Tackling Tradition 88 - Leviticus 18

Question :  Given what you and PAPC believe about Romans 1:18 - 32 & Leviticus 18 would you throw out.   Answer : I am not throwing out any commands.   How so?  By reasoning that God allows us to ground our sexual ethics in the created order,  the tradition bound view’s proponents are the guilty party in that regard.    THE BIBLE EXPLICITLY FORBIDS USING THE VISIBLE ATTRIBUTES OF THE CREATED ORDER AS THE BASIS FOR THEOLOGY, PHILOSOPHY, & ETHICS. Romans 1:18 - 32 is inerrant, infallible, & clear as a bell on this.    One more time:  Romans 1:18 - 32 is a verbal, plenary commentary on Leviticus 18.  To understand the case law in Leviticus 18 correctly, understand Romans 1:18 - 32.  It covers the same exact material & follows the same exact outline.   Leviticus 18 Shema/Prologue  (Lev. 18:1 - 5) General & Specific Prohibitions  (Lev.18: 6 -23)  Document Clause, Witnesses, & Victory...
Post a Comment

O Brother, Where Art Thou? Esau Revisited

Pay attention to Genesis 33 & the story of Jacob & Esau.    It’s the basis of the story of the Prodigal Son.  

Jacob, at a young age, obtains his birthright (via illicit means) & winds up in sorting sheep (slopping pigs) in a far away land (Uncle Laban’s house) returns home & is met by Esau (the Prodigal’s father.  Gifts are exchanged (the ring, turban, etc), $ all is well.    Sometime later Edom (the brother who stayed behind), ie Esau’s offspring, but not Esau himself, gets angry & the LORD cuts them down to size just like the father in the story cut his angry son down to size.   

How is it that we all understand the Prodigal Son’s father to be a godly man like Jethro but somehow Esau isn’t understood that way? 

It’s so simple, a child can understand it. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Favorite Fallacies & Homosexuality

Thesis - The tradition bound view on homosexuality commits a number of logical, epistemic, & exegetical fallacies.  1-  Is - Ought Fallacy  - Human anatomy is said to provide    a blueprint for sexual ethics.  We examined this in my previous article.  A moral “ought” is derived from a physical “is.”  The disputant makes an illicit leap from what is to what ought to be. A classic example is the way some homosexuals defend their sexual ethics by appealing to their biology/genetics.  2 -  Vicious Circularity   - Human anatomy & physiology are raised to the status due a non-arbitrary epistemic warrant.    A non-arbitrary epistemic warrant must be necessary, reasoned, & principled.  In truth, the body is unnecessary to deduce sexual ethics. By way of contrast, God’s nature is definitionally necessary, insofar as God is a necessary being, &, since God is infinite, eternal, & unchangeable in being, w...
Read more

City Of God Study Module 2

            ✨ 👑 GALLIFREY 👑✨                       EDISON/ADONAI                           CAMBRIDGE BASTILLE & PLUME     SAGACITY & THORN                            Zodiac ICONOCLASTS LAW & ORDER         Bishop     Vanity Fair          Forge      Toymaker    Archibaptrix     Chameleon         Enigma     Governess         Corsair       Jodpurs         Sextant       Dauphin       Carnevale       Libertine           Arsenal                  Mosaic  ...
Read more

Romans 1:18 - 32 & Leviticus 18

Paul is following the basic outline of a suzerain covenant in general     & the outline of Lev. 18 in particular.   Shema & Decalogue (Rom. 1:18 - 20)   God’s Image testifies to His attributes & Law.    God created people. His temple bears His Image & runs according to his Law & Gospel.    This corresponds to Lev. 18 : 1 & 2. A - Rom.    1:18 - 19.  God’s wrath falls on those who suppress His image.   B - Rom 1:20  - For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made so that people are without excuse.  What is the teleological intent of the created order?    To serve as an epistemic warrant on par with God Himself? No!  It’s purpose is to serve as a pointer to God who is Himself the only sufficient epistemic warrant for all faith & practice.  ...
Read more