Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
No change in size ,  21:50, February 22, 2009
m
Line 107: Line 107:  
It is to be noted that Jacob did not plan to marry Rachel, but in an example of poetic justice, he was the victim of a "bait and switch" plan by cunning uncle Laban,(Gn. 29) brother to Jacob's mother, which indicates such cunning deceit ran in the family, though with Jacob it was to be weeded out.   
 
It is to be noted that Jacob did not plan to marry Rachel, but in an example of poetic justice, he was the victim of a "bait and switch" plan by cunning uncle Laban,(Gn. 29) brother to Jacob's mother, which indicates such cunning deceit ran in the family, though with Jacob it was to be weeded out.   
   −
====Versus 19: sexual relations during menstruation====
+
====Lev. 18:19: sexual relations during menstruation====
    
Sexual intercourse with a women  possibly after child birth (Lev. 12:2-7) or during her period  is forbidden, and  the latter is specifically revealed to be a capital crime in Lv. 20:18 (if "cut off" is what is meant, versus "put to death").  In Lev. 15:34 the penalty for laying "with her at all" was only seven days separation, but that "laying" might signify simply sleeping with her, as the previous verses are only concerned with contact with a women having an issue of blood (for which no means of stoppage was indicated).
 
Sexual intercourse with a women  possibly after child birth (Lev. 12:2-7) or during her period  is forbidden, and  the latter is specifically revealed to be a capital crime in Lv. 20:18 (if "cut off" is what is meant, versus "put to death").  In Lev. 15:34 the penalty for laying "with her at all" was only seven days separation, but that "laying" might signify simply sleeping with her, as the previous verses are only concerned with contact with a women having an issue of blood (for which no means of stoppage was indicated).
Line 119: Line 119:  
Leaning towards moral law is the fact that the sanctity of blood precedes the Mosiac ceremonial dietary laws, as immediately after the flood, while God sanctioned the eating of all meat  (Gen 9:3; cf. 1:29), eating it with the blood not drained was strictly forbidden. This was later abundantly confirmed in Leviticus. (Lv. 3:17; 7:26; 17:10-14; 19:26) As the purpose of the law is to save life and not destroy them (cf. Mk. 3:4), such a restriction would not forbid the ingestion of pure blood is such dire circumstances. However, it is a matter of controversy whether blood (as in mainly blood or blood products) is considered a food that would place it in the area of liberty for Christians, (1Tim. 4:3-5) or whether it is forbidden due to it's inherent sanctity, perhaps with Acts 15:20 being upheld as part of the Jewish Halakha,<ref>http://hsf.bgu.ac.il/cjt/files/electures/gloss.htm#Halakhah</ref> in addition to causing a possible offense to others.(1Cor. 8,10)<ref>The Chemistry Of The Blood, M.R. DeHaan, M.D. http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/BTP/Dr_MR_DeHaan/Chemistry/05.htm</ref>  
 
Leaning towards moral law is the fact that the sanctity of blood precedes the Mosiac ceremonial dietary laws, as immediately after the flood, while God sanctioned the eating of all meat  (Gen 9:3; cf. 1:29), eating it with the blood not drained was strictly forbidden. This was later abundantly confirmed in Leviticus. (Lv. 3:17; 7:26; 17:10-14; 19:26) As the purpose of the law is to save life and not destroy them (cf. Mk. 3:4), such a restriction would not forbid the ingestion of pure blood is such dire circumstances. However, it is a matter of controversy whether blood (as in mainly blood or blood products) is considered a food that would place it in the area of liberty for Christians, (1Tim. 4:3-5) or whether it is forbidden due to it's inherent sanctity, perhaps with Acts 15:20 being upheld as part of the Jewish Halakha,<ref>http://hsf.bgu.ac.il/cjt/files/electures/gloss.htm#Halakhah</ref> in addition to causing a possible offense to others.(1Cor. 8,10)<ref>The Chemistry Of The Blood, M.R. DeHaan, M.D. http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/BTP/Dr_MR_DeHaan/Chemistry/05.htm</ref>  
   −
Applying this sanctity of blood as relates to Lv. 18:19, many Christians hold that Heb. 13:4 sanctifies all benevolent sexual intercourse between man and wife (male and female), or as affirming their sexual relations in contrast to those which forbid sex in marriage<ref>Wesley</ref>(1Tim. 3:5) Others may disagree, seeing this as  while seeing Lev. 18:19 as still applicable, sometimes out of regard for the procreative process.{{Fact|date=February 2009}}  
+
Applying this sanctity of blood as relates to Lv. 18:19, many Christians hold that Heb. 13:4 sanctifies all benevolent sexual intercourse between man and wife (male and female), or as affirming their sexual relations in contrast to those which forbid sex in marriage<ref>Wesley</ref>(1Tim. 3:5) Others may disagree, seeing this as  while seeing Lev. 18:19 as still applicable, sometimes out of regard for the procreative process.{{Fact|date=February 2009}}
    
====Lev. 18:20: Adultery ====
 
====Lev. 18:20: Adultery ====
Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
2,414

edits

Navigation menu