ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Social Issues

Biblical Homosexuality 2 - Leviticus The Moral Code

Updated on February 18, 2016

The Moral Code - Do We Still Follow It All?

To begin - Welcome to the Second Hub re: the Bible and Homosexuality. Please see "Biblical Homosexuality" for information on Genesis 19 or "Sodom and Gommorah".

Leviticus is often considered the "Moral Code" of the Bible. The chapter lays down all the laws on ways of life, the do's and dont's, the apparent rights and wrong. Laws in this chapter include rules on what to eat or not to eat, to do, to wear, the way in which to slaughter a sacrifice, which animals to give in honour of your God, ways of absolving themselves of unintentional sin, regulations around skin disease, sexual relations with people. Many many laws - hundreds if not thousands of rules.

Rules such as

  1. not eating certain meats,
  2. not wearing two different types of woven material (Lev 19:19),
  3. not touching a woman on her period (Lev 15:19-25, Lev 20:18)
  4. not tattoo'ing or marking your body (Lev 19:28)
  5. The ways to treat others (Lev 19)
  6. Dowry to pay for females (Lev 25)

Why Did They Have These Rules?

These rules served the Israelites well, for the time in which they were written, and followed to the letter. In the time of Leviticus, the Israelites were desperate to forge an existence in the world. So it stands to reason that preventing things such as food poisioning, in a time in which severe dehydration could not be treated, or diseases spreading, such as skin disorders etc, is all about making sure the civilisation survived.

Many of these rules are no longer followed, by even the most devout Christian. Why? Because the New Testament overwrote the rules of the Old, and many of the old Laws are not required any more.

Examples of the Leviticus Laws no longer followed

Rules like not wearing two different types of woven material - I ask you to do something for me - check your underwear. Actually check any item of clothing. Many items are a percentage of something, and a percentage Cotton. Underwear is often a Poly-Cotton blend - Polyester and Cotton. Gasp! Two woven materials. Heck, one of them isn't even NATURAL!. Yet, we all wear it at some point.

Touching a woman on her period - the woman is supposed to stay away from others, and anything she touches is unclean. Now, look at yourself (if you are a woman) or your wife (if you are not) - can you see this happening today? I don't think so. No woman is going to take a week off every month. Nor are you going to destroy anything she touches - hmm, she needed to use your $250,000 Lexus to drive to the supermarket to buy pads/tampons - can't see you destroying it.

IN FACT, the only time this is actually followed - it is not the Christian woman, or men, who do it. It is the Muslim. It is forbidden in Islam for a menstruating woman to touch the Holy Qu'ran (Koran). Hmmmm.

How many of you have, or know someone who has, a cross or rosary tattoo'd somewhere (often their ankle!) on their body? A way for them to show that they love Christ, or that they are religious within a Christian way? I'm sure you at least know ONE person. Are you advocating that they be stoned? That their blood be on their head? No? Hmmmm, But, it is decreed that God has decided these are wrong. Yet, it's just them "showing their faith". This does reek of double standards, doesn't it?

It is apparent that the laws are made in an effort to protect the people from illness, disease, and things that they do not understand. At the same time, providing guides to follow for the way to treat others. Though, these "treat others well" rules are often found in all forms of society, not just Christian.

Homosexuality in Leviticus

But, on to why we are here - Leviticus and Homosexuality. There are two verses dealing with this - one in the sexual relations section (Lev 18) and one in the treatment of others (Lev 20) NIV edition follows:

Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; it is detestable (Lev 18:22)

If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. Lev 20:13

When you look at these two verses in the context in which they were written, they make perfect sense. However the context they were written, and the context that they are now used in, are completely different. Remembering that Leviticus was written in a time when a fledgling society was trying to forge an existence, it makes perfect sense to outlaw any sexual relations that do not produce offspring, or would produce offspring with defects, so homosexual sex was lumped in with incest - a COMPLETELY different entity. You want your society to thrive? You need to encourage population growth, and perfect specimens at that.

Fast forward to now - we are NOT struggling to survive as a species or a race - we are OVER POPULATED. 7 BILLION people - we can't feed a large proportion of them, countries are making rules which seem odd, but in their own way work in the same way as the rules of Leviticus did for population growth, to limit their population, we have over crowding, poverty at crisis levels. Gay sex, non-reproductive sex could save the world, not harm it. Gay sex does NOT produce babies. In a world with 7 BILLION people, we don't NEED more babies.

Translation Is Always An Issue

Depending on the particular version of the Bible you may be quoting/reading from, the two verses in Leviticus have some issues with translation also.

"If a man [ish] … lie with mankind [zakhar, NASB: 'a male'], as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination [to'ebhah, NASB: 'detestable act']; they shall surely be put to death…"

That there are two different words used to describe Man - ish and zakhar - suggests that it may not be as simple as a 'man having intercourse with another regular man". It is ONLY in the KJV that zakhar is translated as "mankind" rather than "a male" The large majority of the use of the word zakhar in the OT is used to describe a man or male animal that has been dedicated to a deity or God for a sacred function. These included circumcised Israelites, Israelite priests, and occasionally those dedicated to Pagan deities. Several scholars have pondered that perhaps it is a forbidding of Israelite men from visiting the male prostitutes that were dedicated to Canaanite deities. Combined with the fact that the words used for abomination/detestable act (to'ebhah) was most often applied to things that related to idolatry, which is the most offensive to God.

It makes more sense when you look at Deut 23:17-18

[17] "There shall be no whore [NRSV: 'temple prostitute'] of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite [NRSV: 'temple prostitute'] of the sons of Israel. [18] Thou shalt not bring the hire [NRSV: 'fee'] of a whore [NRSV: female 'prostitute'], or the price of a dog [NRSV: 'male prostitute'], into the house of the Lord [Yahweh] thy God for any vow: for even both of these are abomination unto the Lord [Yahweh] thy God."

Both the word for whore and sodomite (qedheshah female sacred prostitute, qadhesh - male sacred prostitute) in 17 are derived from the root of "Holy" qadhosh. The words used in 18 are referring to secular female and male prostitutes. So, if you take this into consideration, there were basically some men, and women, that were "untouchable" - those who were dedicated to a Holy cause, for a sacred purpose - which may or may not have been sexual in nature. A regular man should not be having 'relations" with a sacred man, as this would be akin to idolatry - most displeasing to God.

Now, when people say "but it's giving the death penalty, that makes it worse" - the Bible calls for death a lot in Leviticus as it was a wonderful deterrent, and has been applied to cursing one's parents, adultery and blasphemy - I don't hear you calling for the deaths of your teenager children (cursing parents), cheaters (unless they were your significant other), or anyone who takes the Lords name in vain - so why call for the death of homosexuals based on these two verses?

Swearing Falsely

However, the use of the Leviticus verses is now not about population growth protection, preventing regular people from having relations with those dedicated to a sacred position or purpose, or anything of the sort. It is now used to degrade a section of society, who are human just like everyone else. It is used in Hatred, which in itself is not morally right, so is against the Moral Code of Leviticus

Do not swear falsely by my name and so profane the name of God. I am the Lord (Lev19:12) Using God's word to spread hatred is swearing falsely by his name.

Bears thinking about doesn't it?


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 21 months ago from Tasmania

      Thank you Days Leaper, mostly my sentiments also. I have always been ready to respect and honour a genuine belief and philosophy, provided it remains the property of the owner.

      Whether there is/is not god or gods will not influence those who wish to "believe." If any belief is held to be important in a person's life, that remains his/her ch0ice and right.

      If someone feels that, in his/her life. the conventional interpretation of Leviticus applies and should be followed to the letter, then follow that to a "T." But beyond that, "mind your own business."

      It's not necessary or desirable to interfere in the journey of others. (My apologies if it has sometimes appeared that I am disobeying this principle.)

      If the faith in one's "God" is genuine and strong, it should allow the believer to relax and be assured that his/her trust in "God" is sufficient; even when someone else is at opposite understanding.

      Hanavee, our fellow Hubber, has written a long hub based upon his book about Old Testament interpretation. I found it most enlightening and encouraging, not having heard anything but threat and warnings about my eventual demise. Brian remains a deeply committed Christian, for which I have greatest respect, but still retain my disbelief, nevertheless.

      Such writing will always have its critics. There are those who will never, ever change their minds. Sure, it's an imperfect world of humans, but there is a lot more to this world than humans! I have to resign myself to tolerating those who disagree, but then that must be my "cross" to bear, I suppose. I must try not to be vindictive and judgmental in turn.

      Easier said than done!

    • days leaper profile image

      days leaper 21 months ago from england

      a lot of correcting other peoples 'ignorance' as I scan through...

      Surely, these separate groups can follow God in their own way. Why do they want to go against & follow Christianity at the same time?

      Is there a proof of believe against wanting to believe & understanding?

      Follow God, or follow your own kind. Whatever! But there are already too many so called 'Christians' rewriting/ writing their own story/version; and this has a severe warning to not do!

      Doesn't The Bible also warn of people following for jealous reasons? And so condemn the church; that which is usurped and owned by mankind for profit!!!

      No-one say's "Don't" re-The Bible, it is for all those whom wish to read to do so. Then, and only then decide if Christianity is for You.

      Otherwise worship your god by other means/in your own way??? -accept. All 'religions' (ie. modes/methods of belief!) are separate for good reason.

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 21 months ago from New Zealand

      Norine. Thank you for your first comment in reply. Since my last comment

      The rest have been deleted for the reasons I have spelt out numerous times. And is against the TOS should you continue as it constitutes harassment.

      This conversation is over, Norine, as you cannot respect the rules outlined earlier. All further comments will be deleted as I no longer wish to continue a conversation here with someone who insists on name-calling and insults at every other turn. Regardless of your excuses as to how they aren't insults - they are.

      You have ruined a chance to be heard by someone who was willing to listen. (Which is why I suggested email - however, unless you stop the insults, that option is also gone)

      Thank you, and good day.

    • firstcookbooklady profile image

      Char Milbrett 21 months ago from Minnesota

      I'm trying to analyze what you are talking about. It's like discussing Windows 95 with someone who has never used it. Or, dialup with someone who has 4G network. Norine, you are not the Word of God. Jesus said, before he died, Father, forgive them, for they know not what they have done. And, in the last words he spoke was, 'it is finished and into your hands I commit my spirit.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 21 months ago from Tasmania

      Norine, sorry I have to be so blunt about this, but you continue to deliver garbage. You are self-appointed, delusional. You are insulting, speaking to Jacqui as "Girlie," or "girl." You are conceited, believing yourself appointed by "God." You are ignorant, intolerant and arrogantly judgmental of others. You represent, to me, anything but a "Christ-centered person."

      To cap it all, you are stuck in your little world, with a closed mind that wishes to close itself off from any more information and enlightenment.

      Jacqui, I and others have tried to offer you consideration and patience, yet you still keep coming back with "holier-than-thou" attitude.

      What are we going to do with you? Answer: we can do nothing for you. It is totally down to your own choices. Only you can sort your life out. It sounds like you have no other company or socialising, spending your days and hours at the computer, sitting in judgment of others. Well, lift yourself off that seat, get out in to the wide, dangerous, bewitched world of reality and get a life.

      I am NOT demonic, nor is "firstcookbooklady." I am not Satan-in-the-flesh. Nor is anyone else here. We are ordinary souls, living our lives as best we can, without the need of continuous judgment from the likes of you.

      You can throw texts back at us as much as you like, you can shout (Caps) til the cows come home, you will never prove yourself a Christian until you actually display some of that "Love" you so frequently talk about.

      But it's empty rhetoric for you, isn't it? 65 years seems to have taught you very little of substance.

      The person you present to us is, in my humble opinion, pathetic.

      To quote an apt expression, you come over as "being so heavenly minded yet no earthly good." Do us a favour and start to show us that this impression is wrong.

    • firstcookbooklady profile image

      Char Milbrett 21 months ago from Minnesota

      Let those who are without sin, cast the first stone. Jesus.

    • profile image

      Norine Williams 21 months ago


      When one does not separate “carnal” from “Spiritual,” it’s hard to discuss the Word of God. If you recall II Timothy 3:16 which says “ALL SCRIPTURE is inspired by God…” Well, if that’s the case, we can’t “leave out Romans and Corinthians because they were not carried over by God,” can we? ROMANS AND CORINTHIANS WAS GOD SPEAKING THROUGH PAUL (ACTS 19:5) AS HE DID THE PROPHETS OF OLD! Get that through your head and we’ll be on the same wave length! (Again, “carnal” vs. “Spiritual!”)

      All the other “ramblings” you speak of regarding Paul is irrelevant!

      Paul was getting old and was speaking to his adopted son in Christ, Timothy, in the Books of Timothy telling him how to “hold fast to his profession of faith,” to continue to “teach the Word” which he had “known from his youth,” described “battles” he would face, and how the “Church” should be ran!

      Well, I guess Jesus was a “fool,” because He “concerned Himself so much with others” He DIED for them! That’s LOVE! So, what’s a little harassment from the “unspiritual peanut gallery?”

      I concern myself with others for the same reason as GOD, I “desire no one is lost!” GOD has called me (Put this job in my “heart” whether it appears to look “stupid!” or not!) to teach His Word! (Again, “carnal” vs “Spiritual!”)! I only “plant seed” (Tell TRUTH in His Word!), “but GOD gives the increase!” Yes, I’m human, and unintentionally sin, but “I die daily!”

      What “group of people who have done nothing but love another?” Because they all agree on “twisted” Religion (Which Satan has established and is ELATED they believe.), appeasing each other, continuing to “think” they “love” one another, this is love? You want to know what LOVE is - TRUTH! You want to know why there is so much peace and harmony amongst them? Because Satan has already won them and he will not bother them for they are “traveling in the same direction.” (Again, “carnal” vs “Spiritual!”)

      IF you’ve noticed, WHEREVER I go, Satan is in the midst! “Norine” is the blunt of the joke, the psychotic one, the aggravator! I “count it all joy” because such reactions are precisely what Scripture says would happen! John 15:18 says “If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.” HALLEUJAH! Confirmation! You see, they’re “traveling in the same direction;” therefore, peace and harmony!

      JESUS said “Think not that I come to send “peace” on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword” (Matthew 10:34)! Did He LIE? Wherever I go, there is turmoil! Even you don’t like that I give TRUTH because it effects your “belief” but TRUTH is ALL I have which is the Word of God!

      Girl, you must not have followed my comments where I’ve spoken on “Marriage” and “Divorce!” First of all, MOST people aren’t “Married” AS GOD INTENDED and is why the “divorce rate” is so high! I Corinthians 7:39 speaks to a widow and says {paraphrasing} “If she remarries, it MUST be “…ONLY IN THE LORD!” Well, if the SECOND “Marriage” should be “ONLY IN THE LORD” how much more do you think the FIRST one should be? WOW, have we screwed up! Don’t you think that would lower that “divorce rate?”

      Please, don’t get me started on the “Catholic Faith” and/or the priests’ molestation of children and Catholic’s “Twisted” doctrine which has caused so many to be lost (Satan’s Greatest Device to Lose Souls)! Have you ever heard this phrase “Some are called, and some are sent but some just got up and went!” Well, there’s your answer. (Again, “carnal” vs “Spiritual!”) Paul said in I Corinthians 7:7; 9 “For I would that all men were even as I myself.” (v9) “But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.” When one is not “called,” molestation happens! They will receive their “just reward!”

      Why do you continue to insist that “I” only reflect on “homosexuality?” You asked for TRUTH, and that’s ALL I have to give – WORD! Don’t blame the messenger, listen to the Message!

      No, you “don’t have to justify homosexuality,” but you’re “trying!” Homosexuality “IS” if you allow it! You compare yourself to an animal which GOD gave man “dominion” over (Genesis 1:26) and since you have “dominion,” you have “more intellect!” If it were “NATURAL,” GOD wouldn’t have said “UNNATURAL USE OF THE BODY!” GOD did not say to use “a form of population control,” He said “Be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28)! From the beginning, He knew of the population growth and is why you don’t see Him having to return to create more land, trees, water, food, etc. for the increase. He’s done it all! You are not GOD to “control” population growth! It’s against His Word - “Be fruitful and multiply!”

      The two things for consideration:

      (1) “Testing the compassion of His followers” on Homosexuality: I’m doing what He asked me to do, having “compassion” on one by telling TRUTH (Love) in His Word. He asked me to “Preach the Word; be instant in season, out of season; REPROVE, “REBUKE,” exhort with all LONGSUFFERING and DOCTRINE.” Have I not? I’m only here to please HIM; not to appease, not to gain friendships, not to go alone to get alone, but to give TRUTH in HIS WORD! Amen! And It has been “LONGSUFFERING,” wouldn’t you agree?

      (2) If one has homosexual tendencies, it is how they handle it that makes the person! At age 65, you can exclude me! Thank the LORD!

      I hope this helps! Again, it is all “carnal” (lusts) vs “Spiritual” (Eternal life)!

      I pray “the eyes of your heart be enlightened!”

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 21 months ago from Tasmania

      Thanks again for this Hub, Jacqui. I have been following your posts, but refrained in the latter couple of days from giving any encouragement to the Naysayers of Freedom. I await your next hubs.

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 21 months ago from New Zealand

      Norine, thank you for the answer - I always forget the 6th verse used to condemn us - Timothy - so, thanks for reminding me of the last one I have to research.

      Now, like you and I have BOTH said previously - PAUL did not carry over anything. Corinthians and Romans were to be left out, because they are not where it is carried over by God - Paul has good reasons for what he said, why he said it, and when he said it, AND the two words used often to state "homosexual" are misinterpreted and do not mean homosexual (regardless of wording "abusers of themselves with mankind) AT ALL - but are referring to temple prostitutes, and this would be abusing themselves as these people are not destined for them, but for others who's status is different to the people whom Paul is talking to.

      Now, you can google it, or you can wait for the Romans/Corinthians Hub I'm working on....though, the same rules apply there (when it's published)

      Timothy, I can't remember if it's Paul or not, because I've not had a chance to study it further - I will do so, and will discuss with you later. But thanks for providing it as an answer.

      Now, the only fool is one who concerns themselves with the lifes of others who do not affect their life in the slightest. Why do you focus on the lifes of people whom will never have an effect on your life, and who's life you will never have an effect, or at least not the one you want, on? Why not trouble yourself with making sure you are free of sin before commenting on the supposed sins of others....whats that verse? Remove the log from one's own eye, before judging the splinter in anothers?

      Why focus on a group of people who have done nothing but love another? Who aren't even important enough to be included in the 10 Commandments? And even then, you do not focus on the sins mentioned in the BIG TEN - Adultery. Divorce is adultery, but I've never seen any (AT ALL) protests from those who claim to be Christian against the MASSIVE divorce rate in Heterosexuals? (50% of Hetero marriages end in divorce...last I checked). Why? Because many Christians are divorced, and remarried - committing Adultery in both Jesus' and God's eyes - yet, no one protests them getting remarried.

      Why do I not see you protest against priests who molest children being moved from parish to parish to abuse others, rather than transfered directly to a police cell? Why do you focus on the love between two consenting adults WHO DO NOT AFFECT YOU, yet turn a blind eye to the abuse of children within your faith? (Granted, I know you aren't Catholic, but the sexual abuse of children isn't just in the Catholic church)

      But again, I don't know Timothy as well as I know the other 5 verses and their context, so I can't speak directly to that at this present point. But I will.

      I don't have to justify homosexuality - it just is. There is nothing that you or I can do to change that fact. It exists in 1000's of animals in nature (penguins, lions, dolphins, geese, monkey's, apes - just to name a few) - it is NATURAL and is a form of population control. It is natural, because it serves a purpose within the animal, and human, kingdom - to control the amount of growth in the herd/race to within limits that we can sustain. And hey, God created all beings did he not? Including the gay animals.

      Thank you for this discussion, but I think it may have come to an end. I have learnt a bit this time (thanks for the Timothy ref....I could never find my hubs will be complete!). I believe we may have been talking at cross purposes for a time during this - and finally got there ....kind of.

      I'd like to put two things out there at the end of this conversation: (Both for anyone to consider...but nothing is implied by my statements)

      1 - Have you considered that God may have put gay people here to test the compassion of his followers? You tell me my sexuality is my test - but what if my sexuality is the test he set for you? Have you considered that?

      2 - The most vocal anti-homosexuality people tend to be hiding something of that very nature....anyone for whom this is true - please understand that we LGBT will welcome you when you accept your true selves, and give up the hiding behind anti-gay rethoric.

    • profile image

      Norine Williams 21 months ago

      YOU asked me "NUMEROUS" times (YOUR WORDS) not to mention anything by Lev, and when I do as you ask, you still have a problem! What's up? Don't get angry with the messenger, just delivering the Message!



      "CARRIED OVER:" I Timothy 1:9-10 "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, FOR THEM THAT DEFILE THEMSELVES WITH MANKIND, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is CONTRARY TO SOUND DOCTRINE."

      "CARRIED OVER:" I Corinthians 6:9 "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor diolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, NOR ABUSERS OF THEMSELVES WITH MANKIND..."

      Now you can "interpret" these Scriptures as you please to "try and justify" homosexuality, but it will NEVER happen and you will look like a fool!

      You asked NUMEROUS TIMES, now don't try and blame me for giving Scriptures not from Lev, because I ANSWERED!

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 21 months ago from New Zealand

      Oh, and sure, I can google - however you are the one claiming something, therefore the onus is on YOU and only YOU to provide the proof of your claim.

      So, verses where the two homosexuality based verses of Lev are carried over please. Verses only, and not Rom/Cor because you've already said it wasn't them.

      I'm waiting patiently.

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 21 months ago from New Zealand

      So where is it that they are carried over? You can provide the verses where the others that are carried over are worded differently - as you did. But then you didn't provide the verses were these two are carried over. So are they? Or are you just saying that they are?

      These two are important here, because they are what this hub is about. And I have lost count of the amount of times and different ways I have asked you for the same information. You could provide the other verses for the carried over verses quickly, why not the two this hub discusses?

      That is the ONLY thing I am asking of you - what are the carried over verses? (And they aren't Romans or Corinthians). I await your answer - please make it the verses only...the longwindedness is getting tiresome.

    • profile image

      Norine Williams 21 months ago

      Jacqui, why do you insist "only two verses" were "carried over?" Those are the only two that concerns you!

      Take for instance, Lev 19:13 "Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbour, neither rob him: the wages of him that is hired shall not abide with thee all night until the morning. Carried over: "Love thy neighbour as thyself."

      Lev 19:14 "Thou shalt not curse the deaf, nor put a stumbling block before the blind..." Carried over: "It is not good to eat meat or drink wine or anything that causes your brother to stumble."

      Lev 19:15 "Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment (And who says we're not to judge?): thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the might: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbor." Carried over: "Judge righteous judgment."

      You're just "hung up" on the two regarding "homosexuality" trying to "justify," but there's no justification!

      I'd have to go through the entire Book of Lev to tell you each of the 613+ "carried over!"

      I didn't give Book, Chapter and Verse, where "carried over" but you can "google!"

      No, Paul did not "carry over!" Paul was only "a vessel" GOD (aka JESUS) spoke through as with the Prophets of old!

      GOD "carried over" under New Covenant!

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 21 months ago from New Zealand

      Norine - you still haven't answered how only those two were carried over - you speak of the 600+, most of which weren't carried over. So, why only the Levicital laws against males having sex with males (because really, women weren't deemed worthy of mention) the only two carried over?

      Paul did not carry them over - he speaks of rituals and other actions that the pagans of the time were prone to partaking in - turning people away from the pagan faiths by making the more pleasurable of their rituals 'dirty'.

      The words he uses mean - soft and effeminate and refer to temple prostitution and temple prostitutes. Some of whom were male, but not all. These were people whom it was considers not the done thing to cavort with as they were for those in the higher classes/priest type positions and to use them would be an affront to those people. (Usually eunuchs etc). Malakoi and Arsenokoitai - words made up by Paul to explain himself - they do not mean homosexual, not least of all because there was no word in the ancient biblical languages for homosexuals - and the word itself was only created in the early 1900s - one hell of long time after Jesus.

      Why only those two verses? You are the only person who has ever said they were 'carried over'. Your long speech above didn't answer that - you spoke on Mosaic law, and why it was fulfilled - because we couldn't follow them all - so why insist that homosexuals still follow it? Particularly when most Christians have trouble following the 10 Commandments let along Mosiac Law.

      I understand it can't be explained without other verses - what I meant was that Leviticus was to be the focus - NOT Romans or Corinthians.

      So, can you answer? Without the long winded stuff that makes it very difficult to follow your point (particularly on a phone...)

      Jonny - thanks. I'm trying to remain balanced, and respond to those comments that aren't started or containing insults, because I genuinely would like to understand.

      Mayhaps in the future I will remove the comments. But right now, I will leave them. Thank you for your comments also.

    • profile image

      Norine Williams 21 months ago

      You are "distracting" from the WORD being presented! Who do you think you're serving GOD?

      However, when TRUTH is being told, Job 1:6 "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them." Confirms I'm giving TRUTH!

      Continue to be about "your father's" business (John 8:44) and you will receive your "just reward!"

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 21 months ago from Tasmania

      I will not go away Norine while you continue to poison these HubPages with your sick neurotic nonsense.

      You have no intention of allowing others to live their lives as they feel fit. Therefore I stand before you and confront you. You don't like it? Then YOU can choose to leave or be booted out.

      Your choice.

      You will always be welcomed if you present a respectful, considerate, reasonable point of view, but so far it's been only a message of judgement and dogma on your part. So you only have yourself to blame.

      I hope Jacqui will delete yours and my posts here now. It's all detracting from her very reasonable topic.

    • profile image

      Norine Williams 21 months ago

      If you think I'm so "self indulged," why don't you go away and let me be me? Why not? Because you are about "your father's" business (John 8:44); "To kill, steal and destroy" (John 10:10)!

      Have I not given WORD? Oh, but "your father" doesn't want IT known, does he? Too bad! IT will "be known throughout the world" (Matthew 24:14) before JESUS returns! Hate IT don't you? There's NOTHING you can do about IT!


    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 21 months ago from Tasmania

      Jacqui, I must acknowledge your intelligence, patience and basic kind-heartedness in the face of all this insulting banter. You are a credit to HP.

      Norine, if you think 65 years have befitted you with much wisdom, let me tell you your self-delusionment needs a long hard look in the mirror.

      You are not God-appointed. It's self-deception. I have no doubt you are also kind at heart. But you, like so many other religious bigots we have seen in these forums, are steeped in fear, guilt and mysticism. Your "faith" is nothing but self-talk aimed at giving you a false sense of justification. Again I have no doubt you have skills and talents; but they are not being used to enrich others, only to make you feel good about yourself.

      You are entitled to that mode of life. Your choice. But do the world a favour and stop trying to pull others down into your abyss. That is unkind, it's not the Love you are so badly in need of.

    • profile image

      Norine Williams 21 months ago

      Listen, baby girl! I'm 65 years old and another 65 is not promised! I have no reason to LIE to anyone, for we must all "Stand before the judgment seat of Christ" (II Corinthians 5:10)!

      Now listen, GOD came in the form of flesh (I Timothy 3:16) to "fulfill" the 613+ Laws under the Old Covenant because He knew no one could keep them (Deuteronomy 31:27; GOD speaking through Moses!) for "evil man" (Genesis 6:5) to be reconciled to Him! In Ezekiel 22:30 GOD said, He "looked for a man to fill in the gap, but there was no one," therefore, He had to come and do it Himself!

      GOD had given "dominion" to "man" in Genesis (1:26), and since He does LIE (Numbers 23:19), in order to come in the flesh (become "man), to have "dominion" on earth, He spoke through The Prophets ("man") telling everyone He was coming!

      Now the 613+ were to prove to "man" he couldn't keep them and to show "man" how much "He loves us" by coming in the flesh and dying for us! Of course, the 613+ are our basics (Galatians 3:23-25) as are the Ten Commandments; but AGAIN, unless "carried over" under the New Covenant, they have been fulfilled and there's no way one can just stay in the Book of Lev to determine which ones were and which were not!

      GOD has spoken through "man" MOST of the time (I say MOST because He was also in the "GLORY" of a burning bush, a jack ass, a whale, a sperm, etc) to communicate with "man!" I'm not trying to get "off topic," but in order for you to understand "carried over," you must understand how GOD operates: In "GLORIES" (John 17:5)!

      In Acts 19:5 Paul became one of His "Glories" and spoke through him as he did others in the Old Testament, especially the Prophets! Although "Religion" has portrayed Paul as "just another man," GOD continued to operate through Paul as He did with others in the Old Testament because He is the "Same yesterday, today and forever" (Hebrews 13:8)!

      Therefore, when you ask "Who "carried over," you?" NO! It was GOD!

      Wow! That was a lot of typing just to explain Who "carried over" Old Testament Laws!

      Now you can try to use "logic and reasoning" all you want to try and figure out why GOD instituted the 613+, but I tell you He wanted "man" to SEE, we can do NOTHING without HIM! He wanted "man" to SEE how much HE "Loves" us, by coming and dying for us so that we have the opportunity ("Choice;" Joshua 24:15) to be reconciled back to HIM! Now that is LOVE!

      He doesn't ask much of us (I Chronicles 7:14)! Remember HE is the CREATOR! If you were creator of something and you loved it, would you not want it to obey? Even if you owned a dog, would you not want it to obey or run rampant? How much more do you think GOD loves us? He proved it by coming and dying for us, didn't He? Thank you JESUS!!!

      You should be "grateful," rather you try and justify "your desires" by trying to "discredit His Word!" What an "ungrateful" "puppy" you are (Not calling you a dog, just using a scenario!)!

      LORD, "Have mercy on this WORLD! We are still as was described in Deuteronomy "A stiffnecked species," trying to satisfy and justify by LYING to fulfill "OUR DESIRES!!!

      LORD, forgive us "We know not what we do" (Luke 23:34)!!!

      Oh, GOD doesn't "make mistakes!" It's ALL for HIS GLORY (John 9)! READ!

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 21 months ago from New Zealand

      No, I'm discussing context of the verses carried over. So, according to you, they aren't dead - or are you the only one who's carried them over?

      If Mosaic law has been fulfilled why are the two verses I discuss in this hub STILL used by you and others to condemn? Why do you say they've been carried over if they've been fulfilled? How is it DEAD scripture if it's been carried over? How is it DEAD scripture when it is used to deny people rights based in 'religious freedoms'

      I speak on Paul and Corinthians etc in another hub - and that HIS reasons for his verses which aren't anything to do with Lev. Yet are the only other verses that would constitute 'carried over' themes from Mosaic Law.

      I'm discussing the CONTEXT of these verses because most people don't know them - and they made PERFECT sense when read in context - historical, cultural, social - it makes good sense to outlaw anything bar reproductive sexual activities when you are trying to forge an existence in then desert, as well as institute good food and hygiene practices - food poisions get could kill in Lev times. The Mosiac Laws make no sense in today's society, or cultures - yet these two verses are used to condemn homosexuals today. Which is what I was pointing out - using the verses out of context is ridiculous because they don't make sense for today.

      But if you'd actually read the hub, rather than reacted to what you thought it said - you'd know that.

      The only choice I have in relation to my sexual orientation is whether to accept and embrace it, or hate myself for something that cannot be changed. If your God intends to make a person gay, and then insist they hate themselves for it then he is not benevolent, he is evil and hateful. Your God doesn't make mistakes - he made people gay. Sow hat you're saying is he makes mistakes?

      Have you ever considered that maybe he made gay people as a test as to the compassion of his followers? have you ever stopped to consider that? Cause so many people are failing badly.

      Anyway - I've outlined my reasons for this hub - that if you'd read it properly, you would have realised why I was discussing verses no longer relevant to modern life - because people still cherrypick them - maybe not you in this case, but many still do (and hell, despite what it seems at the minute - it's not all about you).

      So discuss Leviticus, or just wait for the next hub, where you can discuss the NT verses to your hearts content (as long as you don't call people names - cause I don't care whether you think they aren't insults - they are). Up to you - email still available.

    • profile image

      Norine Williams 21 months ago

      How plainer can it get! You're discussing something OBSOLETE and comparing "today's" Christians to OBSOLETE Laws claiming disobedience! I keep telling you The Mosaic Laws are GONE unless "carried over" under New Covenant so your analogy doesn't apply! You're "cherry picking" DEAD Scripture unless "carried over!" But this is your HUB!

      What are you doing? Trying to justify "homosexuality?" It won't work according to Scripture and you know it!

      Your sex life is a "choice!" GOD gives ALL crosses to bear, what makes the person is how they handle it! Maybe that's why He's peaked your interest in different religions! He is working with you!

      I am a preacher! He chose me to tell you - "You have a "Choice!"

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 21 months ago from New Zealand

      Norine - if you cannot stick you discussion Leviticus - please leave. This is not yours to use as a pulpit. If you had read the hub you would realise I am focusing on those verses used to admonish homosexuality, so whether or not they've been 'fulfilled' does not matter - we are discussing the context in which they were made originally - social, cultural, historical - rather than cherry picking OUT of context as you are doing.

      BTW - it isn't a choice. My question to those who claim it is is this 'if it's a choice, then you've obviously considered being gay at some point - when did you decide to be straight?' - I have NEVER ever felt any different, I was born this way. Before you start on the 'upbringing allowed the devil in' - I have 7 siblings - all straight, all brought up in the same way. The 'Nuture' argument doesn't work - or I'd be straighter than a ruler, instead of gayer than a rainbow.

      So stick to the topic - or leave. I will discuss with you, but via email. I WILL NOT have you use my article as your own personal pulpit. You want a flock? Become a preacher -


      If you can follow those rules, stay. If you can't - please leave.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 21 months ago from Tasmania


    • profile image

      Norine Williams 21 months ago

      Johnny: No wonder you LEFT Christianity, you didn't know what the heck was going on! Lord have mercy on your "leader!"

      ALL would learn IF demons would not enter!

      The Old Covenant Laws have been "fulfilled" unless "carried over" under New Covenant!



    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 21 months ago from Tasmania

      If there was ever a god worth my attention I would be giving thanks for the fact I have turned my back on this "christian" version conveyed by Norine. She is right though: her's is removed from anything in Leviticus. She has made everything up to suit her own desires, beliefs and imaginations. Perhaps even some kind of guilt there in the back ground.

      All the time such fanaticism is allowed to dominate, your hub will not get the attention and rounded discussion it deserves.


    • profile image

      Norine Williams 21 months ago

      I never "insult" anyone it is the spirit within I insult! Your perception deceived you because of "lack of knowledge" of The Gospel of Christ! You now know I don't speak to a person but the spirit of Satan within. Now you know! How easy was that to ask rather than assume!

      Your HUB cannot be about Lev only because those laws "NO LONGER EXIST!"

      I know where to go to email but you need HELP trying to speak on Lev which has BEEN FULFILLED! You can not apply Laws that are extinct!

      I can't show you where they became extinct without going to the New Testament under the New Covenant and only those Laws "carried over" applies!

      Your sexuality is "your choice!" It is not as though you were born blind, cripple, or with several genitals. GOD gave you genitals of a female for reproduction and any other use is considered "unnatural use of the body" (homosexuality) in the sight of GOD! Why can't it be changed? It's psychological not physical!

      I "sow the Seed, but GOD gives the increase!"

      There is no way I can speak on Lev without showing you what Laws were "carried over" under the New Covenant for MOST of those Laws have "been fulfilled" and I can only "prove" by giving Scripture in New Testament!

      Does that make sense?

      Norine's BELIEF is GOD'S BELIEF and I tell you AGAIN LEVITICAL LAWS (Old Covenant) OR GONE unless "CARRIED OVER!!!

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 21 months ago from New Zealand

      How hard was that? You didn't insult anyone, and look, your comments are still there. Well done.

      I'm more than happy to discuss this with you - but not at the expense of this hub. This hub is about Leviticus, not about Norine and Norine's beliefs.

      So, if we could stick to discussing Leviticus (as I have asked NUMEROUS times), and if you wish to start a hub outlining your beliefs, or email me via hubpages and we can continue this elsewhere (it's simple enough to email through hubpages - go to profile it's there some where)!

      Why haven't I acknowledged your comments? Because I have asked more than once for the discussion to remain on Leviticus. So, I will happily continue, but not here. All good? If you can't figure out how to email from hubpages let me know and I'll email you instead.

      Just so you know - my sexuality is not a choice, nor is it a lifestyle. It cannot be changed. So do not attempt to 'change' me in your conversation. I am also not religious but enjoy learning about faiths - you will not convert me either, but I'd like to learn. Just so we start off on the same page.

      ( I am interested in learning about all faiths - I would like to extend the offer of conversation via email to those of other faiths as well - Muslim, Buddhist etc (though, I need to find the Holy books of each faith too - so any advice on that would be welcome too)


    • profile image

      Norine Williams 21 months ago

      I tried to delete what I said at the end of my previous response, but time for deletion ran out! I apologize in that I didn’t read all of your comment and said “The rest of what you said was “irrelevant!” After reading the entire comment, I felt there were other unanswered comments that were relevant.

      You stated, “I'll point you to the verses that mention that one should worship silently - that those who are loud in their worship aren't actually of the faith. That one’s prayers should be silent, and ones journey with God is personal. Not announced and forced upon others. That one’s faith should be shown in works with women, children and the less fortunate.”

      “Silent?” Psalms 95:1 Psalm 100:1-2 Ps 33:3 Eph 5:19 II Sam 6:5 Jn 4:24! Stop saying what you haven’t READ but have heard! These Scriptures speak to “musical” worship only but there are others!

      I have been called to teach and when “teaching,” one should go to the Books of Timothy and READ what Paul told Timothy (His son in Christ)! II Timothy 2:22 “Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, WITH THEM THAT CALL ON THE LORD WITH A “PURE HEART!” I keep telling ALL we are not to be at peace with those who are not in the Lord, but “…rebuke them before all, that others also may fear” (I Timothy 5:20)!

      “ That one’s prayers should be silent?” Acts 4:24 “And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to GOD, WITH ONE ACCORD, and said, Lord, thou art GOD, which hast made heaven, and earth…” Is this in silence? Is this a “personal relationship?”

      “Not announced and forced upon others.” READ I Timothy 5:20 AGAIN!

      “That one’s faith should be shown in works with women, children and the less fortunate.” IF one has been anointed with the Holy Spirit, “works” are a by-product of a Christ Follower!

    • profile image

      Norine Williams 21 months ago

      FirstCook: "Jesus spent time alone, and when confronted by the Devil, and the Devil's cunning, "refused to submit..." Did you hear "Refused to Submit?" NO ONE can has the right to CONTROL "My Belief" regardless of Author! I "BELIEVE" if WRITTEN!

      FirstCook, you need to "STUDY!" "...unaware of his gentle nature." When HE tore up the Temple for selling therein, did that display "a gentle nature?" When HE called the Scribes and Pharisees "FOOLS" and "HYPOCRITES" throughout Matthew Chapter 23, did that display "a gentle nature?" When HE called Peter "Satan," did that display "a gentle nature?" Get Real! You "Christians" have not "STUDIED" but have been "brainwashed" by your pastors, traditions, schools and seminaries and is EXACTLY why I'm writing a book entitled "Nigga's in Christ!" And don't think it's a "racial slur" as you've been taught but a word used in conjunction with what society "perceive" as "ignorant!" I have seen more Non-Blacks on HP that fits that description, but if it aggravates, as the saying goes, "If the shoe fits, wear it!"

      Jacqui, who told you we are not to JUDGE? (You see FirstCook? Precisely what I'm talking about!) GOD loves "JUDGING" so much even FirstCook mentioned the Book of Judges which HE "inspired men" to put in Bible! I can give at least ten (10) Scriptures to confirm this! Jacqui, we are going to JUDGE "angels" so who is mere-man in that we can't get our practice in NOW! How else will one know they're defying GOD'S WORD?

      You guys anger me by NOT STUDYING! I have no one "Spiritual" to talk to on HP! Everyone want to satisfy their lusts, pride, ego, remain "babes in Christ" and not "GROW" ("From Glory to Glory;" II Corinthians 3:18) as JESUS said we should by remaining COMPLACENT in “unnatural lifestyles” and/or "twisted" doctrine which has been "taught" by pastors, traditions, schools and seminaries which indicates you did not "STUDY!"

      Jacqui, I must commend you in that you are truly "seeking" TRUTH! Although your lifestyle defies Scripture, you want TRUTH! Upon receipt, the "battle" will be to "humble yourself" (II Chronicles 7:14) and "accept" what IS WRITTEN no matter what!

      Don't think I don't go through "battles" daily for I'm "human" also! Your criticism of my following Jesus is a "battle" in the flesh but I "STAND!" Because I know GOD is the source of my strength! I BELIEVE! You think my flesh likes what you guys do to me? You think I like being called names, like being asked not to talk JESUS (as the disciples; yet they continued), like being ridiculed, like my character being destroyed? Who cares (“spiritually!”) for I know there is “reward” for them who “overcome!” Can you handle it? It ain’t easy (in the flesh) but so easy “in the Spirit!”

      Jacqui, when I call someone “demon,” etc, I’m not speaking to the person, but the spirit that’s inside him! Satan's spirits (and there are legions) are demons who overtakes one to prevent TRUTH being told! You see people as human, while I see them as spirits! Either one is on GOD’S side or Satan’s (I Corinthians 10:21)! There’s no in between!

      You can contact HP and ask did I not prevent following this HUB. However, they control what is happening on this Website and they should it is theirs! I’m too old to be lying about worldly things and “DEFINITELY” too old to be lying about the WORD of GOD! Time is nigh for all of us so what would “lying” benefit me? Get Real!

      Yes, it’s YOUR HUB and you can delete at anytime but it’s MY BELIEF and (as the disciples) I will continue to FOLLOW JESUS and be an example of HIM by doing what HE and the apostles did whether it insults, offends, cuts, WHATEVER for it is MY BELIEF! As did the disciples, I WILL NOT BE CONTROLLED and as Esther said “IF I DIE, I DIE!”

      "Terribly simple" if you ask "Why did you do that?" at which time I will give Scripture for my action(s) rather than perceiving "you are personally insulting!"

      Are you ready for "TRUTH" no matter who It offends? I'm here!

      Whatever else you've said is IRRELEVANT!

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 21 months ago from New Zealand

      You are not Jesus, Norine, so even if he did call someone a demon (and hell if it was Satan like you say, isn't he not an actual demon, as in NOT human, naughty Angel etc) it is NOT your place to do so to others. Thou shalt not judge - calling someone a demon is judging is it not?

      Also, isn't lying a sin? You said you had disabled notifications yet responded minutes after I posted. Someone has told a fib.

      You state it's the truth - it's YOUR truth. As misinterpreted as it is, it's yours and yours alone. If we can't stick to topic, I'll point you to the verses that mention that one should worship silently - that those who are loud in their worship aren't actually of the faith. That ones prayers should be silent, and ones journey with God is personal. Not announced and forced upon others. That ones faith should be shown in works with women, children and the less fortunate. Judges is one chapter that comes to mind.

      It is not that I don't believe as you - it's that calling someone (and naming them) a demon is regarded by everyone bar you as an insult, a personal attack - particularly when you take the time to use their name. You cannot deny it is personal when you make a point of using their name. Regardless of your reasons for doing so - it's offensive, rude, and insulting. And it's my hub, I'll delete what is against the TOS, and what is a personal insult.

      See, your comment was left as there were no insults. Terribly simple isn't it?

    • firstcookbooklady profile image

      Char Milbrett 21 months ago from Minnesota

      The problem, Norine, is that you cannot take a question, answer it and stay on topic. No one is amused or enthralled by your hyper-spiritualism, albeit inspired by your willingness to act holier than thou. The author has asked you, several times, to back up your rants with actual facts and to stay on topic. You apparently feel compelled to use your hostile nature to justify verbal abuse. - You do have a major problem with written abuse. You have a tendency to attack people based on whatever inspired text you seem to feel justifies your means. Jesus spent time alone, and when confronted by the Devil, and the Devil's cunning, refused to submit, and told the Devil when told to turn rocks into bread, told him, man cannot live by bread alone. When the people were trying to stone the prostitute, Jesus told the crowd to back off and let the person without sin, throw the first stone. Needless to remind you, that there was no one there that could throw a rock. You proclaim that you are a follower of Christ, AKA Jesus, yet, seem to be unaware of his gentle nature. Read your bible, Norine. Study. [like you tell us]

    • profile image

      Norine Williams 21 months ago

      The problem here Jacqui, is that you don't believe "I BELIEVE" which means to "parrot" CHRIST! YOU or no one else can not take away that BELIEF! If you think I will obey you more than GOD, you are HIGHLY MISTAKEN! You ask that I not "insult!" I repeat, BECAUSE I AM A FOLLOWER OF CHRIST, IF HE DID, I WILL, whether YOU or anyone else see as "insult!" I FOLLOW! Again, if YOU see as insult, Oh well!

      I do not "go along to get along," I'm not on HP to gain friendship, I do not "appease," but if you want "Truth" from HIS WORD, I'm here!

      Let me know when you want "Truth!"

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 21 months ago from New Zealand

      You still haven't answered the question.

      Your comments were deleted due to personal attacks - you know the rules. So if you want to continue to have your comments seen, stop calling people demons etc. I wouldn't delete your comments if you didn't call people names - so the only person to blame for your comments being deleted is YOU. I answered the comments anyway so you could see id read them despite your insults to others. Note, I've deleted others here in the last day who were doing Te same to you so it's not favouritism - it's expecting you to all behave like adults.

      Though - if God created all, did he not create Steve? Also, God does not make mistakes. Therefore, if homosexuality is an affront yet not a choice - he's either made a mistake, and therefore is not infalliable, or he hasn't made a mistake and his followers have misinterpreted his words incorrectly.

      Given the Bible has been translated through at least two if not three languages to get to English, there is more than one opportunity for it to have been misinterpreted. So, unless you speak Aramaiac (sp?), Ancient Greek AND Hebrew - you cannot say your translation is correct. The only way you can say that is if you own the ORIGINAL script in its original form...which you don't. Any one person translating from one language to another (let alone through two or more), is open to letting their own personal bias enter the translation. Without realising it.

      Now, unless you are God, and therefore the original author, you cannot say yours is correct. Neither can I.

      Where does it say unnatural? Except for the verses in Romans or Corinthians, where is is ASSUMED by many to be homosexuals (and as I said previously - is not a direct translation - is a misinterpretation of two words which aren't to do with homosexuals), it isn't anywhere that said 'having gay sex is unnatural' - Levicitus has its reasons for outlawing it, but it doesn't say unnatural. You can use verses outside of Lev, I just don't want to discuss Corinthans or Romans in this hub, as they are part of another hub, and will be dealt with then. I want te words 'unnatural'

      Certain things you do - such as speaking in public as a woman, are outlawed in the Bible and many other religions - why haven't you stopped just in case it offends your God or the God of others? You ask me to behave as you think your God thinks I should, yet you don't behave in a way that would please him either (you speaking in public as a woman, judging others (name calling etc), wearing mixed fibres, not touching anything on your period - there are many many rules in your book that are impossible to follow all at the same time (contradictory actually), so I can safely say you aren't following them all) - but insist I do? What if someone was to insist that you follow the laws of Allah??

      Good bye Norine. I doubt I've seen the last of you, but if you can comment without insults, I will let the comments stand - it's your fault they were deleted.

    • profile image

      Norine Williams 21 months ago

      By the deletion of my comments, I assumed I was no longer welcome and stopped all notifications from this HUB! I don't want to offend anyone "personally," but if WORD offends, so be it!

      Also, I will not respond to "one sided" conversation! I can't recall what I previously posted because you have "deleted!" You as others (Some who call themselves "Christians") delete when responses are against "belief!" Again, I can ONLY respond with WORD; otherwise, it would be "my opinion" and not what's WRITTEN! I NEVER give "my opinion" therefore no one can say "Norine said!" If I insult, it is because I've seen in Scripture where WORD insulted in similar situations! If GOD called one "Ignorant" a "fool," demon, Satan, Hypocrite, LIAR, devil, etc., so will I, for I "repeat" HIS WORD! You may see as insult but I can give Scripture and Verse in which HE did!

      Jacqui, to "carry over" means I will have to speak to other Scriptures in the New Testament (Not the Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke & John which are also under the Old Covenant.) to "prove" where It was "carried over" under New Covenant (Acts and forward). That is not "off topic" of Lev but "proving" It was "carried over" and where! You mentioned "heterosexuals" yet this HUB addresses only "homosexuals!" I will continue to "stick to topic" (which I never was "off topic," only "proving" homosexuality was "carried over" under New Covenant and where)!

      You have given "your definition" of "unnatural use of the body" which differs from GOD'S! I have given Scripture which says a Marriage is between a man and a woman, not Adam and Steve, yet you deleted! I (as you) do not wish to "repeat" because of deletions! Again, I give WORD and cannot apologize if It offends. If you don't want "Truth," you've asked the wrong person for I am not here to "appease" or to "go along to get along!" Only "Truth!" Homosexuality is "unnatural to GOD" based on WORD!

      If I can't respond as JESUS would (Being a FOLLOWER of CHRIST), I guess this conversation ends here! Scriptures says "Be ye followers of me, as I follow Christ" (Paraphrasing Paul speaking in I Corinthians 11:1)!

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 21 months ago from New Zealand

      Norine and Krillco - personal attacks will not be tolerated. Krillco, whilst I understand the point you were making - I need to be fair as it was personal.

      Norine - happy to talk to you, if you can stay on the topic of Levicitus. You have not yet provided where it was said to carry over the homo verses only from lev, yet none of the heterosexual sexual conduct verses of which there are many.

      Unnatural use of body - to have heterosexual sex if you are a homosexual - is unnatural. It is your interpretation that feels that it is the homosexuals who are unnatural, because it would be unnatural for you.

      There are two words which are translated into 'homosexual' in many of the newer versions of the Bible - both do not mean homosexual and are actually in relation to having sex with temple prostitutes. BUT this is Corinthians and Romans. We aren't talking about that here.

      So, if you can't answer my question without harking back them or personal insults - then, no, I don't want to continue the conversation. It is on Leviticus only - because why would I write six different hubs if I was covering them all in the comments? So if you can answer the question, we shall continue. If you can't, please don't continue. And should you continue the personal attacks (cause, even if Jesus said it, you aren't him), I will delete and report.

      So your choice.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 21 months ago from Tasmania

      Don't worry Norine, you will be able to enjoy that totally sinless, absolutely pure, intollerably beautiful and homogenous (i.e., boring) Heaven you dream of, free from us demonic devious devils for eternity.

      We will all be down "there," enjoying the fruits of our debauchery. You will be welcome to visit for a short weekend if you wish.

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 21 months ago from New Zealand

      Norine - any personal insults - calling people demons will be deleted. Keep it up, and I will report you. You will note your comment to Jonny has been denied.

      You still couldn't answer it. Jesus said NOTHING about Homosexuality - AT ALL. Please show me a verse where he (himself) does.

      We are talking about Leviticus. The 10 Commandments aren't in Leviticus. And by the way, if it's such an affront to God, you'd think it would be included in the 10 commandments. It's not. And your time would be better spent protesting adultery - which is in the 10. Don't see anyone being up in arms about the heterosexuals sleeping around, yet it's such an affront to God he mentions it in the 'rules one should follow even if one doesn't follow the rest'.

      Back to Leviticus - why only those two verses carried over? Where does it say they were carried over? (Other than you saying it...cause that don't make it true). And who says they are carried over except for the rest of the Levitical laws? Don't give me Jesus, because I know for a fact he does not mention homosexuality himself anywhere in the Bible.

      If you wish to discuss other verses, then wait until I've done the hub - because we are discussing Leviticus ONLY here (unless you are providing the verses where it says 'the two homo rules in Lev are carried over' (and that's not Cor or Romans - please try again))

      Also - remember you will be deleted if you start personal attacks again (and I will report you)

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 21 months ago from Tasmania

      Norine, you make up your own interpretation of ancient writings, with odscure meanings, lifting a mish-mash of un-related sentences, out of context, just to suit your own pre-conceptions ... then say it's God speaking.

      More like a human mixed-up mentality than the mind of an all-knowing god that is ever worth consideration.

      Your appraisal of me will not have changed, nor mine of you.

    • profile image

      Norine Williams 21 months ago

      Jacqui, what I like about you, you do not “delete” when someone disagrees with your belief which is more than I can say for MOST “proclaimed Christians” on HP!

      First, we MUST get away from the “brainwashing” of the Catholic Faith, which says Paul is only a man who changed the gospel. Did you read Jeremiah and Hebrews? Didn’t GOD say under the New Covenant HE would “put HIS Laws in our hearts and minds?” Did HE not say Paul would “be a vessel to HIM” in Acts 9:15? If HE said HE would “put HIS Laws in hearts and minds,” under the New Covenant, why would HE LIE and not do this with Paul? HE did! Paul wrote the majority of the New Testament because GOD (aka JESUS) was “putting HIS Laws in his heart & mind!”

      Now I know this goes against RELIGION, but is “rightly divided” WORD! Consequently, when Paul spoke, It was JESUS (aka GOD, aka Holy Spirit) speaking “through Paul!” You can’t say “Paul said,” when Scripture tells us It was GOD speaking “through Paul!”

      It is strange how MOST believe GOD spoke through the Prophets of Old but could not speak through Paul although Scripture has been given in which GOD said under the New Covenant HE would “put HIS Laws in hearts and minds! You see the “brainwashing?” Hebrews 13:8 says “Jesus Christ (aka GOD) the same yesterday, today and forever.” Well, if that’s true, It can be, and was done!

      Now concerning Lev! JESUS fulfilled the 613+ Laws under the Old Covenant and unless “carried over” by Paul, we now go by Gal 3:23-24. (READ so It’ll make sense.) Homosexuality is not the only law that was “carried over!”

      The Ten Commandments were certainly “carried over” for those who are coming “unto Christ” or babes “in Christ!” Gal 3:23-25 says “But after “FAITH” came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our “Schoolmaster” to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by FAITH. But AFTER “faith” is come, WE ARE NO LONGER UNDER A SCHOOLMASTER.” Therefore, for beginners in Christ, the Ten Commandments apply and were “carried over!”

      “Who decided?” you asked! GOD (aka JESUS, aka Holy Spirit) speaking “through Paul!”

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 21 months ago from New Zealand

      Norine - I think it may have escaped you that this hub is SOLELY about Leviticus. So discussion on Romans, or Corinthians isn't relevant here - as they will be discussed later when my toddler gives me time to finish the hubs.

      That being said - you speak of the New Covenant - something that Leviticus is NOT a part of. The only thing I've had from discussions with you on Leviticus previously is that the two laws re: homosexuality (or at least homosexual type behaviour) is that it was 'carried over'. Something you've never managed to prove with any other scripture or source other than that Paul spoke of it - which will be discussed in further hubs later. (And Pauls is A MISTRANSLATION of two words - if your bible included the word 'homosexual' - translator bias - as the word itself does not exist in Ancient Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic (my spelling isn't good).)

      Why only the two laws and not the other several hundred in Lev? If you were Jewish (anyone for that matter) - I'd accept Lev as a reason for homosexuals to possibly follow as you'd follow all the other Lev laws as well. But this 'carried over' business - it wasn't Jesus - as Jesus said absolutely NOTHING about homosexuality - so who decided on it? You? Paul wasn't around in the Time of Leviticus so it can't be him (eg his verses are a different reason). So......who decides that TWO out of hundreds get carried over - particularly when they affect 1 in 10 so don't really cAuse those who use them to have to do anything except judge other people (which is sinful in itself).

      I will discuss Leviticus with you as this is what the hub is about - so I'd like the question I pose answered -

      Who decided?

      Otherwise, I am not discussing Romans or Corinthians as I do not wish to repeat my hub elsewhere.

      Thank you for your comment.

    • profile image

      Norine Williams 21 months ago

      Jac: Sorry it took me so long in getting around to reading your HUB! Let me say first of all, I do not hate you are anyone for that matter but MUST tell you "rightly divided" (II Tim 2:15) WORD.

      We now live under the New Covenant in which Old Testament Laws have been "fulfilled!" Whether MOST have been "brainwashed" to believe Paul was 'just a man' teaching against Paganism, that is not what JESUS said. In Acts 9:15 JESUS said {paraphrasing} "Paul will be a vessel to me." After GOD (aka JESUS; SAME SPIRIT; I Cor 12) spoke in Jeremiah 31:33; Hebrews 8:10 and 10:16, HE said HE would "puts HIS Laws in our hearts and minds" and is exactly what HE did with Paul! Therefore, when Paul spoke, IT WAS JESUS, as with The Prophets as it is with us (I Cor 11:1) who are "IN CHRIST JESUS!" Consequently, Paul "CONTINUED FULFILLING LAW" "after" JESUS' ascension with GOD (aka JESUS) speaking through him!

      Therefore, under the New Covenant, we MUST follow Paul as the disciples did when the FIRST CHURCH was established in Acts or on The Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:42)! This is not what "RELIGION" teaches but is WORD "rightly divided!" If one has "Studied" Scripture (and not "man"), they KNOW this to be TRUE! I do not LIE and can "prove" (II Tim 3:16 "for reproof") with the WORD of GOD! I also BELIEVE James 3:1 which says {paraphrasing} "Be not many preachers among you who will receive GREATER JUDGMENT for teaching WRONG!"

      With that being said, let us move on to the subject matter - Homosexuality. Bare in mind, this is not a "personal attack," but what IS WRITTEN!

      The Old Covenant Laws are given for those "coming unto Christ" (Gal 3:23-24) and have been fulfilled by JESUS while in the flesh (Christ) and continued by Paul after HIS ascension! If Paul spoke on These Things after HIS ascension, They continue!

      However, JESUS said in Matthew 19:4 "...Have you not read, that he that made them AT THE BEGINNING made them male and female" when speaking of a Marriage. How then can you try to "justify" anything else?

      Let me paraphrase other Scriptures:

      Rm 1:21-32 "God gave them up to uncleanliness through lusts of their own hearts: for even women did change the "natural use" of their bodies which is against nature as did the men who left the "natural use" of women." I Cor 6:9 "Be not deceived, "abusers of themselves with mankind," will not inherit the kingdom of GOD." Gal 5:19-21 "Now the works of the flesh ("uncleanliness") will not inherit the kingdom of GOD." Ephesians 5:3 "But "uncleanliness" should not be once named among you as saints." Col 3:5-6 "Mortify therefore your members which are upon earth; "uncleanliness, inordinate affection," which is idolatry: For which things' sake the wrath of GOD cometh on the children of disobedience." I Tim 1:9-10 "Knowing this, that the Law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, "for them that defile themselves with mankind," and if there be any other thing contrary to sound doctrine." Jude 7;18-19 "Even as Sodom and Gomorrha giving themselves over to “going after strange flesh…” (v18-19) “…in the last time, should walk after their own “ungodly lusts,” These be they that separate themselves, “sensual,” having not the Spirit.” Titus 1:16 “They “profess” that they know GOD; but in works they deny HIM, being abominable, and disobedient, and to every good work “reprobate.” Rev 21:27 “And there shall no wise enter into it anything that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a LIE.”

      How then, can homosexuality be pleasing in the sight of GOD?

    • Kailua-KonaGirl profile image

      June Parker 24 months ago from New York

      Excellent article. You are correct in stating the Hebrew laws of the time were to prevent harm and increase procreation. The reason Hebrews were told not to eat meat with cloven hoofs (pork) was to prevent the people from getting trichinosis. There was no cure for it at the time.

      Today we raise pork in cleaner environments and no longer have that problem.

      It was the same for tattoos. Infection and blood poisoning from dirty tattoo instruments could kill a person in those days. They did not have the medical knowledge or the sanitation that we have now.

      Because mankind was working on populating the world they were also told to "go forth and populate". This is no longer the case. Now we have an overpopulation epidemic going on and people need to stop having so many babies. Religious rulers need to recognise this issue and tell their followers to use birth control.

      Again, a well written and informative article!

    • firstcookbooklady profile image

      Char Milbrett 2 years ago from Minnesota

      Yes, and just THINK what life would have been like if God, at the tower of Babel, had made everyone DEAF instead of changing their language. Think how that small change would have affected things....

    • days leaper profile image

      days leaper 2 years ago from england

      Now, I can't remember much of the old testament despite reading the church/school version (cofe) twice!! I don't ever recall getting the impression that it was particularly anti-homosexual. But I was somewhat young and didn't get much of anything back then. I still have to use reflection. But before I flounce off to read Leviticus AGAIN (Though KJV this time!) I have to say Elitism must be man(kind) made. Be it Protestants v. Catholics, Muslims v. well everybody, Buddhists v. ???anti-drugs/industry etc., or closer to home: Straights v. Gays, medical profession v. patients, academics v. lay people, teachers v. students or whatever. There is no strict line only good and bad vary to all created degrees in EVERY group known to man(kind)/people... As does levels of intelligence etc. It's how we live. Ive seen recently that certain People that call themselves Christian may well be deluding themselves! I doubt most have even read The Bible. And so church for me is merely for births, and funerals. As for weddings what's all the fuss? The Elder Paul hated all sex but happened to be genetically straight. If you read NT You'll see his words are wise. More about controlling "Wildness" than orientation. If You look closely You'll see what I mean. The disgust being more about that with his orientation mixed in. But also know this You can't reject something and follow it at the same time. And so many are rewriting their own story! Ive sat in the family church before now and got the biggest load of clap trap that came more from her own need to show off than anything biblical. And an obsession with sin that sounded more like she was boasting than complaining. There was certainly no tangible advice in the lecture about self control, from a woman parishioner with some religious degree lecturing. And a vicar whom it turns out raped to my knowledge one girl from my school. Im sure that's worse than a simple attraction to the same sex. (though not being gay, I can only make a somewhat educated guess!)

      About Christmas, a celebration of life to help keep people going in the cold winter months. If it takes the word "Christian" to be more caring, giving to others etc. Then why not use it?

    • Abby Campbell profile image

      Abby Campbell 4 years ago from Charlotte, North Carolina

      Good morning, Jacqui. :-)

      First, I have to say that you are an excellent writer. I love the way you write as it is captivating. ;)

      Second, you gave me much thought in this very well written hub. My background is Christian. For many years, I was confused about this very topic just because of what I was taught. I would also read my Bible and see that what I was taught was "true." Or, was it? LOL.

      Over the last few years, I have been going through a "soulshift." To make a long story short, I would sit in church and ponder questions that were going through my heart... emotions I was feeling (as if what was being taught was not correct). Though I still believe in an Almighty God and continue to read my Bible, I actually left the institutional church here in America. I believe that the American church is also going through a soulshift just as I am. We are questioning, and I believe God is speaking to us. After all, He lives in our hearts. Correct? So, why wouldn't he speak to us personally.

      As you have stated, the New Testament replaced the Old. But, I believe churches are still teaching legalism and focusing on issues that don't really matter anymore. Because we are so focused on these things, we are filled with hatred... arguing and fighting with one another. If Jesus came back right now, He would be appalled by the church (in my opinion). God's two GREATEST commandments:

      (1) to love HIM with all our hearts, minds, and souls.

      (2) to love our neighbor as ourselves.

      "And, the greatest of these commandments is to LOVE."

      Yet, we Christians need to pound others over the head with the Bible as if the book were God Himself. The Bible was meant to be a guide. God is love, and LOVE IS GOD. Why can't we just focus on that? After all, none of us are without sin. Even if one believes that homosexuality is a sin, what about all the other sins that "Christians" commit (as you so have mentioned in your hub). And, doesn't the Bible say that there is no sin greater than another, yet we have place homosexuality and adultery above all else. But, look at the church. There is more pornography and extra-marital affairs than outside of the church! They also teach that gluttony is one of the greatest sins, yet the church is more overweight than the rest of the population! (And, don't tell me that it's genetic because I'm a nutritionist and know better... lol.) It's easy to point to others for what they believe is sin, yet they really need to focus on themselves... look in the mirror and work on themselves. The sooner they learn that LOVE is why Jesus came, the better their souls will be. He came to take the sin away from the world. Yet, we keep living in legalism.

      By the way, if anyone is interested, I would recommend a book called "Soulshift: Manifesting Abundance" by Steve Roberts. He is an ex-preacher, and his book is one of the best I have ever read. You can get it on Kindle for free or at his website in PDF at

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 4 years ago from Tasmania

      So many people have phobias. It's an irrational fear of something. Spiders, earthquakes, snakes, groups of people, the open air, even the "wrath of god"......

      Maybe psychologists understand it. It seems like if people have a wonderful life in front of them, with no apparent danger, then they simply have to invent something to be afraid of.

      What "?phobia" would you call (1) the fear of christians? (2) the fear of death?

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      Most answer this with the ridiculous assertion that Lev. 18 and 20 represent the universal law. Just not Lev. 19 because that mentions sacrifice.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 5 years ago from Tasmania

      Interesting questions, C.J. Sledgehammer.

      Would you like to tell us about gangs in your country? What sort of people do they attack?

    • profile image

      CJ Sledgehammer 5 years ago

      Thank you for the wonderful information, Jacqui.

      I think I could deal with the earthquakes, but those darn White Tails are a force to be reckoned with. The Red Back spider I do not fear as much, because it usually keeps to the coastal regions and is a web dweller, not a wandering opportunist like the White Tail.

      The Australians say they must go through a ritual that consists of checking everything for those pesky White Tails, because this spider gets in their beds, closets, clothes, drawers, sheds, etc.

      Too bad about the gang situation, but it's a good thing the powers that be are starting to address the issue. As they say, "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." This is to say that many a bad thing begins small and then branches out. So, it is better to nip it in the bud before it gets out of hand.

      Peace be with you - C.J. Sledgehammer

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 5 years ago from New Zealand

      Hehe, Cool.

      Gang violence? Some, but not a 'serious' problem. Serious problem seems to me that we would be like Compton etc in the USA.

      Yes, we have gangs, and yes they tend to get into trouble with each other and the law, for the most part - most of them leave everyone else alone. Interestingly enough, we used to own a store in a small town, my mother was on good terms with the leader of the local chapter of the Mongrel Mob - any trouble with his members - he'd sort it. And, most of the time, the trouble was from people from out of town.

      Some areas, like Wanganui, have taken the step of banning gang patches in certain areas of their town due to friction between the local gangs in the center of town. Most places like hospitals ban patches or colours on their property - and this is usually happily abided by.

      The White annoying, but reasonably rare. I've seen a few bites from them - they do tend to get quite nasty quite quickly - infected and mucky, swollen. But they are easily recognisable so errr...the non-buddhist of us (most of us) will squash them! They're nasty as they are able to eat "daddy longlegs" who are the most poisonous spiders but are too small to bite humans, so they ingest their poison.

      It's not really a problem, just another of those things. We on the other hand do not have any snakes - let alone poisonous ones. Nor any dangerous animals like bears, etc. We do have another tourist from Australia which is worse than the White tail, but rare as well - the Red Back Spider. Though, I've never seen one of them...and I've squashed many a white tail!

      Hmmm, more about NZ.....we are a reasonable secular nation, though seem to not be bothered about those who are not secular - have churches, mosques, temples, retreats, synagogues etc. Multi cultural in people, bicultural as a nation and partially bilingual as a nation (Three national languages - English, Te Reo Maori and NZ Sign Language - all speak English, most speak at least a basic amount of Maori).

      So, given my upbringing in a country of such differing views, I guess that explains the way I tend to stick up for the underdog.

      How about you? Where is this 7000 miles away place?

    • profile image

      CJ Sledgehammer 5 years ago


      I, too, live on the Pacific "Ring of Fire" - just 7,000 miles northeast of your location. :0)

      I have also heard that New Zealand has a serious problem with gang violence. Is this true?

      My sons and I are also a bit concerned about the "white tail" spider, that came across from Australia, which somewhat reminds us of the "brown recluse" spider of the American Mid-West. Being a nurse, what do you know about this little critter? Any problems with it?

      Be well - C.J. Sledgehammer

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 5 years ago from New Zealand

      Off topic is fine.

      1)Jacqui is merely the French spelling of Jackie. And for some its the abbreviation of Jacqueline. Except me its just Jacqui. Pronounced, at least here, the same as the other spellings. Feminine form of Jacque (spelling? Sounds like shark.) My mother saw it on a movie. Am not French! Hehe

      2) I believe Christchurch still has numerous aftershocks daily but they've really just become a part of life for them. I've been down about 3-4mths after the Feb quake last year, was in a 4.0 aftershock - like a big truck rumbling past and shaking the place we were in. Not scary though.

      Life is slowly getting back to normal for them, or at least a new normal. But aftershocks will continue as the plates resettle in new positions, perhaps for years.

      We kiwis are lucky to live in such a place. I've always said where ever I go in my life, I will always come home. I think those who are wanting to leave are possibly wanting to leave Christchurch not NZ. And understandably!

      We live straddling the edge of at least two tectonic plates, on the edge of the Pacific Ring of Fire - have at least two active (at times) volcanoes on the North Island. So weird happenings like earthquakes are not unexpected but are few and far between. Though had a few little ones up north here lately!

      Don't let the quakes etc put you off - you'll regret it!

      Thanks for the curiosity. Whereabouts are you?

      Be well too. Jacqui

    • profile image

      CJ Sledgehammer 5 years ago


      If you don't mind, I would like to ask you a couple of questions "off topic", just to purge my curiosity.

      1) What is the origin of your name and what does it mean? Is it pronounced "Jackie", like we do in the States?

      2) What is the state of affairs in New Zealand with the aftershocks on the South Island, especially around Christchurch? I have heard that the aftershocks may continue for another 30 years. What have you seen and heard? Has life returned back to normal there?

      I have always considered New Zealand to be one of the most beautiful places on the planet and had wanted to visit her one day. Yet, I have heard that many Kiwis want to leave because of the earthquakes. Is this true?

      Be well - C.J. Sledgehammer

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 5 years ago from New Zealand

      Thank you CJ. This is all I wanted - a decent respectful oconversation. Thank you for yr comments. Firstly - it's Jacqui not Jill. (The L is an intial)

      A few things:

      1) I am in a committed legal civil union with my wife and soul mate. I am living what I was intended to live - in a loving, monogamous relationship with the person intended only for me. By being the person I was created to be, by God

      2) I do not need to justify myself to God - I am as He made me. He does not make mistakes, only challenges - you know nothing of my challenges - this is not one of them. I am at peace with Him, and myself, as I am as I was intended.

      I do not need to justify myself to Him through his followers. A relationship with God is a personal one, not one through a proxy. Your relationship with Him may be different to mine but it doesn't mean either is wrong.

      3) I am not trying to prove or promoted sexuality with His words. I cannot make any one gay, just as you cannot make me straight. It's impossible.

      What I am trying to do is point out the hypocrisy of those who use his word in the way they do - taking verses out of context - out of the history and happenings of the time - and trying to insert them into today.

      That is all. Thank you for entering into a respectful conversation. By the way, I don't hate you either.

    • profile image

      CJ Sledgehammer 5 years ago


      I do not hate you, not in the least, but your desire to engage in homosexual activity will only cause you more pain before the end. Eating from a forbidden fruit separates you from God and places emnity between you and the truth.

      I read your entire essay and came to two conclusions: 1) you are good writer, and 2) you use the Bible with as much skill and understanding as a novice who sits behind the steering wheel of a car for the very first time.

      Try as you may, Jill, you will never be able to justify your behavior before God, nor will you be successful in using His Word to promote your vice.