[twinmag]

Been lurking a long time. Just logged from my son's computer. Maybe the Episcopalians read these passages in the Bible:

Leviticus 11:10: And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you

Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind, it is abomination.

Note the use of the same description "abomination." Ergo Homosexuality according to the Bible is no worse than eating a shrimp cocktail or a catfish platter. Where am I wrong?

[Rodm]

yes

[PFKEY]

I think your reading of this law is a bit off.

And all that have not fins and scales...shall be an abomination unto you.

Eating squid would be unlawful as would homosexuality.

[Credo]

Actually Robinson isn't the 1st openly gay Episcopal Bishop.

Bishop Otis Charles of Utah came out after he retired and left his wife.

Foxnews on Otis Charles

[livius]

Don't forget that one of God's gifts to Christians was Peter's vision in which God told him there were no longer any "clean" and "unclean" animals or food.

However, the Jewish strictures against murder, theft and homosexuality, among other things, stayed in place.

In other words, what Christianity did was sift out the wheat from the chaff in the Jewish religion, which at that time equated ritual practice with morality.

Christianity, essentially, has no invariable and required ritual practice: but it retained the moral teachings that God handed down to Moses. And that's what matters.

[Jorge]

Note the use of the same description "abomination." Ergo Homosexuality according to the Bible is no worse than eating a shrimp cocktail or a catfish platter. Where am I wrong?

First of all the dietary statutes in Leviticus are directed toward the Jews ONLY, and are not comparable to laws governing sexual moral conduct that apply to ALL men.

Secondly God prescribes the death penalty in Leviticus for homosexuality. Not for eating shellfish.

Furthermore, it is one thing to tell the Jews that shell fish should be an "abomination", or something repulsive to them when it comes to their diet.
It is quite another for God to say that a certain sexual conduct is an abomination to Him.

Finally, the dietary restrictions for the Jews are done away with in the New Testament, but the prohibitions against homosexuality are repeated and confirmed for ALL people.

[Charles H. (The_r0nin)]

And what are the words translated as "abomination" in those two passages in the original Hebrew? Are they the same?

[Shadowfax]

Been lurking a long time. Just logged from my son's computer. Maybe the Episcopalians read these passages in the Bible: Leviticus 11:10: And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind, it is abomination. Note the use of the same description "abomination." Ergo Homosexuality according to the Bible is no worse than eating a shrimp cocktail or a catfish platter. Where am I wrong?

Your error is a common one that many people make. It is the difference between the ceremonial and dietary law that God handed down to Israel only and the eternal moral law that God handed down for all people. The prohibition against eating certain foods and engaging in some acts that would make one unclean were part of the cermonial/dietary laws.

However, the prohibition against homosexual behavior is part of the moral law. It applies not just to Israel but to all peoples and are for all time.

Your misinterpretation is common among people who want to take verses out of context to attempt to impune the Bible. Also, it's a lie that the Bible only condemns homosexuality in the Old Testament. See Romans 1.

[TheWriterInTexas]

God didn't destroy whole cities because people were eating shrimp cocktail.