Homosexuality

[Robert the Pilegrim]

errr, brain malfunction I guess, this was identical to post # 194, I guess I forgot I already posted it.

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

Nor NA, nor CA, nor GA, nor OA, but those who have remained alcohol- and/or drug-free, abstinent from gambling, or out of the "binge-and-purge" eating practices don't care whether science believes them or not. They know it worked for them. No one said they won't still struggle. All sinners struggle with their favorite sin, sometimes for the rest of their lives. Science can't poke or prod faith. It isn't measurable. But it does work.

So what your talking about is abstinence and repressing Homosexual feelings.

 

[IisJustMe]

So what your talking about is abstinence and repressing Homosexual feelings.

As I state in my testimony, I'm a former alcoholic and compulsive gambler. I do not struggle with those addictions anymore, because I have been delivered from them by Jesus Christ. I frankly don't care whether science is able to "measure" my recovery, or the recovery of former practitioners of homosexual behavior. Science can't measure faith, and I would dispute with you whether the secular practices of psychology or psychiatry are science in the truest sense of the word.

I'm a certified Biblical Counselor, my degree is from a seminary. I am also certified in addictions, marriage and family counseling, grief therapy, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Reality Therapy, and crisis counseling. I have never met any two of my secular counterparts who can agree on any one point of their discipline. While brain chemistry can be analyzed and measured, it doesn't account for all aspects of behavior. No one knows, and certainly no one can agree upon, why some patients respond to therapy or counseling, and some do not. I know from my experiences, however, that faith put into action makes the difference, though I cannot begin to explain it.

If an addict wants to be free of his sin, he will be. If a person with a personality disorder wants to function without negative social consequences, he can. People who make up their mind not to be depressed -- if it is not a clinical (i.e., chemical) depression -- they get over it. It is the same with all sin. There is nothing genetic about sin. It is a mindset. Paul summed it up in Romans 8:6, 7 ...

For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so,

Even Christians can suffer from this faulty mindset, despite prayer, fasting, and even desire. Until we surrender ourselves to the will of God, we cannot overcome all the sin in our lives. When we are in tune with His will, we are able to foresake the things of the flesh for the things of the Spirit, and leave willful sin behind.

 

[holo]

We are back at the same question - what is God's will in this matter.

Without the bible, God just becomes a wish-list of what we think he is or want him to be. While the Word of God can definitely be heard outside of the bible, the bible must be the framework in which it is judged.

Why is that?

This is not just in the old testament, but the new too.

The homosexual act is unsafe in itself so why say it doesn't cause harm, ignoring the psychologic side.

I'm not sure what "the homosexual act" is. Do you mean anal sex? If so, sexual activity isn't limited to that.

Place yourself in the shoes of someone with pedophile tendencies. You would expect them to try and control their urges. Many men's urges seem to involve sleeping with as many woman as possible. Should they control their urges?

Sex with children is obviously harmful and abusive. Sleeping around cheapens sex and sensuality and is likely to cause emotional damage. But when two people choose to have steady relations, I can't argue that it's harmful.

Some men claim their behaviour does no lasting harm, but who knows the psychological damage they cause. The car thief and burgular claims his actions cause no harm cause you have insurance. Sometimes faith is about accepting God at his word even when we don't understand why. If you have all your questions answered it's not faith, just common sense.

Car theft does cause damage, but the damage may be repaired

I agree that sometimes we may have to accept God's word without understanding it. But I don't think that goes for moral issues like these.

It is good to be empathetic to others situations, but while you can use this to be sympathetic to their situation, you can't use this to condone their actions.

Absolutetly. That's why I respect 100% those who simply don't have a choice but HAVE to see homosexuality as wrong because of their faith. Usually the gay people are seen as the victims (after all, "they can't help it" etc), but I'm beginning to feel sorry for all those christians who aren't bashing or opposing people, but at the same time feel convicted to stand firm on what they believe to be Godly principles. I used to be one of them.

I fully understand your position though I think it's wrong.

 

[GrimWolf]

Romans 1

18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.
24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. 28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

Jude 1

17But, dear friends, remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold. 18They said to you, "In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires." 19These are the men who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit.

20But you, dear friends, build yourselves up in your most holy faith and pray in the Holy Spirit. 21Keep yourselves in God's love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life. 22Be merciful to those who doubt; 23snatch others from the fire and save them; to others show mercy, mixed with fear—hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh.

Read these passages again, "In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men". It says abandoned NATURAL relations with WOMAN and were inflamed with lust for one another. That means it is UNNATURAL to have "relations" with someone of the same sex as yourself.

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

By that same measure all those who pray for a cure for cancer, for themselves or for their loved ones lack faith, according to you the only reason anybody who suffers from a devastatingly painful illness or injury and prays to God yet is not healed "lacks faith, or doesn't want to be healed".

Last time I checked cancer was not a sin. By the way, my mother died of cancer when I was 10 years old, but I know that where she is now is a lot better than here on earth and yes, it hurt when she died, but it would be selfish of me to be mad at God for taking her to a better place.

You have my sympathy, my mother had the chance to hold my daughter before she died after a long and painful battle with breast cancer.

But I fail to see what any of that has to do with what I wrote.

God will decide when it is time for people to leave this world and so people die of cancer, not because they lack faith, but because it was their time.

That is an interesting interpretation, how do you get that in view of all the passages you quoted from the Bible about faith.

Surely if a mustard seed's measure of faith can move mountains it can't take that much to cure cancer.

Now , God does not make you gay, that is something you decide.

So, not only are homosexuals who prayed to God night after night in fear of their own sexuality lacking faith, they are lieing, because they decided to be gay.

 

[DaveS]

I know I'm flying back a few pages to my last post (have been busy) but I think the point of my post was missed.

I understand that gay people may 'rally' on certain cases. However, this does not refute my point as this thread is a living example of why someone would not want to be gay. Afterall, if you risked the wrath of God and an eternity of suffering for being a 'homosexual practitioner' you would surely want to change!

I personally judge sin on the Law of love. If a gay person is happy because he/she is in a commited same sex relationship then I cannot see anything wrong. Why would God force unhappiness on someone?

A final point is the fact that you cannot compare gambling, drinking etc to someone who is gay.This is because all the former are only 'sin' when they get in the way of your life - God never forbid the odd drink or the odd game of poker, what could be wrong with it really? This also applies to being gay, it is only 'sin' if it gets in the way of your life, as there are many examples of couples who are gay but still lead a perfectly normal life I cannot see how it is comparable. In fact, by forbiding homosexuality you could actually be forcing someone into sin as the issue may completely engulf thier lives, distracting from God.

 

[djbcrawford]

Indeed, it references the Scriptures, though it doesn't say what they are and nor does it say what we are to believe about them. It just says "according to the scriptures" - at this stage, the exact contents of the New Testament hadn't even been decided upon.

The church, however, did exist and the creed does say we are to believe in the church.

Please let me know where in that Creed it says "We believe in the Bible", as equivalent to "We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church," for instead.

So do you think we should just forget about the bible and follow the church. While the Creed may be a good mission statement, it doesn't remove the need for the bible. What about the reference to following the prophets, since they wrote the Old Testament.

Christ himself quoted extensively from the bible and obviously considered it to be the Word of God. He also spent a lot of time explaining the sciptures. He didn't say "This is what it means, but don't worry about it once the Nicean Creed comes out". Instead we are encouraged to meditate on it daily and teach it to our children.

 

[djbcrawford]

The "it doesn't hurt anyone" argument doesn't work for rape, theft or murder.

That's why I chose the phrase between them all. Plenty of people who steal claim no-one gets hurt as they have insurance. Murders and rapists have claimed they can't help it, it's just the way they are.

 

[IisJustMe]

I personally judge sin on the Law of love. If a gay person is happy because he/she is in a commited same sex relationship then I cannot see anything wrong.

If this is truly the measure of what is sin, or not, what should we do or say in the case of a child molester who is "happy" in his or her sexual practices?

Your characterization of alcohol, drugs and gambling in the life of a Christian indicates you don't see things the way I do as an addictions counselor. Alcoholism is not merely "the occasional drink" and neither is drug addiction. Gambling is sin because it is basically greed, which Paul called "idolatry." These are sin, pure and simple, and whether they "hurt" anyone or not is not the issue as to whether they are so defined.

 

[DaveS]

If this is truly the measure of what is sin, or not, what should we do or say in the case of a child molester who is "happy" in his or her sexual practices?

You will notice I said 'commited same sex relationship' and hence no harm done - both happy, both in love, both as far as I can see are following God's Law of love.

Your characterization of alcohol, drugs and gambling in the life of a Christian indicates you don't see things the way I do as an addictions counselor. Alcoholism is not merely "the occasional drink" and neither is drug addiction. Gambling is sin because it is basically greed, which Paul called "idolatry." These are sin, pure and simple, and whether they "hurt" anyone or not is not the issue as to whether they are so defined.

I am talking about the 'occasional drink' or the 'occasional game of poker' - these are not wrong and can be seen by Jesus drinking alcohol himself and even performing miracles so people can drink more. When alcohol and gambling becomes wrong is when they take over a person's life and distracts them from God, they do harm. As homosexuality never does take over a person's life (unless they are a paedophile etc which is a completely seperate issue) and it never does distract them from God (unless they are forced to reject God) then I cannot possibly see how it is wrong.

 

[djbcrawford]

1a) The Bible consistantly states that being a Qadesh* is wrong.
Qadesh is Strong's number 6942, and appears in Deut. 1st and 2nd Kings and Job.
Poking around StudyLight.org's interlinear will give more information

Don't see your point about a Syrian/Egyption godess of sex other than an assumption that you are suggesting the bible has been mistranslated on this point. If you believe the bible is in error then we are getting into a different debate about the accuracy of the bible. This is why I said it is a consistant view throughout. My point is that every sexual relationship the bible talks about from creation to the end of the New Testament in a wholesome way is within a "marriage" between a man and a woman, while at the same time sex between people of the same gender is condemned.

1b)While Jesus didn't specifically mention paying using paper money the only time he mentioned paying for anything was using coins.
The analogy is actually pretty good if you think about it.

Sorry, I have and don't think it is. Jesus said for them to pay their taxes. The fact he used a coin as an illustration is irrelevent. Your argument is more like saying we don't have to to pay Stamp Duty because Jesus said we only had to pay our taxes.

2) Yes, and?
Seriously, I want to know how you think this is an argument against homosexuality.

Do I really have to go through the organs of the body and list their functions and where they are designed to go...

I catagorically reject reasons 1), 2b) and 3 as they are stated (in particular assuming that "feels good" refers to physical sensations).

2a) "God made me this way" is not , IMHO, a useful argument as it is not verifiable.

4) is a partial argument. Outside of sexuality it is indeed a foundation argument about any behaviour.

These are not my arguments, merely ones I have seen people use.

OTOH I would point out that:

A) We know it exists in the natural world

Everything exists in the natural world. With this argument, every act by an animal is natural and acceptable for a human. Cannabalism, matricide, patricide, infanticide (okay I may have spelt them wrong, but you get my drift). Animal behaviour cannot be used to justify human behaviour

B) It is between consenting adults

Here's what this arguement justifies. If you can find someone who will consent to being killed and eaten, it's okay. Prostitution is fine. Multiple sexual partners - no problems. Want to have sex with your horse? (Well maybe not, as that's not two consenting adults)

C) It doesn't hurt anybody in the same way that heterosexuality doesn't hurt anybody (i.e. it jolly well can cause a great deal of pain, but that is a function of the relationships and/or failure to protect against STDs not of homo vs. hetero).

See several of the above consenting ones and add possible psychological damage and unsafe sexual practices (i.e. it's not just about a condom and STD's. Ask a prison doctor.

D) People who are doing good work, productive in society at large and in the church, draw strength from their homosexual relationships just as heterosexuals do.

Good works do not justify bad behaviour. The drug addict may be an upstanding member of society - as long as he gets his fix. The Mafia boss may keep the streets free of petty crime. There are relationships other than sexual ones to draw strength from.

 

[IisJustMe]

You will notice I said 'commited same sex relationship' and hence no harm done - both happy, both in love, both as far as I can see are following God's Law of love.

... conveniently ignoring OT law against same-sex relations of a sexual nature.

When alcohol and gambling becomes wrong is when they take over a person's life and distracts them from God, they do harm.

Again, they are "wrong" before any consequences become involved. That's the part you're not getting here. When Paul says "greed is idolatry" and God says idolatry is a sin, and gambling is equated with greed, then gambling is a sin, regardless of whether there are consequences. Mere thoughts can be sinful, and who is hurt by our thoughts? Only ourselves -- and God. He is the ultimate victim of all sin. It is the same with homosexual practices. You are trying to allow them to have it both ways ...

As homosexuality never does take over a person's life ...

How does being consumed with your "sexual preference" and wrestling with whether the lifestyle is worth the depression and self-destructive behavior you detailed yourself in your original post, not represent something that has taken over your life?

... and it never does distract them from God (unless they are forced to reject God) then I cannot possibly see how it is wrong.

... and how can it not be distracting, from God and from everything else? And whether they realize it or not, it does force them, ultimately, to reject God. Though a person engaging in homosexual practices who has truly believed in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is not condemned, they face the same risks of the unrepentant adulterer, murderer, liar, porn/drug/alchohol/gambling addict, the same risk the young man in Corinth (1 Corinthians 5:2) faced in his sexual sin with his stepmother. He was put out of the fellowship, and Paul gave him over to Satan for the destruction of his flesh -- his physical death, in other words -- to preserve his soul for eternity.

That's not much of a witness to bring before the judgment seat of Christ. In fact, it is no witness at all, and represents loss of all heavenly reward. He would be there, but that's about it. While that's better than not being there at all, it would be like being present for the greatest party of all time, and being confined to a sickbed, unable to partake, or enjoy. Fortunately for him -- and for us, as it illustrates God's love and forgiveness -- repentance brought about his restoration in 2 Corinthians 2.

 

[DaveS]

... conveniently ignoring OT law against same-sex relations of a sexual nature.

...eaten a lobster recently?

Again, they are "wrong" before any consequences become involved. That's the part you're not getting here. When Paul says "greed is idolatry" and God says idolatry is a sin, and gambling is equated with greed, then gambling is a sin, regardless of whether there are consequences. Mere thoughts can be sinful, and who is hurt by our thoughts? Only ourselves -- and God. He is the ultimate victim of all sin. It is the same with homosexual practices. You are trying to allow them to have it both ways ...

I disagree. Many people gamble (poker etc etc) simply for the fun of playing the game. This maybe motivated by greed but I cannot see how this argument can hold as it could be applied to any other situation in life. Afterall, getting a well-paid job may give you more money than needed to survive - is this wrong? No. Compulsively gambling so that you cannot feed yourself or care for others however is most certainly wrong.

Ethics very rarely are laws set in stone and very rarely allow for generalisation.

How does being consumed with your "sexual preference" and wrestling with whether the lifestyle is worth the depression and self-destructive behavior you detailed yourself in your original post, not represent something that has taken over your life?

Misquote...

- As homosexuality never does take over a person's life (unless they are a paedophile etc which is a completely seperate issue) and it never does distract them from God (unless they are forced to reject God) then I cannot possibly see how it is wrong. -

Here I am saying that being gay and acting gay would be as normal to that person as being a heterosexual and acting as such, barring the cases such as pedophilia etc that crops up in both and the stigma against gays which forces gay people into a self-hate, God hating mindset more often than not.

... and how can it not be distracting, from God and from everything else? And whether they realize it or not, it does force them, ultimately, to reject God.

Has a heterosexual lifestyle ever distracted you from God? Maybe it has but the distraction is no different to that of a homosexual. Both sexualities still love for the same reason but just in different directions so to speak.

 

[IisJustMe]

...eaten a lobster recently?

People who don't understand the Law don't understand its three divisions, and that the only one still remotely valid for Christians is the civil and criminal law, and it is but a tutor (Galatians 3:22-25) The Law of Christ (1 Corinthians 9:21) is what holds sway over us, and it is actually more strict that was the original. Love God ... love on another. That doesn't mean jump into bed with someone of the same gender, but as Paul explains in Romans 1:20-27, unnatural impulses are not the fruit of faith, but the fruit of the flesh.

I disagree.

Fine. But the Kingdom of God isn't a democracy. You don't get to pick and choose what you believe and obey.

Many people gamble (poker etc etc) simply for the fun of playing the game. This maybe motivated by greed but I cannot see how this argument can hold as it could be applied to any other situation in life.

Can't? Or won't?

Afterall, getting a well-paid job may give you more money than needed to survive - is this wrong? No.

Beiong paid a fair wage for your labor -- or even a grossly out of proportion wage, such as baseball or football players, is not a sin. Gambling is seeking after gain that requires no effort, no productivity. Whether you can feed yourself or not is irrelevent, but the motivation -- who are you serving? God, or yourself?

Ethics very rarely are laws set in stone and very rarely allow for generalisation.

Darn that Joe Fletcher and his "situational ethics." He has convinced an entire generation of business people they can do anything they want, providing they can justify it. Sorry, but that's not what God said, and He certainly won't reward it.

Misquote...

Look again. Those are your exact words, with the paranthetical phrases removed because they were irrelevent to my point.

Here I am saying that being gay and acting gay would be as normal to that person as being a heterosexual and acting as such, barring the cases such as pedophilia etc that crops up in both and the stigma against gays which forces gay people into a self-hate, God hating mindset more often than not.

I know that's what you were saying. I responded by stating that it isn't the stigma society, or Christians, put on them, it is their own doubts and fears, because deep down inside, they know the laws of God condemn them.

Has a heterosexual lifestyle ever distracted you from God?

That's the wrong question. What you should ask is, "Has sexual sin ever distracted me from God?" and the honest answer is "yes" as it is with most people. I am not condemning homosexual behavior as being worse than any other sexual sin. Adultery, fornication, even pedophilia or rape are all sexual sin equally in need of repentance. So is homosexuality. None of these sins eternally separates a person from God, unless as with any other sin it is not covered by the blood of Christ through faith in His sacrifice for the sinner.

Both sexualities still love for the same reason but just in different directions so to speak.

Insistence on having one's own way in defiance of God's will is still sin, regardless of what that will is. If homosexual behavior is more important to a person than a right relationship with God, they will be dealt with according to His judgment, depending upon that person's position in Christ.

 

[DevotiontoBible]

...eaten a lobster recently?

Your comparing apples to oranges. Eating lobster is not an abomination neither did it get the death penalty in the Bible BUT! homosexuality is both an abomination and deserving of captial punishment by God.

 

[Abruer17]

But that serves as a good question, right? I mean, how are we going to apply some and not others? Where is the dividing line?

 

[DevotiontoBible]

But that serves as a good question, right? I mean, how are we going to apply some and not others? Where is the dividing line?

The dividing line of what rules to apply is to consider what rules are ceremonial and what rules are moral. The ceremonial rules do not apply anymore because those pointed to Christ but the moral rules still apply. Idolatry, sexual immorality, murder, stealing etc. still apply today because they are of a moral nature. Paul never said since we are under grace we are free from morals. Paul always said we are free from the religious rituals of the law.

 

[DaveS]

Your comparing apples to oranges. Eating lobster is not an abomination neither did it get the death penalty in the Bible BUT! homosexuality is both an abomination and deserving of captial punishment by God.

Err...

[BIBLE]9 " 'Of all the creatures living in the water of the seas and the streams, you may eat any that have fins and scales. 10 But all creatures in the seas or streams that do not have fins and scales—whether among all the swarming things or among all the other living creatures in the water—you are to detest. 11 And since you are to detest them, you must not eat their meat and you must detest their carcasses. 12 Anything living in the water that does not have fins and scales is to be detestable to you. [/BIBLE]

Detestable = abomination

People who don't understand the Law don't understand its three divisions, and that the only one still remotely valid for Christians is the civil and criminal law, and it is but a tutor (Galatians 3:22-25) The Law of Christ (1 Corinthians 9:21) is what holds sway over us, and it is actually more strict that was the original. Love God ... love on another. That doesn't mean jump into bed with someone of the same gender, but as Paul explains in Romans 1:20-27, unnatural impulses are not the fruit of faith, but the fruit of the flesh.

Where exactly is the distinction?

Fine. But the Kingdom of God isn't a democracy. You don't get to pick and choose what you believe and obey.

Neither can you I may point out, we are saved by faith and/or love anyway so it really does not matter.

Beiong paid a fair wage for your labor -- or even a grossly out of proportion wage, such as baseball or football players, is not a sin. Gambling is seeking after gain that requires no effort, no productivity. Whether you can feed yourself or not is irrelevent, but the motivation -- who are you serving? God, or yourself?

Who are you serving when you get a job? Has to be yourself.
I could also argue that gambling takes considerably more mental effort than in football, however, most people who gamble do simply do it for fun and they know when to stop. Afterall, gambling is such a blanket term anyway and can only ever be applied to an individual at a time.

Darn that Joe Fletcher and his "situational ethics." He has convinced an entire generation of business people they can do anything they want, providing they can justify it. Sorry, but that's not what God said, and He certainly won't reward it.

Do we have a better alternative? No.

Take this example.

'Gambling is wrong and all who do it will go to Hell'

'Man donates all winnings from the lottery to charity'

Is the man still going to Hell?

I know that's what you were saying. I responded by stating that it isn't the stigma society, or Christians, put on them, it is their own doubts and fears, because deep down inside, they know the laws of God condemn them.

I cringe at the sweeping generaliation.

That's the wrong question. What you should ask is, "Has sexual sin ever distracted me from God?" and the honest answer is "yes" as it is with most people. I am not condemning homosexual behavior as being worse than any other sexual sin. Adultery, fornication, even pedophilia or rape are all sexual sin equally in need of repentance. So is homosexuality. None of these sins eternally separates a person from God, unless as with any other sin it is not covered by the blood of Christ through faith in His sacrifice for the sinner.

But homosexuality involves love between two people of the same sex as opposed to two people of opposite sexes. How can the same love be wrong in one but fine in the other? Neither cause harm, why should there be a distinction?

Insistence on having one's own way in defiance of God's will is still sin, regardless of what that will is. If homosexual behavior is more important to a person than a right relationship with God, they will be dealt with according to His judgment, depending upon that person's position in Christ.

Again, I point out that the homosexual lifestyle only ever becomes more important than their relationship with God at times when it comes under the pressure as what happens with heterosexual people or they are forced into thinking about it. i.e. their lifestyle it condemned and they are condemned to Hell.

 

[DaveS]

The dividing line of what rules to apply is to consider what rules are ceremonial and what rules are moral. The ceremonial rules do not apply anymore because those pointed to Christ but the moral rules still apply. Idolatry, sexual immorality, murder, stealing etc. still apply today because they are of a moral nature. Paul never said since we are under grace we are free from morals. Paul always said we are free from the religious rituals of the law.

But where is the dividing line between ceremonial and moral law? Some laws in Leviticus don't actually have reasons that could be placed into convenient categories, where do these go?