Quote:
Originally Posted by GreekChatObserv
Are you referring to Levitical law? Your bible has also been used to justify slavery. It also advocates the stoning of disobedient children and adulterous wives.
It is interesting how people pick and choose from religious texts that may or may not govern other people.
Do you eat shellfish?
Funny, that plank in your eye. |
As he noted, he's referring to more than the levitical law.
But as for shellfish, c'mon. The church has, say for about 2000 years, distinguished between the ritual law (such as the levitical laws regarding food or clothing materials) and the ethical law (such as laws governing moral, including sexual, behavior). There's actually some discussion about it in Acts, including the decision of the council in Jerusalem that Gentile converts did not have to be circumcised and the revelation to Peter that all foods were permissible. Paul discusses this as well, along with his not infrequent discussions about the degree to which the Law is binding in general. (And his condemnation of homosexual behavior in Romans.)
As for slavery, yes many did use Scripture to condone slavery. Unlike the passages regarding homosexuality, though, I don't think anyone has ever plausibly contended that Scripture affirmatively sanctions or commands slavery, just that it seems to accept it as a fact of the ancient world and does not condemn it. Using this lack of condemnation as justification for slavery is really not the same thing as relying on passages that expressly disapprove of homosexual conduct.
Granted,
many Christians of good faith disagree on exectly how the relevant passages in Genesis, Leviticus, Romans and elsewhere should be interpreted and applied today. And perhaps you find the church's long-standing distinction between the ritual law and the ethical law one that misses the mark.
But to argue that anyone is picking and choosing which rules to follow bases one's argument on ignorance and a very shallow understanding of the totality of Scripture -- it sounds catchy, but it doesn't hold up to any close examination, IMHO.