SEX  DURING  WOMAN'S  MONTHLY  PERIOD?


MY  ANSWER  TO  THE  ANSWER  --  Keith Hunt


Question: "Is it acceptable to God for a husband and wife to have sex while the wife is menstruating / having her period?"

Answer:
Leviticus 15:19says, “When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening.” Similarly,Leviticus 15:24says. “If a man lies with her and her monthly flow touches him, he will be unclean for seven days; any bed he lies on will be unclean.” Finally,Leviticus 20:18declares, “If a man lies with a woman during her monthly period and has sexual relations with her, he has exposed the source of her flow, and she has also uncovered it. Both of them must be cut off from their people.” As a result of these Scriptures, some hold that a married couple should not have sex while the wife is having her period.


MY  ANSWER:  ANCIENT ISRAEL  WAS  IN  THE  MAIN  A  CARNAL  NATION,  ONLY  A  FEW  HAD  GOD'S  SPIRIT  WORKING  WITH  THEM [SEE  NUMBER  11].  GOD  USED  PHYSICAL  NATURAL  [RIGHT  AND  PROPER  IN  THEMSELVES]  TO  COVEY  A  MESSAGE  OF  SPIRITUALITY.  THE  FIRST  TWO  VERSES  QUOTED  ARE  TO  DO  WITH  BEING  "UNCLEAN"  FROM  TEMPLE  WORSHIP.  CERTAIN  PHYSICAL  THINGS  THAT  NATURE,  THE  REGULAR  HUMAN  MIND  KNOWING  CERTAIN  FUNCTIONS  OF  THE  BODY  THOUGH  GOD  MADE,  ARE  SOMEWHAT  PHYSICALLY  .... WELL  HOW  CAN  I  PUT  IT .... WELL  LIKE  A  BOWEL  MOVEMENT,  NATURAL,  BUT  WE  DO  IT  IN  PRIVATE,  AND  IT'S  NOT  SOMETHING  WE  MESS  AROUND  WITH.  GOD  TOOK  A  PHYSICAL  FUNCTION  OF  THE  WOMAN,  THAT  AGAIN,  WE  KEEP  KINDA  PRIVATE,  AND  DO  NOT  MESS  AROUND  WITH.  IT  IS  NOT  THE  CLEANEST  THING  IN  THE  PHYSICAL,  AS  A  BOWEL  MOVEMENT  IS  NOT.  GOD  TOOK  THIS  AND  WAS  GIVING  A  LESSON  OF  PURITY  FROM  IT.  GOD  IS  PURE  AND  THERE  IS  NO  UNCLEANNESS  IN  HIM.  HENCE  TO  FINALLY  COME  BEFORE  HIM  IN  PURITY  AND  CLEANNESS,  WE  WILL  NEED  TO  BE  PURE.  JESUS  PAID  FOR  OUR  SINS,  UNCLEANNESS,  AND  SO  WE  CAN  COME  BEFORE  HIM  THROUGH  CHRIST  NOW,  AND  EVENTUALLY  IN  THE  RESURRECTION  BEFORE  HIM  LITERALLY,  BECAUSE  WE  SHALL  BE  PURE,  NO  IMPURITY  IN  US  AT  ALL.  SO  THE  TWO  VERSES  OF  LEV. 15:19  AND  24  GAVE  A  LESSON  TO  PHYSICAL  CARNAL  ISRAEL.  CERTAIN  PHYSICAL  FUNCTIONS  AND  SICKNESSES  THAT  PEOPLE  HAD,  THEY  COULD  NOT  COME  INTO  THE  HOLY  PRESENCE  OF  GOD  IN  TEMPLE  WORSHIP  UNDER  THE  OLD  COVENANT.  MANY  THINGS  IN  THIS  CHAPTER  ARE  GIVEN  AS  NOW  UNCLEAN  IN  A  CERTAIN  WAY  OF  HUMANLY  LOOKING  AT  IT,  AND  SO  TEMPLE  WORSHIP  WAS  FORBIDDEN  FOR  PERIODS  OF  TIME;  THEN  WHEN  THIS  UN-CLEANNESS  WAS  OVER,  CERTAIN  SACRIFICES  NEEDED  TO  BE  MADE,  TO  RE-ENTER  THE  TEMPLE  WORSHIP  OF  GOD.  IT  WAS  A  PHYSICAL  TEACHING  TOOL  TO  GIVE  A  SPIRITUAL  LESSON  OF  HOW  WE  CAN  COME  BEFORE  GOD.


NOW  LEV. 20:18  -  "CUT OFF"  -  NOTE  THE  WORDING  IS  NOT  "UNCLEAN  FOR...."  AS  IN  THE  OTHER  TWO  VERSES  QUOTED  ABOVE.  THE  OBVIOUS  MEANING  IS  A  MORE  STRICTER  PENALTY  FOR  WHAT  LEV. 20:18  IS  TALKING  ABOUT.  ALBERY  BARNES  IN  HIS  BIBLE  COMMENTARY  SAYS  IN  REGARDS  TO  VERSE  17  AND  "CUT  OFF" - "SEE  EX. 31:14  NOTE.  THE  MORE  FULL  EXPRESSION  HERE  USED  PROBABLY  REFERS  TO  SOME  SPECIAL  FORM  OF  PUBLIC  EXCOMMUNICATION,  ACCOMPANIED,  IT  MAY  BE,  BY  EXPULSION  FROM  THE  CAMP."  ON  EX. 31:14  BARNES  SAYS: "SEE  NUM. 15:32-36.  THE  DISTINCTION  BETWEEN  THE  MEANING  OF  THE  TWO  EXPRESSIONS,  TO  BE  CUT  OFF  FROM  THE  PEOPLE,  AND  TO  BE  PUT  TO  DEATH,  IS  HERE  INDICATED.  HE  WHO  WAS  CUT  OFF  FROM  THE  PEOPLE  HAD,  BY  HIS  OFFENSE,  PUT  HIMSELF  OUT  OF  THE  TERMS  OF  THE  COVENANT,  AND  WAS  AN  OUTLAW.  ON  SUCH,  AND  ON  SUCH  ALONE,  WHEN  THE  OFFENSE  WAS  ONE  WHICH  AFFECTED  THE  WELL-BEING  OF  THE  NATION,  AS  IT  WAS  IN  THIS  CASE,  DEATH  COULD  BE  INFLICTED  BY  THE  PUBLIC  AUTHORITY."


I  HOPE  YOU  SEE  WHAT  ALBERT  BARNES  WAS  SAYING.  "CUT  OFF"  COULD  APPLY  TO  SOME  SPECIAL  FORM  OF  EXCOMMUNICATION,  AND  MAY  BE  EXPULSION  FROM  THE  CAMP.  THEN  WITHIN  CERTAIN  PARAMETERS  IT  COULD  MEAN  THE  DEATH  PENALTY.  


NOW  IT  SHOULD  BE  SEEN  THAT  LEV. 20:18  AND  "CUT  OFF"  IS  SOME  FORM  OF  EXCOMMUNICATION  AND/OR  EXPULSION  FROM  THE  CAMP.


I  SUBMIT  TO  YOU  THERE  IS  A  VAST  DIFFERENCE  BETWEEN  LEV. 15:19, 24  AND  LEV. 20:18.  THE  LATTER  VERSE  AS  GIVEN  ABOVE  IS  CLEAR  IT  IS  TO  DO  WITH  SEXUAL  INTERCOURSE  DURING  THE  WOMEN'S  MONTHY  PERIOD.  AND  PENALTY  IS  TOTALLY  DIFFERENT  FROM  CHAPTER  15:19,24.  THE  TWO  ARE  NOT  DIRECTLY  CONNECTED  AT  ALL.  LEV. 20:18  IS  A  LAW  UNTO  ITSELF,  AND  HAS  NOTHING  TO  DO  WITH  THE  TEMPLE  PER  SE,  OR  BETTER  PUT,  IT  WOULD  STILL  BE  UNCLEAN  FOR  TEMPLE  WORSHIP,  AS  IT  STILL  IS  CONCERNING  AN  "ISSUE"  MAKING  UNCLEAN  FOR  TEMPLE  WORSHIP;  BUT  GOD  SKIPS  OVER  THAT  PART,  AND  GOES  STRAIGHT  TO  THE  MAIN  POINT......  SUCH  AN  ACT  OF  SEXUAL  INTERCOURSE  DURING  A  WOMAN'S  MONTHLY  PERIOD,  GOD  HOLDS  AS  AN  INFRACTION  ALL  BY  ITSELF,  WHICH  WARRANTS  A  PENALTY  OF  EXCOMMUNICATION  OF  SOME  KIND  FROM  THE  CAMP.  GOD  IS  MAKING  THE  POINT  HERE  THAT  THIS  ACT  IS  NOT  CEREMONIAL  IN  TERMS  OF  THE  TEMPLE,  BUT  A  STRAIGHT  UP  LAW  FROM  HIM,  THAT  PRACTICING  SEX  BY  BOTH  DURING  THE  MONTHLY  PERIOD  TIME  IS  WRONG,  IS  NOT  TO  BE  DONE,  AND  REQUIRES  SOME  FORM  OF  EXCOMMUNICATION  FROM  THE  CAMP.  


NOW  USE  SOME  LOGIC.  THE  COUPLE  EXCOMMUNICATED  FOR  SEX  DURING  THE  WOMAN'S  MONTHLY  PERIOD,  WOULD  BE  HIT  BETWEEN  THE  EYES,  THAT  GOD  DID  NOT  APPROVE  OF  SUCH  A  LIFE  STYLE.  YES  I  SUBMIT  TO  YOU  THAT  IS  THE  CLEAR  AND  PLAIN  TEACHING  THAT  GOD  WANTED  TO  GET  ACROSS  TO  ANCIENT  ISRAEL  IN  LEV. 20:18.  THE  LAW  AND  PENALTY  FOR  BREAKING  THIS  LAW  WAS  TOTALLY  DIFFERENT  FROM  LEV. 15:19, 24.

The problem with this view is that if the Scriptures are applied consistently, even touching a woman who is having her menstrual flow would be forbidden. Further, according toLeviticus 15:20-23, even touching something that the woman has also touched would be forbidden. 


MY  ANSWER:  YES  THAT  WAS  TRUE  INDEED.  BUT  THE  CONTEXT  IS  "UNCLEANNESS"  AND  MOST  SCHOLARS  KNOW  THAT  MEANT  YOU  WERE  NOT  OR  COULD  NOT  COME  TO  WORSHIP  GOD  IN  THE  TEMPLE,  BUT  YOU  COULD  STILL  BE  FREE  TO  MOVE  ABOUT  IN  ISRAEL  AMONG  THE  PEOPLE.  LEV. 20: 18 ...... A  DIFFERENT  LAW  WITH  A  VASTLY  DIFFERENT  PENALTY.


Do these laws apply to us today? No, they do not. Why? It is important to remember the purpose of the Old Testament laws concerning blood. In the sacrificial system, blood was sacred (Leviticus 17:11). A woman’s “uncleanness” during her period was symbolic of the value placed on blood. As a result, contact with a woman who was having her period was forbidden.


MY  ANSWER:  TRUE  CERTAIN  OLD  TESTAMENT  LAWS  DO  NOT  APPLY  TO  US  TODAY,  ESPECIALLY  OLD  TEMPLE  LAWS [THERE  IS  NOT  PHYSICAL  TEMPLE  TODAY  FOR  YOU  TO  BE  NOT  ALLOWED  IN  TO  WORSHIP  GOD].  I  HAVE  AN  IN-DEPTH  STUDY  ON  MY  WEBSITE  CALLED  "LIVING  BY  EVERY  WORD  OF  GOD  -  HOW?"  WHICH  GOES  INTO  THE  OUTLINE  OF  FIGURING  WHICH  LAWS  OF  MOSES  ARE  FOR  US  TODAY.

Christians today are not under the Old Testament ceremonial law (Romans 10:4;Galatians 3:24-26;Ephesians 2:15). There no longer is a sacrificial system. Jesus’ blood sacrifice paid the penalty for sins once and for all. The Levitical ceremonial laws do not apply today. There is no biblical reason why a married couple cannot have sex during the wife’s period. Some doctors do not recommend it from a medical perspective, but there are no proven “dangers” of having sexual intercourse during a woman’s period. Usually women have no desire to have sexual relations during their period, so that is definitely another thing to consider. Basically, this issue must be decided by a husband and wife in the spirit of “mutual consent” as1 Corinthians 7:5describes.


MY  ANSWER:  THE  WRITER  IS  WRONG.  THE  LAW  OF  LEV. 20:18  WAS  A  SEPARATE  LAW  FROM  LEV.15: 19, 24.  THE  WRITER  HAS  PUT  THEM  TOGETHER,  WHEN  THEY  ARE  NOT  TOGETHER  AT  ALL.  LEV. 20:18  IS  A  LAW  UNTO  ITSELF,  WITH  A  MUCH  GREATER  PENALTY  FOR  BOTH  THE  MAN  AND  THE  WOMAN.  GOD  IS  CLEARLY  STATING  IN  LEV. 20:18  THAT  HE  DOES  NOT  WANT  A  MAN  AND  WOMAN  HAVING  SEXUAL  INTERCOURSE  DURING  THE  WOMAN'S  MONTHLY  PERIOD.  AND  DOING  SO  WOULD  MEAN  SOME  SORT  OF  EXCOMMUNICATION  UNTIL  THE  COUPLE  GOT  THE  MESSAGE   AS  WE  WOULD  SAY.

THE  MIXING  OF  VERSES  TOGETHER  WHEN  THEY  ARE  NOT  MEANT  TO  BE  TOGETHER  IS  A  WRONG  WAY  TO  READ  THE  BIBLE.  AND  WILL  THEREFORE  LEAD  INTO  WRONG  THEOLOGY.


NOW  GOD  DOES  NOT  EXPLAIN  TO  US  IN  THE  BIBLE  WHY  HE  DOES  NOT  WANT  A  MARRIED  COUPLE  TO  HAVE  SEX  DURING  THE  WOMAN'S  MONTHLY  PERIOD.  BUT  HE  DOES  NOT  HAVE  TO  TELL  US;  IT  SHOULD  BE  ENOUGH  FOR  US  TO  KNOW  THAT  HE DESIGNED  THE  HUMAN  BODY,  AND  HE  KNOWS  WHAT  IS  BEST  FOR  US.  HUMANLY  TO  ME  IT  IS  KINDA  "YUCK - ICKY." JUST  BECAUSE  THERE  IS  NO  "PROVEN  DANGERS"  FOR HAVING  SEX  DURING  A  WOMAN'S  PERIOD,  DOES  NOT  MEAN  THERE  ARE  NOT;  MANY  OF  OUR  SICKNESS  ARE  FROM  WRONG  WAYS  OF  LIVING.  THERE  MAYBE  NO  "PROVEN  DANGERS"  FROM  EATING  WHITE  BREAD,  AND  WHITE  BREAD  PRODUCTS  ALL  YOUR  LIFE,  BUT  I  CAN  TELL  YOU  GOD  DID  NOT  INVENT  WHITE  BREAD,  THAT  WAS  MAN'S  MODERN  WORLD  THAT  DID  THAT.  AND  I  CAN  TELL  YOU  FROM  GOD'S  HEALTH  PERSPECTIVE,  WHITE  BREAD  PRODUCTS  HAVE  BROUGHT  ILL-HEALTH  ON  THE  WORLD,  EVEN  IF  IN  A  LABORATORY  YOU  CANNOT  PROVE  IT  IS  DANGEROUS.


THIS  IS  AN  IMPORTANT  SUBJECT  I'VE  NOT  COVERED  IN  ANY  STUDY  ARTICLE,  SENT  TO  ME  TO  ANSWER  BY  A  FRIEND.


I  WILL  THEREFORE  POST  IT  ON  MY  BLOG.


Keith Hunt