Counterarguments to Leviticus 20:13

[Urban Ranger]

@ loin

[Ben Kenobi]

Old are necessarily discarded.

Verto:

I can pull the verses... you can find them online.

Matthew 5;17-18

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

What's the decision procedure for determining which is which - or is it all just ad hoc?

Again, Verto is very kind... The sections of the sacrificial system are not needed because Christ is the sacrifice for one and for all, the Passover Lamb without blemish.

Most of the Levitical prescriptions do not apply because the system is no longer in place, the apportionments to the Levites, divisions among the tribes of Israel etc.

However, the laws concerning right moral conduct, still apply, Christ himself makes use of Deuteronomy to enforce his points. He is not replacing the code, so much as improving the code.

Secondly, you have a division of church and state implied in Christ, as the Christians are told to respect civil authorities, that they are to obey them, so long as the autorities do not violate their religious precepts.

Thus, civil authories now have the right to ajudicate disputes between believers and non-believers, as well as to enforce punishments. Thus, you do not have the punishments in Leviticus applicable today.

[Sava]

As I understand it, women were treated as property back then. A woman's status was not as worthy as a man's. For a man to have sex with another man (if that is what this is even talking about), that might mean that the man on the receiving end would be demeaned and thought of as a woman... less worthy... so perhaps this isn't about a sexual romp, as it is about the status of a man. Perhaps only woman get the cawk, because they are less worthy.

btw, if anyone who lets a two thousand year old book think for them is a moron... okay, I got that trolling out of my system

this passage also says nothing about hot lezbo action... maybe god likes that kind of pr0n

[Ben Kenobi]

Templar:

Why don't you actually cite the passages....

I'd give your post much more respect. Does the book burn or something?

Romans 1:24-8

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

While not an endorsement of homosexuality, the section is about Roman idolotry - the people were given over to their lust - i.e. made animal-like because they worshipped animal-like idols.

No. Paul is laying out the justification for God's wrath upon Mankind. He starts with the Gentiles, describing the depths of their sins, in order to shame the Gentiles, and instill a desire for repentence.

Among those sins is homosexual acts as well as lust, the one leading to the other.

1 Corinthians 6:9

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders

Great, so a blow job from a woman will exclude a Christian male from heaven. Again, not specific to homosexuality.

Sorry. Pretty clear here that homosexual offenders are included in with all the other forms of wickedness.

Timothy 1:9-10

We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers--and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine

This also contradicts your earlier claim that Paul affirms slavery. I assume Verto places 'perverts' as homosexuals.


Jude 1:7

In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.

Condemns "promiscuity and unnatural vice" - vague and likely applies to straights as well."

No. Not vague.

And my best argument - these are all Paulist texts. Paul also condones slavery and creates a divine right of kings. Real moral guy that Paul.

Dude. Jude is not written by Paul.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Again, Verto is very kind... The sections of the sacrificial system are not needed because Christ is the sacrifice for one and for all, the Passover Lamb without blemish.

Then what's the deal with the "not the smallest letter ... will by any means disappear from the Law" passage? Did Christ mean to say "not the smallest letter will change, except for a whole bunch of passages about slavery and misogyny and animal sacrifice and diet etc." or something? I mean, the cited passage seemed pretty straightforward to me, so I just don't understand why you quoted it and then went on to essentially say "Well, these parts of the law don't apply anymore, nevermind what Christ had to say on the matter."

[Sava]

btw, I don't even see why this crap needs to be in the argument over gays... it's rhetorical nonsense that is completely irrelevant to today's world.

[Ben Kenobi]

A woman's status was not as worthy as a man's.

Not a Christian view. Equality in value, diversity in function.

Genesis 1:27

So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Not a Christian view. Equality in value, diversity in function.

Genesis 1:27

So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

riiiggghhhtttttt.... are you totally daft, or are you joking?

how have women been treated in the christian world the past 2 thousand years? equality you say? HAH!

remember, women only got the right to vote within my grandfathers' lifetime in this country... and US was basically the forefront of freedom.

[joncha]

Originally posted by Sava
btw, I don't even see why this crap needs to be in the argument over gays... it's rhetorical nonsense that is completely irrelevant to today's world.

As long as people believe it, rightly or wrongly, it is very relevant to today's world.

If the shepherd-religions had never caught on and large groups of people in the West still believed in the Roman pantheon, then that set of rhetorical nonsense would be relevant too.

Just because you don't believe in Ben's (and others!) imaginary friend(s), it doesn't mean that you should dismiss the beliefs (and historical baggage) that come along with them.

jon.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Templar:

Why don't you actually cite the passages....

Laziness. I also note you have a different translation than me. (I've got the New American Bible.)

1 Corinthians 6:9

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders

Mine has 'sodomites' in place of 'homosexual offenders'. Hmm, the vulgate only has 'male prostitutes'.

In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.

Sodom's thing was raping strangers, wasn't it?

No. Not vague.

"Unnatural" is pretty damn vague.
(Besides, homosexuality occurs in all primates. Makes it natural right?)

[Ben Kenobi]

Well, these parts of the law don't apply anymore, nevermind what Christ had to say on the matter

Loin,

How does it make sense to apportion land to Levites? There are no Levites anymore.

As for the rest of the Jewish sacrificial system,

In this sense, Christ is the fulfillment of the Jewish sacrificial system. This gets quite deep into the atonement, that I rather blithely referred to as the 'Passover lamb without blemish.'

God desired sacrifice, as a means of temporary cleansing of sin. This, in the OT, took the place of animals, as you see in Leviticus, depended upon the type of sin, and the amount generally proportionate to the blessings bestowed by God. This was so that the poor did not face an unbearable burden. If you actually read the book, you begin to see the intricacies of the system.

The problem with the system, comes from the quality of the sacrifice. Animals could only serve as temporary atonement, because of their flaws. In order to permanently deal with sin, requires an entirely different approach.

In Christ coming to the world, to die, he became, as sinless, the sacrifice the animals were unable to give. As fully man, he experienced all the temptations of man, and thus could understand our plights. He could reach to us in his humanity, and lift us up through his divinity.

Christ, when he died, bore the entirety of human sinfulness, bore the punishment for sin, that would otherwise be visited by man. Thus, it became possible, for those who professed faith in Christ, to be forgiven for their sins, once and for all.

[Sava]

Genesis 2:18

The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him."

and most of Genesis 2:4-18 describes how god created man... and a garden for man... and now a helper for man... making the woman subordinate.

[Ben Kenobi]

I've got the New American Bible.

As usual, I'm getting everything from, http://bible.gospelcom.net/

With the NIV.

Sodom's thing was raping strangers, wasn't it?

Well, best to quote the passage.

Genesis 19:4-8

Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom-both young and old-surrounded the house. They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."

Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him and said, "No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing. Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof."



Do you think if the whole group wanted to have sex with the men, that the only homosexual activity they engaged in was rape?

[OzzyKP]

(Besides, homosexuality occurs in all primates. Makes it natural right?)

Well natural isn't necessarily right. Primates commit murder too.

Not that I'm saying homosexuality isn't right, or that its akin to murder at all. But the whole point of civlization, and thus religion is to get past our base, primative selves.

[Ben Kenobi]

24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

If two become one, how can one remain subordinate to the other?

Heck, look at Ephesians 5:28-9

"In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, "