Can we excuse Leviticus?

[marco]

Having watched a film, based on fact, where a young gay man was brutally beaten to death I turned to the enlightenment of Leviticus 20:13.


"If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their blood guiltiness is upon them."

This is apparently God speaking, the architect of universal harmony. Can this verse ever be justified? Apparently so. I learned that if the entire world resorted to homosexuality then Jesus would not have been able to come and redeem mankind. When Jesus did come, the law passed into disuse.

If the entire world had decided to be celibate, that too would have impeded Christ's arrival, so celibacy should also be an abomination. Maybe it is in some quarters though Paul didn't seem to think so.

Do we: Ignore Leviticus and any other bits of the Bible that seem brutal?
Do we say the old law is no longer needed?
Do we say that if a book inspires such hate, it is a bad book?

[marco]

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

Give a man an excuse and you give him a gun. We are blissfully free, for the most part, of the groups that protest at funerals with placards saying God made AIDS and God hates homosexuals.

In my childhood attendance at church I never once heard the lyrical words from Leviticus, probably because common sense planned the Sunday homily. Jesus said effectively that if we find bad stuff in a book it's a bad book. So why ignore his advice?

[Divine Insight]

Do we: Ignore Leviticus and any other bits of the Bible that seem brutal?

Only if we are prepared to toss out the entire theology. It makes no sense to retain a theology that was originally based on such obvious garbage.

Do we say the old law is no longer needed?

Nope,can't to that. Can't have a God who changes his mind that violates one of the foundational principles of this theology. Besides, even the Christian NT has Jesus decreeing that he did not come to change the laws and that no one jot or tittle of the law shall pass until heaven and earth pass.

So there's no way to salvage this ancient brutal religious mythology even if we wanted to.

Do we say that if a book inspires such hate, it is a bad book?

I do. I don't think the book should be banned. But it most certainly should be officially retired with all other words of fiction.

No one is going to use Zeus as justification for hating on other people. But they DO use Jesus Christ and/or Yahweh, Jehovah, Allah, to do precisely that. So the sooner this hateful dogma is buried in the halls of fiction alongside Greek Mythology the better of human civilization will be.

There's no excuse for supporting Gods that are clearly filled to the brim with jealousy and hatred. We renounce humans who exhibit such bad characteristics. Why worship those nasty traits in a God? It's inexcusable and indefensible.

[Willum]

Well Judaists, say "That only applies to Levite-Jews," the implication being that their kind of Judaism is better than Levitical.

If Judaists can excuse it this way, I am sure Christians can say "that is Old Testament," (somehow ignoring that the entire foundation of their religion is OT).

Every Abrahamist, it seems is in the game of apologizing for the bits of the Bible they find inexcusable.

When I was a Christian, I was a Bible literalist.
And you know what? it was hard, but I was an inhuman monster who believed, MADE MYSELF believe hideous things, because God said so. It was hard believing different people had different rights. That some did not deserve life, even.

It is interesting to me, that when those same laws are turned on Jews and Christians, those laws become unfair or ignorable. Suddenly THEY shouldn't be killed for the same things they slaughtered others for...

Who was I to say Leviticus was wrong? It was paramount to saying God was wrong. Indeed, the truth often doesn't make sense.
To children.

[Elijah John]

Do we: Ignore Leviticus and any other bits of the Bible that seem brutal?
Do we say the old law is no longer needed?
Do we say that if a book inspires such hate, it is a bad book?

We ignore a lot of Leviticus. We say," the Bible as a whole is a mix of Divine enlightenment and primitive, sometimes barbaric human bias". It is contaminated by that bias.

Whether modern Christians and Jews admit it or not, they do in effect cherry pick the Bible, and at the very least ignore the nasty parts. (except for those hateful Westboro Baptist Church types, a very small and extreme minority).

That is why you never hear hymns based on the likes of Leviticus, etc.

[Divine Insight]

We ignore a lot of Leviticus. We say," the Bible as a whole is a mix of Divine enlightenment and primitive, sometimes barbaric human bias". It is contaminated by that bias.

Whether modern Christians and Jews admit it or not, they do in effect cherry pick the Bible, and at the very least ignore the nasty parts. (except for those hateful Westboro Baptist Church types, a very small and extreme minority).

But when you do this how can you not recognize that you are doing nothing more than creating your own ideal God? Instead of accepting the Bible as a basis for morality what you are actually doing is pushing your moral values onto the Bible by rejecting any parts of it that you don't like.

Also as a cultural theology it makes no sense to claim to have a religion based on a dogma that you cherry pick from. If a culture is going to cherry pick from dogma why not do it officially and toss the parts you don't like right out entirely? Why keep them in the so-called "Holy Book" if they have been rejected as being unholy?

So these kinds of apologies simply don't hold water. You (generic you) can't go around proclaiming the Bible to be the basis of your theology whilst simultaneously proclaiming that half of it is contaminated with human barbarism.

I mean theists can and do take this position. But the idea that they actually expect anyone to buy into it is the absurdity.

If a theist rejects all the hatred and ignorance in the Bible as not having come from God then guess what? They have just agreed with and confirmed my position on this theology.

Keep in mind that my position is, and has always been: "The Bible cannot be the directives and opinions of a God as it is written verbatim".

Any theists who claim that half the Bible is barbaric human nonsense have just agreed with my theological position.

[JehovahsWitness]

Do we: Ignore Leviticus and any other bits of the Bible that seem brutal?
Do we say the old law is no longer needed?
Do we say that if a book inspires such hate, it is a bad book?

None of the above: we accept the bible as the word of God and accept God's right to say what behaviours are or are not acceptable.




JW



RELATED POSTS

Did the Apostle Paul only refer to male temple prostitution?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 197#756197

Is the bible's condenmation of homosexual acts unjust?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 621#926621

Did David and Jonathan have a sexual relationship?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 603#710603

[SallyF]

We simply ignore the bits we don't like.

We claim they no longer apply.

We call them "figurative".

We invent all manner of excuses.

But we NEVER admit we have ZERO evidence that ANY version of "God" had anything whatsoever to do with so much as a word of "scripture"

[Divine Insight]

None of the above: we accept the bible as the word of God and accept God's right to say what behaviours are or are not acceptable.

So then you agree that homosexuals should be put to death as per your God's commands?

Do JW's support the death penalty for homosexuals?

And if not, then how can you claim to have accepted the Bible as the "Word of God"?

[Zzyzx]

.

Do JW's support the death penalty for homosexuals?

And if not, then how can you claim to have accepted the Bible as the "Word of God"?

Excellent questions for ANY Christian denomination that claims the Bible to be 'the word of god'.

It seems as though most ignore 'the word of god' when convenient.