Counterarguments to Leviticus 20:13

[Jaguar]

I seem to recall that there was a thread on this a while ago, but I searched for it and couldn't find it.

I'm in a class on the Bible which includes a pair of homophobes who love bringing the infamous passage up. I'd like to be armed with a few counterarguments (from the Bible, otherwise the teacher probably will just break up the discussion and that will be no fun.)

If anyone has good counterarguments from the Bible, or knows where the old thread is, their help would be appreciated.

MrFun, I'm looking to you as the board's gay Christian to help me out.

[Verto]

Lev. 20:13

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

[Verto]

I am interested in hearing the counterarguments for this as well, since to me the passage seems pretty cut and dry.

[monkspider]

The counterarguements have already been made many times. I'm too tired to post them.

[Ben Kenobi]

Jaguar Warrior:

I can help, but it depends on what type of case you are trying to make.

What are your foes saying about Lev 20:13

What exactly do you want to say?

[DRoseDARs]

MS, post them. That's the point of this thread: JW needs them to counter the homophobes in the class.

[The Templar]

Yeah, how about we don't put to death people who curse their parents anymore (20:9), we don't execute men who sleep with their father's wife anymore (20:11) - we put them on Jerry Springer, we don't stone fortune tellers to death (20:27), we don't exile people for haveing sex during menstration (20:18), and so on and so on ...

In fact, any of those penalties would be considered immoral today. Leviticus is an ancient legal code - and should be treated as such ... it has no relevance today except to blockheads who read the Bible as the literal word o' God.

[Verto]

The main argument would be that the Law of Moses(under which the Israelites lived) was fulfilled with the coming of the Messiah.

However, it could be argued that homosexuality was still forbidden in the New Testament.

EDIT: Also, not all things mentioned in the Old Testament suddenly became 'obsolete', for lack of a better word, with the coming of Christ, such as the Ten Commandments.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Verto
I am interested in hearing the counterarguments for this as well, since to me the passage seems pretty cut and dry.

So does 15:14. When is the last time you offered up turtledoves as a holocaust?

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Verto
The main argument would be that the Law of Moses(under which the Israelites lived) was fulfilled with the coming of the Messiah.

However, it could be argued that homosexuality was still forbidden in the New Testament.

Well, argue it then. Anything at all could be argued ...
If the Messiah fulfills the law, then homosexuality is fine.

[Verto]

Originally posted by The Templar


So does 15:14. When is the last time you offered up turtledoves as a holocaust?

See above.

[Ben Kenobi]

Also, not all things mentioned in the Old Testament suddenly became 'obsolete', for lack of a better word, with the coming of Christ, such as the Ten Commandments.

Why not use the words of Christ? He has come to fulfill the law. The Old Testament is fulfilled in the New.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Verto
EDIT: Also, not all things mentioned in the Old Testament suddenly became 'obsolete', for lack of a better word, with the coming of Christ, such as the Ten Commandments.

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

[MRT144]

im so close to just wiping my ass with the bible and selling it as art

[Verto]

Romans 1:24-end of chapter or so.

1 Corinthians 6:9

Timothy 1:10

Jude 1:7