5 votes

Don't you just hate Leviticus?

Who doesn't? Even the Commander in Chief wants in on the action.


This is normal. It's not just the president that feels this way. I have seen the following list of questions on Leviticus floating around social media, and I thought, well, let's just answer these questions directly.

So that's what I'm going to do. You will be able to find my responses to the questions below in [brackets].

Remember, we hate this law. Romans 8:7 makes that quite clear. "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." Romans 8:7 KJV Translation

Here we go...


On her radio show, Dr Laura Schlesinger said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following response is an open letter to Dr. Laura, written by a U.S. man, and posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as informative:

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 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 them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination ... End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are 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?

[There are 2 reasons you cannot own Canadians. First, in our country, only the state can own slaves. So, if you want to own anyone, you are going to have to take it up with them. Second, the Canadians are from the same stock as Americans. Just a few generations ago we shared common blood. They would fall under the law of brothers, Hebrew servants. That means, according to Deuteronomy 15:12, they have to be released every 7 years. *Or he could sell himself to you through the year of Jubilee, or he could voluntarily stay with you forever. Lev 25:39-42; Deut 15:16-17]

2. 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?

[Marriage in Hebrew law is a 2 party contract between the man and the father of the bride. The man takes over guardianship of the woman and the liabilities that come with her. That is, he has to feed and clothe her. Exodus 21:10-11 makes that clear. With that in mind, you are free to charge as much as you like. Jacob agreed to work 7 years for his wife Rachel. But she may have been more valuable and better looking than your average girl. If you take the girl without asking the father, you pay 50 pieces of silver and the father can still refuse to give you his daughter. Deuteronomy 22:29 and Exodus 22:16-17.]

3. 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.

[It is the responsibility of the woman to keep herself separate during menstruation. Menstrual blood is a bio hazard. If you touch an unclean woman or her bed, you wash and are unclean till evening. *It's not sin unless you are approaching the woman to uncover her nakedness or lie with her during her period. Lev 18:19 and 20:18]

4. 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?


5. 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, or should I ask the police to do it?

[No. If the police, judges, or elders will not enforce the law, then you have no right to take the matter into your own hands. Your neighbor has a right to stand before the judges and plead his case.]

6. 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? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

[Some abominations require capital punishment. The death penalty is not commanded for dietary laws, although the health and social effects may prove deadly.]

7. 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?

[This law applies to the Aaronic priests. Normal people do not keep the service of the altar. Glasses would pose a problem in this service.]

8. 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?

[The death penalty is not commanded for a violation of this law.]

9. 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?

[Better to use a different football. But if you do pick up a pig skin, wash your clothes, and be unclean till evening. Lev 11:25 *EDIT* Turns out, footballs are not made of pigskins.]

10. 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)

[No, the death penalty is not commanded for mixed seed or clothing. For blasphemy, yes, they are stoned. But there must be due process. Deuteronomy 17:2-4 *Also, the word "private" here is wrong.]

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I'm confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your adoring fan,

[*Edit* I think it was falsely attributed to]
James M. Kauffman, Ed.D. Professor Emeritus, Dept. Of Curriculum,
Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia

P.S. It would be a damn shame if we couldn't own a Canadian.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


Mentioning Leviticus is not an argument.

If you are still reading I will expand slightly

Most people do not question what they hear in Church. For the Elite, that is perfect.

Remember, it was the Catholic Church that tried to say you needed a priest to talk to God. This is one reason for the division among the churches. DIVIDE AND CONQUER.

If the crusaders would kill for it, then the control of information must have been THAT VITAL.

Trust me, the Christian religion has been co opted by evil. This is very evident with the hate groups, molestation, UFO propaganda siding hypocritical manifestations.

why do we always except the tale that the Jews killed Jesus? Remember that the only time Jesus ever got physical is when he drove the money changers out of the Temple. Right after that he is crucified. They could have easily been the ones behind it, then using the Jew story to further "divide and conquer"

Here's to you if you actually read all that.

Ron brought the Liberty movement together, Rand is expanding the crap out of it! :)


"Most people do not question what they hear in Church. For the Elite, that is perfect."

I've never been to a church that didn't encourage people to look into things for themselves, like the Bereans in Acts 17:11

"Remember, it was the Catholic Church that tried to say you needed a priest to talk to God. This is one reason for the division among the churches. DIVIDE AND CONQUER."

I don't know of any catholic who ever believed that. Talking/prayer to God on your own is encouraged by Catholics, and to my knowledge always was. Disinformation is also a way to cause division. Where the catholic church had a problem was in mediation of sacraments and interpretation, but not in talking to God.

"If the crusaders would kill for it, then the control of information must have been THAT VITAL."

There is a lot of spin applied to historical studies of crusaders. Nominalism is often the problem where religion is blamed.

"Trust me, the Christian religion has been co opted by evil. This is very evident with the hate groups, molestation, UFO propaganda siding hypocritical manifestations."

Aberrations of Christianity do not detract from Christianity itself. If Jesus didn't teach hate/molestation/etc., then you can't blame those things on Christianity when false Christians do it. The bible is full of accounts of corrupt people within Godly communities. Will you blame Jesus for Judas's greed? Why trust you instead of Jesus when he says the following? Matthew 16:18b "...I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

"Furthermore, why do we always except the tale that the Jews killed Jesus? Remember that the only time Jesus ever got physical is when he drove the money changers out of the Temple. Right after that he is crucified. They could have easily been the ones behind it, then using the Jew story to further "divide and conquer""

Well, it was actually the Romans who killed Jesus after being urged to do so by 'some' Jews. Why accept that? Because that is what the historical documentation points to. 'Could have .. would have' stories are not any reason to believe that your proposition corresponds to reality.

its not that hard.

"Who do you think chose the books in the Bible?"

Your response:
God did. At church councils, Christian churches merely 'recognized' which books were already accepted in churches by consistency of use.

My response:
I'm sorry you still believe that. I think Leviticus is a good example of my point.

I'm just saying, there are SO many more scriptures and possibilities with things that don't add up. The message Jesus brought forth resonates with me, but the Bible contradicts this displays the narrative of something that can be strued to be VERY negative. This is why the whole world is not Christian now. Look at the hypocrisy.

I am not sure how God picked the books. That just sounds like a way to get people to not question which books did and did not make the Bible. None of them were written by God or Jesus themselves. This is my explanation for the division among Christians and why so many people stray from the message.

Ron brought the Liberty movement together, Rand is expanding the crap out of it! :)


I still don't see how mentioning Leviticus is an argument. Christians would agree that Leviticus exists, but they wouldn't see it as a problem, as they try not to look at it out of context or uncharitably. It's easy to spin other peoples words, especially when not paying attention to the context. It's likely that there are precepts you hold about Leviticus which are incorrect, but because they were not mentioned, are not addressable. The fact that you can't get things to add up could mean that you aren't doing the math right. I'm wondering what you think the message of Jesus was if you reject books he adored. I also don't see the connection you are drawing between your confusion and division of Christians and the existence of apostates. There are other explanations for those concepts which make more sense to me, which I won't get into now unless you want to.

Here's another argument for you.. If an all powerful God wanted to communicate to people who would follow him, then it follows that the people who he wanted to give the message to would have the message the all powerful God would want them to have. If you accept that an all powerful God wanted to communicate, then it's a question of whether or not an all powerful God can fail, which would be self refuting if you thought he could fail. So if one already has reason to believe that the religion of Jesus was from God, then it would follow that followers of Jesus would have whatever communication God wanted them to have, in whatever form he wanted them to have it. It's not surprising that God would use something as plain as human accounts transmitted textually when Jesus himself spoke in parables instead of being totally open with his message.


I know that Jesus did not refute the books of the Bible, but we leave too much to assumption. My opinion is not "the truth", but it is what resonates with me. I lost my religion when I fell for the tricks and traps left in the religion. I came back to it only after more and more strange truths I discovered on my own.
Most of my family, except my mother, think I am crazy when I tell them that Aliens are not real and the Rapture is propaganda.
At here, I can talk openly about those beliefs whether they are right or wrong.

Ron brought the Liberty movement together, Rand is expanding the crap out of it! :)


Yes, open dialog is good. I think liberty-minded people are generally very tolerant even when they disagree strongly. Too many people are intolerant as they preach tolerance, but I don't really see that here much.

The rapture is a relatively new concept. Even within millennialism, a gathering back to Christ is placed at different times( pre-trib imminent, pre-trib non-imminent, post-trib, mid-trib, etc.). Amillennialism was much more mainstream prior to this new teaching, and for a longer time. Preterism is also something to consider. But eschatology is not really a major issue in my opinion.

I've always thought belief in aliens was not characteristic of Christians, unless you consider heavenly beings (i.e. angels, cherubims, seraphims, etc.) to be considered aliens. Though, if space aliens or life on other planets did exist, I don't think it would conflict with the Bible.

What exactly did you leave, and what exactly did you come back to?

Since you asked

Growing up I assumed that Aliens were real, but I never saw them. I did, however, has several paranormal experiences growing up.

When I started want questions to my answers, I turned to the Internet to start research. I did have to sift through a lot of propaganda, but it started to become clear when propaganda was the directive after my intellectual awakening (Kind of known as education).

I came to realize was Hitler was after and why those scientist involved were brought to America to continue their work (Project Paperclip.

I also watched every episode of History Channels Ancient Aliens. This was also a propaganda tool. Almost everything they said was true though. Lots of evidence is shown to support Alien life. This is the technology Hitler was after.

The evidence shows that during the time of the Ancients, technology was advanced. Planes, helicopter, DNA tampering and one of my favorites, Rocket ships. This is important. The rocket ship pictures detail show that they were leaving a planet in a similar vessel that we use today.
So in theory, we are using that technology today!

The problem was, that technology enslaved mankind. I mean the all the crossbreeds give that away. The Bible said that the fallen Angles mating with the women of Earth is one of the reasons that the Earth was flooded. The Earth was flooded in NUMEROUS religions.

I went to a government school and realized that not only was my history changed to indoctrinate me into to a certain way of thinking, but I was being taught certain things for a reason. I love Greek and Roman mythology. I also watched all of the Hercules and Xena TV series when I was a kid. This stuff has started to meld together. Mythology and History. Who were the fallen Angles? Were they the gods?

Understanding the nature of how secret the Fed and other Taboo topics were, I started to wonder why Aliens were almost being pushed on the public. It was then I started to realize they WANTED us to believe it was Aliens at Area 51. The press put out that story than pulled it back on purpose. They wanted to use that as a cover up for the technology they were developing. We know that stealth planes originated from that base, but the rest is pretty much "Secret".

The state would love to destroy Christianity and drive a dagger right through it. The Elite remember the Christians are their biggest rival.

I have experienced too many things to deny the spiritual world. What if that world is just another dimension we cannot see? Was if Heaven is a place on Earth? Just another decisions. Well, what happened to those gods from the Greek mythology? Why are the Elite worshiping the ancient gods (Bohemian Grove and some Illuminati wannabe performers). My answer is that they exist in the spiritual world and they can manifest themselves here periodically, but they now rule us vicariously though the Elite. This is why they worship them. They give them the info they need to develop the technology that God flooded this Earth for. They make promises to them about ruling the world.

That is why I have come to the conclusion that Jesus is real and the battle has always been good vs evil. According to the Bible, which I still read, Jesus will come back and rule for a thousand years. I don't think he will physically come back, but he will rule vicariously though us all. This time, the technology will empower mankind.

That is the brief story of what I believe :)

Ron brought the Liberty movement together, Rand is expanding the crap out of it! :)


I see, thanks for sharing.

There are different takes on the interpretation of Genesis 6 and the Nephilim, some of which view them as mere humans: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nephilim

Though I'm not convinced of the existence of UFO's, I know people who say they've seen them. There's a lot of stuff about "nazi UFO's" on youtube, and although it might seem far fetched, it definitely seems more plausible that advanced technology was discovered by humans than that space aliens exist and visit us.

The mythological gods of the Greeks and Romans are part of a polytheistic system which isn't compatible with Christianity.
But if you consider the following verses the Greek and Roman pantheons might be viewed in a different light and not as true deities but perhaps as some sort of evil spirit or fallen angel:

1st Corinthians 10:20 "But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils."

Psalms 96:5 "For all the gods of the nations are idols: but the LORD made the heavens".

I think the idea that spiritual beings can influence people and governments is biblical. But I think there is a sort of compatibilism where even if God allows something evil to influence a Government to do evil things, though God is not culpable for their evil deeds, God still has sovereign control of the situation and has a purpose for allowing it, even when we don't know what it is.
For example, it says: Revelation 17:16-17 "And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled."

This was just posted today


Ron brought the Liberty movement together, Rand is expanding the crap out of it! :)

Nice scripture quotes

Thanks for listening.

Ron brought the Liberty movement together, Rand is expanding the crap out of it! :)

Well spoken.

Well spoken.

Solid gold. I used to love

Solid gold. I used to love going into my local christian bookstore and reading horrible crap straight out of the bible. People inside would sit there with painted-on smiles pretending that the horrible crap I was reading was "good." Wether it was the bit about selling your daughter into slavery, tossing your wife into the street if you didn't like her (so long as you gave her 7 days of food)or loving god burning out the eyes of ungrateful people with plague after they didn't give him quite enough butt licking after he tossed them some bread, the reactions were always priceless.

Sick, sadistic peasant control based on the most Orwelleon ideas imaginable. An omnipresant brutal authoratarian who is "always" spying on your every move and will destroy your eternal soul if you don't submit entirley. Or INGSOC would say: A loving father who guides you and gives you free will. Ha.

This is like saying

"I don't like chapter 6 of this one book" except you failed to read it in the context of the story as a whole.

This is a good word from a pastor in NYC Tim Keller:

"Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it."- Ron Paul

Don't Believe everything you Read - Art Bell

Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
Rand Paul 2016


the only part of Leviticus still relevant in terms of being required now is the moral aspect, the ceremonial and legal aspects were fulfilled through Jesus.

In other words, the ceremonial practices (such as mixing seed, "clean" and "unclean," etc.) and the legal aspects (prescribed punishments, etc.) are not in force any more. However, the moral condemnations (homosexuality is wrong, murder is wrong, incest is wrong, adultery is wrong, etc.) are still in effect, given that the New Testament clearly affirms those.

No, really. It actually is that simple. Thus, homosexuality is wrong and should be condemned, BUT stoning them is no longer acceptable. The Old Testament law required constant obedience, and things like homosexual sex and murder were considered epic levels of disobedience, given how utterly and inherently unnatural (literally, perversion of God's intent) they are. However, thanks to Jesus' sacrifice, they can be forgiven - though forgiveness does require sincere repentance.

No bastards in church-which is that: moral, ceremonial or legal

Deuteronomy 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.

Please clarify which of the 3 aspects you mention (moral, ceremonial or legal) this applies to and why.

I honestly tried to categorize this using your outline above. I concluded it would seem to most closely fit with 'moral' aspect - being a phenomenon inextricably linked to biblically prohibited "immoral" sexual acts. Further, being a bastard clearly carries moral condemnation (the word itself is derisive as in "YOU BASTARD!!!"). Finally, like the other moral aspects you listed, the unwholesome state of being a bastard is also 'affirmed in the New Testament' (e.g. Hebrews 12:8). Indeed, as with many New Testament ideas, it is no longer solely physical reality that matters. With New Testament ideology, you can commit adultery in your heart (regardless of actual adulterous physical action) and you can be a bastard if you lack chastisement (regardless of actual parental marital status at birth).

Perhaps you'll just say I'm a bastard for posting a comment here on an issue I find troubling. If so, what does the bible say that means for my great, grand, great, great, great, great, great grandchildren?


The Old Testament law in question deals with how a ceremony is conducted. So it is obviously and explicitly a ceremonial law.
The passage in Hebrews in the New testament speaks of a spiritual relationship with God; all of the ceremonial laws point to some sort of spiritual reality. Also, "actual parental marital status at birth" is irrelevant to the spiritual reality spoken of in Hebrews 12, as John 1:12 makes legitimate son-ship available to anyone who receives Jesus:

John 1:12 "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:"

Perhaps you should exercise a little charity when interpreting the bible: http://philosophy.lander.edu/oriental/charity.html


I really do thank you, I love it when anyone honors God's word. Right down to the ones the left loves to hate.

Why did you not bother to

Why did you not bother to post the answer to this letter?


Don't forget what happens to abominable children.

It turns out that "abomination" doesn't mean what people think it means, and, of course, Jesus was famous for a more enlightened attitude toward women, children, slaves, and foreigners, even making one of those awful Samaritans the hero of a parable.

Sometimes I think people are confused about the difference between homosexual behavior between homosexuals, and homosexual behavior between straight people, the latter of which is clearly unnatural.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

IMissLiberty, would you

IMissLiberty, would you elaborate on your thinking here about this notion of the difference between homosexual behavior between straights as opposed to gays?

Not for debate...more because I'm thinking what you wrote could trip a wire in a debate I'm having with myself.

Rape vs Sex

Most would agree that two people having sex should be in agreement about what they're doing. Rape is bad. An expectation of marriage on one side and not on the other is bad. A contract (marriage, or perhaps otherwise) is good.

An act, involving another, should be natural, in harmony with each person's best self. Taking advantage of children is bad.

Expressing one's drives without regard to the other is not good, and neither is forcing oneself to accept behavior that does not feel right.

Straight men in prison engaging in homosexual acts is a perversion the same as if they force themselves on women who aren't on the same page one way or another. I can see why that would be "an abomination."

Two people in love, committed to each other, and in accord with their physiology (e.g., not immature children, and in harmony with their physiology), is clearly part of the ideal. One thing is clear: sex drive, sexual identity, and sexual maturity are all fundamentally physiological, under the influence of hormones before birth and after, and usually not controlled by the individual (i.e., "God-given"). The only thing we can learn to control is how we value what we were given and how we treat what others were given.

If homosexualality is an abomination, why does God keep making them? It's fairly apparent that the abomination is perverted sex, not natural, committed sex between two people on the same page (no fraud, mutual respect, commitment, etc.).

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

not proven.

"If homosexualality is an abomination, why does God keep making them? "

It's not proven that that inclination is genetically determined or that 'God made them that way'. The bible teaches that God lets people fall into their own pits, and lets them fall into their own sin when they don't love the truth of God. If they truly loved the truth of God, you'd think they would accept God's view of what good human sexuality is supposed to look like.

Here is a quote from the bible which gives the impression that the bible teaches that people are not born that way, but that it is a result of something else:
Romans 1:21-27 "Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."

That being said, I don't think gay people are less valuable than others. Nobody is perfect, but it's always good to strive to better ones self.

Consistency is important. Contradictions are unhealthy.

Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities also has the power to make you commit atrocities. –Voltaire

"Many people would sooner die than think; In fact, they do so." -- Bertrand Russell

"I have examined all the known superstitions of the word, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth." ~ Thomas Jefferson

Beautiful. Simply....

Beautiful. Simply.... beautiful.