Should Leviticus 18:22 be removed from the Bible?

Post Reply New Topic

It's no secret that this particular part of the bible has torn a lot of families apart rather than knitting them together, as summed by this quote I got from a post by my acquaintance Edenthiel, which belongs to the Director of the movie "Latter Days" (2004)

"...there is a massive irony, both in the film and in real life, that a religion so focused on the family and its importance is ripping families apart through its teaching on homosexuality" -Director C. Jay Cox

Should this part of the Bible be removed for the sake of bringing families together? Will it ever change the Bible significantly? Is it even relevant when compared the more timeless and morally universal parts of the Bible? (Like Matthew 7:12)

Tell all about it below!

If you did that, you'd have to remove everything from the Bible that seems morally questionable today. And that's a lot of stuff.

I don't know if it's a good idea to actually remove parts from the Bible. But our understanding of what the scriptures mean is always changing and evolving, and pastors can teach different interpretations of the Bible.

The Apostle Paul said about 12 or 13 times that we should "read the scriptures with reason" meaning logical, personal, rationale. Using his suggestion, the door is opened several interpretations within the New Testament understanding of the Old Testament. So, no, the Bible needn't be edited, though wise sages, including Rupert Murdoch, have tried frequently to do so. There are Bibles of all flavors. Even Thomas Jefferson edited his King James Version Bible to better reflect his opinions.

The passage is (by implication) addressed to men. It says not to sleeps with other men "the way you lie with womankind" because its "an abomination". In other words: "no male homosexuality allowed".

As the above poster said if you took out everything in the Bible that doesnt square with modern morality then you would be lobotomizing many huge chunks of the Bible.

The opposite is also the case: following the word of scripture -even by fundies-is quite selective.

The Old Testament forbids you to eat shell fish, and to even touch the skin of a pig (cant have football anymore).

You cant change the Bible because "God is unchanging". But humans do change in how they interpret his books. Go figure.

Why not just decide to not be a Christian instead? It makes a lot more sense to me, rather than trying to change aspects of a religion which is not based on science but faith.

The bible doesn't make sense or fit in with modern times because it was written when the world was a huge mystery, and people needed to come up with explanations for things they didn't understand. Those explanations don't fit in with our modern understandings because they weren't based on science.

Leviticus 18:22 is hardly the worst part of the Bible... actually, it doesn't even come close.

Here are some of the greatest hits:

1 Peter 2:18 = Justification for slavery.

1 Samuel 15:3 = Justification for genocide.

Exodus 22:18 = Justification for THIS.

Well, female homosexuality isn't exactly allowed, as per Romans 1:26.

However (like Aspie Utah said) you're not first person to seek to edit the Bible.

What Thomas Jefferson did was to perform some 18th Century style low tech "word processing" on the New Testament (with razor, and glue) to remove all miracles, and other supernatural occurances from the life of Jesus. Jefferson concluded that the resulting narrative still worked as a story, with inspiring teachings about morality.

My favorite instance of would-be editing of the Bible was by a certain fervent turn-of-the-20th-Century German-American Methodist minister in rural Kansas who also happened to be the father of my Grandfather. Even my strictly religious grandparents described him as "such a fright" because his religious fervor.

While reading the Bible one day he suddenly got angry, stood up, and then physically tore the entire Book of Ecclesiastes out of the binding of the KGV, and threw the pages on the floor! He had decided that Ecclesiastes just didnt belong in the Bible, and that he was sick of seeing it in there.

Mom pointed out to me that "in all fairness centuries of scholars havent figured out exactly why Ecclesiastes is in the Bible either. It's a bit of non sequitar".

But the lyrics of one of the best songs by Sixties folk-rock band the Byrds, "There is a Season [turn, turn]" is lifted almost verbatim from Ecclesiastes.

Why would anyone want to edit the Bible? Instead abridging it in a piecemeal fashion, teach your children to take each verse in a contextual perspective.

You can't remove 18:22

Just like you can't remove the Lord's Prayer because it espouses monotheism and the belief in a Supreme Being.

This would set a really bad precedent, frankly. People would start seeking to remove sections of books which they don't like.

Let me emphasize: I am not a believer in quite a bit of the precepts of the Bible.

I don't believe in God.

I am a believer in some of the moral precepts of the Bible.

Some others, fughettaboutit!