I didn’t say “monogamous.” You added that part to my post. I said a married (i.e. lifelong-committed) relationship between male and female. While some of the details of how that works do, indeed, change across the pages of scripture, the broad male-female committed pattern does not change.

I also agree Jesus said a lot of “you have heard it said that. . .but I say to you. . .” but within this issue, he himself says “Moses allowed you to divorce, but God’s designed intent was a man and woman leaving family and home behind to cling together in marriage.” So on this one, you cannot make the case he broadens it you. Instead, when given a chance, he actually cinches down harder.

My remarks about these statements may be a footnote to the discussion, but the famous (or infamous, depending on your point of view) “antitheses” in the Sermon on the Mount can be used by anti-Semitic individuals and groups to dismiss Judaism as an “inferior” religion and, in the extreme, to persecute Jews.

I don’t know all of the details, so someone here who is more knowledgeable of the development of the rabbinical tradition within Judaism may want to offer more. However, if I understand the history correctly, this form of teaching that Jesus used (”You have heard it said…but I tell you…”) was a fairly established teaching method among the rabbis as the rabbinical tradition emerged within the first century A.D.

Even if my historical understanding is faulty–and please make corrections so I will learn more about it–I read Jesus as inviting his listeners to look more deeply into the teachings of the Law and to pursue even higher levels of conduct, even more sublime justice and mercy, and an even more powerful love of God, self, and neighbor.

Thus, while Jesus’ teaching is technically new, it really is more a further development of traditional Jewish morality, a pointer to the fulfillment of the Law, if you will.

Again, this is probably a footnote, but I am sensitive to these concerns so I make the point. Peace.

i can say that in my experience, what feels right and wrong for us sometimes changes over the course of our lives and i think that’s part of one’s personal journey. there was a time, when i was much younger that although i wasn’t religious at all, i personally felt that for me, casual sex was wrong, or more simply that i just wasn’t wired that way even if some people were. it took a few years of me still feeling somehow guilty after a hook-up before i finally shook it off. when i finally did just have what was mutually regarded as a total one-night stand without wanting anything more to do with the guy afterward, i had a huge wave of “is that all there is?” (a la peggy lee).

the outcome wasn’t that i started banging every boy on the block, but that i had to revise my own notions about myself and what was “right” for me to account for the fact that at least at some period in my life, casual sex was indeed what i was interested in and i didn’t feel bad about it in the slightest. i’m not saying you’ll have a similar revelation, just that part of growing up i think is realizing that what you want one day may not be what you want later on and that that’s ok.

A good analysis of this issue, which goes back to the original language and historical context of the “clobber verses”, is Samuel Kader’s “Openly Gay, Openly Christian”.

More generally, Hugo, I say “cheers!” to your Spirit-led hermeneutic. The Bible is all about God doing new things and humans taking way too long to catch on.

I will read your post on hooking up.