tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-146780325302102876.post6958876610528606550..comments2024-03-20T08:06:18.312+00:00Comments on Benny's Blog: Bible says No - Part 2 - Leviticus 18Benny Hazlehursthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11106740133903626260noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-146780325302102876.post-12589090946201610922011-03-25T16:30:54.737+00:002011-03-25T16:30:54.737+00:00Oh, sorry. BDB is my trusty ole Brown Driver Brigg...Oh, sorry. BDB is my trusty ole Brown Driver Briggs Hebrew Lexicon, on which I spent half my holiday earning in 1975.Bishop Alan Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13879516755776951638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-146780325302102876.post-29848458506451753042011-03-25T13:41:10.182+00:002011-03-25T13:41:10.182+00:00Sorry if you get this twice - the website swallowe...Sorry if you get this twice - the website swallowed my post and I've no idea if it got through!<br /><br />Bishop Alan: What does the acronym BDB stand for?<br /><br />In general.<br /><br />What this is saying to me is that Christians are far too willing to use isolated biblical verses as a kind of oracular pronouncement, rather than looking at the proper context (textual or cultural).<br /><br />Before the election, my church handed out a leaflet with web addresses of places supposed to help Christians make up their minds who to vote for. One was a briefing from, I think, the "Christian Institute", which seemed to score different political parties on their stand on various issues considered to be traditional Christian morality:<br /><br />. the sanctity of marriage (esp. with respect to gay marriage).<br />. the sanctity of life (esp. with respect to abortion).<br />. (bizarrely) the right to hit your children.<br /><br />The best-scoring party on this narrow range of issues turned out to be the UKIP!<br /><br />None of this helps me, as a volunteer with the Samaritans (14 years now) in supporting, for example a young woman who has got pregnant & to have the baby would ruin her life and she is agonizing over whether to have an abortion, or someone struggling with issues of sexuality.<br /><br />What I have found is that the command not to judge (an absolute key principle Samaritans operates on) is incredibly liberating as it allows you to focus on the other person as a real human being with feelings and conflicting emotions, rather than someone to be put straight (no pun intended!)Iainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04685228974985888660noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-146780325302102876.post-25655364149762952062011-03-25T13:03:01.036+00:002011-03-25T13:03:01.036+00:00I strongly agree, Banny. I've had a look at a ...I strongly agree, Banny. I've had a look at a BDB, and it relates strongly and consistently to anti-idolatry contexts i.e. identity established by cultic difference. It's a key to kosher food laws because they, of course, were a means of establishing the particular election of the people in distinction to their Canaanite neighbours.Bishop Alan Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13879516755776951638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-146780325302102876.post-68583128981686984272011-03-25T10:56:13.097+00:002011-03-25T10:56:13.097+00:00@Bishop Alan:
Thank you for this. I think that t...@Bishop Alan:<br /><br />Thank you for this. I think that the other issue is the weighting of the word towards the religious context, which writers like Robert Gaganon acknowledge but fail to consider.<br /><br />A good prallel (but I am not suggesting this as an alternative translation) is the english word 'sacrilege'. As soon as we hear it, we are immediately taken to religious context in our thoughts - it carries that wieghting in our minds.<br /><br />That is not to say that it cannot be used in other contexts. <br /><br />For example, as a fan of Single Malt Whiskies I might refer (slightly tongue in cheek) to the idea of putting lemonade in a good whisky as 'sacrilege'! However, even here, the word has its power preciesley because of its religious association.<br /><br />I think that the evedence points to 'to-ebah' carrying the same kind of association in the OT.Benny Hazlehursthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11106740133903626260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-146780325302102876.post-34686171437035235162011-03-23T22:38:59.681+00:002011-03-23T22:38:59.681+00:00תעב, I see from my student notes from the middle a...תעב, I see from my student notes from the middle ages combines four strands — <br /><br />(1) (to a small extent) offence against particularity of the people, <br /><br />(2) foreign behaviour, <br /><br />(3) idolatry (including offering of firstborn by fire when combined with verb to do) - wrong or foreign sacrifice<br /><br />(4) Tabu, including marrying a foreigner and especially eating non=Kosher Food (Dt 14).<br /><br />Not sure the English "Abomination" accurately represents any of these! Perhaps the best parallel is the toEbah of marrying out in e.g. Mal 2:11 and non Kosher food consumption which is certainly Toebah. I find it a hard one to in down, but it is plainly central to and characteristic of the food laws.Bishop Alan Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13879516755776951638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-146780325302102876.post-36653522242656694412011-03-23T20:10:44.453+00:002011-03-23T20:10:44.453+00:00@Ian: Thank you for commenting on the blog.
I am...@Ian: Thank you for commenting on the blog.<br /><br />I am not sure that the logical argument you model is the one I am using.<br /> <br />However, considering the 'A is linked to B' model, your assertion would want to points us towards a conclusion that A is wholly bad. This is certainly not justified.<br /><br />There is another step required before we can determine if something is wholly bad - we must look at all the links which it has - B,C, D and so on. If all of these are bad, then we can conclude that 'A' is wholly bad. But if any of C, D, etc. are good, then we cannot conclude that A is wholly bad.<br /><br />For example: Money is linked with Greed: Greed is bad. I would assert that Money is bad insomuch as it is linked with Greed - not that ALL Money is bad. To test this, we would have to look at all the things it is linked to, many of which are positive and productive. Because it is linked to some things which are positive, we cannot conclude that money is ALL Bad, merely that it is bad insomuch as it is linked to bad things - like greed.<br /><br />Or again: Heterosexual sex is linked with Adultery; Adultery is bad; But that would not lead us to the conclusion that all Heterosexual sex is bad.<br /><br />So to say that Homosexual sex is linked with pagan worship, and that pagan worship is bad cannot be used on its own to lead to a conclusion that all homosexual sex is bad.<br /><br />Many Christians like me have seen the love of God at work in faithful, committed same-sex couples in a way which blesses them and those around them.<br /><br />Of course Leviticus 18 cannot give us the full picture on the goodness or badness of homosexual relationships. It was written to address what people would have seen at that time - where same-sex acts certainly took place in pagan worship and culture, which made them 'to-ebah' - an abomination. It says nothing about the aspirations of LGBT Christians today.<br /><br />I hope to reply to your comment on Part 3 tomorrow.Benny Hazlehursthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11106740133903626260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-146780325302102876.post-45764119215735776172011-03-22T14:10:00.775+00:002011-03-22T14:10:00.775+00:00Benny, thanks for your careful exploration of this...Benny, thanks for your careful exploration of this issue. But I don't think the logic of your argument stands up.<br /><br />To say 'A is linked with B; B is bad; therefore A is only bad insomuch as it is linked with B' does not follow. There is a sense which you are right: all these issues will be understand to a greater or lesser extent in relation to pagan practices around. But there is nothing in the text of Lev 18 which points to cult prostitution per se.<br /><br />A much more convincing reason is that paganism rejects the male/female pattern in the creation account of Genesis 1, and it is this that Leviticus is rooted in, which is also why Paul picks up the themes of sexuality and creation in Romans 1.<br /><br />The phrase itself 'lie with a man as with a woman' is very general and not context-specific, which again points to the widest sense of prohibition.Ian Paulhttp://www.psephizo.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-146780325302102876.post-26061886660094396612010-11-25T14:40:40.753+00:002010-11-25T14:40:40.753+00:00Thank you for both comments. Iain makes a very goo...Thank you for both comments. Iain makes a very good point, and I am sure that you are right about verse 21. The other thing to notice is vs 23 which speaks against 'lying with a beast'. Although our culture might consider this to be at the extremes of moral depravity, it is not dscribed as 'to-ebah'- instead it is merely 'tebel' which means 'confusion'!Benny Hazlehursthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11106740133903626260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-146780325302102876.post-66925298079292237602010-11-25T13:03:40.562+00:002010-11-25T13:03:40.562+00:00Thanks for the post - I was aware of to-ebah befor...Thanks for the post - I was aware of to-ebah before, but hadn't seen the link to temple prostitution so clearly explained.<br /><br />I also wonder if there is significance in the placement (and context) of Lev 18:22 in the text. As I recall there are a whole sequence of sexual prohibitions early in the chapter, then other admonitions, followed by this. In particular the immediately preceding verse Lev 18:21 is about sacrificing your children through fire (or some translations refer to sacrificing your children to the Canaanite God Moloch). This practice (sacrificing through fire) is condemned in the prophets (as I recall several times in Jeremiah). Given this context of the immediately preceding verse I wonder if this also increases the significance of 18:22 as describing religious ritual rather than the general case of same sex relationships?Iainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04685228974985888660noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-146780325302102876.post-22444963470165023642010-11-25T11:12:35.673+00:002010-11-25T11:12:35.673+00:00Thanks for the post, informative on such a controv...Thanks for the post, informative on such a controversial issue for the church today. Look forward to the next one!Chris Hhttp://lansburyslido.posterous.comnoreply@blogger.com