A little fun.

[Miracle Storm]

Not my work...hehe, but thought it was funny.

Dear Dr. Laura,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's law. I have learned a great deal from you, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend homosexuality, for example, I will simply remind him or her 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 other laws in Leviticus and Exodus and how to best follow them. To wit:
When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Leviticus 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. How should I deal with this?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as stated in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Leviticus 15:19-24). The problem is, how can I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Leviticus 25:44 states that I may buy slaves from the nations that are around us. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Canadians, but not Mexicans. Can you clarify?

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?

A friend of mine says that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Leviticus 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Leviticus 20:20 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?

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.
Sincerely,
A devoted listener

found at
'Atheist Empire'​

 

[lawtonfogle]

Post that here http://christianforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=40.

Though the answer your looking for is that the old laws have passed away. Also means you can't use L.18:22 to say no homosexuality. But because there is a verse which is currently being translated to say no homosexuality (big debate there, I'm not the best to ask about it though) in the NT, people can instead use that.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Though the answer your looking for is that the old laws have passed away. Also means you can't use L.18:22 to say no homosexuality. But because there is a verse which is currently being translated to say no homosexuality (big debate there, I'm not the best to ask about it though) in the NT, people can instead use that.

They can but they do so incorrectly when they do. There is no Biblical basis for such a judgment whatsoever; the only basis is prejudice and ignorance.

 

[Miracle Storm]

Post that here http://christianforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=40.

Though the answer your looking for is that the old laws have passed away. Also means you can't use L.18:22 to say no homosexuality. But because there is a verse which is currently being translated to say no homosexuality (big debate there, I'm not the best to ask about it though) in the NT, people can instead use that.

Matthew 5:18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

If even one law can be discounted by a person of faith than what makes the others valid?

the NT..is discriminatory against woman and an advocation of slavery..but if one loves another like theirself they are supposedly the ones depraved..:o

 

[lawtonfogle]

Matthew 5:18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

If even one law can be discounted by a person of faith than what makes the others valid?

the NT..is discriminatory against woman and an advocation of slavery..but if one loves another like theirself they are supposedly the ones depraved..:o

And when Jesus said "It is done." everything was accomplished. Not sure what the heaven and earth disappearing had to do with it. From the sound of it, Jesus may have just been saying that "assuming God allows this world to exist for the next few years". There was at least one thing Jesus didn't know at the time, maybe there was some more, but I'm pretty sure that the old law has passed away. Else, what about the eating of unclean animals (and Peter's vision)? And I'm sure Paul spoke of the old law as passing away.

 

[Miracle Storm]

And when Jesus said "It is done." everything was accomplished. Not sure what the heaven and earth disappearing had to do with it. From the sound of it, Jesus may have just been saying that "assuming God allows this world to exist for the next few years". There was at least one thing Jesus didn't know at the time, maybe there was some more, but I'm pretty sure that the old law has passed away. Else, what about the eating of unclean animals (and Peter's vision)? And I'm sure Paul spoke of the old law as passing away.

Peter's vision was about Jews and gentiles iirc
What I am saying is christians cannot have it both ways..Either all of the law stands or none of it does.

If Jesus eradicated the law for those who are saved than that means ALL of it. When people choose bits of the law and say well "this makes sense, but this doesn't so we will not enforce this as God's law" we have a problem..
Err...this is turning into something better suited for another forum here methinks.

My point is this..people condemn homosexuals and say it is because of their big book..BUT their big book says not to do many things that they do now. As well as this holy book advocating things we find despicable OT & NT..

 

[lawtonfogle]

Peter's vision was about Jews and gentiles iirc
What I am saying is christians cannot have it both ways..Either all of the law stands or none of it does.

If Jesus eradicated the law for those who are saved than that means ALL of it. When people choose bits of the law and say well "this makes sense, but this doesn't so we will not enforce this as God's law" we have a problem..
Err...this is turning into something better suited for another forum here methinks.

My point is this..people condemn homosexuals and say it is because of their big book..BUT their big book says not to do many things that they do now. As well as this holy book advocating things we find despicable OT & NT..

I don't pick and choose, I say they are all gone. The thing is, when many people here (and everywhere) read 'sexual immorality' or such highly undefined terms, they think that the writer is talking about all the things it was wrong to do before the law was abolished.

Murder was one of the laws of old, right? Do not murder (I say it is murder, some say it is kill, but that is another story). Well, all the old laws passed away, right? But it still isn't ok for me to go on a human hunting spree, right? So, it seems that while the old laws have passed away, part of what they said sticks. Just because a law has passed away doesn't mean that another one hasn't replaced it as far as function.

So really, the only debates I think are worth having is if a new law has replace an old one or not, as such, quoting old laws really don't have much use.

Anyways, this one should be added:
[/quote]
<insert marriage versus reference here> say we should marry to avoid sexual immorality, but my son (24) is attracted to kids to young to marry without parental consent. My friend is willing to let her daughter (8) marry my son, but for some reason, the pastor is against this. He claims that it is immoral, though he offers no verses to back it up. Does anyone know what versus the pastor is referring to when he says such a union is immoral?
[/quote]
It would still be a problem these days because the versus in question is in the NT, I think 1 Corinthians 7, not sure. But if we want to stick to the subject with old testament laws, then this is what should be added instead:

My youngest daughter (now 9) was raped by a man 2 years ago. For some reason dealing with plea bargain, he is getting out in a year, and has written to us offering the 50 shekels to marry here as Deut 22:28 demands. So should I wait for him to get out of prison to have the marriage or have one of the prisoner weddings?

 

[Texas Lynn]

The thing is, when many people here (and everywhere) read 'sexual immorality' or such highly undefined terms, they think that the writer is talking about all the things it was wrong to do before the law was abolished.

Homosexuality was never wrong, and the assertion otherwise is just an expression of prejudice and ignorance. At the time of the ancient Hebrews women were property and marriage was merely an arranged transfer of property. The idea of getting morality from a sick, evil society like that is ridiculous. "Sexual Immorality" as they defined it was a property crime.

 

[Miracle Storm]

I don't pick and choose, I say they are all gone. The thing is, when many people here (and everywhere) read 'sexual immorality' or such highly undefined terms, they think that the writer is talking about all the things it was wrong to do before the law was abolished.

Murder was one of the laws of old, right? Do not murder (I say it is murder, some say it is kill, but that is another story). Well, all the old laws passed away, right? But it still isn't ok for me to go on a human hunting spree, right? So, it seems that while the old laws have passed away, part of what they said sticks. Just because a law has passed away doesn't mean that another one hasn't replaced it as far as function.

Erm..Murder is against the real law..regardless of biblical "law"
Murder is harming others..homosexuality is not.

So really, the only debates I think are worth having is if a new law has replace an old one or not, as such, quoting old laws really don't have much use.

Anyways, this one should be added:
<insert marriage versus reference here> say we should marry to avoid sexual immorality, but my son (24) is attracted to kids to young to marry without parental consent. My friend is willing to let her daughter (8) marry my son, but for some reason, the pastor is against this. He claims that it is immoral, though he offers no verses to back it up. Does anyone know what versus the pastor is referring to when he says such a union is immoral?

Hm...maybe it would be best to follow the law of the land, especially when it pertains to those under 18 and protecting our children..

I'm unsure of what point you are driving at..

 

[Hentenza]

Not my work...hehe, but thought it was funny.

Dear Dr. Laura,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's law. I have learned a great deal from you, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend homosexuality, for example, I will simply remind him or her 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 other laws in Leviticus and Exodus and how to best follow them. To wit:
When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Leviticus 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. How should I deal with this?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as stated in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Leviticus 15:19-24). The problem is, how can I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Leviticus 25:44 states that I may buy slaves from the nations that are around us. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Canadians, but not Mexicans. Can you clarify?

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?

A friend of mine says that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Leviticus 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Leviticus 20:20 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?

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.
Sincerely,
A devoted listener

found at
'Atheist Empire'​

Lucky for ALL of us, Jesus Christ fulfilled the law and saved us from sin.

 

[KCKID]

Lucky for ALL of us, Jesus Christ fulfilled the law and saved us from sin.

What about all of those millions B.C. ...does God simply apologize to them?

 

[Hentenza]

What about all of those millions B.C. ...does God simply apologize to them?

Just read your bible. It's all in there.

 

[Texas Lynn]

What about all of those millions B.C. ...does God simply apologize to them?

It's certainly true some primitive understandings of cosmology sound like bad superhero comic plot forms.