Be a homo or eat a lobster - same thing!

[Pilgram]

I was recently sent the following. I know some of you will get a chuckle. Enjoy

On Dr. Laura Schlessinger's 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 response is an open letter to Dr. Laura, penned by a US resident, which was posted on the Internet.


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.

• 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?
• 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?
• 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.
• 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?
• 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?
• 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?
• 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?
• 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?
• I know from Lev. 11: 7-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
• 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.

[bananabrain]

dr. laura is a feckin' feathered eejit and a disgrace. it's people like that that make a lot of work for people like me.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[I, Brian]

The above letter has been going around the internet for years.

The strange thing is that in the past I've seen it gleefully presented by Atheists, who somehow see it as a rebuke to Christianity - even though Christianity makes no claim to follow the few hundred laws presented in Leviticus.

It therefore falls as a strange judgement of Judaism, which in itself has traditions to answer the issues raised.

[Pilgram]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

The above letter has been going around the internet for years.

The strange thing is that in the past I've seen it gleefully presented by Atheists, who somehow see it as a rebuke to Christianity - even though Christianity makes no claim to follow the few hundred laws presented in Leviticus.

It therefore falls as a strange judgement of Judaism, which in itself has traditions to answer the issues raised.

The reason I thought the letter would be of interest is precisely because Christians DO claim to follow SOME of the few hundred laws presented in Leviticicus. This is why I thought the letter very amusing and thought it belonged in the politics and society forum.

I don't believe the person who wrote it sincerely believed that Christians believe all of Leviticus. That's what makes it amusing. And that's what makes it a social issue (I thought).

When Christians condemn homosexuals they often refer to homosexuality as an abomination. (See Jerry Falwell, et al) This, of course, comes from the language of the old testament moreso than the new. I don't even know if the term "abomination" is used in the new testament. Anyone, a cite?

In any case, the reason I posted it was to invite feedback about the hypocrisy of not only Dr. Laura but of the many Christian pundits who like to condemn homos while insisting that they follow Christ's teachings. (maybe not the one about judge not so that you may not be judged). Homosexuality was what initiated the letter and homosexuality is certainly a social and political issue.

As far as it being a "strange judgement of Judaism" I can't speak. I will let anyone familiar with Leviticus decide whether we should award the death penalty for working on the Sabbath. And if those who claim to follow Leviticus do not stone such horrible Sabbath workers to death, neither will I.

[Vapour]

Well, it's simple. You shouldn't eat lobster because it's abomination. Same with pig.

http://www.godhatesshrimp.com/

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by Pilgram

The reason I thought the letter would be of interest is precisely because Christians DO claim to follow SOME of the few hundred laws presented in Leviticicus. This is why I thought the letter very amusing and thought it belonged in the politics and society forum.

I don't believe the person who wrote it sincerely believed that Christians believe all of Leviticus. That's what makes it amusing. And that's what makes it a social issue (I thought).

When Christians condemn homosexuals they often refer to homosexuality as an abomination. (See Jerry Falwell, et al) This, of course, comes from the language of the old testament moreso than the new. I don't even know if the term "abomination" is used in the new testament. Anyone, a cite?

In any case, the reason I posted it was to invite feedback about the hypocrisy of not only Dr. Laura but of the many Christian pundits who like to condemn homos while insisting that they follow Christ's teachings. (maybe not the one about judge not so that you may not be judged). Homosexuality was what initiated the letter and homosexuality is certainly a social and political issue.

As far as it being a "strange judgement of Judaism" I can't speak. I will let anyone familiar with Leviticus decide whether we should award the death penalty for working on the Sabbath. And if those who claim to follow Leviticus do not stone such horrible Sabbath workers to death, neither will I.

I quite agree with the strangeness of quoting OT laws when they are supposed to be fulfilled. As to Judaism - I think a lot has changed over the past few thousand years.

[QueryGuy]

Originally Posted by Pilgram

The reason I thought the letter would be of interest is precisely because Christians DO claim to follow SOME of the few hundred laws presented in Leviticicus. This is why I thought the letter very amusing and thought it belonged in the politics and society forum.

There is an overlap between the laws of the New and Old Testament. However, other than the Ten Commandments the laws of the OT have little bearing on "ideal" Christian behavior. The NT takes precedence over the OT, and in most cases, if a rule is not mentioned in the NT most Christians don't feel obligated to follow it. This can depend a lot on the denomination, though.

When Christians condemn homosexuals they often refer to homosexuality as an abomination. (See Jerry Falwell, et al) This, of course, comes from the language of the old testament moreso than the new. I don't even know if the term "abomination" is used in the new testament. Anyone, a cite?

The terminology is irrelevant. The NT explicitly forbids homosexual acts, which is a much more important guide to Christian philosophy than what is said in the OT.

QG

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by QueryGuy

The terminology is irrelevant. The NT explicitly forbids homosexual acts, which is a much more important guide to Christian philosophy than what is said in the OT.

I don't believe that Jesus is attributed to have commented on the issue - and Saul of Tarsus (St. Paul) makes comment on a lot of issues, such as women covering their faces, talking, and men having long hair.

[QueryGuy]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

I don't believe that Jesus is attributed to have commented on the issue - and Saul of Tarsus (St. Paul) makes comment on a lot of issues, such as women covering their faces, talking, and men having long hair.

That's true, but I have never heard of a single Christian denomination that looks at the gospels alone for guidance. The separation of the two portions of the NT is mainly just an academic exercise. In actual religious practice, it just doesn't work that way.

QG

[CSharp]

Pilgram wrote:

When Christians condemn homosexuals they often refer to homosexuality as an abomination. (See Jerry Falwell, et al) This, of course, comes from the language of the old testament moreso than the new. I don't even know if the term "abomination" is used in the new testament. Anyone, a cite?

Luke 16:15, King James Version, in context:


14 And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.
15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.
16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.

[suanni]

With regard to the initial post and the piece by Dr. Laura, although I feel it to be quite an amusing piece and was probably written to be derisory, all it seeks to do for those who have a brain in their head is to think. It is recognised that much of the laws in the holy books have to be taken in context with the laws of the land. And if a person wishes to pull fun out of the law, they ought to look about the (although still legal) forgotten laws of the land within their state/county or country.
Why is it that aetheists seek to mock those who believe? Is it out of insecurity?
Why is it that the Jewish faith has been the butt of so many jokes over the years?
And why is it that man feels the need to be derisory towards his fellow man?
And why is it a sin to eat lobster? (no, I'm not taking the mick!)

[Marsh]

Originally Posted by Pilgram

When Christians condemn homosexuals they often refer to homosexuality as an abomination. (See Jerry Falwell, et al) This, of course, comes from the language of the old testament moreso than the new. I don't even know if the term "abomination" is used in the new testament. Anyone, a cite?

When Christians condemn homosexuals, they themselves are abominations, having broken Jesus' commandment to love their neighbours as they love themselves. Anybody out there who wants to be condemned? Wouldn't you prefer mercy?

The message from both Jesus and his apostles is clear: hate the sin, love the sinner, because some day God will weigh your sins with the same scale you used to weigh the sins of others.

I too have seen this letter before. Most people look at it as living proof that the Mosaic Law is defunct and out-of-date. Personally, I look at it as proof of my need for a saviour in Jesus Christ. Every single judgment cited in that letter remains true to this day. You want a better, more fierce example of the law? Check out Deuteronomy 28 to find out the full extent of the curse God promises to the disobedient. No part of this law has passed away; God's word is truth, and the truth never changes.

And this is why, in my mind, I not only want but need Jesus to be my saviour: with his crucifixion he paid a debt that the works of my mortal hands never could.

[Anzac]

I bet if someone took the time and effort to probe ever corner of every translation of every Bible they could find something to contradict it. Taking everything literally in the Bible eventually means you can't do anything yet must do everything, which is why it is subject to interpretation and then different interpretation.

[Alex P]

Originally Posted by bananabrain

dr. laura is a feckin' feathered eejit and a disgrace. it's people like that that make a lot of work for people like me.

b'shalom

bananabrain

Try and see the lighter side?...

[Dondi]

Wow, Alex, you dug pretty deep for this one. Four years.