You may have seen this before. It's worth another read. Thanks to Debs for sending it to me. Thanks to Torontomike for being my techie guru.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On her radio show, Dr. Laura Schlesinger (a popular conservative radio
talk show host in the USA) said that homosexuality is an abomination
according to the Bible Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under
any circumstance. The following response is an open letter to Dr.
Laura, penned by James M. Kauffman, Ed. D. 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 clearly states it to be an abomination... end of
debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other
elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.
1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and
female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A
friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not
Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
2. I 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. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in
her period of menstrual unseemliness - Lev. 15: 19-24. The problem is
how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.
4. 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 neighbours.
They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
5. I have a neighbour 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, or should I ask the police to do it?
6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than
homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees'
of abomination?
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. I 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 and thus enjoy
considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can
help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
People Who Live In Glass Houses and The Throwing Stones Scenario
No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://www.thehodgeblog.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/75
Brilliant.....Thanks for sharing.
While mildly amusing - proof once again that the idea of "God" is a disturbing and imitable irony. The references to Leviticus are proof positive. Makin' shit up to scare the populous...shameful!
Rick,
Never watched much of "West Wing", but came up with this re Dr. Laura. Don't know which one came first................but it really doesn't matter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eD52OlkKfNs
Anyone can take certain passages of the Bible and distort them in a manner that suits them as posted here. The Old Testament is a reference to life as it was BEFORE the birth of Christ and before he died for our sins. The New Testament relates to life AFTER Christ's resurrection. So really, the witty reply has no merit in the true meaning of how it was written. I sure wouldn't want to live as an atheist and get to the end of life and realize that there is a God. That's what you call a "bad day"!
But Dave.....If someone came forward today and said they saw a man walk on water, part an ocean, turn water into wine, and many other outrageous things from the bible..take your pick...they would be committed to an insane asylym!
...along with anyone who believed him. It would be immediately deemed a cult.
Any religion is a "cult". Brain washing from cradle to grave.
Well this is definitely an interesting piece...
Let me just point out that people don't naturally like rules, in fact they naturally are opposed to rule and law. That is why you don't like it when someone in authority tells you what to do. Naturally, instinctively we resent things people tell us to do. I am reminded of this human nature when I read this and observe the absolute mockery of law that this is. It is written with complete ignorance of what the Bible actually says and the principles that the Bible teaches. Even in grade 11 English you were taught not to take a quotation out of context. We both know that you can split a sentence and citing only half of it completely twists what the author intended. The reason they teach this in English is because, the sources you use are not supposed to be manipulated, but are supposed to align with whatever point your paper is making. I know that is obvious but the same thing should apply here, and yet it doesn't.
All these verses from Leviticus are not cut in the sense that only half of them is used in the argument. They are however cut from the context that the Bible places them in. If you were to read the whole Bible, you would realize that this book of Leviticus is outlining what is called Old Testament Law. This Law was given specifically for the people of Israel to follow. God giving this Law is commonly called the Mosaic Covenant (Moses received the Law for the people). This covenant stood as the people entered the land God had promised the descendants of Abraham, the land of Canaan (present day Israel).
Romans 7:7-8 says referring to Old Testament Mosaic Law, “What shall we say, then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! Indeed I would not have known what sin was except through the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, "Do not covet." But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of covetous desire. FOR APART FROM LAW, SIN IS DEAD” (emphasis added). So we see that the law was actually just the manner in which people could understand their own sinfulness. If it wasn't for the rule that said it was wrong, it wouldn't be wrong.
Now these laws themselves are no longer in effect. This ultimately is the reason that these verses are completely out of context. It would be unreasonable to stone and burn people right left and centre, and we don't do it. In Jesus death comes the necessity of faith. Acts 10:43 says, that “All the prophets testify about Him [Jesus] that everyone who believes in Him [Jesus] receives forgiveness of sins through His [Jesus'] name.” Belief and faith are synonymous and it is clear forgiveness now comes through faith. Galatians 3:25 says, “Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.”
Hebrews 8:6 states that, “...the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises.” These promises that are better are the ones that state that all are saved through faith. These promises are better because they had been promised since the time of the Mosaic Covenant, not that God was shafting the people before, but that He was pointing to the need of sinners and the mercy He did show through Jesus.
Now under Jesus' New Covenant of blood, Galatians 3:10 sums up where things are at. “All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law."” They are cursed because it is absolutely impossible to follow every letter of the Old Law. This very fact was pointing to the need that everyone has for Christ Jesus. In Him we have freedom from all the Laws that God desired and we have no way of keeping. Now does not mean that we are to live however we please. The New Testament is full of truth regarding how to live. But now as 1 Peter 4:11 says, “...do it with the strength God provides.” So the rules that do existed, are not ever expected to be fulfilled on our own strength. It is absolutely impossible to do everything God requires.
Now secondly, this Mosaic Law maintains the principles of the Bible. It is not like we currently need to stone people to death, but in those times it identified, and still does, the severity with which God looks on sin. The Law was designed, like is stated above, to demonstrate the need of the people.
So this article, is taking snippets of truth and so twisting them, that there is really no argument against the Bible at all. If I cut random sentences out of the newspaper and put them together in such a way that it was funny. Ultimately the sentences would not be taken as direct fact, because they would not be in context. That would just be a given. It is exactly the same thing here. The fact that people naturally are opposed to the Bible, speaks to the fact that they know deep deep down, that it has truth, but they have decided they do not want any part in it.