Queer Lounge at Sundance 2007 Panel on Faith Part 2

[helenabuckingham]

Is there more to this discussion somewhere?

[jimmy198017]

I'm not sure if i agree with everything in the film, because i have't seen it yet, but i think it's great that you guys have really dug into this on a theological basis. you're right that people just take what they traditionally have heard and go with that. But the issue affects to many people to make such quick judgements.

[Progo35]

I need to see this film to see if it adresses the NT on homosexuality, as it isn't in these previous but is an important thing to address

[erikwait]

(Cont.) Hence to quote an OT passage concerning sexual morality (Homosexuality, beastiality, fornication, rape etc.) while not quoting a passage concerning eating kosher animals is not "selective reading" in an arbitrary manner but rather citing those passages which have not been deemed obsolete by the NT.

[CrisBrighton]

erikwait, you're leaving out something important. It's true that the moral laws are in force while the laws governing uncleanness are not. Anything that the Old Testament calls "toevah" - unclean, or abomination in many versions of the Bible - is part of that law that has been done away by Christ's death on the cross. The Bible specifically refers to homosexuality as toevah, along with eating shellfish, wearing clothes of mixed fiber, and having sex with a menstruating woman. (continued)

[mrsgoatlady77]

r u saying that the NT says we can eat unkosher food??? if the real Messiah came to do away w/ Torah, then Deut 13 & 18 are a lie. they both say a true Prophet MUST uphold Torah, or he is false.

[CrisBrighton]

The dividing line isn't topical, with sexual laws in force but food laws done away. Rather, it's the laws by which the Jews were set apart that were done away. Paul says the same thing in the New Testament by calling homosexuality "akatharsia," or unclean. Keeping one law against uncleanness and discarding the others is selective reading. (continued)

[CrisBrighton]

The dividing line isn't topical, with sexual laws in force but food laws done away. Rather, it's the laws by which the Jews were set apart that were done away. Paul says the same thing in the New Testament by calling homosexuality "akatharsia," or unclean. Keeping one law against uncleanness and discarding the others is selective reading. (continued)

[CrisBrighton]

There is one exception to this: acts that are toevah "before the Lord" are still in force. But this doesn't apply to the Levitical verses on homosexuality. Nothing that could be translated as "before the Lord" appears in either of them.

[CrisBrighton]

One more point: a few laws are found in both codes, but again, the law governing homosexuality is not.

[erikwait]

The law of the OT is still binding unless it has been abbrogated by God in the NT. Laws unique to the OT that are typological of Christ or separated Jews & Gentiles are no longer binding. Hence the sacrificial system, circumcision, food laws etc. are abbrogated. The moral law of the OT is still binding as Jesus Himself said He did not come to do abolish it but to uphold it & anyone who diminishes these laws will be the least in the Kingdom (Mat. 5:17). Read "The Gay Gospel" by Joe Dallas.

[Sammy0414]

Do you keep Kosher laws. I think not

[billyez]

...Selective reading? The Bible is selective reading? Yeah, I'm glad I saw this, it only affirms how dangerous movies that promote the gay agenda are.

[mlinarskito]

It is selective reading for people to simply take one verse and use it to condemn other people while doing things that surrounding verses state as abominations also.