This thread is for posting your thoughts, comments, and questions on Leviticus 19-21 from our daily Bible readings.

Click here to read the passage at Bible Gateway.

Hi Justin:

So how do we come to terms with Levitcus 20:13. I have the King James Version "If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them". How do we come to terms as gay Chrisitians.

David

you know that really sucks, cause i already made my daughter a prostitute!

That is still the one passage that I cant get over. My thing I got over is 1 corinth 6:9 by http://www.clgs.org/5/5_4_3.html I read it a year ago and was happy with the article. Might be long, but worth the read. I dont know... maybe search that sight for an insight look on the lev scriptures.

Thanks, Jake I will take a look at it. Also, a friend told me about Matthew 5: 17-18 "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fullfil" In a sense a lot of Christians tend to forget the old testament in view that they think that the New Covenant surpases the Old Covenant, when in fact Jesus states that is still much part of us. This is what I am wrestiling with right now.

Do not forget the end of Matt 5:18 - "until all is accomplished." Also, read the series of teachings that immediately follow, all in terms of "you have heard...but I tell you..." Jesus' message is to live in relationship, not rigid observance.

If you read Acts 15, the council in Jerusalem concerning the question of the relationship between non-Jewish converts and the law, the answer they arrived at was 'not much.' The letter they send out is an instruction to avoid practices that would tempt gentiles to go back to pagan worship and to avoid breaking their promises of marital fidelity (an issue in couples where only one converted). Other than that, the council's stance is that Jewish law is a part of Jewish life.

The gospel calls us to lives of radical liberation balanced by mutual responsibility. It will always be the challenge to find that balance in our daily lives. Perhaps this is why, in Luke's version of the saying, we are told to take up and carry the cross each day if we are to accompany Jesus. We see the struggle in Paul expressed in his letters and we experience it ourselves. The answer will not be found in going back to legal rigidity, unless you are convinced that Jesus accomplished nothing.

Randy

Thanks, Randy will take a look at that.

If we look at the historical context of the time, we can conclude that the homosexual acts that Leviticus would be referring to actually had more to do with worship of a goddess (or her priest) of fertility. So this passage is forbidding homosexual temple prostitution or pagan religious rituals, not a loving, committed gay relationship.

I highly recommend reading "The Children Are Free" by Rev. Jeff Miner & John Tyler Connoley. They really put those "Clobber Passages" into perspective and help the glbt community breath a sigh of relief that we are not going to hell because we happen to be gay.

As for the rest of today's reading, the laws are for the most part common sense. Don't lie, cheat, steal, disrespect your parents and the elderly, eat meat that has been sitting out for three days, have sex with any of your close relatives, practice sorcery, force your children into prostitution (Really!?! People did that?!? Looks as if no one would have gotten the parent of the year award back then.)

Now there are a few versues that make me shout out WHAT THE WORLD?!?
-Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material. (Your trying to look at the tag on your shirt right now, aren't you? )
-Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard. ( oh,oh...having been a hair dresser for over 15 years I guess I've been the caused of a lot of people being condemned to hell...and I got paid! )
-Do not cut your bodies (OUCH! )for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourself. (So I guess tattoo artists have been another cause of condemnation...takes the pressure off the hair dressers. )

I guess what I'm trying to say here is that everything needs to be taken in its historical context. For a text taken out of context is pretext.

Peace, Love, and

Well, what a fascinating passage! I gave most of my thoughts concerning the "clobber" aspect of this passage in the discussion on Leviticus 18 here, but there are some other things standing out to me now. I think you guys have all made some good points. I'm interested in the punishments described in Leviticus 20.

The death penalty is prescribed for anyone who gives his children to Molech (20:2), anyone who curses his father or mother (20:9), adulterers and adulteresses (20:10), both parties if a man sleeps with his father's wife or daughter-in-law (20:11-12), both parties when "a man lies with a man" (20:13), for all parties if a man lies with a woman and her mother (20:14), for both a man (or woman) and an animal if they engage in bestiality (20:15-16), and for a medium or spiritist (20:27). Lesser punishments include being cut off from the people, as in the instance of a man and woman who have sex during the woman's period (20:18) or dying childless, as in the case of a man who sleeps with his aunt (20:20). (Or are being "cut off" or being made to "die childless" just more figurative ways of referring to the death penalty? If so, why the switch?)

It's interesting how so many of the other passages here deal with taking care of the less fortunate or oppressed in society. Leviticus 19:9 makes provisions that will help to feed the poor, Leviticus 19:13 protects the working class, and Leviticus 19:14 shows that God cares for those who are disabled. Perhaps most significantly, Leviticus 19:34 says "The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born. Love him as yourself..." Likewise, Leviticus 19:18 says "Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself." Effectively, both Jews and Gentiles alike are treated as equals here, and so the command is to love your neighbor as yourself, the same command that Jesus said is the second greatest commandment (after loving God, Matthew 22) and which Paul said fulfills the Law (Romans 13).

Another notable point is the repetitive nature of many of these commands. For example, Leviticus 19 has prohibitions against shaving or clipping off the edges of your beard, as well as cutting your body (19:27-28), and these same commands are repeated to the priests in Leviticus 21:5. Other commands, like the death penalty for one who curses his mother or father, have also appeared in Exodus. (Ex. 21:29). The same for bestiality also appears in Exodus 22:19. There are plenty of other examples, and general ideas about not perverting justice or showing partiality are reiterated throughout the Mosaic Law. Makes me wonder about in what context these commands were originally used, if that makes sense.

---

One thing that also really grabbed my attention in this passage was Leviticus 21:10. In the NIV, it reads "The high priest, the one among his brothers who has had the anointing oil poured on his head and who has been ordained to wear the priestly garments, must not let his hair become unkempt or tear his clothes." There's a footnote indicating that the text could mean the the priest must "not uncover his head." I did several quick cross-references on BibleGateway, and while the majority of translations seem to agree that the text refers to hair being unkempt or messy, notable versions like the NASB and KJV say clearly that the priest should not uncover his head. Not knowing near a thing about Hebrew, I don't know what the source of contention is here, but as a reader, it makes more sense to me that this would be referring to a head covering of some sort, and if that is indeed the case, it brings up some interesting points of discussion.

Paul teaches in 1 Corinthians 11 that women should pray and prophesy only with their heads covered, something which has been the source of plenty of debate in the church all on its own. There's a great little story in Genesis 38 about Judah, one of the sons of Jacob. His daughter-in-law (Tamar) had been made a widow (twice over, if memory serves), and Judah had promised another of his sons to her. He was afraid to deliver on his promise, though, because he had already lost two of his sons who had been given in marriage to Tamar, and so he let it slip by. When Tamar saw him one day, she was timid about the whole thing, so she disguised herself by putting a veil over her head. Judah saw her and, because her head was covered, mistook her for a prostitute! (He ended up sleeping with her, but that's another story altogether...)

Anyway, I think it becomes abundantly clear that Paul was giving an instruction dealing with cultural issues. He was talking about a woman covering her head for issues pertaining to propriety in worship - but in another cultural context, a woman with a covered head could be mistaken for a prostitute! And here, in Leviticus 21, we see that male priests (depending on translation) were required to cover their heads. Seems to become a much more complex discussion.

PS - I wonder if those who would quote Leviticus 20:13 to condemn LGBT people would be as quick to cite Leviticus 20:37, "Keep all my decrees and all my laws and follow them. I am the LORD."