counter statistics

Wednesday, December 05, 2007

The Logical One Responds, Doesn't Answer the Question

In our last episode we wrote about SD 35 Republican BPOU Chair, True North "nucleus" and MOB Blogger, Cindy Whitehair, aka the Lady Logician's post that responded to a Nick Coleman column column going after Archbishop John Nienstedt for his anti-gay animus. In her post, the Logical One suggested that Leviticus 20:13 supported the Archbishop's position.

The Lady Logician said...

I didn't quote Leviticus 20:13 - I quoted Leviticus 18:22...Is that the best you can do?


Actually, she quoted 20:13:

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.


The Logical One continues:

I also find it interesting that this is how you respond to a civil conversation. It speaks volumes about you.

Regarding Lev 20:13 you totally skip over the part where it says that the blood guilt (for the sin) is ON THE HEAD OF THE SINNERS!

Nice of you to put words in other peoples mouths....

LL


I quoted you directly LL. Please answer the question? Does your quoting of Leviticus 20:13 mean you agree with its call for the Death Penalty for gays? A simple yes or no will do.


Avidor said...

What is "blood guilt"?

9:18 AM
Savage Republican said...

Actually, she's a Christian so you have to read both parts of the bible.
All the penalties for sin have been paid in full by Jesus.
So yes there is a call for death penalty (for this and all the other sins), but the penalty was already paid.
But the important part is also the go forth and sin no more.

And she is not part of the "Leviticus crowd.
It is Genesis that sets out the plan. Leviticus is just because people were too dense to see it clearly.

And again, condemn the sin, love the sinner.

As for 'blood guilt', the guilt for the loss of their life. In other words the sinner is to blame for his sin.

11:58 AM


MarkH, a contributor here, also left a comment over on the Logical One's post:


Lady Logician - which half of the Bible are you cheering for? The Old Testament or the New?

I only wish that the Archbishop focused on teaching the Gospel.

If you read the Gospel of John very carefully, you'll find out that the only sin cited is that of unbelief.

I have no personal need to be welcomed by the Catholic Church. I'm a lifelong Protestant, and do not anticipate changing my mind about the role of a Pope any time in the foreseeable future.

There's no Pope in the Bible...

The Archbishop's assertion that a homosexual orientation is caused by some childhood trauma is mind-boggling and insulting. Unless of course he's referring to children being abused by Catholic clergy?

By Markh, at 12:14 AM


And the soap opera continues.

6 comments:

Savage Republican said...

I let LL answer what her meaning was herself.

But this is a common false claim against Christians.

No one is calling for the Death Penalty for sin.
The Bible says the penalty for sin is death.
As a Christian we know that the penalty has been paid for all who believe by the death and resurrection of Jesus.
Thus John's statement not that unbelief is the only sin, but that without belief there is no guarantee of forgiveness.

So no one is calling for death penalty for anyone.
But also is not suggesting that just because our sins have been forgiven that we continue to sin.
Though as a believer we know that we all sin and all continue to ask for forgiveness.

This is not that hard to understand.
The bible is pretty easy to read, suggest you do it sometime.

Savage Republican said...

Also Markh there are other sins mentioned in John.
Adultery for one (John 8)
Jesus forgives her sin but also commands her to leave her life of sin.
John 8:11
"Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin.

John has many mentions of the law of Moses and how Jesus paid the price of the law.

Avidor said...

What do you think Jews should do about Leviticus 20:13?

Savage Republican said...

avidor, that is a good and difficult question for a Christian to answer.

My understanding is that they are still bound by the Law.

As a believer in Christ, my obligations to ritual laws have been fulfilled with Christ's coming and my debt to moral laws have been paid with his death (though I am still required to obey them, with the help of God). I also am not required to do those things to identify myself as part of God's chosen people (The, I will be your God, you will be my People part) - again, because my belief in Christ and his resurrection has full filed those promises in the covenant.

Our Jewish brothers are bound by the covenant God made with them and the duties and rituals proscribed.
I would ask your Rabbi what is needed for those who have not kept the covenant.

That is the great strength I have from my knowledge that my debt has been paid. I do not have to worry if I will be forgiven, for I know it is has already been granted. (But remembering the command to "leave your life of sin')

For those who do not believe, I pray for them, knowing that without belief, I have no guarantee of anything.

Hope that answered your question.

Avidor said...

Sorry, I'm still confused...

If Leviticus is irrelevant for Christians, why mention it?

Savage Republican said...

Leviticus is not irrelevant, it is fact very relevant.
It there was no law, then what do we need forgiveness from?

We are still bound by law (part of which is put forth in Leviticus) and the penalty still apply.
Just they have been paid for by the blood of Jesus who paid the price for our sins.

Thus for a Christian to ignore the moral laws is to both diminish the sacrifice that was made for us and to dishonor that sacrifice.

We both forgiven for our sins (because the penalty has been paid) and asked to leave our life of sin.
Through the sacraments we acknowledge our need for forgiveness and remember the sacrifice that granted us forgiveness.

But just because we are forgiven does not remove the law.

As a poor analogy:
If a bank forgives my debt or someone else pays it for me,
It does not mean I did not have a debt and that I was not required to pay it. But because someone else paid it, I am not required to pay it myself.

(To keep from repeating myself, please reread my third paragraph that starts "As a believer in Christ" and talks about forgiveness and but also the need to follow the law)