Leviticus lives (in a few places and for a few reasons only)

The use of the Old Testament book of Leviticus has been reduced to a very few issues in the church, with homosexuality being foremost among them. Look at this article excerpted from today's (Mar. 1, 2014) Toronto Globe and Mail featuring my former employer, Trinity Western University: 

Inside Trinity Western’s struggle between faith and equality  

A month after Matthew Wigmore came out to friends at his evangelical Christian university, he stood before his philosophy of sex and gender class to give a presentation on homosexuality and reparative therapy. Mr. Wigmore, 19, felt vulnerable. Much of the presentation – which denounced the so-called treatment for homosexuality – was based on uncomfortable personal experiences.

However, the second-year theatre student felt bolstered by a supportive social circle at Trinity Western University, including friend and project partner Dillon James, who is also openly gay.

After a discussion that followed the October presentation, Mr. Wigmore asked if there were any dissenting viewpoints. A hand slowly went up.

“I personally read the King James Version [of the Bible],” the classmate said. “It’s hard for me to see how homosexuality is the right choice. How do you expect to get into heaven?”

A hush fell over the classroom. Before Mr. Wigmore could reply, another classmate interjected:

“Well, you’re a woman and you’re speaking right now. Technically, [The Book of] Leviticus doesn’t allow that.”

Added Mr. James: “And you’re wearing a fur coat – something the Old Testament law wouldn’t approve of either.”

The conversation quickly ended, Mr. Wigmore recounts in an interview (Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/inside-trinity-westerns-struggle-between-faith-and-equality/article17185258/).

[My editorial comment: Clearly the female objector/quoter of Leviticus was not in the mainstream of this TWU class. The professor permitted the presentation, two openly gay students were involved, and a classmate not identified as gay rebuked the conservative woman. Nevertheless within evangelicalism, Catholicism, and other pockets of
Christianity, Leviticus is relied on for a worldview that doesn't approve of gays.]

Here again are the two verses referenced by the TWU student who objected to her classmate's orientation:

Lev. 18:22: Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.

Lev. 20:13: If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

It is not unusual to see, among conservative Christians of a certain age, a  little fridge magnet or plaque that goes something like this: 'God said it; I believe it; that settles it'.  With that mindset, one could quickly conclude, as did the TWU student above, that these verses mean exactly what they say, not just in 1000 BC, but now as well. 

But such reliance on the book of Leviticus, or other legal passages from the Mosaic Code, can cause real problems for the literalist; i.e., when even other biblical writers ignore the teachings. Consider contradictions within the Bible itself in the application (or not) of that early legal teaching versus later biblical books--up to and including one of the 10 Commandments:

1. Is a eunuch (a castrated male) welcome in God's house and in his kingdom?

a. Leviticus 21:17-21 For the generations to come none of your (i.e. Moses' brother Aaron's) descendants who has a defect may come near to offer the food of his God. No man who has any defect may come near: no man who is blind or lame, disfigured or deformed; no man with a crippled foot or hand, or who is hunchbacked or dwarfed, or who has any eye defect, or who has festering or running sores or damaged testicles. No descendant of Aaron the priest who has any defect is to come near to present the offerings made to the LORD by fire. He has a defect; he must not come near to offer the food of his God.

b. Deuteronomy 23:1 If a man's testicles are crushed or his penis is cut off, he may not be admitted to the assembly of the LORD. 

c. Isaiah 56:3-5 Let not the foreigner who has joined himself to the Lord say, “The Lord will surely separate me from his people”; and let not the eunuch say, “Behold, I am a dry tree.” For thus says the Lord: “To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose the things that please me and hold fast my covenant, I will give in my house and within my walls a monument and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off. 
 
d. Acts 8:26ff Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Rise and go toward the south to the road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.” This is a desert place. And he rose and went. And there was an Ethiopian, a eunuch, a court official of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who was in charge of all her treasure. He had come to Jerusalem to worship and was returning, seated in his chariot, and he

was reading the prophet Isaiah. And the Spirit said to Philip, “Go over and join this chariot.” So Philip ran to him and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?”

“How can I,” he said, “unless someone explains it to me?” So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.

This is the passage of Scripture the eunuch was reading:

“He was led like a sheep to the slaughter,

    and as a lamb before its shearer is silent,

    so he did not open his mouth. In his humiliation he was deprived of justice.....”

The eunuch asked Philip, “Tell me, please, who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else?” Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus.

As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being baptized?” And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him. When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away, and the eunuch did not see him again, but went on his way rejoicing.

The first passage teaches that a eunuch is not a candidate to fill the role of priest because he could not bring offerings to the Lord's altar. In the second passage this prohibition is extended to any man who wants to be numbered among God's people and to worship him in the Temple. But by the time of the prince of prophets in the Old Testament, Isaiah, eunuchs who converted to Judaism were guaranteed a place of high esteem in the Temple, and in the early days after Christ's resurrection, the apostle Philip was directed by the Holy Spirit to seek out a eunuch and bring him into Christ's kingdom.

2. Is the Sabbath (i.e., Saturday as a day of rest and worship) to be kept by God's people today?

a. Lev. 23:3 There are six days when you may work, but the seventh day is a day of sabbath rest, a day of sacred assembly. You are not to do any work; wherever you live, it is a sabbath to the Lord. 

b. Exodus 20:8-10 Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns (N.B. The context of this declaration is the proclamation of the 10 Commandments).

c. Ex. 34:21 Six days you shall labor, but on the seventh day you shall rest; even during the plowing season and harvest you must rest.

d. Isaiah 58:13-14 “If you keep your feet from breaking the Sabbath
    and from doing as you please on my holy day,
if you call the Sabbath a delight
    and the Lord’s holy day honorable,
and if you honor it by not going your own way
    and not doing as you please or speaking idle words, then you will find your joy in the Lord,
    and I will cause you to ride in triumph on the heights of the land
    and to feast on the inheritance of your father Jacob.”
For the mouth of the Lord has spoken.

e. Acts 20:7 On the first day of the week, we gathered with the local believers to share in the Lord's Supper. 

f. Romans 14:5 In the same way, some think one day is more holy than another day, while others think every day is alike. You should each be fully convinced that whichever day you choose is acceptable.

While Sabbath-keeping was urged on the Jews throughout the Old Testament period, Christians from the beginning celebrated their faith together on Sunday, which they called the Lord's Day. Note that the day on which Jesus was resurrected (Sunday) was also called the Lord's Day. The great (5th century) St. Augustine stated that Christians are bound to keep nine of the ten Commandments [because the New Testament repeats and re-introduces them in a different form] but are free to break the Sabbath. An earlier (2nd cent.) church leader, Tertullian, said, “We solemnize the day after Saturday in contradiction to those who call this day their Sabbath." To St. Paul, Sabbath-keeping was a matter of indifference. Keep in mind that Paul described himself, in his pre-Christian days, as a Hebrew of the Hebrews and and Pharisee of the Pharisees who would have carefully observed Levitical teaching.

3. Are there foods which a follower of God should not eat?

a. Leviticus 11:46-47 This is the law about beast and bird and every living creature that moves through the waters and every creature that swarms on the ground, to make a distinction between the unclean and the clean and between the living creature that may be eaten and the living creature that may not be eaten. 

b. Deuteronomy 14:1ff You....are a people holy to the Lord your God, and the Lord has chosen you to be a people for his treasured possession, out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth. You shall not eat any abomination.

c. Acts 10:9-15 Peter went up on the roof to pray. He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. Then a voice told him, "Get up, Peter. Kill and eat." "Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean." The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean."

St. Peter knew his Levitical teaching, but when he argued with God on the basis of those laws, God rebuked him for doing so.

I could give more examples, but I simply want to illustrate that biblical writers themselves were not nearly as literalistic as the TWU students and many others who want to use Leviticus and other biblical legalisms to condemn certain behaviours. Am I simply arguing my case for the Bible being gay friendly by positing that it can't be trusted, or is something else going on?