Editing Christianity and Zoosexuality

{{Essay}}

If you are a Christian [[zoophile]], I know how challenging it can be to discover your [[zoophilia]] and mend these two things. I am not going to trample on your Christian faith. I know very well the reasons why you keep your faith. It is a wholesome, simple life and one that allows endurance, unlike any other religion I’ve seen. 

What I’d like to do, is to strengthen your Christian faith while possibly mending your peace with God and zoophilia, or start you on the track to finding that peace. There are many interpretations of the bible, and perhaps you as a Christian have not known the more hidden, obscure interpretations. Even one possibly that may condone a zoophilic lifestyle albeit with the traditional Christian restraint.

==Genesis==

===Genesis 2:23===
For a better understanding of this very foreign and very controversial concept in Christianity, let's examine the position Judaism takes towards Genesis 2:23. The following is taken from the Jewish Bible with Rashi's commentary.


{{Blockquote|text=And man said, "This time, it is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. This one shall be called Isiah (woman) because this one was taken from ish (man).|title=''Genesis 2:23''}}


{{blockquote|text=This teaches us that Adam came to all the animals and the beasts'' ''[in search of a [[mate]]], but he was not satisfied until he found Eve.||author=''Rashi''|title=''Commentary for Gen 2:23''|source=''from Yev. 63A''}}

Rashi further references from the Jewish Talmud, Yebamoth 63a:

{{blockquote|text=Yebamoth 63a states “What is meant by the Scriptural text, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh? This teaches that Adam had intercourse with every beast and animal but found no satisfaction until he cohabited with Eve.|source=''ibid''}}

So there, we have something quite significant for [[zoophiles]]. The Jewish faith and interpretation clearly show that the LORD brought Adam to have sexual relations with all the beasts of the field but was not satisfied until he eve was made. I’m sure this is shocking to some of you listening, but please, the Jewish rabbis are very shrewd in their interpretations, and why did they choose this very uncommon commentary? There must be a biblical reason why they interpreted Genesis 2:23 that way, and there is. Now grab your King James Bible, and let us look at why the rabbi interpreted Adam's [[bestiality]] as so. Let's read Genesis 2:18-20

===Genesis 2:18-20===
{{blockquote|text=And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.|title=''Genesis 2:18-20''}}

The Jewish words for help meet are ''Ezer Kenegdo'', which literally means "A Help corresponding to him". That is established correctly? The LORD brought all the beasts before Adam to find Help corresponding to him. The MEAT of the question is what kind of help was the LORD looking for Adam? I’ll emphasize this again, what kind of ''EZER KENEGDO'' did the LORD intend?

===Genesis 2:24===
{{blockquote|text=Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.|title=''Genesis 2:24''}}

Now this verse above, clearly could not have been Adam’s words, as we know that Adam had no physical father nor mother. Who penned these words with interpretation? Obviously Moses who wrote genesis and what was the purpose that was declared for eve being made? He says it right there, “They shall be one flesh”. 

So Moses admits in genesis 2:24 that the help meet (the Ezer kenegdo) of genesis
2:18-20 was the search for a physical sexual compatibility. The LORD brought Adam the beasts of the field to become one flesh with or said more clearly.

==Adams Search for Sexual Compatability==
Adam committed bestiality with the animals the LORD GOD brought him, in searchof the physical sexual compatibility or his (ezer Kenegdo). He then used his free 
will and said animals were not his Ezer Kenegdo, and eve was made and then Moses declared that they had become “One Flesh” thus showing their sexual compatibility.

I'll summarize this once more, Adam looked for sexual compatibility (ezer kenegdo) amoung the animals, he declared he didn’t find any, and eve was made. Eve was his ezer kenegdo, and his sexual compatibility was declared by Moses as “Shall be one flesh”

Now I understand this interpretation is very very unknown to the masses, but it is a VALID interpretation and has an accurate scriptural basis for it being a source of faith for zoophile Jews, Christians, and Muslims.

Now lastly, I feel you Christian zoophiles out there. Please ponder and meditate on these other things that were involved with Adam then.
Also, consider that the tree of knowledge had already been created by the time this event with Adams bestiality occurred, which means he had the framework to rebel, which had free will. I want you to ponder the consideration to if Adam DID say that the animals were his Ezer Kenegdo? What if Adam DID choose the beasts of the field? It would NOT have been a sin to choose the beasts at that time. Sin didn’t exist. Don’t you feel you would like the same choice?

The LORD did not see bestiality as a sin in Adam’s case, nor was it prohibited by law until Moses received the Levitical law from the LORD. So why was bestiality prohibited for the nation of Israel? Perhaps it was likely to do with false worship and the physical uncleanness/health concerns it may have caused. On the other hand, maybe it was due to the nation’s population and why polygamy was allowed during Israel’s time.

Is the Levitical law applicable to Christians? Or did christ supersede the law and returned us back to what it was like in Adam's time? Like the children of God under grace? You must ask the right questions now that you have a snippet of truth. I do believe that the LORD is not against bestiality and never was for the reasons people believe. 

==Animals are Gods Gifts==
Bestiality might have been a tool to teach Adam or perhaps honestly give Adam the free choice of sexual partners or his help meet. Judaeo-Christian values, when understood, will accept the bible for what it says, and the persecution of zoophiles is incredibly unfounded in the name of those religions. It is also greatly un-founded that zoophile Christians be persecuted by fellow Christians when they choose to lay down with the same animals the LORD GOD brought forth to Adam. The same beasts that the LORD deemed worthy for Adam.

So, where does this leave us? What practical use is this for the morality of zoophile Christians? And I believe I could not fully answer that beyond the example Adam set for zoo Christians.

# Adam laid with many animals and married none.
# Adam did not have children until after the fall of mankind.
# Adam’s purpose was to tend to the garden and animals.

My loose interpretation would be a zoo Christian is not obligated to marry animals. One may have as many animal partners as he wishes so long as one can tend them as Adam did. One should attempt to aid the Christian congregation as one is able. However, I cannot tell you where your faith and moral choices should rest.

==References==
* ''Christian Apologetics and Zoophilia.'' By [mailto:libbypaw@protonmail.com Libbypaw]