Why do christians keep the old testament if they really don't follow it?  They should just drop it, it really is a ridiculous book. I ask this question here on TA because I can't get an intelligent answer anywhere else. I always hear the same things in defense of the OT; only god knows the reasons, have faith that he knows what's best, things were different back then. And then, they don't even follow the rules clearly outlined. I found this letter and had to share it.


---
On her radio show, Dr Laura Schlesinger said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following response is an open letter to Dr. Laura, penned by a US resident, which was posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as informative:

=============

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination... End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath.Exodus 35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle- room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your adoring fan.

James M. Kauffman, Ed.D. Professor Emeritus Dept. of Curriculum,
Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia

Views: 507

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Many Protestant sects can't get rid of the disgusting and completely immoral Original Sin/Fall of Mankind/collective guilt stuff. It's the very core of their whole theology. For them it's the whole reason why Jesus needed to die. So without Original Sin, the whole NT becomes pointless too. The Calvinists took that that the perverse extreme of Total Depravity, and they are the ones who colonized the US.

I never quite understood why Jesus couldn't just die for mankind's ACTUAL sins instead of some ancient guilt. The moral solution to the Original Sin problem is called Pelagianism, but of course it was declared a heresy because it stated that humans chose good and be good without explicit divine intervention.

I'm curious of the whole "Jesus died because of YOUR sins" logic (the emphasis on "yours" usually).

So - christianity does not approve of reincarnation. How, or rather why, is exactly the "original sin" exactly inherited?

And if Jesus died somewhere around 2000 years ago, AND there is no reincarnation, how exactly is it YOUR (or anyone's who is living presently) fault that he died?

And to take one step further: let's just assume all the logic above makes sense (no reincarnation, yet someone died thousands of years ago because of a problem you are causing), well, if his death fixed anything (I also never understood why the blood sacrifice was needed), then isn't it time to just MOVE ON?

If his death really fixed everything, then aren't the people sin free now? Why do they (christians) go around telling "Jesus died because of YOUR sins" instead of enjoying the sin free existence that should be the case... it's time to move on if there's nothing more to fix there.

Still, I have never understood the logic behind ME being somehow responsible for how some fictional person decided to die thousands of years ago. Wouldn't it also be my fault if my grandad killed someone before I was born?

Thanks Steve,

I understand their idea of original sin, there will always be immoral people,  what confuses me is that this "perfect" god seems to have made so many immoral decisions. Selling your daughter into servitude, that's not right, but god says you can do it.  So I ask, was god wrong? If so the whole story falls apart, if no..I don't like god.

Think of christianity as a movie series. The OT is the first movie, it had some plot flaws and problems but it was basically a remake of all the other movies at the time so it wasnt very popular. Then came the sequal, the NT, which the die-hard fans of the OT rejected but appealed to a more general audiance but the premise of the movie existed solely on the plot flaws of the first movie. It is like watching only the second or third LOTR without watching the first. Nothing makes much sense and the movie crumbles into confusion. The xians need their OT to make their NT make sense because having your god die as a common criminal on a cross is not a good climax to a story if he didnt need to do it in the first place.

as for the whole immoral god thing, it helps if you can scare people into following you if buttering them up doesnt work. That and their mythology would be kind of lame if it there weren't any conflicts in it.

And the Mormons didn't like either movie that much, so they had a remake that the other fans consider horrible.

In any case, that particular version of the problem is over 2000 years old and known as the Euthyphro dilemma:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthyphro_dilemma

As formulated is focuses on why things are good, but you can easily reverse it to evil and it's really about divine command theory in general

Hehe. I forgot about the Mormons, the other white meat. The Mormon Bible is really just a collection of fan fiction that someone organised and thought it was a good as the real thing.

This is brilliant...do you mind if I post it on my FB page?  I'll of course give you all the credit.

Another similar referenc, not sure which came first the video or the letter. 

The scene is a reference to the letter which circulated on the internet

Cheers Steve. Didn't know. Awesome though right?

Sure, go ahead. I can't take all the credit, though; there was a picture floating around TA with a caption that was basical what I said in a nutshell.

The OT prophecy is used to legitimize Jesus so the Xians can't drop the OT, would be sorta like throwing out the baby with the bath water.

Joseph was from the House of David, part of the prophecy, but Joseph isn't daddy so not sure why they keep pointing to that fact.

RSS

  

Events

Blog Posts

Labels

Posted by Quincy Maxwell on July 20, 2014 at 9:37pm 24 Comments

Services we love

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by Dan.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service