Leviticus 18:22, the only spot the bible says gay is wrong?

Great Debates
61

Perhaps, my point though was that some gospels advocate keeping the law, while others do not. Matthew advocates keeping the law.

That’s an interesting spin, but sort of irrelevant. Matthew’s Jesus was not advocating merely sliding by, which is what you would need to show.

Further, consider these verses:

5:16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven. 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.*

and obviously:

5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Which puts a damper on your just do the minimum theory.

Jesus then goes on and gives a bunch more prescriptions. There is also this:

7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven;* but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven**. *

7:24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
7:25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
7:26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: *
*
19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

In other words, some people will profess to be Christians, yet they don’t do the will of the father and they will not enter into the Kingdom of heaven.

62

You misinterpreted my theory, it is not ‘just do the minimum’ and certainly not just sliding in - if this is your interpretation you can not yet enter heaven you are not ready IMHO.

But it is the only way for humans (who can’t follow the law) to get into heaven. To become the least in heaven, for me that means to be born again of the heavens, a small baby and therefor ‘least’ in respect to size.

And I wouldn’t worry about this (below), as the prostitute’s and other ‘sinners’ have exceeded the righteousness of the ‘priestly’ class as a whole.

63

My mistake, I meant your theory on the interpretations of those passages. As to how to get into heaven, again, I’d say it depends on who you are reading. In the true Pauline Epistles, man could not earn his way into heaven - this is why he had problems with both Peter and James.

In Matthew, you had to essentially earn your way into heaven.

As to Matthew’s spin on the prostitutes and other sinners, I’d think that he’d argue that they still need to follow the law.

But then again, it all depends on which gospel you believe - they weren’t all written to the same groups of people. They were written to diverse groups with different goals.

64

Good thing all Christians strictly follow all the rules in Leviticus, huh?

65

Instead of all these elaborate interpretations of ancient texts, I prefer to simply do what I feel is right or wrong.

66

My guess is that some Christians do the same, the only difference between them and you is that they would cherry pick verses to support their positions and ignore verses that did not support them.

67

Yes. It feels safer that way.

Reminds me of when Huck Finn resolves to just go to hell for the sin of helping a slave escape rather than turning him in. Huck’s simple boy’s mind was vastly morally superior to any of the Bible-quoting adults around him, and he didn’t even know it.

68

This brings a interesting question, at least to me. Could a person be a prostitute and be found sinless because her heart was pure. In this she would be giving up her body for the advancement of God’s kingdom, the sexual part is just the method of reaching a certain category of people, such as she may be able to befriend other prostitutes and help them, but she would need the ‘job’ or ‘cover’ of being a prostitute to really earn their trust to let her in so she may help them.
That above pretty much sums up how I see the law, if you are really trying to do the will of God in Love you are already found guiltless no matter what the letter of the law says. The law being always there for those who are not acting in the Love of God.

It has also been my experience that their will be a conflict between the Law and what you believe is acting in Love at some point in a person’s life. That person must (eventually) come to the conclusion at some point in their life f’ the Law, I’m going to do what is right and let God judge me - and God does and finds you guiltless.

69

Kind of what Jesus said.

70

And evidently Huck Finn :slight_smile:

71

Chimera: “And then Jesus’ disciples became greatly ill, for there was a foul bacteria upon their unwashed hands that afflicted them all.” Really? Bacteria was known then? I don’t think so. The words of the Bible I live by are the ten Commandments, the Golden Rule (do unto others as you would have others do unto you), and “judge not lest ye be judged.” The Bible was written by man, and has been edited and had whole books eliminated to suit the majority religion or monarch or pope. The original Hebrew, Greek, or other language can have different meanings for the present that were not meant 2,000 years ago.

72

I’m pretty sure Chimera was being facetious, there.

73

Was there a loud whooshing noise over your head while you posted this? :dubious: