Answering this mockery?: Same sex agenda & mocking the OT

Discuss topics raised by callers on the radio program
Post Reply
jpat1975
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 10:14 am

Answering this mockery?: Same sex agenda & mocking the OT

Post by jpat1975 » Sun Apr 24, 2016 9:21 am

Getting tired of seeing garbage like this letter being circulated on social media.

Assuming for moment that someone wanted to reply to this for an open-minded relative... how would a Christian refute and expose this particular example?

This letter basically is saying that we should disregard God's clear disapproval of certain same sex issues, because of all this other stuff being mocked here...
On her radio show, Dr. Laura 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 response is an open letter to Dr. Schlesinger, written by a US man, and posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as quite 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 neighboring 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 uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

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 neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I 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, 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'm confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your adoring fan,

James M. Kauffman,

Ed.D. Professor Emeritus,

Dept. Of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia

P.S. (It would be a damn shame if we couldn't own a Canadian.)

jpat1975
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 10:14 am

Re: Answering this mockery?: Same sex agenda & mocking the O

Post by jpat1975 » Sun Apr 24, 2016 9:33 am

I was reading this morning about some other mockers and hypocrites. In particular , the Sadduses , who did not believe in the ressurrection yet were asking a really complex hypothetical question about a wife who was at different times married to seven husbands.

The fact that this particular group was questioning something they did not even believe in exposed them as mockers without any serious interest in the truth.

How did Jesus handle this? Can His approach be applied to the example I quoted in my previous post?

Jesus did not give them a direct answer nor was He tripped up by their complex question. He rather turned the tables in them by stumping them with a totally different question - yet still on the same general subject of eternal matters.

No doubt this same approach can be adopted in the case of modern day mockers and hypocrites who have no genuine interest in the truth.

What might Jesus have said were He posed this letter today? What would you say? Would you consider your answer to be satisfactory or a cop-out? Should one remain silent?

jpat1975
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 10:14 am

Re: Answering this mockery?: Same sex agenda & mocking the O

Post by jpat1975 » Sun Apr 24, 2016 10:47 am

This seems to address a lot of the original post quoted letter
...Objections Answered
1) If you want to say homosexuality is wrong based on the O.T. laws, then you must still uphold all of the laws in Leviticus and Deuteronomy.

The Old Testament laws are categorized in three groups: the civil, the priestly, and the moral. The civil laws must be understood in the context of a theocracy. Though the Jewish nation in the Old Testament was often headed by a king, it was a theocratic system with the Scriptures as a guide to the nation. Those laws that fall under this category are not applicable today because we are not under a theocracy.

The priestly laws dealing with the Levitical and Aaronic priesthoods were representative of the future and true High Priest, Jesus, who offered Himself as a sacrifice on the cross. Since Jesus fulfilled the priestly laws, they are no longer necessary to be followed and are not applicable now.

The moral laws, on the other hand, are not abolished because the moral laws are based upon the character of God. Since God's holy character does not change, the moral laws do not change either. Therefore, the moral laws are still in effect.

In the New Testament we do not see a reestablishment of the civil or priestly laws, but we do see a continuation of the moral law. This is why we see New Testament condemnation of homosexuality as a sin although not with the associated death penalty. ...( from https://carm.org/christianity-and-homosexuality )

Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: Answering this mockery?: Same sex agenda & mocking the O

Post by Singalphile » Sun Apr 24, 2016 10:52 am

That goes way back, at least to 2000 (source).

I'm sure you'll find plenty of useful Christian commentary about the role of the OT, such as in jpat1975's link, but I don't think that mockers of that sort will make any effort to understand it.

Same-sex sexual relations/acts - along with envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness, gossiping, slander, hatred of God, insolence, haughtiness, boasting, disobedience to parents, etc. - are condemned by Paul in Romans 1, at least, not just the OT. (It's helpful to google up claims to the contrary - here or here - to see their weakness.)
Romans 1-2

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world,[g] in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God's righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

2 Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things. 2 We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who practice such things. 3 Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? 5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed.

6 He will render to each one according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are self-seeking[a] and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. 11 For God shows no partiality.
That's a lot to quote, and I know you all know it, but it's helpful in this discussion, I think.
Last edited by Singalphile on Sun Apr 24, 2016 5:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

User avatar
morbo3000
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 9:05 pm
Location: Washington State
Contact:

Re: Answering this mockery?: Same sex agenda & mocking the O

Post by morbo3000 » Sun Apr 24, 2016 2:12 pm

The author was using satire. Jesus did the same thing sometimes to call out the pharasies for following the letter of the law but missing the spirit. I'm not equating the two, just pointing out that satire is not itself un-christian. Only when you feel you are falsely the target.

I think the solution to this for Christians is to not use the leviticus passage. The discrimination between ceremonial law and moral law is way too nuanced for an outsider to understand. And it's not the Christian message anyway. Better to focus on Paul.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
When you are a Bear of Very Little Brain, and you Think of Things, you find sometimes that a Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it.
JeffreyLong.net
Jesusna.me
@30thirteen

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Answering this mockery?: Same sex agenda & mocking the O

Post by Paidion » Sun Apr 24, 2016 4:45 pm

Yes, I know it's satire, but it's also more than satire. We must genuinely deal with the Mosaic laws which were referenced, if we believe that these laws were God's word to Moses.

It is not necessary to go to the law of Moses, to justify the position that homosexuality is wrong. As Singalphile pointed out (with references), Paul clearly expressed that practising homosexuality is morally wrong.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
morbo3000
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 9:05 pm
Location: Washington State
Contact:

Re: Answering this mockery?: Same sex agenda & mocking the O

Post by morbo3000 » Sun Apr 24, 2016 7:11 pm

@paidon Agreed. She affirmed her position based on Leviticus because she was Jewish. I think the satire he answered was appropriate to someone who argues from that text.

I'm reminded of Rachel Held Evans's book "a year of living biblical womanhood." She demonstrated by imitating literal commands, how drawing a straight line from an ancient semetic penal code to the 21st century has lots of problems. Almost always violations of basic human rights.

Christians arent limited to Leviticus. As you say, Paul is a much better source for the traditionalist view. Because you don't wind up with the blatant anachronism of Leviticus.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
When you are a Bear of Very Little Brain, and you Think of Things, you find sometimes that a Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it.
JeffreyLong.net
Jesusna.me
@30thirteen

crgfstr1
Posts: 140
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:55 am
Location: Santa Cruz, CA

Re: Answering this mockery?: Same sex agenda & mocking the O

Post by crgfstr1 » Mon Apr 25, 2016 7:25 am

I think there are a lot of good thoughts and points made here. Maybe there is one more approach to consider on this topic. I haven't thought it through thoroughly yet but here is my thinking thus far.

According to the subject this post was tied to a same sex agenda. I think when we here the phrase "Gay Pride" a Christian should at first and foremost object to the term pride. Pride is the root of all contention and conflict. Christ taught us to be humble by example. All forms of sexual immorality are a judgement from God on the society itself that has turned from Him. This will not go away until we loose our pride and turn to God. In fact it is the sin of pride that leads us further and further into depravity. The sins themselves are in a sense the symptom of the pride and not humbling ourselves and returning to God. We can in no way cure ourselves of our sins. Only God can do this. When we or our society is living in sin we are to humble ourselves and seek a closer relationship with God.

We are to be humbled by our sins not proud of them. We aren't even to be proud of our good works for they are a gift from God. How much more are we to not be proud of our being turned over to temptation by God and falling into it. We are being chastened to return to him not run further away. "Blessed are the poor in spirit." is where the sermon on the mount begins. So too it is where we are to begin to repair our relationship with God.

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: Answering this mockery?: Same sex agenda & mocking the O

Post by steve » Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:25 am

I posted an answer to this widely-circulated internet piece twelve years ago, on our original forum. You can find those responses here:
http://www.wvss.com/forumc/viewtopic.ph ... a06d9ec293

Post Reply

Return to “Radio Program Topics”