Posted on 12/20/2005 8:21:21 AM PST by GOP_Party_Animal
Some of the following points (see comment below) are just a sarcastic reference to old religious practices. However, it is difficult for me to square the Bible's tolerance for slavery and violence with what it is supposed to be: a foundation for Judaism and Christianity (true religions of peace).
Why does the Bible simply regulate slavery instead of coming out against this clear evil? And why does it prescribe such draconian measures (like stoning) for infractions against the Faith? Almost sounds... Islamic.
You can't claim homosexuality is wrong with Biblical verses then ignore the Bible's tacit endorsement of slavery. How do you argue against all this?
(Excerpt) Read more at snopes.com ...
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 I 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 him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.
a) 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?
b) 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?
c) 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.
d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed 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?
e) 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?
f) 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?
g) 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?
h) 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) 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?
j) 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, so I am confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
Your devoted disciple and adoring fan.
Why would someone be asking HER for spiritual advice???
What I keep in mind is that religion is mankind's interpretation of God, and mankind is imperfect. Slavery back then was a societal convention, much like abortion is today. Morality is constantly evolving, and Christianity shouldn't be thrown out just because it appeased historical customs of the time. That would be like saying the Bill of Rights is bunk because the founders didn't address Women's Suffrage or Animal Rights.
Anyone who has actually sat down and read Leviticus with attention knows that while Leviticus describes sodomy as an abomination worthy of death for all human beings, various other Levitical commandments involve a variety of levels of individuals.
Some apply only to Jews. Others apply only to adult male Jews. Others apply only to male Jews of the tribe of Levi. Others apply only to male members of certain clans of the tribe of Levi. Others apply only to adult male members of a certain family of a certain clan of the tribe of Levi. Many apply only to a specific individual.
The laws regarding slavery only apply in circumstances where slaveholding is constitutive of the social order and Leviticus does not require any individual to own a slave.
Most of the cherry-picked quotes are Old Testament Mosaic Law, which is certainly not up-to-date Christian outlook.
Naw, it is standard troll letter to condemn morality and justify homosexuality. If one buys into the notion that scripture is the source of morality you lose the argument and anything goes.
"Naw, it is standard troll letter to condemn morality and justify homosexuality"
Yup. I saw Bartlet use this strawman on West Wing. Was a deliberate cheap shot at Laura.
In my view looking at various scriptures while quite helpful in determining a moral code is not the last word for the development of one. The main advantage of scripture study in this respect is that if one follows the strictures laid down one can avoid a lot of suffering. The other method for determining if there is moral law and how one should live in order to conform to it is to observe the beliefs and actions of oneself and others. In this one has to be as objective and honest as possible.
Just a few areas into which one could delve:
1. What does the practice of homosexuality bring about in the lives of those who practice it?
2. What does sexual promiscuity deliver to those who indulge in it?
3. What effect does dishonesty have on those who engage in deceit, lying, cheating, etc?
4. How does indulging in the use and abuse of alcohol and drugs effect the lives of those who engage in this?
5. Does crime pay? If so, how so?
There are many, many more areas of life one could engage. Also, one should not just confine observation to the person or persons who engage in various practices and beliefs but should also take a look at the effect these have on family, friends, businesses, communities and nations. One should also observe the consequences of truthfulness, chastity, humility, charity, forgiveness and the like. After all a moral code is more than just forbidding destructive belief and practice - it is also a statement of what is positive and constructive.
I suppose it makes sense then, to correct anyone who purely uses the Bible as a literal moral guide. You have no defensible ground if you say "Homosexuality is wrong because the Bible says so".
Interesting stuff... keep it coming!
"After all a moral code is more than just forbidding destructive belief and practice - it is also a statement of what is positive and constructive."
I've always felt that these are the best arguements for morality. God's laws have a real and tangible use. Man's laws (not eating shellfish) are imperfect and sometimes useless and stupid.
Exactly right. Variations of this same letter have appeared on FR hundreds of times.
"a) 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?"
Answer- there is no need for you to burn a bull. A review of Hebrews would inform you that the animal sacrifices are no longer necessary thanks to Christ.
b) 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?
Answer- slavery is no longer allowed (unless you mean utter dependence on the government). Still, even if you do sell her, at least she's alive. Most parents these days just have the unwanted kid's brain's sucked out prior to birth. Now who's more of a barbarian?
c) 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.
Answer- thanks to the wonderful invention of feminine hygene products, these laws are no longer necessary. Besides, why are you putting your hands on women anyway? Does the name Bob Packwood mean anything?
d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed 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?
Answer- Because slavery is abolished, you cannot own slaves. Back then, it made it illegal to enslave your kinsmen.
e) 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?
Answer- This law only applies to Old Testament Israel. Because you don't live in Old Testament Israel you cannot apply this law to him. Rather, you are supposed to show him the proper way by your example. Check out Daniel.
f) 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?
See answer to e
g) 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?
Are you the high priest? No. Therefore you have no business in the Holy of Holies. Since the Temple is gone, you need not worry about this anyway.
h) 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?
See answer to e
i) 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?
See answer to e. Besides, the football is probably synthetic anyway.
j) 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)
See answer to e
Bump for later reply. But for the moment, to me, homosexuality is just . . . uh . . . yucky! Don't ask me to eplain why it's yucky. More to come, re-iterating what I've posted on the topic here in the past, apart from the yuckiness of it. Gotta run now.
How do you know which is which? I'm asking honestly.
It is also my understanding that the slavery of the ancient world was not the same as the chattel slavery of the modern Americas. Examples.
Slaves in ancient times could buy their freedom.
Slaves in ancient times were in many cases survivors of war who were sold as slaves rather than be killed.
Slaves were considered members of the household. Some were well educated and even served as tutors.
Families were not separated.
Some had willingly sold themselves into slavery to pay off debts.
I think that is some of the differences. I am not endorsing slavery but it is important to remember that what we think of as slavery is not what was known in the Ancient World. If you read the slave codes of Louisiana during its years as a Frech colony you will see this. Those slave laws had their orgin in the Roman laws on slavery.
The stuff from Leviticus (the Old Testament, which is most of the screed) is old Mosaic Law.
Christianity, while sharing origins from the Old Testament, is based on doctrines established in the New Testament, which supercedes the old law. For instance, Christ is the sacrifice-- no animals are needed in Christianity due to his sacrifice. And the aspects of forgiveness established by Christ overshadow the killing of unbelievers, etc.
Answer- Because slavery is abolished, you cannot own slaves. Back then, it made it illegal to enslave your kinsmen.
Obviously, the false seeker who wrote this letter has no understanding of "slavery" in biblical times. Today, anyone over 40 who draws a mental picture of slavery probably thinks of Kunta Kinte. That kind of slavery certainly did exist in our history and old world history and was evil. But that was not the only kind. The evil kind of slavery was clearly suffered by the Jews in Egypt. God heard their cries and led them out through Moses.
However, at that time slavery was also a perfectly accepted social convention, created by men, and was used frequently for the settlement of debts. I agree to be your "slave" for two years and you pay off my debts. It is what we would call today indentured servitude. In our culture today we would call that unacceptable, but it worked for them at the time. I think an actual comparison could be drawn to what is happening with illegal Mexicans today. "You're illegal, if you do whatever I say I will give you money to send back to your family."
God obviously draws a distinction between different types of slavery. On one hand, he clearly disapproved of the slavery the Jews suffered in Egypt. He freed them. On the other hand he teaches that slaves should be good to their masters and masters should likewise be good to their slaves. Both slave and master should serve the Lord. See Colossians 3:22 - 4:1 -
22 Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. 23 Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men, 24 since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving. 25 Anyone who does wrong will be repaid for his wrong, and there is no favoritism. [4] 1 Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because you know that you also have a Master in heaven.
God did not institute slavery, men did. God only allowed it, as he allowed Moses' rules for divorce in his attempt to appease the people. For God's purposes He chose for men to slowly learn the evils of slavery when it was practiced for the purpose of evil. At least we Americans have gotten it. Sadly, slavery is still openly practiced in many parts of the world today.
Biblical narrative vs Biblical law.
When Jesus talked about the divorce laws, He said those laws were given due to the "hardness of man's heart". God is dealing with sinners who can't stop sinning, so he gave laws to at least put some limits on it. Slavery already existed, so God put limits on it, as He did with many other things.
"For this reason God gave them up to vile passions."
One form of judgment is to turn man over to his sins.
The Torah helped civilize a cruel and barbaric world. Much misunderstanding of the Bible results from an ignorance of the historical context. For instance, people often cite "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" as proof of the Bible's irrationality. When looked at in light of the fact that at that time it was common for one tribe to completely massacre another over a minor offense, it becomes clear that the rule was intended to bring a proper measure of retraint to justice.
So too with the laws regarding the treatment of slaves, who previously could be killed at the whim of their masters. The rules regarding the treatment of slaves like the "Eye for an eye..." were momentous advancements in civilized behavior. And it was the Judaic-Christian values which eventually caused the abolition of slavery in the West!
And why does it prescribe such draconian measures (like stoning) for infractions against the Faith? Almost sounds... Islamic.
The strict laws found in the Torah were a civilizing force for a barbaric people, and the laws were just that-for a particular people at a particular time. Biblical VALUES, however, are for all mankind. While the Bible never says that slavery is good, it states in the strongest language possible and repeatedly that homosexuality is sinful. The terrible penalties which were required for the people of the time are not necessary in modern society, but the values are the same.
You can see this clearer (I think) if you compare the Bible to the Koran. The differences --- they are fascinating--- point to the uniqueness of the Judeo-Christian interaction between Divine truth and human intellect.
According to Islamic historians, Mohammad repeatedly went into a trance state and started reciting he-knew-not-what. He became a ventriloquist's-dummy, possessed or coercively controlled by a spiritual entity who dictates, dictates, dictates. Each and every separate phrase in it is held to be unalterable, even technically un-translatable (because Allah spoke Arabic!) and true like a snapshot, that is, complete in itself.
The Bible, by contrast, was written by 40+ human authors over a span of 1,000 years, on three continents (Europe, Asia, and Africa) in three languages (Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek), in the words of the authors themselves ("The Word of God in the Words of Man").
This was based not on puppet-like possession and ventriloquism, but on a quirkier, more interactive thing called “inspiration,” employing the human writers' own intelligence, vocabulary, memory, imagination, cultural resources, and individual personalities. It's held to be true, but not in the manner of a series of snapshots-from-heaven, but in the manner of a movie. It tells a story which progresses.
Read the Koran,. You'll find it lacking in thematic or narrative coherence. It has a garbled, fragmentary feel. On the other hand, the books of the Bible --- which you might expect to be a bit choppy, considering their scattered provenance --- paradoxically, start from multifaceted points of view, and develop inexorably toward the same culminating truths.
But note the different deities’ stance on human freedom. One crushes it. The other develops it. One says “Submit.” The other says “Look. Listen. Think.”
Here's an interesting note: the typical Islamic stance toward the Koran is rote memorization. The Typical Jewish stance toward the Torah is commentary ("Talmud.") The word "Muslim" means "one who has submitted." The word "Israel" means, literally, "one who wrestles with God."
How does this apply specifically to moral guidance?
To put it briefly, with the Bible you have to look at the whole of Salvation History --- the whole "movie" --- to grasp its meaning and properly interpret its parts. The old and reliable principle of exegesis is, "Let Scripture interpret Scripture" --- in other words, let the clearer or later parts govern the interpretation of earlier or more obscure parts.
Furthermore, Christians would insist that the New Testament is the interpretive key to the Old Testament. And the Church (which Christ said would be guided by the Holy Spirit) is the key to the New Testament.
As a 2005 A.D. Christian, I rely on two millennia's worth of wrestling and commentary since the beginning of the Church. A lot of things have become clear because of this tremendous and brilliant resource of thinking-with-the-Church. Much of which is now summarized and searchable.
See, for instance, http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
Just as an exercise, type in keyword "slavery."
This makes sense to me.
I'm pinging you to my response above, #25, because I thought you might be interested.
Merry Christmas!
"Don't ask me to explain why it's yucky."
I'll do it for you - inserting your reproductive organs up someone's waste tract is "yucky". I think the ancients referred to it as "abomination" which is kinda the same thing as "yucky". ;)
Nicely done. Thanks. I would email your rebuttal to Sorkin and the rest of the West Wing writers, but I have a sense they are already know they are shills.
I've noticed that about the gospels of the New Testament, they don't contradict each other, but rather enrich the others.
Moses, Daniel, the Apostles were not literary men, but a renegade prince, a government bureaucrat, fishermen, doctor, tax collector, layer of waste to early Christians. Truly a motley crew they were.
Good post. Good points made.
Without freedom, true love can't develop or even exist.
Thanks for the ping and the link!
May the Birth of Christ find a manger in the hearts of all.
Wise men still seek Him.
Best -- Dave
For some fascinating reading on this subject from historian/sociologist Rodney Stark (an agnostic who gives credit where credit is due):
For the Glory of God:
How Monotheism Led to Reformations, Science, Witch-Hunts, and the End of Slavery
by Rodney Stark
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0691114366/002-5423294-3388818?v=glance&n=283155
The Truth About the Catholic Church and Slavery
The problem wasn't that the leadership was silent.
It was that almost nobody listened.
By Rodney Stark
www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/128/53.0.html
And, just for fun: How Christianity (and Capitalism) led to Science
http://chronicle.com/temp/reprint.php?id=tqm4xd5mqkk5px43d968m19qmf4w3g5y
Enjoy! MERRY CHRISTMAS!
And, just for fun: How Christianity (and Capitalism) led to Science .
Thank you for that post.
Makes me proud as a Jew.
Merry Christmas to you and yours.
Happy Chanukah, and God's blessings on you and all your loved ones.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.