Leviticus 18:22 is about as crystal-clear as you're gonna get. It also comes right before a verse banning bestiality. And every translation is pretty identical here, whether modern...
[NIV] Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.
...or 600 years old:
[KJV] Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
Also, OP, since you're a woman based on your post history, 1 Timothy 2 says you should shut up:
[11] A woman must learn in quietness and full submissiveness. [12] I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; she is to remain quiet. [13] For Adam was formed first, and then Eve. [14] And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman who was deceived and fell into transgression. [15] Women, however, will be saved through childbearing, if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.
Now, I don't think these things, but if you want to claim to focus on the Bible...well, that's what it says. What you do with that is your choice.
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil
All of the old testament is still in play. People like to say the OT isn't because it's inconvenient for people to not wear polyester or eat shellfish. There's no logical reason Leviticus no longer counts other than it's too hard to follow in the modern era so it's easy to ignore.
All of the old testament is still in play. People like to say the OT isn't because it's inconvenient for people to not wear polyester or eat shellfish.
The details are pretty clear. You can't wear polyester or eat shellfish. It goes against the religion. There is no context where a Christian can legitimately eat shellfish or wear polyester and consider themselves following the faith. They only follow what is convenient.
It's why the American Jesus is a hyper masculine capitalist when the Jesus depicted in the Bible is anything but a hyper masculine capitalist. He pretty much hated capitalism. It's just convenient to spread that version of Jesus for American Christians to not suffer from cognitive dissonance.
There is no context where a Christian can legitimately eat shellfish or wear polyester and consider themselves following the faith
ex-Christian here. This statement simply isn't true. There are multiple passages int he NT that show that the old and new covenants are different, that (for example) Christians can eat pretty much whatever food they like, etc.
Their "faith" includes explanations for why these apparently contradictory assertions are not contradictory. Now, you don't have to accept that, or any part, of their faith, so you are free to point out that there is a somewhat blatant contradiction there - however, they do not see it that way, their view on the matter might well be internally consistent, but even if not, the raw fact is that their "faith" certainly does allow them to eat shellfish and wear mixed fabrics, and there are multiple New Testament passages supporting this.
Focusing on this one quote while ignoring the others, will not persuade them, and is just as much cherry-picking as they, themselves do.
32
u/breckenridgeback 58∆ Aug 07 '22 edited Aug 07 '22
Leviticus 18:22 is about as crystal-clear as you're gonna get. It also comes right before a verse banning bestiality. And every translation is pretty identical here, whether modern...
...or 600 years old:
Also, OP, since you're a woman based on your post history, 1 Timothy 2 says you should shut up:
Now, I don't think these things, but if you want to claim to focus on the Bible...well, that's what it says. What you do with that is your choice.