Dr. Laura and Leviticus

Status
Not open for further replies.
V

vindicator

Rear Admiral
I was sent this by a friend and this will gaurunteed get me in trouble but I just have to share it

Subject: According to the Bible ...........

Dr. Laura Schlessinger is a US radio personality who
dispenses advice to people who call in to her radio
show.
Recently, she said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew,
homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus
18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance.
The following is an open letter to Dr. Laura penned by
a US resident and posted on the Internet. It's funny,
as well as informative:

Dear Dr. Laura:
Thank you for doing so much to educate people
regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from
your
show, and try to share that knowledge with as many
people as I can. When someone tries to defend the
homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind
them that Leviticus 18:22 dearly states it to be an
abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding
some of the other specific laws and how to follow
them.

1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I
know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord. (Lev.
1:9) The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor
is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

2. 1 would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as
sanctioned in Exodus 21:7.
In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair
price for her'?

3. 1 know that I am allowed no contact with a woman
while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness,
(Lev. 15:19-24)
The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking,
but most women take offense.

4. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves,
both male and female, provided they are purchased from
neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that
this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you
clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

5. 1 have a neighbor who insists on working on the
Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put
to death.
Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating
shellfish is an abomination (Lev. I 1: 1 0), it is a
lesser abomination than homosexuality.
I don't agree. Can you settle this?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar
of God if I have a defect in my sight.
I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my
vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room
here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed,
including the hair around their temples, even though
this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27.
How should they die?

9. 1 know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a
dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play
football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by
planting two different crops in the same field, as
does
his wife by wearing garments made of two different
kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also
tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really
necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the
whole town together to stone them? (Lev. 24:10-16)
Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private
family affair like we do with people who sleep with
their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I
am confident you can help. Thank you again for
reminding us that God's word is eternal and
unchanging.
 
I'm no Bible-guy, but isn't punishing people for their supposed sins VariableDeity's job? More than half of these don't make sense simply because they're asking "should I punish so and so".
 
My NIV is in storage but I seem to remember the phrase "should be put to death" a lot, with little certainty who on a case-by-case. Maybe there's a specific section on God-sanctioned smiting?
 
I know that letter was primarily tongue-in-cheek, but to clear up any possible confusion on the part of an innocent passer-by to this thread, here's something that wasn't mentioned.

With a few minor exceptions, most of the stuff mentioned in the old testament as 'unclean' or not-to-be-done was reversed in the new testament under the 'new covenant'. For instance, there's an account where Peter has a vision in which the Lord instructs him to eat some unclean animals, and declares them cleansed. While this was also a message that Peter should go preach to the gentiles (read the story to get the full picture), it also served to let us know that we can now cook and eat our shellfish and pork, thank you.

The modern day church (so far as I know) doesn't condone slavery. Homosexuality is still considered an abomination (even though we aren't supposed to *condemn* someone for their sins, but rather confront and *encourage* them in love and patience). It's still considered wickedness to nail a close relative, or to get it on with someone you aren't married to. As for sacrifices, Christ was/is the *ultimate* sacrifice, cleansing sins instead of covering them up. Thus, no more need for sacrifices.

I don't generally like to dive into my religious beliefs in this community (considering how popular my smoking/drinking/fornicating policy has made me, even though I don't impose it on others), but, heck, I'm just in the mood to dive some. Enjoy.
 
considering how popular my smoking/drinking/fornicating policy has made me, even though I don't impose it on others
Click to expand...

I, at the very least, have some degree of respect for you with regards to this.
 
Yeah... better to have someone who admits he's imperfect than someone who acts "holier than thou."
 
Yeah, that letter to Dr. L. has been posted before here in the CZ.
Sardonic as all getout, but it conveniently sidesteps the *specific* issue that Dr. L brought up...

overmortal said:
...With a few minor exceptions, most of the stuff mentioned in the old testament as 'unclean' or not-to-be-done was reversed in the new testament under the 'new covenant'. ...

...Homosexuality is still considered an abomination... It's still considered wickedness to nail a close relative, or to get it on with someone you aren't married to...
Click to expand...
You are correct; much of what was panned in the OT was indeed eclipsed by the teachings of the gospel (like the Peter example you gave). However, it is noteworthy that the one subject area where the teachings of the OT still stand and haven't been "rescinded" by the gospel message is the various prohibitions against sexual sin. AFAIK, pretty much all those prohibitions still apply. There are several citations in the NT (by Paul, in particular, though there are some from others) that decry homosexual conduct.

t.c. cgi said:
Yeah... better to have someone who admits he's imperfect than someone who acts "holier than thou."
Click to expand...

Chernikov said:
Oh, the irony of that name....
Click to expand...
I hope them references weren't aimed at me, cuz if they were, y'all need to go back & do a sampling of my posts on the topic:

I've made no bones about the fact that I am every bit as much an imperfect sinner as anyone else on the planet. After all, if I wasn't, I would have no need of salvation and Christ, and I certainly wouldn't go around "preaching" the gospel to folks as I do.

Fact is, if God gave it to me to change some of the "rights & wrongs" laid out in Scripture, I'd be sorely tempted to do so in the sexual arena specifically. I don't particularly like the idea of having to remain celibate until/unless I marry. However, the truth of God stands, and my sole duty is to obey (So far, so good, BHG.). In any event, I gladly bow to the wisdom of the One who is greater than all.

Would that y'all would do the same, but that's your call...
 
Preacher said:
I hope them references weren't aimed at me.
Click to expand...

Mine was actually targeted at some of the locals I know. There is a certain tendency for some (my father included) to brow beat all non-believes into submission. I've never found that as a wise way to reach out to others. These are the kind who will readily treat anyone like meat in need of a blessing, and I'm willing to bet few people like that kind of treatment...
 
t.c.cgi said:
Mine was actually targeted at some of the locals I know. There is a certain tendency for some (my father included) to brow beat all non-believes into submission. I've never found that as a wise way to reach out to others... I'm willing to bet few people like that kind of treatment...
Click to expand...
Thx 4 the clarification.
I know whatcha mean about that - it was that same kinda people (long on enthusiasm, but short on tact/sensitivity) that turned me off to Christianity for the longest time. It wasn't till I met some more "quiet Christians" (as I called 'em) that I began to wonder what it was they had that I didn't have...
 
so if the old testament doesnt count anymore why do people qoute it when it suits their needs and then say but oh wait it only means this now

Preacher the point that was to be made is that if you want to say the bible is complete and correct then you must repeat must follow all the Laws in that book you cant pick and choose what is right and wrong and to answer an ealier post by LOAF in the old testement Jews were to eradicate anything unclean people animals Idols anytning that would allow sin to posion god's "people"

-Rance-
 
vindicator said:
so if the old testament doesnt count anymore...

...the point that was to be made is that if you want to say the bible is complete and correct then you must ...follow all the Laws in that book you cant pick and choose
...and...in the old testement Jews were to eradicate anything unclean people animals Idols anytning that would allow sin to posion god's "people"

-Rance-
Click to expand...

Um, I didn't hear anyone say that the OT "didn't count"...
What overmortal said was "most of the stuff mentioned in the old testament as 'unclean' or not-to-be-done was reversed in the new testament". Note the qualifiers "most of" and "unclean or not to be done". That only comprises a small amount of the text of the OT & the principles found therein. In short, that's a far cry from saying let's throw the whole OT out (which is what you're implying).

If you read thru the NT, you'll see that the "old things" which no longer apply in the NT era are, in the main, specifically mentioned. As such, the NT *itself* gives you the guidelines as to what is no longer "kosher" (pun fully intended). So, what folks are quoting is, for the most part, the stuff that the NT specifically cites, rather than their *own* ideas that "suit them".

The point to be made, rather, is that we follow what the NT sez as to what OT prohibitions & such no longer apply. As has been wisely said, the best guide to interpreting the Bible...is the Bible itself. As to the Jews eradicating unclean things from among them: Their ultimate failure to do so in the conquest of the Promised Land is precisely what led them to, in the end, go into exile in the last half-millennium or so BC. This also is specifically mentioned in no less than the OT itself. The writings of the prophets & others (Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezra, Nehemiah, for example) were replete with warnings/laments about this.
 
That is true but the fact that dr. laura protest herself as an orthodox Jew,

makes those laws apply to her as that is the part of the bible is the one the jews follow.
In regaurds to claims the NT makes changes to these laws is true but how much is god and how much of our *bible" has been perverted by spinoff churches?
who broke away from the main body. you see christians of today are not the christians of yester year. their laws have been changed and changed and changed to suit the needs of whomever was in power at the time.
namely henry the 8th breaks off from the catholic church because he wishes to divorce his wife. the other spin offs has been over other disagreements right or wrong so I say that the bible can be quoted as you see fit but again it has to be whole and complete not pick and choose what was true then and true now because that just makes you look like youre desiging your own morality that suits you BTW in reading spme of the jesus texts he never condems slavery he tells the people that if they are in bondage to be loyal and serve their masters so technicly I can own a slave because Jesus never attacks slavery there for fighting the civil war was pointless because Jesus never said it was bad but then never said it was good so is he indifferent?

-Rance-
 
I wonder if in the wing commander era they would be nice and give gay people a system of planets where all of our kind could love and be all happy and stuff without stupid people around to tell us we are second class and undeserving of eqaul rights and stuff
and oh then we could have a space station the Las Gaygas where we could have fly through marriges

lol

-Rance-
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top