Homosexuality, False Contexts, and Perverting Scripture

Pulpit-279x275

LEVITICUS 18

“‘No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the Lord…..
22 You  shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

Today, many Christians try to defend sodomy by attempting to place the condemnation of Scripture in a false context.  The prime example is Leviticus 18.  A pastor, from one of those denominations that endorses sodomy, explained to college students that the prohibition in Leviticus, chapter 18, was no different from the prohibition against eating pork or frog legs in Leviticus, chapter 11.
Of course, this is absurd. The clear divisions in Leviticus begin with, “And the Lord spoke…,” as in chapter 11 where the context is dietary laws and in chapter 18 which condemns sexual immorality: incest, adultery, and sodomy.
To be consistent with his argument, the pastor would have, also, had to defend these other sexual sins and child sacrifice (v.21).

The clear warning to God’s people at the beginning of chapter 18 is not to accept the sins of the nations around them.

The answer to God’s prohibitions against sin is not to defend sin but to acknowledge it and repent.  That is the call to all. We are all sinners. Christ died to deliver us from sin, not to enable us to make excuses for it.
The sad state of our society today is, to a large degree, due to the salt losing its savor. Another sin which is condemned in Leviticus is the failure to give faithful witness by remaining silent.
[See Ch. 4, Sin and Silence, in Love, Prayer, and Forgiveness: When Basics Become Heresies]

jesus_and_children_window_qwtpmpfh1[Thorough background on the texts of Scripture that prohibit sodomy, including Leviticus, by N.T. Prof. Robert Gagnon, here. ]

Advertisements

6 comments on “Homosexuality, False Contexts, and Perverting Scripture

  1. I checked out your web post about [homosexual] marriage, and wanted to point out that sin has consequences designed to teach us not to do those things. I doubt the consequences of eating ham is as serious as sodomy. Even if they don’t believe the Bible really means it, all they have to do is look at the dysfunction relationships between sodomites and the consequences of their filthy habits. I don’t believe someone who has given himself completely to God could embrace [churhes blessing homosexual acts].

  2. Michael Snow says:

    And, off course, ‘eating ham’ is in a jarringly different context than sexual sins.

    Yes,, sin has its consequences, the most trerrible consequence being the ultimate one which results from the refusal to repent.

  3. Michael Snow says:

    One of the other tactics used to deny the clear meaning of this text is to claim that it only refers to temple prostitution. This is another modern myth invented to plead for sin. In the context, such an argument would also have to include the sexual immorality of adultery, incest, and bestiality as being ‘ok’ outside of pagan temple practices.

    The sentence is clear and unequivocal, this act is an abomination in an absolute sense just as is bestiality, etc.

  4. […] Perverting the text of Scripture These new interpretations of Scripture ignore or invent 'new' context. Such 'interpretations' never existed in church history until the 20th Century. Here is one example: https://textsincontext.wordpress.com/…ing-scripture/ […]

  5. This post sort of goes along with what I was thinking today, about how far astray we Americans, and the world at large actually, have wandered from basic morality. And, we Christians will have to answer to God one day for our conduct. I often think of the prophet Nathan’s words to David after he’d sinned with Bathsheba and had her husband Uriah killed, that David’s conduct had given the enemies of the Lord an occasion to blaspheme Him (2 Samuel 12:14). We the Church, I fear, have given unbelievers reasons to scoff at God in much in the way by our compromises, etc. Thanks for the excellent post and for following my blog! I am looking forward to receiving more posts.

    • As long as we are adapting to secular values and that automatically means a subjective moral value, the kind of which goes with “the moral with most vote wins” approach. These things are bound to happen.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s