Mandrakes-DUDAI: (Genesis 30:14)

Menstrual Cycle-DRK NSHM: (Genesis 31:35)

Sacred Sex Trade-ZNH: (Genesis 34:31)

Eunuch/Intersexual-SARS: (Genesis 37:36)

Coitus Interruptus–SHT: (Genesis 38:9) 

Mandrakes-DUDAI: (Genesis 30:14)

This sexual health image connects to a plant root often shaped in the sexualized image of human beings, the mandrake. Strong H1736 matches the Hebrew DUDAI
דּוּדַי, pronounced du-DIE. DUDAI occurs seven times in five verses in the Hebrew Bible.

Mandrake references can be found in Genesis, Jeremiah, and The Song of Solomon. The mandrake root possesses narcotic properties inducing hallucination. So potent, ancient surgeons used mandrake root as anesthesia for surgery. Ancient Near Eastern folk medicine included the mandrake as a sexual health remedy for curing infertility. Pictures of uncovered roots often resemble the naked human form so the mandrake can take on a sexualized physical image (Britannica, 2021).

In Genesis, Reuben, the eldest son of Jacob and Leah, unearths mandrakes (Genesis 30:14). Reuben coerced a sexual encounter with Bilhah, his father Jacob’s concubine. As retribution for this act of sexual sedition, Reuben receives his father’s death bed curse (Genesis 49:4). Rachel, Jacob’s favorite yet infertile wife, barters for Reuben’s mandrakes. Rachel offers her sister Leah, the mother of Reuben, a drug trade for sexual favors. Rachel hopes to become pregnant by the superstitious use of the mandrakes. The trade goes down like this: Rachel permits Leah to have intercourse with her husband, Jacob, if Leah surrenders the mandrakes to Rachel. Leah had no children for several years, so perhaps Rachel gambles that mandrakes offer better odds of producing a pregnancy than Leah conceiving with Jacob. The gamble goes poorly for Rachel. The mandrakes fail to produce offspring for Rachel, and Leah bears three more children before Rachel, now recovered from mandrake intoxication, finally conceives the favored son, Joseph (Brittanica, 2021).

During wheat harvest, Reuben went out into the fields and found some mandrake plants, which he brought to his mother Leah. Rachel said to Leah, “Please give me some of your son’s mandrakes.” But she said to her, “Wasn’t it enough that you took away my husband? Will you take my son’s mandrakes too?” “Very well,” Rachel said, “he can sleep with you tonight in return for your son’s mandrakes.”  So when Jacob came in from the fields that evening, Leah went out to meet him. “You must sleep with me,” she said. “I have hired you with my son’s mandrakes.” So he slept with her that night. God listened to Leah, and she became pregnant and bore Jacob a fifth son. (Genesis 30:14-17)

The final two mandrake references appear in Jeremiah and The Song of Solomon. Jeremiah cites the term as a prophecy metaphor. Solomon uses mandrakes in context of a love poem for his paramour. All citations for the toxic, hallucinogenic mandrake root connect to unhealthy sexuality or the trauma of exile.

Menstrual Cycle-DRK NSHM: (Genesis 31:35)

The term for menstrual cycle occurs once in Genesis 31:35. Rachel feigns menstrual cramps to conceal stolen contraband from her father, Laban: “Rachel said to her father, ‘Don’t be angry, my lord, that I cannot stand up in your presence; I’m having my period.’ So he searched but could not find the household gods” (Genesis 31:35).

This is the only occurrence of menstrual cramps in the Bible using the Hebrew words, DRK NASIM, or the way of women.

Sacred Sex Trade-ZNH: (Genesis 34:31)

ZNH, זָנָה (pronounced zan-AH), appears 93 times within 81 verses of the Hebrew Old Testament (Strong, H2181). ZNH has range of use: to be or act out in adultery, be or act as a sex trade worker, or describing spiritual decline of intimacy with God. The Aramaic and Ethiopic use of ZNH is quite literal, effusio seminis virilis, seman effusum, or absorption of the male seed (Strong, H2181).

ZNH appears three times for sexual health education of children in Genesis. Shechem rapes Dinah. Ancient sexual health customs allow for rape victims to marry the perpetrator once their value as a virgin bride has been compromised by assault (Exodus 22:16-17; Deuteronomy 22:28-29). Dinah’s brothers retaliate by coercing the perpetrator with his male tribal community to circumcise themselves as part of a faux marital agreement. While Shechem and his male cohorts recover from surgery, Dinah’s brothers wreak vengeance by slaughtering the incapacitated circumcision patients. Genesis relays the reason for the brothers’ atrocity: “But they replied, ‘Should he have treated (raped) our sister like a prostitute (ZNH)’” (Genesis 34:31).

The final two Genesis citations of ZNH, זָנָה emerge in the Judah and Tamar sacred sex trade seduction snapshot of Genesis 38. Judah promises to give his son Shelah to Tamar in marriage, whose previous two husbands died in the Onan coitus interruptus snapshot. 

When Judah delays the marriage, Tamar conspires to pose as sacred sex trade worker and seduce Judah into impregnating her. Judah falls for the coercion and Tamar conceives by her father-in-law. When Tamar’s pregnancy is disclosed, Judah assumes she conceived in the sacred sex trade. Judah calls for Tamar’s execution. The death sentence is commuted when his pregnant daughter- in-law produces identification Judah gave her after the sex trade transaction. Judah remarks after ordering the death of his daughter-in-law with near termination of his embryonic twin sons, “She is more righteous than I, since I wouldn’t give her to my son Shelah.” And he did not sleep with her again (Genesis 38:26).

Exodus cites ZNH twice. Both refer specifically to the sacred sex trade and idolatry. Leviticus uses the term, sacred sex trade seven times. Three passages emerge in directions for priests. Leviticus directs priests not to marry within the sacred sex trade, and daughters from priestly families are not to engage in ZNH (Leviticus 21:3). The sacred sex trade connects directly to the worship of Molek (Leviticus 20:4) and spiritual mediums. Goat worship with the sacred sex trade begins the conversation in Leviticus 17:7. The people of Israel are mandated not to force their daughters to enter the sacred sex trade (Leviticus 19:29). All five citations in Numbers relate to the sacred sex trade. Israel was to adorn clothing with tassels as a reminder to down regulate sexual neural pathways.

You will have these tassels to look at and so you will remember all the commands of the LORD, that you may obey them and not prostitute yourselves by chasing after the lusts of your own hearts and eyes. (Numbers 15:39) 

 For the first time male sacred sex trade workers appear in the Bible. 

You must not bring the earnings of a female prostitute or of a male prostitute into the house of the LORD your God to pay any vow, because the LORD your God detests them both. (Deuteronomy 23:18) 

God prohibits Israelis from paying vows with sacred sex trade earnings in Numbers 23:18. The final passage of Numbers proposes upon Moses’ death, the people will once again decline to the sacred sex trade (Numbers 31:16). 

The Prophets

Joshua mentions Rahab the sacred sex trade worker four times. All citations reflect positively on her for her faith and willingness to protect covert Israeli operatives. Judges strategically uses ZNH, זָנָה six times, perhaps connecting decline of consciousness. All citations connect to the sacred sex trade. Judges 19 highlights decline of sexual health for the people of Israel. A Levitical priest takes a concubine from Bethlehem who then abandons him for the sacred sex trade. The story of Israel’s pathogenesis hits rock bottom in these final chapters. The priest’s concubine is gang raped, her body is dismembered, then the parts are distributed to the twelve tribes of Israel. The families of Benjamin, having fallen into disfavor, face possible extinction. In response, the eleven tribes annihilate the people of Jabesh Gilead, kidnapping 400 virgins for the Benjaminites. With regret, this number of human contraband fails to meet the need. The Israelis encourage the tribe of Benjamin to,”Go and hide in the vineyardsand watch. When the young women of Shiloh join in the dancing, rush from the vineyards and each of you seize one of them to be your wife” (Judges 21:20-21). Murder, annihilation, gang rape, and kidnapping define unhealthy sexuality, along with the decline of conscious awareness. The final words in Judges connect loss of intimacy with the decline of sexual health: “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as they saw fit” (Judges 21:25).

Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel use the term ZNH thirty times in their prophecies about the unfaithfulness of Israel. ZNH appears fifteen times in the minor prophets. The Writings use the term nine times. All references connect to the sacred sex trade and infer the unfaithfulness of the people of Israel.

The New Testament

Sacred sex trade worker, pornay, πόρνη, pronounced POR-nay, appears twelve times in the Greek New Testament (Strong, G4204). Matthew records the term twice in chapter 21. Jesus compares the righteousness of sex trade workers with their tax-extorting customers against the religious politicians opposing Christ and his ministry. Jesus states that sex trade workers enter the kingdom of heaven before corrupt religious elitists. Luke uses the term pornay, πόρνη in the Prodigal Son snapshot (Luke 15:30). Again, this parable compares the arrogance of  religious politicians to the transparency of the prodigal son who returns to the compassionate father. The allegedly devout brother condemns the prodigal son because of participation in the sex trade. The compassionate father, God, defends the prodigal son with heartfelt intimacy of reconciliation. 

Pauline Epistles

Paul the Apostle utilizes the word pornay twice in a sexual health piece for the Corinthian community. In Paul’s mind, participation in the sacred sex trade results in the same kind of spiritual unity as sexual intercourse in marriage. 

The General Epistles

The books of Hebrews and James reflect on the life of Rahab, the sacred sex trade worker of Joshua 2. Rahab protected two Israeli intelligence operatives surveilling Jericho for an impending siege. All Biblical writers speak of Rahab with dignity and respect. In fact, Rahab appears in the direct family line of Jesus within Matthew’s genealogy (Matthew 1:5). 

The final pornay passages appear five times in Revelation 17 and 19. Conspiracy and intrigue weave end time disaster with greedy sexual politics. Four times the sacred sex trade appears in chapter 17, describing a political leader ultimately defeated by a military power. The final reference to pornay features defeat of the sexualized leader within a celestial scene of victorious celebration. 

Eunuch/Intersexual-SARS: (Genesis 37:36)

Genesis as educational primer for children, teaches the spirituality of sexual health including those incapable of heterosexual intercourse. Eunuch, meaning those unable to have heterosexual genital intercourse, is the Hebrew word SARS appearing 42 times in the Hebrew Old Testament (Strong, H5631). The New Testament Greek term is eunuch, εὐνοῦχος, pronounced you-NEW-kos, which occurs eight times (Strong, G2135).

In the Old Testament, SARS is used to describe Potiphar, the cup bearer and chief baker for Pharaoh, the eunuchs caring for the harem including Esther, and Isaiah’s encouraging prophecy of hope. In the New Testament Jesus affirms intersexuality-eunuchism among the church, and the conversion of Queen Candace’s chief of operations in Acts 8. All references to intersexual/eunuch/SARS in the Bible hold positions of honor and dignity. The Scriptural record also supports that the first African convert to Christianity was a eunuch and possible intersexual holding one of the highest executive level positions within Ethiopia. A full treatment of the intersexual/εὐνοῦχος/SARS citations can be found in Appendix D.

Birth Control, Coitus Interruptus-SHT: (Genesis 38:9)

The coitus interruptus snap shot of Onanin Genesis 38 features two words necessary for the conversation of sexual health. The passage in question states, “But Onan knew that the child would not be his; so whenever he slept with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from providing offspring for his brother” (Genesis 38:9). The word ‘spilled’ in Hebrew is SHT, שָׁחַת, pronounced sha-HATH  (Strong, H7843). SHT, appears 147 times in 136 verses of the Hebrew Old Testament. The range of meaning includes: go to ruin, act corruptly, injure, violate, fall, escape, destroy, mutilate, or spoil. 

The other term is ZRA, זֶ֫רַע , pronounced ZE-raw. This word means seed, used figuratively and literally for fruit, plant, sowing-time, posterity, unhealthy sexuality, child, fruitful, and sowing-time, and semen (Strong, H2232).

The Genesis use of SHT connects the pathogenesis of intimacy with God to the unhealthy sexuality of Genesis 6. Twice in Genesis 6 the text states the earth had become SHT, that is, declined from intimacy with God to sexual abuse. God responds to the SHT of mankind with SHT, translated as ‘destroy’ in the following two verses. Humankind expended tremendous energy in the pursuit of unhealthy sexuality. Perhaps the global flood became the equal response in consequence? The references to SHT in Genesis 9 reflect God’s covenant to withhold this same kind of destruction in the future. The remaining passages from Genesis 13-19 connect SHT to the destruction of Sodom due to erotic rage involving sexual violence. 

The Genesis 38 Onan snapshot features the only citation in the Hebrew Old Testament referring to coitus interruptus. All Genesis citations connect to sexual health. Two more passages connect to unhealthy sexuality in Ezekiel and Proverbs. Both touch the sacred sex trade and adultery, the first stating: “Her sister Oholibah saw this, yet in her lust and prostitution she was more depraved than her sister” (Ezekiel 23:11). The second states: “But a man who commits adultery (idolatry) has no sense; whoever does so destroys himself” (Proverbs 6:32).

In the book of Genesis, SHT only connects to the unhealthy sexuality of erotic violence: the sexual nihilism of Genesis 6-9, the erotic violence of Sodom in Genesis 13-19, and the Onan coitus interruptus snapshot of Genesis 38. If one connects the context of these words with the death of Er and Onan, then the text implies that coercive violent sexuality brought about their deaths.

Mandrakes-DUDAI: (Genesis 30:14)

Menstrual Cycle-DRK NSHM: (Genesis 31:35)

Sacred Sex Trade-ZNH: (Genesis 34:31)

Eunuch/Intersexual-SARS: (Genesis 37:36)

Coitus Interruptus-SHT: (Genesis 38:9) 

Jacob and Intimacy with God

The Jacob snapshot paints a dramatic picture of intimacy with God overcoming coercive character defects. The Hebrew name Jacob literally means “a traitor who lifts his heel against his victim, anything that stalks, attacks, ambushes, or cheats from behind, insidious, deceitful, the painful consequences of a bribe, or the aftermath of shame” (TWOT, pp. 691–692; BDB, pp. 784–785). Jacob is the younger of two fraternal twins. As his brother Esau is born, reaching out from the birth canal, Jacob grasps the heel of the elder twin. The foreshadowing of Jacob the manipulator sets for the rest of his life. 

The rap sheet for Jacob’s coercive acts is impressive. The deceiver Jacob takes advantage of Esau’s weakness to manipulate the elder brother into selling his valuable birthright. Jacob offers a bowl of stew in exchange for Esau’s inheritance. The famished Esau relinquishes his privileged inheritance, forfeiting both his family leadership and its judicial authority(Genesis 25:29–34). Jacob perpetuates the coercive behavior by cheating Esau again in a conspiracy with his mother, Rebekah. Mother and son perpetrate this deception to coerce a blessing from the blind and beguiled Isaac. Esau, now fooled twice, threatens to kill his fraternal twin, which makes a connection to Genesis 4:1–16 with the coercion of Cain’s premeditated murder of his brother, Abel. In the Jacob snapshot, the elder again conspires to murder the younger. 

The God of Genesis reflects a relentless resilience for intimacy with humankind. While Jacob seeks a wife, God speaks to Jacob in a dream. He 

had a dream in which he saw a stairway resting on the earth, with its top reaching to heaven, and the angels of God were ascending and descending on it. There above it stood the Lord, and he said: “I am the Lord, the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac. I will give you and your descendants the land on which you are lying. Your descendants will be like the dust of the earth, and you will spread out to the west and to the east, to the north and to the south. All peoples on earth will be blessed through you and your offspring. I am with you and will watch over you wherever you go, and I will bring you back to this land. I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you.”

When Jacob awoke from his sleep, he thought, “Surely the Lord is in this place, and I was not aware of it.” He was afraid and said, “How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God; this is the gate of heaven.” (Genesis 28:12–17)

Jacob makes a poignant statement, “I was unaware” (Genesis 28:16).Awareness is the word YDA, ידע intimacy, used also for sexual intimacy. Jacob’s coercive tactics emerged from a life without spiritual or relational intimacy with God or his family. This lack of intimacy may explain the callous treatment of his closest family members. Intimacy forms in the prefrontal cortex, which regulates fear, anger, and sexual neural pathways. Without intimacy activating in the (PFC), the system can dysregulate. Jacob assesses his coercive history accurately. He has no intimate connection or knowledge of God. The loss of intimacy with God forms the pathogenesis or decline of consciousness to unhealthy sexuality throughout the Book of Genesis. 

The tables turn on Jacob. The coercive mastermind experiences painful manipulation in return. Laban, Jacob’s father-in-law, victimizes Jacob in an unhealthy sexuality snapshot of betrayal. After promising Rachel in marriage, Laban switches daughters on the wedding night. In the morning, Jacob becomes profoundly aware of the coital coercion. Laban manipulates Jacob to serve nearly two decades in the family business. The deceiver, Jacob, gets schooled in coercive tactics by his father-in-law (Genesis 29:15–29). “Jacob made love to Rachel also, and his love for Rachel was greater than his love for Leah. And he worked for Laban another seven years” (Genesis 29:23, 30). The Hebrew word for made love is BO,בא, meaning ‘to come in to.’ The word for sexual intimacy, YDA, is not used. Perhaps this has meaning? It appears Jacob, the intelligence behind numerous crimes against his own family, cannot escape the cycle of coercion, shame, and treachery.

During the 20-year stint of forced servitude to Laban, the Jacob snapshot revisits sexual health themes. Rachel, the infertile beloved bride, cannot conceive. Leah, the unwanted and unloved sister bride, cannot stop giving birth. Within 4 years, Leah delivers four sons. Rachel scores zero births. The game is on. 

When Rachel saw that she was not bearing Jacob any children, she became jealous of her sister. So she said to Jacob, “Give me children, or I’ll die!” Jacob became angry with her and said, “Am I in the place of God, who has kept you from having children?” Then she said, “Here is Bilhah, my servant. Sleep with her so that she can bear children for me and I too can build a family through her.”So she gave him her servant Bilhah as a wife. Jacob slept with her, and she became pregnant and bore him a son. Then Rachel said, “God has vindicated me; he has listened to my plea and given me a son.” Because of this she named him Dan. Rachel’s servant Bilhah conceived again and bore Jacob a second son. Then Rachel said, “I have had a great struggle with my sister, and I have won.” So she named him Naphtali. (Genesis 30:1–8)

Jacob apparently recalled the stories of how his grandfather Abraham used female slaves for reproductive services. He submits to Rachel’s plea to impregnate a surrogate slave. When Leah realizes she can no longer conceive, she repeats the surrogacy plan with her own slave.

When Leah saw that she had stopped having children, she took her servant Zilpah and gave her to Jacob as a wife. Leah’s servant Zilpah bore Jacob a son. Then Leah said, “What good fortune!” So she named him Gad. Leah’s servant Zilpah bore Jacob a second son. Then Leah said, “How happy I am! The women will call me happy.” So she named him Asher. (Genesis 30:9–13)

Once again, Jacob faces the coercive power of food. This time food for sex. Just as Jacob manipulated Esau with stew, Leah, the unwanted and unloved sister-wife, coerces Rachel. Leah challenges Rachel to compel Jacob to have intercourse with Leah using food. The rejected sister barters food for sex using the mandrake plant, an ancient aphrodisiac with hallucinogenic compounds. The progeny of Abraham repeats pimping of family members with sex and food. 

During wheat harvest, Reuben went out into the fields and found some mandrake plants, which he brought to his mother Leah. Rachel said to Leah, “Please give me some of your son’s mandrakes.”But she said to her, “Wasn’t it enough that you took away my husband? Will you take my son’s mandrakes too?” “Very well,” Rachel said, “he can sleep with you tonight in return for your son’s mandrakes.” So when Jacob came in from the fields that evening, Leah went out to meet him. “You must sleep with me,” she said. “I have hired you with my son’s mandrakes.” So he slept with her that night. God listened to Leah, and she became pregnant and bore Jacob a fifth son. Then Leah said, “God has rewarded me for giving my servant to my husband.” So she named him Issachar. Leah conceived again and bore Jacob a sixth son. Then Leah said, “God has presented me with a precious gift. This time my husband will treat me with honor, because I have borne him six sons.” So she named him Zebulun. Some time later she gave birth to a daughter and named her Dinah. (Genesis 30:14–21)

Part of the teaching theory of Genesis seems to connect to the results of unhealthy sexuality. Ham assaults his mother, and the incestuous offspring is Canaan. He receives a curse, possibly genetic mutations? The land of Canaan appears in the Old Testament as a continual threat to the people of Israel. Reuben, harvester of sexual aphrodisiacs and hallucinogens sexually assaults his father’s concubine. In Jacob’s farewell blessing to his family, this abuse is remembered, and Reuben receives his just consequence. Dinah, offspring from the coercive pay for sex with food deal, becomes a rape survivor. Consequences of unhealthy sex thread throughout the characters of Genesis.

Menstruation: The Way of Women 

Sexual health education would not be complete without a conversation with maturing children about menstruation. The Book of Genesis as sexuality educator does not disappoint. With stealth Jacob the deceiver abandons his abusive father-in-law, Laban. As Jacob’s family gathers their belongings for the hasty exodus, Rachel steals the religious idols of her father, Laban, stashing them in her saddle bags. The enraged father pursues his lost icons and family. Spirituality and family bonds form humankind’s deepest attachment. In one day Laban loses daughters, grandchildren, and his idols. Laban reaches the caravan carrying his family. As the grieving father searches for his idols, Rachel conceals her treachery by sitting on the saddle bags. When interrogated, Rachel claims she cannot get up from her seated position because she suffers from menstrual cramps. This excuse may form a dual purpose for children—teaching about idolatry and female reproductive function.

When Laban had gone to shear his sheep, Rachel stole her father’s household gods. Moreover, Jacob deceived Laban the Aramean by not telling him he was running away. So he fled with all he had, crossed the Euphrates River, and headed for the hill country of Gilead. Jacob answered Laban, “I was afraid, because I thought you would take your daughters away from me by force. But if you find anyone who has your gods, that person shall not live. In the presence of our relatives, see for yourself whether there is anything of yours here with me; and if so, take it.”… Now Rachel had taken the household gods and put them inside her camel’s saddle and was sitting on them. Laban searched through everything in the tent but found nothing. Rachel said to her father, “Don’t be angry, my lord, that I cannot stand up in your presence; I’m having my period.” So he searched but could not find the household gods. (Genesis 31:19–35)

Jacob now faces a confrontation with his elder twin Esau, from whom the deceiver, Jacob, manipulated both birthright and blessing. Esau threatened to kill his brother, Jacob, in retaliation for that coercion. On the way to encounter his bitter elder brother, Jacob sees God. Intimacy can be painfully transparent. 

Then Jacob prayed, “O God of my father Abraham, God of my father Isaac, Lord, you who said to me, ‘Go back to your country and your relatives, and I will make you prosper,’ I am unworthy of all the kindness and faithfulness you have shown your servant. I had only my staff when I crossed this Jordan, but now I have become two camps. Save me, I pray, from the hand of my brother Esau, for I am afraid he will come and attack me, and also the mothers with their children. But you have said, “I will surely make you prosper and will make your descendants like the sand of the sea, which cannot be counted.” (Genesis 32:1–12)

Jacob the mastermind of deception prays with others in mind. He uses the words, kindness and faithfulness (Genesis 32:10). Jacob has not dealt with God on this level before. The imminent loss of family and his own life bring Jacob to a place of humility. No more coercion.

God sends a messenger to wrestle Jacob. The transformation from manipulator to intimate friend of God approaches. As the wrestling match lasts through the night, the MMA envoy taps out by dislocating Jacob’s hip and then by blessing Jacob. The reforming con man asks for a blessing and is given a new name. A name in the ancient Near East possessed the character and the potency of the named. The manipulator experiences a transformation of character. His new title reflects inner change, Israel, meaning God Prevails. Jacob will not be known as the ambush brother and deceiver of family, but instead his locus of control, or inner drive, becomes the prevailing presence of God. This new name identifies the resilient people of modern day Israel and fulfillment of the sexual health big picture, ‘Be fruitful, increase, and fill the earth.’

So Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak. When the man saw that he could not overpower him, he touched the socket of Jacob’s hip so that his hip was wrenched as he wrestled with the man. Then the man said, “Let me go, for it is daybreak.”But Jacob replied, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.” The man asked him, “What is your name?””Jacob,” he answered.

Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have struggled with God and with humans and have overcome.”

Jacob said, “Please tell me your name.”

But he replied, “Why do you ask my name?” Then he blessed him there.

So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.”

The sun rose above him as he passed Peniel, and he was limping because of his hip. Therefore to this day the Israelites do not eat the tendon attached to the socket of the hip, because the socket of Jacob’s hip was touched near the tendon. (Genesis 32:24–32)

Jacob sees the face of God, the Hebrew word is Peniel. Humankind sees God, the Creator sees into humans, intimacy. The prefrontal cortex is responsible for consciousness, reason, social awareness, compassion and intimacy. Jacob, now Israel, will need this new transparency as he faces a lifetime enemy, his brother Esau, who was once intent on murdering Jacob. Intimacy forms part of the regulation system of the prefrontal cortex. Intimacy balances anger, fear, and sexual neural pathways. Israel is ready for the final aspect of intimacy with God, reconciliation. When Israel confronts his mortal enemy, the reformed con man is regulated, aware, and humble. 

Jacob looked up and there was Esau, coming with his four hundred men; so he divided the children among Leah, Rachel and the two female servants. He put the female servants and their children in front, Leah and her children next, and Rachel and Joseph in the rear. He himself went on ahead and bowed down to the ground seven times as he approached his brother.

But Esau ran to meet Jacob and embraced him; he threw his arms around his neck and kissed him. And they wept. Then Esau looked up and saw the women and children. “Who are these with you?” he asked.

Jacob answered, “They are the children God has graciously given your servant.”

Then the female servants and their children approached and bowed down. Next, Leah and her children came and bowed down. Last of all came Joseph and Rachel, and they too bowed down.

Esau asked, “What’s the meaning of all these flocks and herds I met?”

“To find favor in your eyes, my lord,” he said.

But Esau said, “I already have plenty, my brother. Keep what you have for yourself.”

“No, please!” said Jacob. “If I have found favor in your eyes, accept this gift from me. For to see your face is like seeing the face of God, now that you have received me favorably. Please accept the present that was brought to you, for God has been gracious to me and I have all I need.” And because Jacob insisted, Esau accepted it.

Then Esau said, “Let us be on our way; I’ll accompany you.” (Genesis 33:1–12)

The transformation completes. Intimacy restores with reconciliation. Genesis 1–3 outlines seven kinds of intimacy. In order of appearance, intimacy in Genesis presents as spiritual, beautiful, pleasurable, compassionate, balanced, sexually healthy, and reconciles relationships. The Jacob–Israel snapshot ends with forgiveness, as does Genesis 1–3 when God reconciles the first family by covering their shame. Immediately following this reconciliation piece, the first act of genital sexual intercourse occurs in Genesis 4:1. The intimacy of reconciliation follows Cain’s murder of his brother, the covenant with Noah, the compassion of God for Hagar and Ishmael, the reconciliation of Abraham with Abimelek, and now Jacob-Israel with Esau. Reconciliation and amends form in the prefrontal cortex. This part of the brain regulates anger, fear, and sexual neural pathways. The premise of this work forms on the ability to regulate affect as Jacob did with Esau.

Children learn from caregivers how to calm themselves, called anxiety regulation. Little children can also mirror the dysregulation of anxiety from parents. The Dinah unhealthy sexuality snapshot shows how a family system can repeat traumatic thinking and behavior. Jacob now faces perhaps the most painful consequence for a father. Dinah, offspring of the Jacob and Leah mandrakes-for-sex bargain, is raped by Shechem. Although Jacob-Israel has experienced a major shift in character, the culture of deception he nurtured throughout his life punishes his children. Dinah’s brothers retaliate by conspiring to annihilate the entire male population of Shechem in revenge for the rape. The sons of Jacob mirror the manipulation of Jacob and his wives, who coerced birthrights, blessings, religious rituals, and sex for food. 

Because their sister Dinah had been defiled, Jacob’s sons replied deceitfully as they spoke to Shechem and his father Hamor. They said to them, “We can’t do such a thing; we can’t give our sister to a man who is not circumcised. That would be a disgrace to us. We will enter into an agreement with you on one condition only: that you become like us by circumcising all your males. Then we will give you our daughters and take your daughters for ourselves. We’ll settle among you and become one people with you. But if you will not agree to be circumcised, we’ll take our sister and go.” (Genesis 34:13–17)

The brothers use the religious ritual of circumcision to deceive Shechem and his community. Jacob’s sons negotiate with the rapist, Shechem, to circumcise the entire male population in return for their sister’s hand in marriage. While recovering from surgery, the sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi slaughter and loot the unsuspecting circumcised villagers. 

Jacob reconciles with God and Esau. His family, however, repeats coercive behavior. The final statement in the Dinah snapshot sets up educating children about the ritual abuse of the sacred sex trade with the word, ZNH, temple prostitute. But they replied, “Should he have treated our sister like a prostitute?” (Genesis 34:31).

Jacob-Israel’s coercion days seem to be over. He has connected with God in meaningful ways and made amends with his twin brother, whom Jacob scammed both birthright and blessing from. Jacob-Israel connects with God intimately. Without directive, Jacob-Israel rids his family of idols with a focus on ritual purification, symbolizing depth of commitment and honor. 

Then God said to Jacob, “Go up to Bethel and settle there, and build an altar there to God, who appeared to you when you were fleeing from your brother Esau.”

So Jacob said to his household and to all who were with him, “Get rid of the foreign gods you have with you, and purify yourselves and change your clothes. Then come, let us go up to Bethel, where I will build an altar to God, who answered me in the day of my distress and who has been with me wherever I have gone.”So they gave Jacob all the foreign gods they had and the rings in their ears, and Jacob buried them under the oak at Shechem. Then they set out, and the terror of God fell on the towns all around them so that no one pursued them.

After Jacob returned from Paddan Aram, God appeared to him again and blessed him. God said to him, “Your name is Jacob, but you will no longer be called Jacob; your name will be Israel.” So he named him Israel.

And God said to him, “I am God Almighty; be fruitful and increase in number. A nation and a community of nations will come from you, and kings will be among your descendants. The land I gave to Abraham and Isaac I also give to you, and I will give this land to your descendants after you.” Then God went up from him at the place where he had talked with him.

Jacob set up a stone pillar at the place where God had talked with him, and he poured out a drink offering on it; he also poured oil on it. Jacob called the place where God had talked with him Bethel. (Genesis 35:1–15)

Jacob-Israel reflects an intimacy with God not seen before his MMA wrestling match in Genesis 32. He seems to possess a spiritual sensitivity for authenticity with God. He leads his family to purge idolatry from their community. Jacob-Israel buries the idols in Shechem, the symbol of unhealthy sexuality, betrayal, and treachery. God then speaks to Jacob-Israel, tying in the sexual health-positive big picture of Genesis 1–11. “I am God Almighty; be fruitful and increase in number. A nation and a community of nations will come from you, and kings will be among your descendants” (Genesis 35:11).

This section closes with the genealogy of Esau, the cheated brother. The genealogies appear to be the literary device called inclusio, indicating the end of a snapshot. Although manipulated out of his birthright and blessing of the first born, Esau does well. God blesses Esau with children and financial security. A sexual health motif appears in this piece. Esau chose to marry within the Canaanite community. As the reader recalls, Canaan was the incestuous offspring of Ham and his mother in Genesis 9:22. Perhaps this lends some insight into the reason for Jacob-Israel’s ascent over his brother Esau? 

The Joseph snapshot concludes the Book of Genesis. Chapters 37–50 feature the themes of masturbation theology, birth control, the sacred sex trade, possible intersexuality and the regulation of sexual arousal.

Joseph, the 11th son of a blended family, finds himself marred amidst the politics of jealous siblings. Joseph betrays the confidence of his brothers by ratting them out to their father with a, ‘bad, RA report.’ The 10 half-blood siblings resent Joseph even more because their father rewards Joseph for the betrayal. Jacob gives Joseph a highly prized royal garment called a chitone immediately following the report on coercive behavior. This valuable apparel was used as a trading commodity in the ancient Near East. The chitone of Genesis 37 is the same word and perhaps type of royal apparel God tailored to cover the shame of Adam and Eve in the Genesis 3:21 reconciliation scene. The blended family bitterness escalates when Joseph details disturbing dreams for his family. Joseph, clearly immature with brazen lack of humility, narrates a number of dreams predicting his family would one day slavishly submit to his authority.

Jacob lived in the land where his father had stayed, the land of Canaan. This is the account of Jacob’s family line. Joseph, a young man of seventeen, was tending the flocks with his brothers, the sons of Bilhah and the sons of Zilpah, his father’s wives, and he brought their father a bad report about them.

Now Israel loved Joseph more than any of his other sons, because he had been born to him in his old age; and he made an ornate robe (chitone) for him. When his brothers saw that their father loved him more than any of them, they hated him and could not speak a kind word to him.

Joseph had a dream, and when he told it to his brothers, they hated him all the more. He said to them, “Listen to this dream I had: We were binding sheaves of grain out in the field when suddenly my sheaf rose and stood upright, while your sheaves gathered around mine and bowed down to it.”

His brothers said to him, “Do you intend to reign over us? Will you actually rule us?” And they hated him all the more because of his dream and what he had said.

Then he had another dream, and he told it to his brothers. “Listen,” he said, “I had another dream, and this time the sun and moon and eleven stars were bowing down to me.”

When he told his father as well as his brothers, his father rebuked him and said, “What is this dream you had? Will your mother and I and your brothers actually come and bow down to the ground before you?” His brothers were jealous of him, but his father kept the matter in mind. (Genesis 37:1–11)

Jealousy escalates to murderous hatred similar to Cain’s murder of Abel in Genesis 4. The 10 brothers tend herds near Shechem, where their sister Dinah was raped, and incarcerate Joseph in a prison pit. The place names of Canaan and Shechem paint unhealthy sexuality images and set the tone for the conspiracy to kill Joseph. The enraged brothers strip him of the extravagant chitone and soak the precious garment with animal blood. The crimson-drenched chitone strengthens their alibi claim of Joseph’s demise—death by apex predator. In lieu of murder, Joseph’s brothers sell him to Midian slave traders. The brothers score a financial victory in the sale and lessen their guilt of fratricide. The slave traders sell Joseph to Potiphar, a possible intersexual Egyptian military officer, called a eunuch, SARS, סרס.

Masturbation Theology and Birth Control

Before the Potiphar snapshot gains traction, the centerpiece of Jewish and Christian masturbation theology unfolds in Chapter 38. Judah, one of Joseph’s brothers, marries a bride with Canaanite history. Canaan is often an image of unhealthy sexuality and coercion. The vocabulary for sexual health and intimacy, YDA, does not appear. The Hebrew words for genital sexual intercourse in this piece are LQH, and BO,“he took her and went into her”  (BLB, Genesis 38:2; Strong H3947 and H935). These words may connect a sense of unhealthy sexuality to the snapshot. Judah’s marriage yields three sons, Er, Onan, and Shelah. Onan is the principle player in Christian masturbation theology.

Judah got a wife for Er, his firstborn, and her name was Tamar. But Er, Judah’s firstborn, was wicked in the Lord’s sight; so the Lord put him to death.

Then Judah said to Onan, “Sleep with your brother’s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the child would not be his; so whenever he slept with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from providing offspring for his brother. What he did was wicked in the Lord’s sight; so the Lord put him to death also. (Genesis 38:8–10)

This unhealthy sexuality snapshot forms one of the most prolific misuses of Scripture over the last 3500 years. From this singular verse of the Bible Jewish and Christian theologies of masturbation developed, impacting the current era. The plain reading of the text states that the Lord killed Er for unspecified evil acts. The word for evil, RA in the Book of Genesis up to this point means coercion or sexual abuse. The younger brother, Onan, refuses to impregnate his sister-in-law as tribal custom permits. Onan too commits acts of coercion and dies. The final scene in the snapshot shows Tamar coercing a pregnancy with her father-in-law, Judah. She poses as a sacred prostitute to seduce Judah unknowingly for sex. Religious writers from many faith traditions for over 2000 years have mistranslated this single line of Scripture into a theology negatively affecting sexual health education for billions of people. 

As laid out in Genesis 38, ancient Near Eastern sexual health codes permitted a surviving family member to marry a brother’s widow. This marriage practice, called a YBM, or Levirate marriage, has occurred in many cultures for thousands of years until the present. The purpose of this form of marriage was to bring financial stability for the widow with tribal protection (Oxford Biblical Studies Encyclopedia, 2021).

Deuteronomy 25:5–10 permits the brother of a man who dies childless to marry the widow in a Levirate marriage, which allows either party to refuse the union.

If brothers are living together and one of them dies without a son, his widow must not marry outside the family. Her husband’s brother shall take her and marry her and fulfill the duty of a brother-in-law to her. The first son she bears shall carry on the name of the dead brother so that his name will not be blotted out from Israel.

However, if a man does not want to marry his brother’s wife, she shall go to the elders at the town gate and say, “My husband’s brother refuses to carry on his brother’s name in Israel. He will not fulfill the duty of a brother-in-law to me.” Then the elders of his town shall summon him and talk to him. If he persists in saying, “I do not want to marry her,” his brother’s widow shall go up to him in the presence of the elders, take off one of his sandals, spit in his face and say, “This is what is done to the man who will not build up his brother’s family line.” That man’s line shall be known in Israel as The Family of the Unsandaled. (Deuteronomy 25:5–10)

Islamic Sharia Law too encourages similar consensual sexual health practices.

O you who have believed, it is not lawful for you to inherit women by compulsion. And do not make difficulties for them in order to take [back] part of what you gave them unless they commit a clear immorality. And live with them in kindness. For if you dislike them – perhaps you dislike a thing and Allah makes therein much good (Islamic Studies, 2021).

The purpose of the consensual Jewish YBM and similar Sharia Law codes was to protect the widow by ensuring provision and protection. Offspring created inheritance rights, status, and security. Both sexual health traditions required mutual consent for the marriage of the widow to the brother-in-law.

The Judah unhealthy sexuality snapshot paints a picture of coercive sex beginning with Er and Onan and continuing through Judah and Tamar. Er acts wickedly, RA. The meaning of RA in the Book of Genesis up to this point is coercion or violent sexual abuse. The text clearly states that God kills Er for unnamed acts of coercion and perhaps abuse. The snapshot then describes Judah coercing Onan, his son, to have intercourse with Tamar to fulfill the YBM or Levirate marriage law. Onan does not consent to this marriage by Judah but instead practices coitus interruptus, withdrawing the penis from the vaginal barrel before ejaculation, when having intercourse with Tamar. He chooses not to conceive with Tamar and ‘spills his seed’ at ejaculatory inevitability. The Hebrew words for “spills his seed” are SHT ZRH, שחת זרע. The word for seed or semen is, ZRH, זרע (Strong, H2233). SHT, שחת, appears 147 times in the Old Testament. All of the uses of this word carry the nuance of corruption or coercion (Strong, H7843). 

The intent of the Judah unhealthy sexuality snapshot may teach children about nonconsensual sexuality. Er’s evil was unnamed acts of coercion. Judah manipulated Onan to marry and conceive with Tamar. Onan, too, according to the text bears guilt for coercive action. Based on the limits of the text, the coercion appears to be that Onan did not assume the responsibility of fulfilling the Levirate marriage law or YBM. 

What follows, however, appears to be thousands of years of personal bias and sexual politics attached to this one line of Biblical text. Religious writers assumed that Onan’s death sentence was for the evil of, ‘spilling the seed’ or withdrawing the penis at ejaculatory inevitability. Church fathers, popes, Christian medical professionals, and Evangelical authors have connected Onan’s act with ejaculation of any kind, ascribing the death sentence for transmission of semen based on the misuse of a single line of Scripture called prooftexting. 

The word masturbation did not appear in print until the 17th century AD. The Latin word masturbation means ‘destruction by the hand’ (Harper, 2021). Theologians began to connect the term masturbation to Onan’s death sentence for coitus interruptus. The context of the passage, however, appears to be another lesson reinforcing the evil of coercive sexuality and abuse. The Onan incident is not a genital self-stimulation narrative. In addition there exists no support from other Biblical passages that God killed Onan for practicing birth control, coitus interruptus. The judgment against Er and Onan appears to have clear textual support on the basis of coercive sexuality and or violent abuse. No Biblical evidence supports the death sentence for coitus interruptus or genital self-stimulation to orgasm with ejaculation. The non-Biblical term masturbation appears to be a misuse of Scripture. The 17th century word masturbation does not appear in or reflect the authoritative text of the Bible anywhere. 

The translation method this work uses is called Biblical theology. This time-tested process uses Scripture to interpret Scripture. When a passage requires clarity, other relevant texts are compared for meaning. Biblical theology can be thought of as a scientific method for studying sacred literature with integrity. The tension in this passage focuses on the interpretation that God put Onan to death because he practiced birth control during intercourse through coitus interruptus. Therefore according to many authors any transmission of semen except for procreation is condemned by God and sinful.

The circumstance of Onan’s death appears four times in the Old Testament (Genesis 38:9–10; 46:12; Numbers 26:19; 1 Chronicles 2:3). Two of the passages state that Onan simply died (Genesis 46:12; Numbers 26:19). The Hebrew verb form used in these two passages is called the Qal. This verb form shows that Onan died without intervention from God to end his life. The text of Genesis 38:10 states that someone or something killed Onan. The final Onan passage of 1 Chronicles 2:3 mentions Onan but does not state that the Lord killed him. Rather, Er his brother was terminated by God. The author of Chronicles omits Onan from the consequences of direct judgement by God. The four texts agree that Onan did not die by a direct act from God.

The verse in question is not clear that Onan’s death was caused by God. The passage literally says in the Hebrew language, ‘He (Onan) did evil in the eyes of the Lord, and the thing which he did, killed him, even him.’ Hebrew to English translators added “The Lord”  to verse 10 as the subject doing the killing. (Genesis 38:10) The corruption and misuse of this passage began with the editing of the text by an unknown translator from the Hebrew to English who added “The Lord” as Onan’s executioner. (Genesis 38:10) No direct statements in the Bible support God putting Onan to death. All Biblical citations converge to the point that God did not terminate Onan because he withdrew before ejaculation.

The energy spent on this verse matters for billions of people who look to the Bible for sexual health education. What the reader will see in the following history of masturbation theology is the threat of divine death sentence and disease for ejaculation. Specifically, according to numerous religious writers, any sexual arousal or transfer of semen except for conception may bring the same consequences for death as Onan received. One misused prooftexted verse of Scripture without support from the entirety of Biblical revelation created 3500 years of threat, violence, and sexual shame among people of faith.

The first part of the word masturbation derives from the Latin word, manus, meaning ‘hand.’ The second part of the Latin term, disturbare, means to disturb, demolish, or destroy. Stupere connects to this word, meaning stupid or shameful. The Latin word masturbor then follows the meaning, ‘I shamefully defile myself, I masturbate.’ The word masturbation first  appears in literature by 1711. In the 1620s, mastupration preceded the use of the term masturbationderivedfrom the latin words manus, hand, and stupor meaning rape, defile, or dishonor. In the 17th century genital self stimulation carried the nuance of sexual violence and shame. (Harper, 2021)

The Evangelical Christian books Every Man’s Battle and Every Women’s Battle reflect thinking on genital self-stimulation to orgasm with ejaculation from the 1990s. Arterburn (2001), the primary author for these books, reflects the cultural and Evangelical sexual politics of the era. Panic and crisis of the 1980s’ AIDS epidemic may have driven religious and political leaders to teach abstinence in favor of sexual health. Arterburn reflected, “Masturbation is a symptom of uncontrolled eyes and free racing thoughts” (Arterburn, 2001, p. 110). He counseled that masturbation ceases when a man can “bounce” his eyes and take his thoughts captive (p. 112). He stated that the only legitimate release from genital tension for a single man is the nocturnal emission. Arterburn did not permit men to masturbate, even though he admits the Bible does not speak to it. Ethridge, Arterburn’s female counterpart and coauthor of Every Woman’s Battle, too instructed her readers not to masturbate. She (2003) stated, “Believe it or not no one ever died from not having an orgasm…once the sin of masturbation does know you by name, it will call, and call and call” (Ethridge p. 40). Is it possible that Ethridge may imply, ‘Believe it or not, some have died from an orgasm,’ specifically Onan? Ethridge stated that treatment for masturbation is to “starve it to death” (Ethridge, p. 41). Neither Arterburn nor Ethridge believed genital self-stimulation to orgasm with ejaculation was an acceptable practice, even though both admit the Bible gives no direction on the matter. 

The 19th and 20 centuries featured religious and medical practitioners contributing to the conversation of genital self-stimulation to orgasm with ejaculation. Doctor John Harvey Kellogg of the Battle Creek Corn Flakes fame (February 26, 1852–December 14, 1943) passionately campaigned against genital self-stimulation. Kellogg legitimized his views by using medical language with citations from physicians like Dr. Adam Clarke. Kellogg (1888) citing Clark compared the disastrous effects of genital self stimulation to plagues, war, and small pox. (Kellogg, 1881) Kellogg made strong warnings against masturbation claiming genital self-stimulation could be fatal, literally dying by one’s own hand. Kellogg believed the ‘solitary-vice’ caused uterine cancer, urinary diseases, nocturnal emissions, impotence, epilepsy, insanity, mental and physical pathologies, and dimness of vision. Kellogg warns of the evils of sex perhaps believing sexuality itself to be evil. He crafted treatment plans to cure children from acting out in what he termed the ‘solitary vice’ and or ‘self abuse’ (genital self stimulation). Kellogg prescribed as means of masturbation prevention: restraining a child’s hands, protecting the genitals with patented cages preventing sexual contact, stitching the foreskin shut with wire, electrical shock, and circumcision without anesthesia. Kellogg himself underwent circumcision at the age of 37 (Kellogg, 1888). Kellogg presented detailed treatment plans to prevent genital self-stimulation.

A remedy which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision, especially when there is any degree of phimosis. The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic, as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment, as it may well be in some cases. The soreness which continues for several weeks interrupts the practice, and if it had not previously become too firmly fixed, it may be forgotten and not resumed. Further, a method of treatment [to prevent masturbation] … and we have employed it with entire satisfaction. It consists in the application of one or more silver sutures in such a way as to prevent erection. The prepuce, or foreskin, is drawn forward over the glans, and the needle to which the wire is attached is passed through from one side to the other. After drawing the wire through, the ends are twisted together, and cut off close. It is now impossible for an erection to occur, and the slight irritation thus produced acts as a most powerful means of overcoming the disposition to resort to the practice. In females, the author has found the application of pure carbolic acid (phenol) to the clitoris an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement (Kellogg, 1888, pp. 294-296).

In Kellogg’s (1883) Ladies’ Guide in Health and Disease for nymphomania, he recommended “Cool baths; the cool enema; a spare diet; the application of blisters and other irritants to the sensitive parts of the sexual organs” (Markel, p. 215).  Kellogg also reported that he practiced female genital mutilation by surgically removing the clitoris in cases of “self-abuse (genital self stimulation), and a complete abandonment to lascivious thoughts” (Kellogg, 1883, pp. 546-547). 

Swiss physician Samuel-Auguste Tissot published L’Onanisme in 1760, a comprehensive medical treatise on the negative effects of genital self-stimulation to orgasm with ejaculation. Tissot believed that seminal fluid was an ‘essential oil and stimulus.’ According to Tissot, the loss of semen in large amounts could cause, 

a perceptible reduction of strength, of memory and even of reason; blurred vision, all the nervous disorders, all types of gout and rheumatism, weakening of the organs of generation, blood in the urine, disturbance of the appetite, headaches and a great number of other disorders. (Stolberg, 2000, pp. 1-21)

In the 17 century, masturbation became synonymous with Onan in Genesis 38. Although different behaviors, Coitus interruptus and genital self-stimulation now become one idea (Etymonline, 2021). A 17th-century Puritan law code for the colonies of New Haven, Connecticut outlawed blasphemy, homosexuality, and genital self-stimulation. The consequence for offenders? The death penalty (Lawrence, 1997, p. 41).

Before masturbation terminology appeared in the 17th century early Christian church fathers contributed volumes of commentary. Many church authorities taught that genital self-stimulation was a secret sin, injurious, prohibited, and corrupt. In the 14th century AD, Jean Gerson, crafted a confessional manual entitled, On the Confession of Masturbation. Gerson’s manual directs clergy to confess to the sin of masturbation which was considered more serious than incest, or the kidnapping-rape of nuns and virgins (Taylor, 2008).

Thomas Aquinas, 1225–1274 AD, scholastic of the Catholic Church authored the Summa Theologica, The Summary of Theology. The Summa intended to instruct seminarians and literate church members. In Question 154 Article 5, Aquinas argues for the sinfulness of dreams producing nocturnal emissions. 

Article 5. Whether nocturnal pollution is a mortal sin? Objection 1. It would seem that nocturnal pollution is a sin. For the same things are the matter of merit and demerit. Now a man may merit while he sleeps, as was the case with Solomon, who while asleep ob tained the gift of wisdom from the Lord“ (1 Samuel 3:5). Therefore a man may demerit while asleep; and thus nocturnal pollution would seem to be a sin (Knight, 2017; Summa Theologica,154:5).

Beginning in the 11th century Pope Leo IX regarded genital self-stimulation as, “unnatural sex, murder, a diabolical practice, and the cause of two-thirds of all diseases and disorders including insanity, neurosis, and neurasthenia” (Patton, 1985, p. 133).

Epiphanius of Salamis (375 AD) stated in Medicine Chest Against Heresies, that certain Egyptian heretics “exercise genital acts, yet prevent the conceiving of children. Not in order to produce offspring, but to satisfy lust, are they eager for corruption”(Catholic Encyclopedia, 2021; Medicine Chest Against Heresies 26:5:2, 375 AD). Lactantius, advisor to Roman Emperor Constantine the Great, in the fourth century AD added, “God gave us eyes not to see and desire pleasure, but to see acts to be performed for the needs of life; so too, the genital [‘generating’] part of the body, as the name itself teaches, has been received by us for no other purpose than the generation of offspring” (Catholic Encyclopedia, 2021;Medicine Chest Against Heresies, 6:23:18). Clement of Alexandria in 191 AD stated that, “Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted, and, “To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature” (Catholic Encyclopedia, 2021; The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2; 2:10:95:3, 375 AD).

Origen (184-253 AD), an Early Church Father, was considered the genius of the second and third century church. Origen authored a body of over 6,000 works laying the foundation for current Christian theology, apologetics and preaching theory. Origen also struggled with dysregulated sexual arousal. As a young man, he voluntarily submitted to a bilateral orchiectomy, the surgical removal of both testicles. His goal was to conform to the words of Jesus in Matthew 19 regarding becoming a eunuch for the sake of the kingdom of God. Origen later regretted his decision (Silver, 2021).

Christ does not speak on the matter of genital self-stimulation to orgasm with ejaculation. Neither New Testament writers nor Old Testament authors rule on the matter. Again, the primary Christian authoritative sources and accepted body of sacred literature do not regulate genital self-stimulation. The Old Testament passages connecting to transmission of seminal fluids can be found in the Levitical sexual hygiene code.

When a man has an emission of semen, he must bathe his whole body with water, and he will be unclean till evening. Any clothing or leather that has semen on it must be washed with water, and it will be unclean till evening…When a man has sexual relations with a woman and there is an emission of semen, both of them must bathe with water, and they will be unclean till evening…These are the regulations for a man with a discharge, for anyone made unclean by an emission of semen. (Leviticus 15:16,17,18, 32)

Neither mandate nor commentary exists for genital self-stimulation to orgasm with ejaculation in the entire Bible. The focus of transmission of fluids in Leviticus falls under the heading of hygiene and in this case sexual health hygiene. There are no death penalties in the Leviticus sexual hygiene code for the transmission of seminal fluids by any means.

Four characteristics underlie the postmodern sex addict in North America. P. Carnes explained in a sex addiction certification seminar (personal communication, January 2014) the typical person with problematic sexuality comes from a Bible believing family with black and white shame based rules, deprivation, and sex negativity. This work attempts to counter these underlying drivers of addict behaviors with sexually healthy Biblical conversations. The goal is to teach children that the sexual health-positive big picture of the Bible reflects intimacy with God. This spiritual intimacy is beautiful, pleasurable, present in compassion, balanced, sexually healthy, and reconciles relationships. Rather than rigid shame based compliance to man-made mandates, this work teaches children the health of consent with boundaries. Instead of deprivation thinking, children are shown how to love and care for the image of God within themselves and others through sexual health hygiene. Sexual health can be only good reflecting the omnibenevolence or complete goodness of the Creator. Sexual health is never a state of sin in the Bible.

Clarke (2021), the author of Connection Theory, mentored clinical sexologists to examine, ‘the meaning’ of sexual behavior in the assessment of disorders. Does the meaning of one’s sexual health practice connect to the image of an omnibenevolent Creator? Does the spirituality of sexual health follow Scriptural support? Does sexual hygiene promote beauty and pleasure as opposed to neglect and shame? Does a sexual health practice bring balance with compassion, or does the behavior become obsessive, problematic, and cause harm? Is the outcome of one’s sexual hygiene restoration of health? Does sexual hygiene like genital self stimulation connect to the values of one’s family and community? These questions of spiritual significance transcend the black and white shame based approach of many religious writers over the last 2000 years. My goal not to promote a sexual hygiene behavior, but rather to permit the reader to choose what is Scriptural and healthy and to do so without shame. Replacing shame based rules with compassionate boundaries, promoting sexual health hygiene in place of deprivation, and connecting intimacy to sexual health may help children by treating the underlying drivers of problematic sexuality and at the same time honor the teachings of the Bible.

The final scene in the Judah unhealthy sexuality snapshot may teach children about the religious sacred sex trade of the ancient Near East (Genesis 38:13–30).

When Tamar was told, “Your father-in-law is on his way to Timnah to shear his sheep,” she took off her widow’s clothes, covered herself with a veil to disguise herself, and then sat down at the entrance to Enaim, which is on the road to Timnah. For she saw that, though Shelah had now grown up, she had not been given to him as his wife. When Judah saw her, he thought she was a prostitute, for she had covered her face. Not realizing that she was his daughter-in-law, he went over to her by the roadside and said, “Come now, let me sleep with you.”And what will you give me to sleep with you?” she asked.

“I’ll send you a young goat from my flock,” he said.

“Will you give me something as a pledge until you send it?” she asked.

He said, “What pledge should I give you?”

“Your seal and its cord, and the staff in your hand,” she answered. So he gave them to her and slept with her, and she became pregnant by him. After she left, she took off her veil and put on her widow’s clothes again…

About three months later Judah was told, “Your daughter-in-law Tamar is guilty of prostitution, and as a result she is now pregnant.”

Judah said, “Bring her out and have her burned to death!”

As she was being brought out, she sent a message to her father-in-law. “I am pregnant by the man who owns these,” she said. And she added, “See if you recognize whose seal and cord and staff these are.”

Judah recognized them and said, “She is more righteous than I, since I wouldn’t give her to my son Shelah.” And he did not sleep with her again. (Genesis 38:13–30)

Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, poses in cognito as a sacred sex trade worker to coerce him to impregnate her. Judah has intercourse with Tamar and she conceives. In a politically brilliant move Tamar requests his signet ring and staff as Judah arranges payment for sex. In modern terms perhaps one would say, she asked for his passport and vaccine record as security for payment. When Judah hears of her pregnancy, he orders her death sentence until Tamar produces Judah’s passport picture and proof of vaccination, the signet ring and staff. 

The sacred sex trade formed a strategic part of ancient Near Eastern culture and sexual health education for children. In the Sumerian era 1750 BCE religious institutions staffed priests, attendants, artists with sacred sex trade workers in places of worship. The purpose of the sex workers connected the believers with the deities through intercourse. The sacred sex workers provided a, “substantial part of the temple’s income” (Tannehill, 1980, p. 79). The sacred sex trade business provided great profit to religious institutions. One sex worker named Metiche, earned the name, Clepsydra, or stop watch, for timing the length of customer intercourse so she could streamline her clients for greater income (Tannehill, 1980, p. 100). A millennium after Hammurabi, Herodotus, the Greek historian, reported, 

Every woman who is a native of the country must once in her life go and sit in the temple and there give herself to a strange man….she is not allowed to go home until a man has thrown a silver coin into her lap and taken her outside to lie with him. …The woman has no privilege of choice-she must go with the first man who throws her the money. When she has lain with him, her duty to the goddess has been discharged and she may go home…. Tall handsome women soon manage to get home again but the ugly ones stay a long time before they can fulfill the condition which the law demands, some of them indeed as much as three or four years. (p. 80). 

Sacred sex workers classified in three groups. The harimtu, connected to the word harem, may have been a quasi secular sex worker. The qadishtu, a sacred sex worker, reflects the Greek narrative of Herodotus. The ishtaritu were dedicated sex workers for the goddess Ishtar (Tannehill, 1980, p. 80). A Babylonian father wrote to advise his son, “Never take a harimtu to wife, her husbands are beyond counting; nor an Istaritu, she is reserved for the gods” (p. 80). 

According to Tannehill (1980) caregivers may have coerced their children into the sacred sex trade. The sex trade offered a less expensive way to transition a female child into adulthood rather than paying a dowry. The harimtu appear to have been married women who left their husbands and had no other recourse than the sex trade. The higher earning sex trade workers operated within the temple complex itself perhaps because of the volume of customers and income potential. The under earners focused on locations outside the temple where potential customers gathered, typically, the local bar. This class of sex workers operated on the “streets, crossroads, and public places” (Tannehill, 1980, p. 80). The sacred sex trade had strict regulations on publicity and marketing. Assyrian law insisted that, 

“A common harlot shall not veil herself (as other women do); her head shall be uncovered. Anyone who sees a common harlot veiled shall arrest her….They shall beat her fifty strokes with rods, and they shall pour pitch on her head” (Tannehill, 1980, p. 81). 

The sacred sex trade involved coercion. A concubine did not have the independence of a hetaira, nor legal protection of a wife, and if she displeased her master, she could be sold to a brothel (Tannehill, 1980, p. 104). The sacred sex trade offered survival to women and girls, not choice. The placement of Chapter 38 in the Joseph snapshot seems awkward. On the other hand, perhaps this cameo on unhealthy sexuality contrasts with Joseph’s healthy response to Potiphar’s wife and her seduction attempts in the coming chapters?

The Joseph snapshot resumes with Chapter 39 and the term eunuch appears for the first time in the Bible. The bitter brothers sell Joseph into slavery to Ishmaelite investors. The reader may note that Ishmael is the surrogate son of Abraham and Sarah with Hagar the slave. The earlier drama of blended family betrayal and coercion finds some justice and perhaps humor with the descendants of Ishmael selling Joseph to an Egyptian executioner. Potiphar, an elite royal military captain, describes in two ways. He is the guardian, SAR,שר, of the Pharaoh and identified as a eunuch, SRS, סריס (BLB, Genesis 37:26). The reader may note that the words guardian, SAR,שר, and eunuch, SRS, סריס sound similar but have different spellings (Strong, H5631).

The Biblical text identifies Potiphar as a eunuch. Eunuchs have been employed by royalty for millennia to oversee their harems. The eunuch was unable to impregnate consorts because of intersexual traits at birth or surgery to remove genitalia. Eunuchism includes those born with intersexual traits incapable of heterosexual intercourse. This section describes both eunuchism and intersexuality connecting them to the sexual health teachings of the Old and New Testaments. Clinicians use the term intersexual for variations in sexually reproducing organisms. Intersexual births feature characteristics between typical males and typical females. Intersexual genitals differ in numerous ways with wide diversity. Many intersexual traits never appear outwardly. Some variations present when the intersex child reaches puberty, and still others at adulthood. Again, some intersexual traits never appear physically (Fausto-Sterling, 2000).

Fausto-Sterling (2000) examined clinical intersex data from 1955 to 1999. She stated, “We surveyed the medical literature from 1955 to the present for studies of the frequency of deviation from the ideal male or female. We conclude that this frequency may be as high as 2% of live births” (pp. 151–166). Genetics governing growth and development cause most intersex variations. Hormones underlie the most frequent variations among the intersexual population. Sterling listed numerous intersex variations with their prevalence:

Not XX and not XY one in 1,666 births

Klinefelter (XXY) one in 1,000 births

Androgen insensitivity syndrome one in 13,000 births

Partial androgen insensitivity syndrome one in 130,000 births

Classical congenital adrenal hyperplasia one in 13,000 births

Late onset adrenal hyperplasia one in 66 individuals

Vaginal agenesis one in 6,000 births

Ovotestes one in 83,000 births

Idiopathic (no discernable medical cause) one in 110,000 births

Iatrogenic (caused by medical treatment, for instance progestin administered to pregnant mother) no estimate

5 alpha reductase deficiency no estimate

Mixed gonadal dysgenesis no estimate

Complete gonadal dysgenesis one in 150,000 births

Hypospadias (urethral opening in perineum or along penile shaft) one in 2,000 births

Hypospadias (urethral opening between corona and tip of glans penis) one in 770 births (pp. 151–166).

Numerous eunuch snapshots appear in both the Old and New Testament records. The Bible uses the terms SARS in Hebrew and eunuchos in New Testament Greek (Strong, H5631, G2135).

Royalty concerned for DNA purity of heirs chose staff members incapable of reproduction to oversee harems. The SARS-eunuch lacked the ability for genital sexual intercourse with the king’s wives whether by intersexual traits or surgical castration. The SARS served as a nonthreatening caregiver ensuring royal blood lines with unbroken succession to the throne. 

The fifth century AD Etymologicon by Orion of Thebes cites an early definition for the SARS: guarding the bed and being deprived of male to female sexual intercourse.

The historian Lucian states criterion for vetting a SARS: physical inspection of genitalia while examining the candidate during an unsuccessful sexual act with females. This vetting process proved the SARS posed no threat to infiltrate royal DNA (Sturz, 1820, p. 58).

Many cultures record surgical castration to prevent sexual intercourse with royal consorts. Vietnamese eunuchism removed both testicles and penis of male staff members to ensure the progeny of the Emperor. The duties of Vietnamese eunuchs primarily maintained the harem for sexual intercourse with the Emperor (Taylor, 2013).

The Biblical Hebrew word for eunuch is saris, SRS, סריס (Strong, H5631). Potiphar in the Joseph snapshot circa 12th Dynasty BCE is called Pharaoh’s SRS (BLB, Genesis 37:36, Strong, H5631). Daniel of the Babylonian Exile 8th century BCE served under a SRS and is assumed to be part of the eunuch culture to secure the purity of heir making. The Book of Isaiah 56:1–5 uses the term SARS in a blessing piece.

This is what the Lord says:

“Maintain justice

and do what is right,

for my salvation is close at hand

and my righteousness will soon be revealed.

Blessed is the one who does this—

the person who holds it fast,

who keeps the Sabbath without desecrating it,

and keeps their hands from doing any evil. 

Let no foreigner who is bound to the Lord say,

“The Lord will surely exclude me from his people.”

And let no eunuch(SARS) complain,

“I am only a dry tree.”

For this is what the Lord says:

“To the eunuchs(SARS) who keep my Sabbaths,

who choose what pleases me

and hold fast to my covenant—

to them I will give within my temple and its walls

a memorial and a name

better than sons and daughters;

I will give them an everlasting name

that will endure forever.

The Old Testament records the word for SARS 42 times. Of those 42 uses, English versions translate eunuch 28 times (Strong, H5631; Biblical Hermeneutics, 2016). Brown Driver and Briggs Hebrew Lexicon connects the Hebrew SARS, to the Arabic term, “to be impotent” (BDB, p. 710). Holladay’s Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (1983) defines SARS as only eunuch. The Aramaic dialects also translate SARS only as eunuch (Biblical Hermeneutics, 2016). The Book of Esther cites servants of the harem of Ahasuerus. These eunuchs are named specifically such as Hegai and Shashgaz, Hatach, Harbonah, Bigthan, and Teresh. The sarisim, the plural of SARS, were potential threats to impregnate the harem of the king and therefore chosen because of the inability for intercourse with royalty.

Some argue that if Potiphar were a eunuch with perhaps intersexual variations then why would he be married? Chapter 38 of Genesis immediately preceding this snapshot illustrates the YBM or Levirate Law of ancient Near Eastern custom to marry the widow of a deceased brother-in-law. Potiphar in similar way may have married his brother’s widow to protect her financially. Potiphar’s union may also be explained as a possible political alliance within the court of Pharaoh. Finally, the pursuit of a sexual affair with Joseph in the face of Egyptian taboos for adultery may be explained by a sexually frustrated partner. Potiphar’s wife pursued Joseph with relentless abandon. Could it be that her marriage to a partner unable or unwilling to engage in intercourse motivated her pursuit of Joseph?

The New Testament uses the term eunuch in two narratives, Mathew 19 and Acts 8. Jesus speaks of eunuchs in Matthew 19 stating that some intersexual-eunuchs are born, some eunuchs are made (surgically), and others choose to be eunuchs (Matthew 19:1–12).

“Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”

Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.”

Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.” (Matthew 19:1–12)

The eunuchs Jesus described may include those who were born with intersex variations and could not have heterosexual genital intercourse. The second snapshot appears in Acts 8:26–39. In this piece the apostle Phillip interprets Isaiah 53 for an, “ Ethiopian eunuch, an important official in charge of all the treasury of the Kandake which means ‘queen of the Ethiopians.’” (Acts 8:27) The reader can note that the Ethiopian eunuch served a royal consort, a queen tracking with Old Testament usage. In addition the term eunuch separates from the words, ‘an important official in charge.’ This supports the context of the SARS of the Old Testament who guards the harem of the king.

During my 40-year career as a faith-based sexual health educator, the tendency of conservative Christians has been to condemn intersexuality as immoral or taboo. The conversation that intersexuals are born, ‘that way’ has been resisted by many. Scripture and the teachings of Christ both support the concept of intersexuality at birth. The reader may also note that all intersexual citations in the Bible appear without condemnation. In Deuteronomy 23:1 a statement is made prohibiting some males from worshiping with the congregation. “No one who has been emasculated by crushing or cutting (the genitalia) may enter the assembly of the Lord.” This Deuteronomy passage does not use the word SARS. The words, emasculated by crushing or cutting, appear four times in the Bible, and the meaning seems to involve an act of random violence (Deuteronomy 23:1, 1 Kings 20:37, and Song of Solomon 5:7). SARS-eunuch in the Old Testament never carries a negative image.

Intersexual-eunuch passages in Matthew 19 and perhaps Acts 8 appear without condemnation as well. The Acts snapshot with the Ethiopian eunuch and Phillip communicates honor and dignity.

The Joseph snapshot may also be a teaching piece for children on the regulation of sexual arousal. Joseph’s brothers sold him to a slave owner named Potiphar, whose royal duties included guarding Pharaoh’s consorts. Potiphar, ‘The Butcher’, entrusted Joseph with his entire household. Joseph, a skilled administrator, inspired both productivity and profit with his leadership skills. 

Now Joseph had been taken down to Egypt. Potiphar, an Egyptian who was one of Pharaoh’s officials, the captain of the guard, bought him from the Ishmaelites who had taken him there.

The Lord was with Joseph so that he prospered, and he lived in the house of his Egyptian master. When his master saw that the Lord was with him and that the Lord gave him success in everything he did, Joseph found favor in his eyes and became his attendant. Potiphar put him in charge of his household, and he entrusted to his care everything he owned. From the time he put him in charge of his household and of all that he owned, the Lord blessed the household of the Egyptian because of Joseph. The blessing of the Lord was on everything Potiphar had, both in the house and in the field. So Potiphar left everything he had in Joseph’s care; with Joseph in charge, he did not concern himself with anything except the food he ate. (Genesis 39:1-6)

A sexual health snapshot follows on regulating sexual neural pathways and sexual arousal. Potiphar’s wife sexually harassed Joseph in the workplace. On multiple occasions the executioner’s wife coerced Joseph for intercourse. The value of storytelling permits the listener to enter into the narrative with imagination and color. Perhaps Potiphar’s wife felt discontent being married to a partner incapable of sexual intercourse and conception? Did the relationship between the The Butcher and his wife result from an arranged marriage as Levirate customs permitted? Whatever the reason, Potiphar’s wife pursued Joseph even though Egyptian taboos forbade adultery with execution as punishment. The tension and stakes created high anxiety for all involved. 

Now Joseph was well-built and handsome, and after a while his master’s wife took notice of Joseph and said, “Come to bed with me!”

But he refused. “With me in charge,” he told her, “my master does not concern himself with anything in the house; everything he owns he has entrusted to my care. No one is greater in this house than I am. My master has withheld nothing from me except you, because you are his wife. How then could I do such a wicked thing and sin against God?” And though she spoke to Joseph day after day, he refused to go to bed with her or even be with her.

One day he went into the house to attend to his duties, and none of the household servants was inside. She caught him by his cloak and said, “Come to bed with me!” But he left his cloak in her hand and ran out of the house.

When she saw that he had left his cloak in her hand and had run out of the house, she called her household servants. “Look,” she said to them, “this Hebrew has been brought to us to make sport of us! He came in here to sleep with me, but I screamed. When he heard me scream for help, he left his cloak beside me and ran out of the house.” She kept his cloak beside her until his master came home. Then she told him this story: “That Hebrew slave you brought us came to me to make sport of me. But as soon as I screamed for help, he left his cloak beside me and ran out of the house.”

When his master heard the story his wife told him, saying, “This is how your slave treated me,” he burned with anger. Joseph’s master took him and put him in prison, the place where the king’s prisoners were confined.

But while Joseph was there in the prison, the Lord was with him; he showed him kindness and granted him favor in the eyes of the prison warden. So the warden put Joseph in charge of all those held in the prison, and he was made responsible for all that was done there. The warden paid no attention to anything under Joseph’s care, because the Lord was with Joseph and gave him success in whatever he did. (Genesis 39:6-23)

This is the first snapshot in Genesis demonstrating the regulation of sexual arousal. Joseph, a handsome single young man is sexually pursued by someone his superior. Dominant in authority through her husband, Potiphar’s wife attempts to coerce sexual favors from her husband’s subordinate employee. When confronted with the seduction narrative of Potiphar’s wife, Joseph responds with the prefrontal cortex regulating sexual response. One feature of this work emphasizes healthy regulation of sexual neural pathways rather than depriving sexuality. These themes are taken up more fully in the Neuroscience and Clinical Sexology section. 

The prefrontal cortex regulates the limbic system, where anger, fear, and sexual neural pathways wire. This regulation can also be called executive function. When the prefrontal cortex operates with balance, sexual arousal can be regulated. When the prefrontal cortex is depleted of blood flow, anger, fear, and sexual arousal cannot be fully regulated. Detailed explanation can be found in the Neuroscience section on the prefrontal cortex and anxiety regulation. The reader can note the prefrontal cortex response of Joseph to regulate sexual arousal. 

But he refused. “With me in charge,” he told her, “my master does not concern himself with anything in the house; everything he owns he has entrusted to my care. No one is greater in this house than I am. My master has withheld nothing from me except you, because you are his wife. How then could I do such a wicked thing and sin against God?” And though she spoke to Joseph day after day, he refused to go to bed with her or even be with her. (Genesis 39:8–10)

Joseph uses the reason center of the prefrontal cortex to make a sexually healthy decision. The Hebrew word for decision is MAN, מאן, to refuse utterly (BLB, Genesis 39:8, Strong, H3985). Next Joseph stated that Potiphar entrusted all to Joseph’s care. The word for intimacy of compassionate presence is used, YDA, ידע. This is the same word used for sexual intimacy, an intimate knowing, reasoning with compassion. Finally, Joseph affirmed that he cannot engage in sexual intercourse with Potiphar’s wife because the act would be wicked, RA, a coercive act against God. This view of sexual intercourse touches the spirituality of intimacy. Joseph felt compassion for the will of both God and Potiphar. The last scene in this snapshot shows Joseph fleeing the threat of coercive sexual assault.

Potiphar, Pharoah’s executive executions officer, imprisoned rather than torturing and killing Joseph for the alleged rape attempt of his wife. Perhaps Potiphar understood the sexual politics of his partner so he commuted Joseph’s sentence to life imprisonment? This story is an excellent depiction of sexual health that teaches children to regulate sexual neural pathways with reason, emotional intimacy, compassion, awareness, and spirituality. 

The balance of the Book of Genesis Chapters 40–50 reflects Joseph’s spiritual intimacy with God in prison, emancipation to the court of Pharaoh, his marriage, and it climaxes with the intimacy of family reconciliation. Joseph of all the characters in the Book of Genesis consistently acts with sexual health in mind. The book ends with the intimacy of family reconciliation just as Chapter 3 finishes with God reconciling the shame of humankind. In Chapters 1–3 of Genesis, the sexual health big picture illustrates intimacy between God and humankind. This intimacy is first spiritual, then beautiful, compassionately present and pleasurable, and balanced; it reflects sexual health and reconciles relationships. Joseph finds a compassionate presence of God while incarcerated. 

But while Joseph was there in the prison, the Lord was with him; He showed him kindness and granted him favor in the eyes of the prison warden. So the warden put Joseph in charge of all those held in the prison, and he was made responsible for all that was done there. The warden paid no attention to anything under Joseph’s care, because the Lord was with Joseph and gave him success in whatever he did. (Genesis 39:21–23)

Twice the text stated that God was with Joseph in presence and specifically “showed him kindness (compassion) and granted him favor in the eyes of the prison warden.” This kindness is the intimacy of compassionate presence. God helps Joseph regulate the fear and pain of prison with awareness of the compassion and love of God. 

Joseph has two children during his tenure as chief operating officer of Egypt, Manasseh and Ephraim. 

Before the years of famine came, two sons were born to Joseph by Asenath daughter of Potiphera, priest of On. Joseph named his firstborn Manasseh and said, ‘It is because God has made me forget all my trouble and all my father’s household.’ The second son he named Ephraim and said, “It is because God has made me fruitful in the land of my suffering.” (Genesis 41:50–52) 

Although the text does not state a clear connection, it appears that Joseph may have married into the family of Potiphar, “two sons were born to Joseph by Asenath daughter of Potiphera, priest of On” (Genesis 41:50–52). Potiphera may be a name connecting to Potiphar, The Butcher, Joseph’s first Egyptian employer. Although the terms are similar, there is no Biblical text to confirm. 

The snap shot of Joseph ends this great book on a sexual health-positive note. Joseph regulates sexual neural pathways in the prefrontal cortex through spirituality, compassionate presence, and reconciliation. His brutal family history of betrayal then reconciles with these words,

 When Joseph’s brothers saw that their father was dead, they said, “What if Joseph holds a grudge against us and pays us back for all the wrongs we did to him?” So they sent word to Joseph, saying, “Your father left these instructions before he died.” This is what you are to say to Joseph: ‘I ask you to forgive your brothers the sins and the wrongs they committed in treating you so badly.’ Now please forgive the sins of the servants of the God of your father.” When their message came to him, Joseph wept.

His brothers then came and threw themselves down before him. “We are your slaves,” they said.

But Joseph said to them, “Don’t be afraid. Am I in the place of God? You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives. So then, don’t be afraid. I will provide for you and your children.” And he reassured them and spoke kindly to them. (Genesis 50:15–21)

When Joseph stated he would provide for the children, he used the word, TPH, טף  ‘little ones’ (Strong, H2945). The term TPH means “racing toddler with tripping gait.” This final scene speaks to small children about the care and compassion of God for them. The Joseph snapshot forms an inclusio of sexual health, tying in Genesis Chapters 1–5. Human sexuality reflects the image of omnibenevolent Creator whose compassion teaches children about sexual health and safety.

What would a child of the 4th century BCE learn about sexual health from this primer called Genesis? An awareness could emerge that sexual health forms one aspect of intimacy with God. Human sexuality is spiritual, beautiful, pleasurable, created without shame, possesses a compassionate presence, brings balance, and reconciles relationships. Sexual health forms a central place in the life of a community called covenant with God. Sexuality reflects one piece of intimacy with the God of the Bible. Rather than sex becoming object of worship, sexual health reflects a facet of intimacy with God and one another. Sexual health parallels a spiritual, beautiful, pleasurable, compassionate, balanced, and reconciling intimacy with God and one another.

Unhealthy sexuality from a 4th century BCE child’s view might look like coercion, a powerful person manipulating sex from a weaker one. Unhealthy sexuality may look like sharing private parts with a family member. Unhealthy sexuality betrays a partner without compassionate presence. Unhealthy sexuality perpetrates erotic violent against another, called rape. Unhealthy sexuality connects to the sacred sex trade manipulating profit by coercing families to share private parts with strangers.