Leviticus and Homosexuality

[po18guy]

He is asking where the reasoning came from for the doctrine to be created, since it is not clear in the text we have from Jesus.

Paul, who was handpicked by Jesus, and who forgave sins in the person of Christ, declared very clearly on this issue. Spiritually speaking, it is not safe ground to seek loopholes in God’s word. In fact, there is no such theological loophole, since the Church has authoritatively spoken on this very subject:

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

141 Cf. Gen 191-29; Rom 124-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10.
142 CDF, Persona humana 8.

 

[AT_Cross]

The book Bible Basics for Catholics addresses the laws of books like Leviticus in an interesting way. The author seems to contend that the 10 commandments were revealed by God but that Moses, in his anger against the Israelites gave them numerous other laws to very strictly define what was allowed. If the Israelites had been able to perfectly follow the 10 commandments, they wouldn’t have needed more.
Jesus seems to acknowledge this when he sums up the entire law and commandments by saying that we are to love The Lord with all our heart, soul, mind and strength and our neighbor as ourself. He also acknowledged that Moses allowed the Israelites to divorce because of the hardness of their hearts but that God did not design marriage to be subject to divorce.
If you look at the 10 commandments, they are all laws that are revealed in nature. This is the reason homosexual relations are condemned. When we take something God designs for a certain purpose and twist that purpose, then we are elevating our will over God’s and when we do that we sin. The human body was very clearly designed a certain way and when we decide to use “our” body however we want to, we get into trouble. I have great sympathy for people with homosexual feelings, but there is nothing God allows that He will not also help us with. We are not merely sexual beings but rather spirit and flesh that are called to love our God with all that we are.
Blessings and Peace.

 

[sirach2v4]

There is a Jewish commentary on the New Testament called The Annotated New Testament. There’s a lot of helpful information in here, on questions such as this – helpful perhaps not always on a specific question, but in general.

Jesus seems to underscore your position, see Mt 5:17 up to maybe verse 24 or so. But, the key here, is the issue of if, when, how, and where the old law may have been fulfilled by Jesus, which it was. So, taking all of this together, one may loosely say that as Jesus fulfilled the righteousness requirements of the law, the ceremonial or cultic requirements such as sacrificing animals, were abandoned. But, the righteousness is never superceded as the cultic requirements were.

Your specific questions about homosexual relations have been addressed by others, above. There are still people who, like yourself, question whether the prohibitions were mendable disciplines or more rigid and unchanging in nature.

There is no central authority (or “magisterium”) in Judaism, comparable to the Catholic Church. As such, there is support for homosexuals in Judaism, without the harsh restrictions at the “law” otherwise imposes. As I understand it, Reformed Jews don’t even accept the inspiration of the Torah (including Leviticus). So, if it is already not a fact, there is certainly discussion about whether homosexually oriented persons may be a rabbi.

That Annotated New Testament also reiterates that in Judaism there is no official interpretation of any verse of scripture. The Talmud is the Jewish commentary on scripture that was compiled (and redacted) in the general time frame of 200 BC to 400 AD. I’ve read that the general understanding of the Talmud is that it takes questions up to a certain point of interpretation, but that none is treated with absolute finality – always leaving any question open to further study and elaboration.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

In the largest frame of reference, I accept the teaching of the Church that homosexuality is a disorder. exactly!

On one level, the Bible (and faith) are a “cure” to turn the afflicted person away from the conduct that is forbidden. After all, the OT lists lots of sins. In the vicinity of Gen 4:6, there is a short discussion of the principle that sin is all around us, tempting us. As it is stated there “master it.” That is the statement of free will in the Bible and how we are to handle sin, in general, all of it, including homosexuality.

On the physical level, I believe that there is a biological reason for homosexual inclination. Most probably it is some some broadly genetic problem – which medical science is only beginning to explore. The epigenome are the millions of chemicals that control the switches for turning genes on and off. Make a point of living a long life, and I believe a cure for homosexuality will be found, as for other genetic-related disorders, and you will see it. Pray for this medical cure for homosexuality.

The real question for the future is, when we have the medical cure, will people take it and apply the spiritual cure, as well.

When the Church says it is disordered it refers to morally disordered, in the Latin it uses the same term to refer to masturbation and divorce (inordinata)

Doctrine is not created. It is never made up out of thin air. It is revealed by God and determined by the Church, by interpretation of Sacred Scripture and Holy Tradition, which are God’s inspired Word.

The teaching on homosexual acts is from natural law.

Sorry Jimmy, Jesus did address it directly.
Matthew 15:19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:
Mark 7:21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,
The Greek word for fornications is porneia which means sexual sins. This included all sex outside of married a man and woman. Personally I don’t use Leviticus when discussing homosexuality. I stick with the above verses and Romans 2 and 1 Corinthians 6.

Fornication≠sodomy
sodomy≠homosexuality

The book Bible Basics for Catholics addresses the laws of books like Leviticus in an interesting way. The author seems to contend that the 10 commandments were revealed by God but that Moses, in his anger against the Israelites gave them numerous other laws to very strictly define what was allowed. If the Israelites had been able to perfectly follow the 10 commandments, they wouldn’t have needed more.
Jesus seems to acknowledge this when he sums up the entire law and commandments by saying that we are to love The Lord with all our heart, soul, mind and strength and our neighbor as ourself. He also acknowledged that Moses allowed the Israelites to divorce because of the hardness of their hearts but that God did not design marriage to be subject to divorce.
If you look at the 10 commandments, they are all laws that are revealed in nature. This is the reason homosexual relations are condemned. When we take something God designs for a certain purpose and twist that purpose, then we are elevating our will over God’s and when we do that we sin. The human body was very clearly designed a certain way and when we decide to use “our” body however we want to, we get into trouble. I have great sympathy for people with homosexual feelings, but there is nothing God allows that He will not also help us with. We are not merely sexual beings but rather spirit and flesh that are called to love our God with all that we are.
Blessings and Peace.

Correction, nine of the Decalogue are precepts of natural law, the Sabbath however is not a percept of natural law.

 

[stevekehl]

Fornication≠sodomy
sodomy≠homosexuality

Not sure what your point is but your assertion is wrong. Jesus was an observant Jew and under Jewish law homosexuality was a sexual sin, along with heterosexual sex outside of marriage, rape, incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and necrophilia. In Mark 10 Jesus said since the beginning God ordained that a man and his wife be one flesh, not man and partner, or lover, or loved one, or person assuming the role of a spouse, or whatever PC buzzwords are used today.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Stevekehl,

I think you have brought up some very good ideas.

Hopefully, we have addressed the concerns of the OP.

God Bless

Not sure what your point is but your assertion is wrong. Jesus was an observant Jew and under Jewish law homosexuality was a sexual sin, along with heterosexual sex outside of marriage, rape, incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and necrophilia. In Mark 10 Jesus said since the beginning God ordained that a man and his wife be one flesh, not man and partner, or lover, or loved one, or person assuming the role of a spouse, or whatever PC buzzwords are used today.

 

[stevekehl]

Hi, Stevekehl,

I think you have brought up some very good ideas.

Hopefully, we have addressed the concerns of the OP.

God Bless

Thanks. I think the Christian community needs to sharpen their arguments against homosexuality because I keep hearing questions about it pop up among believers. If gay marriage is legalized I forsee lawsuits against churches that refuse to marry them, religious freedom be hanged.

 

[po18guy]

Thanks. I think the Christian community needs to sharpen their arguments against homosexuality because I keep hearing questions about it pop up among believers. If gay marriage is legalized I forsee lawsuits against churches that refuse to marry them, religious freedom be hanged.

I think that, once secular government assumed authority over a Sacrament of God, the beginning of the end could be seen. If we consider the pattern of unrelenting attacks on marriage in recent decades, its increasing disuse, disrespect and irrelevance in pop culture - and now this sudden urge to -]redefine/-] pervert its very nature, it is clear that the one who hates all that is good and holy is coming against it with what power he has left.

 

[meltzerboy]

That Annotated New Testament also reiterates that in Judaism there is no official interpretation of any verse of scripture. The Talmud is the Jewish commentary on scripture that was compiled (and redacted) in the general time frame of 200 BC to 400 AD. I’ve read that the general understanding of the Talmud is that it takes questions up to a certain point of interpretation, but that none is treated with absolute finality – always leaving any question open to further study and elaboration.

In a sense, the Talmud fills in the details that are omitted in the Torah. For example, the Torah speaks of honoring the Sabbath, but is rather brief on how to do so, what behavior is permitted, and what work cannot be performed. The Talmud goes into much more detail on this and many other topics.

With regard to homosexuality, male homosexuality is spoken of directly in the Hebrew Bible as an “abomination.” The meaning of the term as used in Hebrew, however, has been open to some interpretation, including what type of sin, if any, it encompasses. Female homosexuality is not spoken of directly, but has been interpreted as sinful according to Orthodox Judaism, together with male homosexuality, by means of references to more general biblical passages that suggest so. Conservative Judaism and Reform Judaism both have different perspectives concerning homosexuality compared to Orthodox Judaism.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Not sure what your point is but your assertion is wrong. Jesus was an observant Jew and under Jewish law homosexuality was a sexual sin, along with heterosexual sex outside of marriage, rape, incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and necrophilia. In Mark 10 Jesus said since the beginning God ordained that a man and his wife be one flesh, not man and partner, or lover, or loved one, or person assuming the role of a spouse, or whatever PC buzzwords are used today.

According to their definitions they aren’t equal

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Dakota,

Would you kindly explain your statement (maybe provide a reference… ) ?

I had thought that all sexual sins were essentially combined into one category. Female homosexuality was assumed to be just as wrong as the strongly condemned male version - but, nothing was written to my knowlege.

Thanks Meltzerboy for an informative post.

God bless

According to their definitions they aren’t equal

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Po18guy,

Maybe I am mistken, but I think the first evidence of this was in threatening Military Chaplains for expressing their views and bearing witness to the Gospel’s message. Here is a March 2011 news link: catholiccitizens.org/press/pressview.asp?c=52791 I do not know the current status of this attack, but given our nation’s majority decision to keep the current Commander-in-Chief and his apparent hatred for individual conscience, I just do not see how there can be any change for the better.

While not necessarily a, ‘…preview of coming attractions…’ I think this will give us all pause as we consider not only our own personal future, but that of our beloved nation. Here is an article I found very intersting: mercatornet.com/articles/view/same_sex_marriage_ten_years_on_lessons_from_canada1 While each country is truly different maybe there is another lesson that Canada can teach us (we refused to learn from them on how health care is actually rendered - now we can find about queues at our leisure as we live the details of ObamaCare that our Congress skillfully managed to exempt themselves from.

God bless

I think that, once secular government assumed authority over a Sacrament of God, the beginning of the end could be seen. If we consider the pattern of unrelenting attacks on marriage in recent decades, its increasing disuse, disrespect and irrelevance in pop culture - and now this sudden urge to -]redefine/-] pervert its very nature, it is clear that the one who hates all that is good and holy is coming against it with what power he has left.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Meltzerboy,

Would you kindly explain how these three contemporary versions of the Jewish Faith view homosexuality? I gather from your post there is a three-way difference of opinion.

Thanks

God bless

In a sense, the Talmud fills in the details that are omitted in the Torah. For example, the Torah speaks of honoring the Sabbath, but is rather brief on how to do so, what behavior is permitted, and what work cannot be performed. The Talmud goes into much more detail on this and many other topics.

With regard to homosexuality, male homosexuality is spoken of directly in the Hebrew Bible as an “abomination.” The meaning of the term as used in Hebrew, however, has been open to some interpretation, including what type of sin, if any, it encompasses. Female homosexuality is not spoken of directly, but has been interpreted as sinful according to Orthodox Judaism, together with male homosexuality, by means of references to more general biblical passages that suggest so. Conservative Judaism and Reform Judaism both have different perspectives concerning homosexuality compared to Orthodox Judaism.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Hi, Dakota,

Would you kindly explain your statement (maybe provide a reference… ) ?

I had thought that all sexual sins were essentially combined into one category. Female homosexuality was assumed to be just as wrong as the strongly condemned male version - but, nothing was written to my knowlege.

Thanks Meltzerboy for an informative post.

God bless

sodomy refers to sexual acts that are inherently sterile and it does not matter the sex of the parties involved whether it be one man and one woman, two women or two men. Sodomy also does not care whether the parties are legally and/or ecclesiastically married. Sodomy can be fornication or adultery. Check Liber Gomorrhianus by Saint Peter Damian who is a Doctor of the Church.

Homosexuality refers tot he quality or condition of sexual attraction to the same sex.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Dakota,

Thank you.

I was unaware of Liber Gomorrhianus - and considering that it was written around 1050, it shows that not much has changed in almost 1,000 years!

God bless

sodomy refers to sexual acts that are inherently sterile and it does not matter the sex of the parties involved whether it be one man and one woman, two women or two men. Sodomy also does not care whether the parties are legally and/or ecclesiastically married. Sodomy can be fornication or adultery. Check Liber Gomorrhianus by Saint Peter Damian who is a Doctor of the Church.

Homosexuality refers tot he quality or condition of sexual attraction to the same sex.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Hi, Dakota,

Thank you.

I was unaware of Liber Gomorrhianus - and considering that it was written around 1050, it shows that not much has changed in almost 1,000 years!

God bless

nihil novi sub sole

 

[stevekehl]

sodomy refers to sexual acts that are inherently sterile and it does not matter the sex of the parties involved whether it be one man and one woman, two women or two men. Sodomy also does not care whether the parties are legally and/or ecclesiastically married. Sodomy can be fornication or adultery. Check Liber Gomorrhianus by Saint Peter Damian who is a Doctor of the Church.

Homosexuality refers tot he quality or condition of sexual attraction to the same sex.

You know exactly what I meant.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

You know exactly what I meant.

I’m sorry, I guess when you said “your assertion is wrong” I assumed you meant “your assertion is wrong”, if you didn’t mean my assertion was wrong then what did you mean?

 

[stevekehl]

I’m sorry, I guess when you said “your assertion is wrong” I assumed you meant “your assertion is wrong”, if you didn’t mean my assertion was wrong then what did you mean?

I meant your assertion is wrong. Don’t try to split hairs and obfuscate the issue with implications of technical inaccuracies and linguistic maneuvers. I’ll be glad to debate an issue with you, but don’t play online lawyer.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Stevekehl,

Hold on a minute - you may not be in agreement with Dakota - but, your tone is coming over in a rather hostile manner. Is this what you intend? Really. Drop the attitude.

If you think Dakota’s assertion is wrong - then tell us all exactly what it is you find wrong with it. Your last two posts have been quite vague - so, maybe by just spelling out your objection(s) we could all take a look at what it is you’re talking about.

God bless

I meant your assertion is wrong. Don’t try to split hairs and obfuscate the issue with implications of technical inaccuracies and linguistic maneuvers. I’ll be glad to debate an issue with you, but don’t play online lawyer.