Have I Posted This On The Correct "Page" ?

[JohnHenry]

..... OR, should it be on Humor ?
This guy really wants own a Canadian .


On her radio show, Dr Laura Schlesinger 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, written by a U.S.man, 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 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 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 anabomination, 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.

[carver]

Written by someone with an agenda. That of proving that the Bible either contradicts it's self, or that the Bible is not reverent in today's society.

[Juker]

Once again we see a "natural man" trying to interpret God's Word.

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Corinthians 2:14)

Leviticus is part of the Mosaic Laws, prescribed for the sanctification of Israel.

Since Little Jimmy Kauffman has taken the time to read Leviticus, he should also take the time to peruse assorted passages concerning mocking God.

Oh, and there are also plenty of verses in the New Testament regarding non-breeders.

[ampaterry]

Those who start reading scripture with a mind to find foolishness in it Will be led by Satan to believe they have found it.

Every law had a purpose, some still do.
It requires some degree of INTELLECT to discern one from the other.

For instance; a nomadic people living in a desert area are told it is not a great idea to eat shell fish.
Duh!!

[Double D]

It amazes me how people think they are somehow getting away with something by mocking the scriptures. One scripture they wont mock is
"Every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is lord"
Let them say what they will now, judgement awaits everyone.

[brad87]

Originally Posted by Juker

Once again we see a "natural man" trying to interpret God's Word.

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Corinthians 2:14)

Leviticus is part of the Mosaic Laws, prescribed for the sanctification of Israel.

Since Little Jimmy Kauffman has taken the time to read Leviticus, he should also take the time to peruse assorted passages concerning mocking God.

Oh, and there are also plenty of verses in the New Testament regarding non-breeders.

Didn't Jesus say something along the lines of "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone?"

I think you're forgetting your good book. You cannot call him out for something by committing the same sin.

By the way, if you (all I've seen in here aside from the OP) weren't so bullheaded, you might take it as satire attempting to explain that taking and applying verses from the bible verbatim is NOT acceptable. There are general ideas and themes that pervade the whole deal, and those are what you need to focus on, instead of condemning someone for violating one 'law' that is found in the midst of others that allow and promote slavery, animal sacrifice, and murder.

[ampaterry]

At the risk of being bullheaded -

Jesus did indeed say let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Stoning was capital punishment.
IOW, they intended to kill this woman for adultery, and Christ stopped them.

No one here advocated killing anyone, but merely stated what was wrong in this first post.

In other words, a JUDGMENT was made concerning the claim that acts of homosexuality are no worse than eating shellfish.

Christ told us to "Judge righteous judgment".

How many people were killed by God for unrepentant acts of homosexuality?

How many were killed for eating shellfish?

Satirical indeed, but absolutely wrong.

[brad87]

Originally Posted by ampaterry

At the risk of being bullheaded -

Jesus did indeed say let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Stoning was capital punishment.
IOW, they intended to kill this woman for adultery, and Christ stopped them.

No one here advocated killing anyone, but merely stated what was wrong in this first post.

In other words, a JUDGMENT was made concerning the claim that acts of homosexuality are no worse than eating shellfish.

Christ told us to "Judge righteous judgment".

How many people were killed by God for unrepentant acts of homosexuality?

How many were killed for eating shellfish?

Satirical indeed, but absolutely wrong.

If you want to cherry pick, by all means, I can't stop you. Just look at what you're doing first, and try to not assume I'm a camel riding Jihadist when I say things that relate to Christianity.

And you're just as wrong as the satirist, btw.

[ampaterry]

Brad, the dietary laws were removed by events described in the New Testament.

The sacrificial laws were fulfilled by Christ's sacrifice as recorded in the New Testament.

There are other laws that simply have no application today.

But the directive against homosexuality has never been changed; it was a sin in the OT, in the NT, and remains a sin today regardless of how much political pressure the gays are able to muster.

No cherry picking involved at all.
God wiped out an ENTIRE CITY for the sin of homosexual acts.
I know of no other sin in scripture that drew that kind of punishment.
And yet here we are trying to say it is just an alternate lifestyle, that gays are 'born that way', etc.

[brad87]

Originally Posted by ampaterry

Brad, the dietary laws were removed by events described in the New Testament.

The sacrificial laws were fulfilled by Christ's sacrifice as recorded in the New Testament.

There are other laws that simply have no application today.

But the directive against homosexuality has never been changed; it was a sin in the OT, in the NT, and remains a sin today regardless of how much political pressure the gays are able to muster.

No cherry picking involved at all.
God wiped out an ENTIRE CITY for the sin of homosexual acts.
I know of no other sin in scripture that drew that kind of punishment.
And yet here we are trying to say it is just an alternate lifestyle, that gays are 'born that way', etc.

According to who, for the bolded part? And how do you know the city was wiped out for homosexuality? I seem to recall them doing quite a few things that were contrary to God's will at the time. And you can't say they aren't born that way. There is nothing to prove it either way.

[rosierita]

Originally Posted by brad87

According to who, for the bolded part? And how do you know the city was wiped out for homosexuality? I seem to recall them doing quite a few things that were contrary to God's will at the time. And you can't say they aren't born that way. There is nothing to prove it either way.

to say that they are born that way is saying that God goes against His own Word, which He does not.

[brad87]

Originally Posted by rosierita

to say that they are born that way is saying that God goes against His own Word, which He does not.

Where does God say that people are NOT born with sin in their hearts, with the exception of Adam and Eve?

[graehaven]

Originally Posted by brad87

Where does God say that people are NOT born with sin in their hearts, with the exception of Adam and Eve?

Fallacy. Poor point of debate there.

You cannot go from a specific to a generalization to underscore you point on the specific. YOU were referring (and she too) to homosexuality. Not sin in general.

FAIL

[brad87]

Originally Posted by graehaven

Fallacy. Poor point of debate there.

You cannot go from a specific to a generalization to underscore you point on the specific. YOU were referring (and she too) to homosexuality. Not sin in general.

FAIL

Trying to relive your days on the high school debate team?

When she is talking about how people can't be born homosexual, because it would go against God's will, she is calling it a sin, yes? That is at least how interpret it.

Sin goes against gods will. She is saying homosexuality is a sin. Therefor it falls into the general category of sin. Homosexuality is able to be swapped out with any other sin in the book, so its applicable to blanket it in with sin in general.

[ampaterry]

Originally Posted by brad87

According to who, for the bolded part? And how do you know the city was wiped out for homosexuality? I seem to recall them doing quite a few things that were contrary to God's will at the time. And you can't say they aren't born that way. There is nothing to prove it either way.

In reverse order:

I can say they aren't born that way because the human genome has now been completely sequenced, and the gay gene is suspiciously missing.

I can say that Sodom was destroyed for ALL of their sins, but Homosexuality is the ONLY one that was specifically listed, and the sexual sins are the only ones that are specified as abomonations to God.

Now to your "according to who" challenge.
I made no representation that God had done away with them, I merely meant that some of them deal with circumstances which no longer exist. This fact should be apparent to any rational person, and not based upon some authority.

For instance:
Here in the US, as well as in every civilized nation on the planet, slavery is illegal. Due to this, the laws regarding the treatment of slaves no longer have an application in these countries.

There are laws regarding the treatment of our work animals.
With modern farming methods and machinery, work animals are almost non-existant, therefore these laws are passing out of applicability as well.

[brad87]

Originally Posted by ampaterry

In reverse order:

I can say they aren't born that way because the human genome has now been completely sequenced, and the gay gene is suspiciously missing.

I can say that Sodom was destroyed for ALL of their sins, but Homosexuality is the ONLY one that was specifically listed, and the sexual sins are the only ones that are specified as abomonations to God.

Now to your "according to who" challenge.
I made no representation that God had done away with them, I merely meant that some of them deal with circumstances which no longer exist. This fact should be apparent to any rational person, and not based upon some authority.

For instance:
Here in the US, as well as in every civilized nation on the planet, slavery is illegal. Due to this, the laws regarding the treatment of slaves no longer have an application in these countries.

There are laws regarding the treatment of our work animals.
With modern farming methods and machinery, work animals are almost non-existant, therefore these laws are passing out of applicability as well.

To reply in order:

Homosexuality is not a physical attribute (or defect, however you view it). It is a state of mind. You don't check the genes for someone liking or disliking something irrationally. I hate the smell and taste of pickles. There is a specific psychological reason behind this, not one that has to do with my DNA.

So you don't know exactly which sin it was that caused the destruction of the city, you just use that part of the bible to judge and condemn your fellow man? Understood.

If God has not explicitly done away with some of his decrees, why are they not still followed? Slavery, murder, and physical assault are all allowed and encouraged by God's rules. By not partaking in his directives, you are defying God, and his will. You will burn in Hell along side the homosexuals you condemn for this. The rules of the state do not trump those of God.

[graehaven]

Pointing out obvious logical fallacies does not require former experience on a debate team, LOL.

It is clear you are not interested in finding truth, rather in fostering contention. I'd ask how long you've been gay, but, that point is now moot.

[ampaterry]

Brad, you are confusing temptation with sin, and they are not at all the same thing. Scripture plainly tells us that Christ was tempted. It also plainly tells us that he was without sin. We, as human beings, are indeed born to face a life of temptation. We are not born bound to commit any specific sin, though. Being human, we WILL fail sometimes; it is in our fallen human nature to do so. But we are not predestined to be a murderer, a thief, or homosexual. We may face the temptation to do those things, but whether or not we do them is our choice, completely.

BUT - if we fail to resist the temptation in any area of sin and THEN we refuse to admit it is a sin, and THEN go so far as to try to convince the world that this particular practice is NOT a sin, we have fallen below the normal sinner who knows it is wrong and repents of it. We have gone from a personal failure to working for the other side, trying to get others to fail as we have.

[ampaterry]

Originally Posted by brad87

To reply in order:

Homosexuality is not a physical attribute (or defect, however you view it). It is a state of mind. You don't check the genes for someone liking or disliking something irrationally. I hate the smell and taste of pickles. There is a specific psychological reason behind this, not one that has to do with my DNA.

So you don't know exactly which sin it was that caused the destruction of the city, you just use that part of the bible to judge and condemn your fellow man? Understood.

If God has not explicitly done away with some of his decrees, why are they not still followed? Slavery, murder, and physical assault are all allowed and encouraged by God's rules. By not partaking in his directives, you are defying God, and his will. You will burn in Hell along side the homosexuals you condemn for this. The rules of the state do not trump those of God.

You make my point quite well. Homosexuality is NOT a physical thing at all, like a taste for certain foods. Vegemite is proof that one is NOT born with likes and dislikes for food, but aquires them in the process of living. In the same manner, one may grow to accept certain sins while rejecting others, in spite of the fact that God has specified they are sin and to be avoided.

Yes indeed, I do know exactly which sin God condemned Sodom for. He made it quite clear by specifying that one sin, as well as mentioning that there were others.

I work very hard to follow God's rules every day. I merely state that some, as I specified earlier, no longer apply in our present society. I do not need to re-invent slavery in order to deal properly with slaves, I do not need to sell my tractor in order to use oxen so I can treat the properly, and I do not have to re-invent Baal worship in order to not burn children on his altar.

And I do not condemn homosexuals, I inform them of the fact that their activity is a sin.
Then, if they fail to repent of that sin, God condemns them.

[nightwalker]

Amen, and well stated.