Death penalty in Leviticus (Jewish opinions also appreciated)

[m8g8]

Hello,

I am having a mini debate with someone who claimed that they are intolerant of all religion because they support killing homosexuals and such.

I asked him why he thinks religions teach this, and he pointed out Leviticus.

I basically replied by saying that they agreed to a covenant and the person I’m debating with said basically said:

“Your God gave a law to Jews that said to stone homosexuals and this is written in the bible. Because of this law, gay people were killed. Your God allowed that?”

How would you respond to this? I haven’t studied scripture.

 

[RileyG]

Use this scripture verses:
John 8:1-11

"Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

“No one, sir,” she said.

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

God Bless

 

[meltzerboy]

Hello,

I am having a mini debate with someone who claimed that they are intolerant of all religion because they support killing homosexuals and such.

I asked him why he thinks religions teach this, and he pointed out Leviticus.

I basically replied by saying that they agreed to a covenant and the person I’m debating with said basically said:

“Your God gave a law to Jews that said to stone homosexuals and this is written in the bible. Because of this law, gay people were killed. Your God allowed that?”

How would you respond to this? I haven’t studied scripture.

Well, study the Torah and the Talmud and get back to me in about 20 years. LOL

Seriously though, it’s complicated since the Written Law (Torah) has many levels of interpretation, whereas the Oral Law (Talmud) helps to understand the
Torah, as do the mystical writings of the Kabbalah, particularly the Zohar. For one thing, the death penalty itself was not administered willy-nilly. There had to be a conscious understanding on the part of the accused concerning the crime they were committing, as well as at least two bona fide eyewitnesses to the crime. With regard to the particular issue of homosexuality, this requires an understanding of topics such as forbidden pagan rituals, sodomy, the Hebrew meaning of the word “abomination,” the exclusion of female homosexuality, reasons for cross-dressing proscriptions, and so forth. There are several interrelated topics involved in a discussion of this subject.

All of the above is of course limited to the Hebrew Bible and its understanding according to Judaism, and does not take into account the writings of the New Testament or the teachings of the Church regarding the Old Testament Law.

 

[teeboy]

The Old Testament law was replaced by the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth and his Church.

 

[CopticChristian]

Hello,

I am having a mini debate with someone who claimed that they are intolerant of all religion because they support killing homosexuals and such.

I asked him why he thinks religions teach this, and he pointed out Leviticus.

I basically replied by saying that they agreed to a covenant and the person I’m debating with said basically said:

“Your God gave a law to Jews that said to stone homosexuals and this is written in the bible. Because of this law, gay people were killed. Your God allowed that?”

How would you respond to this? I haven’t studied scripture.

Mg,

Actually Deuterotomy is a law of compromise from Moses and written in Leviticus…recall that Moses allowed Divorce and Jesus pointed out that this was not so…the Old Covenant was a law of compromise after the first law…God gave the 10 commandments and Moses provided the laws of Deuterotomy and Leviticus…

 

[meltzerboy]

Mg,

Actually Deuterotomy is a law of compromise from Moses and written in Leviticus…recall that Moses allowed Divorce and Jesus pointed out that this was not so…the Old Covenant was a law of compromise after the first law…God gave the 10 commandments and Moses provided the laws of Deuterotomy and Leviticus…

A law of compromise? What do you mean by that term? Deuteronomy is a legal synopsis of the previous books of the Torah, and each of the Ten Commandments or Statements is more fully explicated in the course of the Torah books.

 

[CopticChristian]

A law of compromise? What do you mean by that term? Deuteronomy is a legal synopsis of the previous books of the Torah, and each of the Ten Commandments or Statements is more fully explicated in the course of the Torah books.

Scott Hahn points out that divorce was allowed because otherwise the men would kill their spouse…so divorce was allowed…this is his term…

 

[meltzerboy]

Scott Hahn points out that divorce was allowed because otherwise the men would kill their spouse…so divorce was allowed…this is his term…

OK, but the underpinning of divorce in Judaism, including no-fault divorce which is permitted, is that living together in misery demeans each spouse’s love of G-d as well as each other. The religious requirements for obtaining a divorce are not so easy, however, and are not to be taken lightly.

 

[m8g8]

Thank you for your replies, but there are a few more things I would like to clear up by continuing the debate lol.

Scott Hahn points out that divorce was allowed because otherwise the men would kill their spouse…so divorce was allowed…this is his term…

By this do you mean to prevent people from killing their spouses so that they can end the marriage? (Like Henry VIII did?).

 

[m8g8]

Well, study the Torah and the Talmud and get back to me in about 20 years. LOL

Seriously though, it’s complicated since the Written Law (Torah) has many levels of interpretation, whereas the Oral Law (Talmud) helps to understand the
Torah, as do the mystical writings of the Kabbalah, particularly the Zohar. For one thing, the death penalty itself was not administered willy-nilly. There had to be a conscious understanding on the part of the accused concerning the crime they were committing, as well as at least two bona fide eyewitnesses to the crime. With regard to the particular issue of homosexuality, this requires an understanding of topics such as forbidden pagan rituals, sodomy, the Hebrew meaning of the word “abomination,” the exclusion of female homosexuality, reasons for cross-dressing proscriptions, and so forth. There are several interrelated topics involved in a discussion of this subject.

All of the above is of course limited to the Hebrew Bible and its understanding according to Judaism, and does not take into account the writings of the New Testament or the teachings of the Church regarding the Old Testament Law.

Thank you for explaining this. However, I think the other person will still respond with, “That proves your God allowed homosexuals to be killed”.

I found a BBC page explaining Judaism and capital punishment. It also mentioned the Talmud:

bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/judaism/jewishethics/capital.shtml

Anyone reading the Old Testament list of 36 capital crimes might think that Judaism is in favour of capital punishment, but they’d be wrong. During the period when Jewish law operated as a secular as well as a religious jurisdiction, Jewish courts very rarely imposed the death penalty. The state of Israel has abolished the death penalty for any crime that is now likely to be tried there.

The classic Old Testament texts quoted to justify capital punishment are these:

---

… life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth …
Exodus 21:23-24
A man who spills human blood, his own blood shall be spilled by man because God made man in His own Image.
Genesis 9:6​

Although they seem clear these texts are commonly misunderstood.

To really understand Jewish law one must not only read the Torah but consult the Talmud, an elaboration and interpretation by rabbinical scholars of the laws and commandments of the Torah.

The rabbis who wrote the Talmud created such a forest of barriers to actually using the death penalty that in practical terms it was almost impossible to punish anyone by death.

The rabbis did this with various devices:

interpreting texts in the context of Judaism’s general respect for the sanctity of human life
emphasising anti-death texts such as the commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’
interpreting texts to make them very narrow in their application
refusing to accept any but the most explicit Torah texts proposing the death penalty
finding alternative punishments, or schemes of compensation for victims’ families
imposing procedural and evidential barriers that made the death penalty practically unenforceable
The result of this is that there are very few examples of people being executed by Jewish law in rabbinic times.

Israel

In 1954, Israel abolished capital punishment except for those who committed Nazi war crimes.

In the 54 years that Israel has existed as an independent state, only one person has been executed. This person was Adolf Eichman, a Nazi war criminal with particular responsibility for the Holocaust.

However, if I show them this, they might argue that those views are recent. Sorry, I’m really bad with theology, but this person is really intolerant and always says the same thing. I want to finally prove him wrong!

 

[Kaninchen]

However, if I show them this, they might argue that those views are recent.

What would ‘recent’ mean? It was pretty difficult to get yourself executed in biblical times.

‘My Jewish Learning’ is usually a good source on such things, here’s their piece on the death penalty in Judaism.

 

[m8g8]

What would ‘recent’ mean? It was pretty difficult to get yourself executed in biblical times.

‘My Jewish Learning’ is usually a good source on such things, here’s their piece on the death penalty in Judaism.

Thank you very much. That helps a lot, but I will wait to see if anyone gives other replies before telling this to them. This person is quite stubborn lol.

If I explain that it was/is almost impossible to put someone to death, he will say “But it still was possible, and your God created the law”.

It’s funny how he willingly ignores all the aid that religions have brought and that most charities have religious roots/funding, yet calls them evil :-/.

 

[eternalrest]

Hello,

I am having a mini debate with someone who claimed that they are intolerant of all religion because they support killing homosexuals and such.

I asked him why he thinks religions teach this, and he pointed out Leviticus.

I basically replied by saying that they agreed to a covenant and the person I’m debating with said basically said:

“Your God gave a law to Jews that said to stone homosexuals and this is written in the bible. Because of this law, gay people were killed. Your God allowed that?”

How would you respond to this? I haven’t studied scripture.

Can’t tell you the full answer to this as I don’t completely understand either. However, notice that Catholicism does not allow this. See how Jesus reacted when the Pharisees attempted to stone the woman caught in adultery - let those without sin cast the first stone. No one was without sin, no one cast the stone. He didn’t say that the woman didn’t deserve death (change the law); just that these Pharisees were not qualified to cause death to her given their own sins. And the woman will die eventually; at that point, Jesus will judge her. However, Jesus’s mercy is his greatest attribute and will be combined with his justice. Jesus interprets the spirit, not just the letter, of the law and prior circumstances. Prior to Jesus coming to earth and saving us, life was different. There may not have been the possibility of an afterlife at all prior to his death and resurrection; as the afterlife for humans may have only begun to exist after his death and resurrection so perhaps God evaluated death differently.

Roy Schoeman, a born Jew who believes that Catholicism is the fullness of Judaism wrote the book: Salvation is From the Jews. He said basically that the reason that all of the laws were given to the Jews was to keep the Jewish people pure enough to be a nation worth giving birth to Christ (otherwise Christ’s birth would have been a sacrilege) and prevent corruption of the religion due to the beliefs of other pagan nations. A similar reason as for why Mary was a virgin mother and bore Jesus without sexual intercourse (sexual desire was corrupted through the Fall).

You might also consider reading the books: The Mystery of Israel and the Church I, The Mystery of Israel and the Church II, and The Mystery of Israel and the Church III since they come recommended by the Association of Hebrew Catholics. They might understand what was going on better. Sadly, haven’t had a chance to read them myself.

 

[eternalrest]

It would be interesting from him to hear why he thinks we will all die. When someone dies, does he see “God” as killing them? If not, why not? According to his logic, shouldn’t a good God allow us to live forever instead of letting us die from a car accident, stroke, etc?

 

[stevekehl]

First of all, God required two witnesses to provide testimony in court, and then forbade the bearing of false witness. I don’t know about you but one person has never seen me in bed with my wife, let alone two. So any homosexual stoned must have been blatant in their behavior, which would have caused social upheaval in their community.
Second, no one can be stoned for homosexual acts by themselves, so one person leads another into sin. God can’t abide sin and several of the capital offenses in the OT involve more than one person engaging in sin. If you recall, Jesus said anyone who leads a child into sin would be better off drowning themselves.
Third, the purpose of the Law was to preserve the Jewish nation for the coming Messiah and the end times (see Revelations). The nations around Israel allowed homosexuality and this was one thing that set the Jews apart from them. As we can see God’s plan worked. I have yet to meet a Hittite, a Jebusite, even the Greek and Roman ethnic groups are not the same as in ancient times, having intermarried with invaders and immigrants through the centuries.
Last, this is a topic best understood by a Christian. You and I can accept God’s commandments because we see the value of God’s grace and direction in our lives. I God commands that I give up adultery, I’ll do that, be generous to those in need, I can do that, forgive people who offend me, I can do that (not that I’m bragging, I fail to do these things as well). No one says, God forbids homosexuality, well He must be God and Jesus must be His son, I’m going to get baptized today. Until we submit to God’s will all of His commandments seem unreasonable.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

I always thought that many Levitic laws and punishments were instituted to prevent diseases from spreading in the desert and that the drastic punishments on homosexuality are instituted for no other cause than to stop certain diseases from spreading like wildfire. That’s why it merited such a great punishment, for the greater good of Israel. In the New Convenent the situation is different, homosexuality remains a sin but the punishment isn’t of this world anymore. Just my 2 cents.

I’m going to get baptized today.

That’s good for you!

 

[meltzerboy]

Thank you for explaining this. However, I think the other person will still respond with, “That proves your God allowed homosexuals to be killed”.

I found a BBC page explaining Judaism and capital punishment. It also mentioned the Talmud:

bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/judaism/jewishethics/capital.shtml

However, if I show them this, they might argue that those views are recent. Sorry, I’m really bad with theology, but this person is really intolerant and always says the same thing. I want to finally prove him wrong!

The narrower interpretation of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” is in the realm of appropriate compensation for business transactions. The broader interpretation relates to exacting a punishment for the crime that does not go beyond the appropriate level: the focus is on LIMITING the punishment rather than extending its reach. There is here an element of mercy that forms a part of the justice that is meted out.

 

[teeboy]

The narrower interpretation of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” is in the realm of appropriate compensation for business transactions. The broader interpretation relates to exacting a punishment for the crime that does not go beyond the appropriate level: the focus is on LIMITING the punishment rather than extending its reach. There is here an element of mercy that forms a part of the justice that is meted out.

Justice surpasses “getting even” in the NT. Expect anger (a capital sin) if you choose to act on Jesus’ words about Justice.

In the event you do turn the other cheek, pray that you will forgive.

Also, except to bear fruit for the Church.

 

[eternalrest]

The narrower interpretation of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” is in the realm of appropriate compensation for business transactions. The broader interpretation relates to exacting a punishment for the crime that does not go beyond the appropriate level: the focus is on LIMITING the punishment rather than extending its reach. There is here an element of mercy that forms a part of the justice that is meted out.

Its also part of merit. It seems horrible that God asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, but you see that because Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac then God was able to sacrifice Jesus.

 

[eternalrest]

The narrower interpretation of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” is in the realm of appropriate compensation for business transactions. The broader interpretation relates to exacting a punishment for the crime that does not go beyond the appropriate level: the focus is on LIMITING the punishment rather than extending its reach. There is here an element of mercy that forms a part of the justice that is meted out.

Its also part of merit. It seems horrible that God asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac to God, but you see that because Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac then God was able to sacrifice Jesus for us all.