boys have a higher speaking voice, pursue nursing or cosmetology school and show any emotion besides anger and violence, or have mannerisms that seem “feminine”, or enjoy primarily the companionship of the same sex, something is wrong with that person– they ARE gay. (The same happens to girls who aren’t “girly” enough- or fit the norms for women). I believe (in some, maybe many!!!) this can result in that person not fitting into the norms and deciding they must have been homosexual from birth because they are “different” even if they have never desired sexual relations with the same sex. Isn’t it ironic (or a little nutty) that we CAN’T accept boys/males who like to play with dolls or do arts and crafts or who’s favorite sport is ballet as JUST BOYS/MALES who enjoy or excel at those things because God created them with certain gifts despite their gender but now we CAN accept them if they say they are homosexual!?! What I’m trying to say is that I believe WE (the church included) are part of the homosexual issue because in many ways we have muddied the waters and ADDED to the commands as to what it means to be homosexual based on cultural norms making it more than sexual sin. It is possible to learn to flee the temptation of such a sin but much more impossible when it seems like everything about a person is considered wrong! I have several people in my life who live under the label of homosexual and I’m regularly having to wade thru my own judgements and cultural influence and worldliness because it matters to me that I continue to gain revelation from the Lord and get this as right as I can sticking to His commands, not my own fickle self.
Honestly? Torah is written to those who embrace it. If they don’t embrace it, it simply doesn’t apply, no matter what we see as the consequences. To enforce on to people who do not believe, on our part, is simply an act of spiritual tyranny that neither Elohim or Messiah intended.
The law of the land will never surpass Torah, in the end, so the law of the land, to a Torah believer is redundant, but to the non believer it is everything.
When other religions attempt to impose their law on non believers we call that radicalism, and it goes downhill from there. We don’t want their laws imposed in our lives, but they believe their laws are essential to our life and are willing to do whatever it takes to impose on us.
Again…we have words for that, they are not complimentary.
It appears those things that are toevah are all related to death, and that is why those who eat shrimp have no right to condemn homosexuals; this is one instance where the gay rights activists have it correct. I suspect the reason female homosexuality isn’t mentioned is because there is no death, no misdirection of the procreative process, and lesbians often have children. You may note that the Orthdox only speak against the male variety. Celibacy is also not well thought of in Judaism, and it is incumbent upon the male, not the female, to marry and procreate. @Skip Moen, I would guess you are aware of the several midrash in Genesis rabah and Leviticus rabbah that mention that men were making marriage contracts with men and beasts in the days of Noah.
First of all, your translation of to’evah is absolutely wrong. It is something that goes against the culture, not “gross”. It was never intended to be a “moral” term. Vayikra starts with G-d explaining that they (Bnei Yisraʾel) should not follow the customs of Egypt from where they came, or those of Canaan to where they were going. The point of this (and most of the Law) is to differentiate themselves from other cultures. They were a people (nation) without a country and needed to maintain an identity wherever they happened to be until such time as they entered the Promised Land.
Besides all that, 18:22 is HORRIBLY mistranslated in the Christian bible, which is where modern Jews seem to derive this idea.
ואת זכר לא תשכב משכבי אשה תועבה הִוא
V’et (and with) zachar (male) lo (not) tishkav (lie down) mishk’vei (bed [of]) ishah (women) to’evah (abomination?) hu (grammatical error by Moses, well documented).
This passage has nothing to do with the penetration of a man by another man. Even if you could make that stretch, the use of the word ZACHAR (in stead of ISH) suggests a young (virgin or unmarried) male. Throughout Vayikra, the work ZACHAR is used to describe an appropriate animal sacrifice (unblemished male).
[2] Could it be that ezer kenegdo didn’t show up for such acts because she knew who she was…just like she didn’t show up and engage in the sin of the golden calf? Purpose prevailed…