A response to the “Response to Dr Laura” Graphic – Part 3

Posted: July 4, 2012 in Covenental Apologetics, Culture, General
Tags: , ,

Well, here we are, part 3!

This has taken longer to get round to writing than I had anticipated – apologies for that folks!

If you have missed parts 1 and 2 of this blog series, please check then out here before continuing, things will make much more sense:

A response to the “Response to Dr Laura” Graphic – Part 1

A response to the “Response to Dr Laura” Graphic – Part 2

So, lets get cracking shall we?

The 3rd objection is as follows:

“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 offence.”

So lets look at the section:

“‘When a woman has a discharge, if her discharge in her body is blood, she shall continue in her menstrual impurity for seven days; and whoever touches her shall be unclean until evening. 20‘Everything also on which she lies during her menstrual impurity shall be unclean, and everything on which she sits shall be unclean. 21‘Anyone who touches her bed shall wash his clothes and bathe in water and be unclean until evening. 22‘Whoever touches any thing on which she sits shall wash his clothes and bathe in water and be unclean until evening. 23‘Whether it be on the bed or on the thing on which she is sitting, when he touches it, he shall be unclean until evening. 24‘If a man actually lies with her so that her menstrual impurity is on him, he shall be unclean seven days, and every bed on which he lies shall be unclean.”

Lets just move past the sarcastic questions and deal with the real questions – how does this pertain to the issue of homosexuality being referenced in leviticus ?

Well, similarly to the other points, the issue is essentially something like “well, this doesn’t get practiced, so why should we hold to the idea of homosexuality still being the case?”.

For one simple reason, and one straightforward section:

Hebrews 9:6-10:

“Now when these things have been so prepared, the priests are continually entering the outer tabernacle performing the divine worship, 7but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance. 8The Holy Spirit is signifying this, that the way into the holy place has not yet been disclosed while the outer tabernacle is still standing, 9which is a symbol for the present time. Accordingly both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience, 10since they relate only to food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until a time of reformation.

11But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; 12and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. 13For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, 14how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?”
What is the authors point?

Very similar to the previous answers we have given, this was part of the ceremonial law, specifically in the context of that chapter, ceremonial washings and cleanliness. This was simply foreshadowing of things to come in fulfilment of Christ. The idea of ceremonial cleansing being a foreshadowing of the cleansing that Christ would make on behalf of his people by sacrificing himself on the cross. If you compare to the two paragraphs in Hebrews, the comparison between the old ways in the OT laws and regulations and Christ in the NT fulfilment of those pictures of what would happen is crystal clear. This is why this law is not directly applicable today, because it, along with many other things in the ceremonial were simply a foreshadow of what would be the reality that is found in Christ, i.e spiritual cleansing.

So, we can see that this in no way abrogates the continued application of the moral laws in Leviticus prohibiting homosexual behaviour.

Stay tuned for the other objections to be answered!

God bless!

Advertisements
Comments

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s