Why does Leviticus trump Jesus?

If Jesus DID say anything at all about homosexuality--and he seems to have had a lot to say about almost anything people did--no record of what he said on the subject has been transmitted to us. Given the first-century Judean animosity toward homosexuality, that suggests that either he said nothing on the subject, or he was more tolerant than his followers.

You're correct that Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 are the only statements about homosexuality in the Old Testament. But that first-century animosity--a leftover from the Maccabees' revolt against a regime bent on forcing Greek ways on its conquered territories--does get expressed at least a couple times in the New Testament. That complicates the argument.

One of these is Romans 1:26-27 (the only instance which includes lesbianism along with male homosexuality). While it (like Leviticus) fails to treat the subject from a modern understanding of sexual orientation, it's pretty clear. And it's the only New Testament instance that is at all clear.

Jude 7 claims the destruction of Sodom was primarily a punishment for homosexuality. This is the same misreading of Genesis 19 that now is featured in the Catholic Catechism--one which would fall apart if the writers were honest enough to choose between two possible interpretations: Either they are arguing that all homosexuals are rapists, or they are arguing that rape is okay if the victim is the opposite sex from the perpetrator. Honestly facing that choice would lead anyone (whether a Catholic Pope or Jude himself) to realize it's a stupid claim.

The other two New Testament instances (I Corinthians 6:9-10, I Timothy 1:8-10) are basically long-standing customary mistranslations. The word used looks, to anyone familiar with Greek roots, as though it ought to mean male-male sexual intercourse. The problem is that there were a wealth of Koine Greek expressions for that activity, and none of them are known to have used the word. Some later writers seem to have picked it up, but the only writer who offers any explanation says that it refers to an activity possible between man and wife. The only basis for reading it as referring to homosexuality is WANTING to read it that way.

There're also a couple statements in the Epistle of Barnabas, but that dropped out of Bibles around the fourth century and is firmly regarded as non-canonical now.

Rather than "love thy neighbor as thyself," which Jesus (and earlier teachers including Hillel) drew from Leviticus (right between those two references to homosexual sex, in fact), I prefer to base my own assessment on the Golden Rule (which Jesus also developed from an earlier statement by Hillel). My own sexual orientation is in the majority, and consequently I enjoy rather a large set of social, legal, and financial privileges connected with being married. If I happened to be in the minority, and the majority decided my marriage wasn't legally recognizable, I wouldn't like it one bit. By the Golden Rule, I am commanded, by Jesus, to treat others as I would have them treat me.

The fact that a few uptight contributors to the thousand-year arguments recorded in the Bible happened to be unwilling to extend this teaching to its logical conclusion does not carry anywhere near the same weight with me.

When Jesus Christ died on the Cross, So did the Laws of the Old Testament. He is The New Covenant of all Sin. In other words, If one believes in Jesus as Lord and Savior. They are Saved. Not depraved actions of man kind. Read the New testament verses below.

Leviticus 18:22

Leviticus 20:13

1 Corinthians 6:9

Romans 1:24-26-27

Loving some one is expected as a Christian. Tolerating the behavior is not. Homosexuality spans the whole of the Bible and is a "sin", and is not ambiguous. The performances, statutes, and ordinances have changed but not what is a sin, that never changes. A sin is a sin.

Now ket me go a different way with homosexuality. Marriage is not an issue of “rights,” as same-sex marriage proponents maintain, nor is it strictly a religious doctrine. It is, rather, based in natural law, lex naturalis, which is the system of law that is determined by nature, and is thus universal. Embedded also in nature’s law is the use of reason to analyze social and personal human nature to deduce binding rules of behavior from it. As fundamentally significant as marriage is to to our culture, our society, and our civilization, the institution cannot be cavalierly “redefined.”

The family is the fundamental building block of society and predates the state and even the societies it builds…At the heart of the family is the mother and father who bring their children into existence.” This is a self-evident truth, regardless of who said it, and anthropologists, biologists, sociologists, and politicians have reiterated that very sentiment. The family is the building block of society and civilization, and the cornerstone to that foundation, or the genesis of it, is a mother and a father.

Foundations must be strong, and built to withstand the elements, corrosion, and the test of time. Otherwise, the structure built thereon will inevitably crumble. If a foundation is made with unmixed cement or just water, as same-sex marriage tries to do, the foundation is weak, and the structure (our civilization) built thereon will crumble. When we tamper with, and attempt to socially-engineer the foundational elements and institutions to civilization and our society, the results will be destructive.

There's no "trumping" here, and I agree with you that you're missing something. Briefly....all OT laws were given to Israel only. To understand the Bible one needs to know the dispensation and the audience in which the passage being studied falls...it is wrong to apply it to everyone when it's not issued to everyone. Jesus died on the cross to bring a new covenant of grace through faith in Him to all who would believe. That "saves" people from the law, bondage of the law, condemnation of the law, which stands only for those who reject the new covenant. People cannot be under both law and grace since the two are mutually exclusive. Everyone is under one or the other...the determining factor is their position in Jesus Christ.

Although I believe you intend to be offensive ("spawn of god" is betraying) you're incorrect to assume that the only passages in the Bible that reference homosexuality are those in the OT law. There are several in the NT as well. It seems to me you're just another one of the many here who get stuck in a part of the Bible and don't make it past there to ever fully understand the message of the whole book, which works together as one consecutive message.

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.

Because Leviticus is harder and gets the hate going better. That Jesus stuff is too soft and airy fairy.

He doesn't sound so loving in my book.

"For truly I tell you, 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"

- Jesus

"For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death."

- Jesus

"But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them--bring them here and kill them in front of me.'"

- Jesus

"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn "'a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law"

- Jesus

“The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows."

- Jesus

I think everybody can agree that Leviticus is crazy.

Nobody except God trumps Jesus

Religious bigotry trumps everything.