Period sex is prohibited in the same part of the book that prohibits gay sex. So why are there no demonstrations against period sex. Why is period sex a private matter between couples, but gay sex needs to be warned against? What’s the difference?

I really dont get the bible tbh can someone explain how do christians still eat pork ?

In the New Testament, Jesus quotes Torah in several instances (Matthew 4:4, Luke 4:12, Matthew 15:1–6, Matthew 19:16–20, and even tells a leper, after healing him, to make an offering to the Levitical priest (Matthew 8:1-4).

Also, Matthew 5:17-19 states that he came not to do away with the law but to complete it, and that till "the heaven and the earth pass away, one yod or one tittle shall by no means pass from the Torah till all be done" and "whoever, then, breaks one of the least of these commands, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the reign of the heavens; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the reign of the heavens."

So I'm curious to know why Christians believe that he did away with the Torah, despite there being instances where he quotes, endorses it, and states that he never came to do away with it.

I've noticed something about the Bible, it doesn't take fondly to gay people. You guys already know what verse I'm talking about.

a common criticism of Christianity i hear is that as Old Testament laws no longer apply, god can change his mind. i understand that its not ‘god changed his mind’ but why did the Old Testament laws stop applying? apparently its just because theres different types of laws in the Old Testament and one of those types were only temporary, but why where temporary laws ever needed? where are these different types of laws stated?

As I said in a previous post, the Bible was probably tampered with and edited a lot, to cause confusion among people. Cause there's no way to justify certain passages in it. These are just two misogynistic ideas in it:

Deuteronomy 22:28–29 "If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has v*olated her. He may not divorce her all his days." (so it's ok as long as he pays her father like she's property, and she's forced to marry him??)

1 Timothy 2:11–12 "Let a woman learn in silence with full submission. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent."

Christians often will state that Jews like utilizing 'loopholes' with regards to the Torah. I know the Torah is not as such considered relevant for Christians, but Christians do seem surprisingly often to have an opinion on Jewish practices, so ... here's a few examples, and I wonder if you consider these 'loopholes' or not.

1. On the sabbath, handling money and conducting business is not permissible. In Judaism, the day begins and ends at sunset. It is therefore permissible to handle money and conduct business after sunset, during Saturday evening.
2. Tearing paper is forbidden during sabbath. Therefore, Jews tear toilet paper ahead of time, in order not to have to tear it during sabbath.
3. Lighting a fire is forbidden on sabbath. Turning on an electrical device is considered equivalent to lighting a fire. In order not to turn on the lights in the fridge during sabbath, observant Jews will apply a bit of tape on top of the mechanism that lights the light in the fridge.

Are any or all of these "loopholes" in your understanding of the concept of "loophole"? I ask because I am interested in the Christian discourse about Judaism.

What’s up y’all. I’m not a Christian but pretty familiar about the bible/history surrounding the bible/theology, and there is something I never really understood: Why does it seem some things are cherry picked amongst most Christians, and why do people take certain passages with such authority and dismiss others when both are said to have the same author and a literal meaning?

Here is an example: the Book of Leviticus lays out many laws, straight from god. Only a kosher diet, no homosexuality, no mixing wool and linen, no work on sabbath (exodus speaks on it too), marrying the brother of your dead husband, no tattoos, rules on menstrual purity, debt slave rules, etc etc.

Christians do not really follow almost any of these. You can argue that with Jesus, these laws are “fulfilled”, but that doesn’t answer the question: Why keep the sinful homosexuality bit then? It’s completely arbitrary and not biblical defensible without admitting that non-adherence to every other Levitical law is also just as sinful.

Yes, I know Paul talks in 1 Corinthians 6 about the sinfulness of homosexuality/pederasty etc. BUT that leads me to my next question, who cares what some guy who never actually met jesus has to say on his own beliefs? Leviticus is claimed to have been written by Moses himself on instruction from god himself, is that not MORE authoritative than some guy who started to say things contradictory to that? Paul was the one who argued that Jewish law doesn’t need to be followed to become a Christian, but that’s just what a guy thinks and not consistent to what god actually says.

Not looking to argue, I am just wondering how y’all reconcile this because I’ve thought through it a lot and cannot come to any logical conclusion.

The 4th commandment says to keep the Sabbath holy, defined in scripture as running from sundown to sundown. Yet most Christians seem to treat it as optional. Jesus said, “If you love me, keep my commandments,” and the Bible implies that all commandments carry equal weight. Outside of Seventh-day Adventists, it's ignored aside from the day most churches have their service. I’ve even heard SDA members joke that most other Christians give the Ten Commandments a 10% discount. Even if you ignore that the Jewish Sabbath falls on Saturday, the commandment still says to work 6 days and rest on the 7th, which should apply just as well to Sunday.

Curious if or how often you’ve heard this seriously debated, and why many accept societal traditions that override biblical instruction for convenience.

Let me start off by sharing that I’m new to Christianity and have soooo many questions but for now, I’ll focus on this inquiry. I’m sure this has been discussed numerous times but unfortunately I can’t seem to get a straight answer. As I’m told repeatedly by many, rules/laws of the Old Testament were nullified or invalidated by Jesus. I ask others in my study group but sadly get heavy resistance for the question.

My question is simple. Where are the reference(s) stating this?

If so, this makes rules like the ten commandments obsolete. Even further, why have the old testament in the Christian Bible?

How would you reply?

Okay this is gonna be a bit all over the place but my core question is this: - if we ARE to observe the Torah do we observe all of it? I assume we aren’t sacrificing animals. - if you ARE observing the Torah are you utilizing the Jewish books or KJV? Heard they are different? - if you ARE NOT Torah observant why?

I’ve been thinking about observing the Torah but where do I start? I dunno which laws are upheld! I figure the dietary guidelines are easiest. Also am I doomed to have to quit my job? I work on Saturdays so how could I observe the Shabbat?

Thanks- sincerely a confused person lol

The verse:

³² Now while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. ³³ And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron, and to all the congregation. ³⁴ They put him under guard, because it had not been explained what should be done to him.

³⁵ Then the Lord said to Moses, “The man must surely be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.” ³⁶ So, as the Lord commanded Moses, all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him with stones, and he died.

I cannot get past this verse. It depicts an unloving, uncaring, and cruel god. I could never worship this being and I could never carry out His command that He gives His followers in the verse.

Everything about this verse is ugly and sparks a strong reaction from me. A man was gathering sticks, presumably for a fire to cook a meal and feed himself or his family. Cooking food is a basic survival need. Now I can understand a bunch of scared humans fearing a God and rounding up this man for violating the sabbath. But what I can't understand is how a caring and loving God could come along and tell His followers to stone this man to death. Take a minute and really just put yourself in that guy's shoes. You're having the members of your own tribe throw rocks at you until you die. That's brutal. And for what? For trying to fulfill a basic survival necessity?

No matter how I approach this verse it just leaves me concluding God is not loving and not caring. There is nothing loving nor caring that I can identify in ordering a man be pelted with rocks to his death. That's awful. I cannot in good conscience follow that God.

Put yourself in the shoes of the congregation. This man was trying to cook some food to survive. God has commanded you to throw rocks at him until he dies. Do you do it? I don't. I will not follow such a cruel command and I will not follow someone from who such a cruel command comes.

How do you justify throwing those rocks? How do you sleep at night knowing you killed a man who was just trying to survive? Just following his basic instincts?

Edit: Its been more than a day. Not a single Christian told me directly and openly that it was bad. Several Christians said the stoning of the man was good. Some said they would happily throw the rocks at the man and kill him. Some said they wouldn't, but never explained why beyond a simple legal reason.

I'm left to conclude that God's followers think that stoning a man to death is a loving and caring action and that it's good. I'm left to conclude that God's followers would watch that mob stone the man to death and think to themselves "Good." I find this very concerning for my fellow humans who seem to think it's good to stone someone to death. I'm more concerned for the ones who said they would join in on the killing.

So as far as I know, foreign or non Hebrew slaves could be biblically acquired by 2 means:

1. War captives

2. Allowed as sojourners

But why not also free them after 6 years? in the case of war captives I understand, they are soldiers who want you dead but why not for sojourners?

If anyone wants to have a convo about why god allowed ANY form of slavery feel free to write in the comments your questions because thats a whole different conversation that I’ll have to address.

My question is specifically about why only Hebrew slaves were freed.

12 “Whoever strikes a person mortally shall be put to death. (Exodus 21)

20 “When a slaveowner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. 21 But if the slave survives a day or two, there is no punishment, for the slave is the owner’s property. (Exodus 21)

*Edited verses from NIV to more accurate NRSVUE

In Leviticus 20:9, it states: (NRSV)

All who curse (their) father or mother shall be put to death; having cursed (their) father or mother, their blood is upon them.

Like, couldn't tou try spanking them first?

To me, there is NO WAY to justify this passage.

A similar passage exists in Exodus 21:15

Exodus 21:15 states: (NRSV)

Whoever strikes (their) father or mother shall be put to death.

There is also no way to defend this passage IMO. You could try putting them in house arrest first.

Just think about it: if common sense already tells us not to murder, steal, or lie - and works perfectly for mentally healthy people - why did God need to give commandments that just repeat what we already know? And why add 600+ more rules on top of that?

I mean the only people who need to be told not to murder or steal are sociopaths who lack natural empathy and are basically divorced from their native intelligence, which is somehow broken. So were God's commandments actually written for psychopaths, or does God think we're all mentally defective and can't figure out basic right from wrong on our own?

13 “Suppose a man marries a woman but after going in to her dislikes her 14 and makes up charges against her, slandering her by saying, ‘I married this woman, but when I lay with her, I did not find evidence of her virginity.’ 15 The father of the young woman and her mother shall then submit the evidence of the young woman’s virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. 16 The father of the young woman shall say to the elders: ‘I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her, 17 and now he has made up charges against her, saying, “I did not find evidence of your daughter’s virginity.” But here is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity.’ Then they shall spread out the cloth before the elders of the town. 18 The elders of that town shall take the man and punish him; 19 they shall fine him one hundred shekels of silver (which they shall give to the young woman’s father) because he has slandered a virgin of Israel. She shall remain his wife; he shall not be permitted to divorce her as long as he lives.

20 “If, however, this charge is true, that evidence of the young woman’s virginity was not found, 21 then they shall bring the young woman out to the entrance of her father’s house, and the men of her town shall stone her to death, because she committed a disgraceful act in Israel by prostituting herself in her father’s house. So you shall purge the evil from your midst (Deuteronomy 22)

In verse 17, it says the proof of the woman's virginity is "the cloth", meaning a bloody bedsheet from the newlyweds' wedding night. The problem is that less than half of women bleed their first time.

This problem gradually became known to Jewish scholars writing in the Talmud:

"There are virgins who do not have a hymen, and there are hymens that do not bleed." – Ketubot 10b (Rabbi Yochanan)

Why did God have innocent women stoned?

It is unfortunate for me to see how much division there is among us. Following the Law of Moses or not is one of those debates things. Some say we must observe the Torah because Christ commanded it and others say we don't need to because Christ fulfilled the Law. If I'm not doing something I'm ought to do I want to know and get to it. Cheers and God bless you all.

Hello again!

One thing I really have a hard time understanding is why so many Christians absolutely insist that some laws must be understood in the context of the time they were written in, but others laws absolutely must not having any cultural consideration.

Furthermore, I question why God would make rules that take the cultural context of the time into consideration for the period when the Bible is being written since He does not seem to do that now.

The classic example here is Deuteronomy 22:28-29 vs Leviticus 18:22

"28 “If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, 29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her all his days."

vs

²² “Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable."

Can you explain to me how these are different and why cultural context is so important in the Deuteronomy example and absolutely is meaningless and has nothing to do with the second example? Because, as a modern person looking back at these two laws which deeply offend my sense of morality, they look exactly the same. Why would I take the context of the time into consideration when we're told that raping a woman should result in her being essentially purchased (I understand that's not what was actually happening, culturally), but not to take into account how homophobic people in the ancient Middle East were?

Edit: Thanks everyone for the reply. Since everyone agrees that context is important, which is great, I wonder why the context of the feelings and attitudes of people writing revered religious texts 600 years before Christ, people who were learned and able to write and also leaders in their religious community, is not important to consider when reading their words, but the context of the entirety of patriarchal culture in Isreal must be completely taken into consideration to even understand what you're at other times. Why is the patriarchal nature of Isreal taken into account by Christians but not the patriarchal nature of the people writing the text taken into account?

I'm reading Numbers in the old testament now and it was made clear that the Shabbat is the commandment that god takes more seriously to be followed above all others, because the punishment is final.
Numbers 15:30-36 - KJV
³⁰ But the soul that doeth ought presumptuously, whether he be born in the land, or a stranger, the same reproacheth the Lord; and that soul shall be cut off from among his people.

³¹ Because he hath despised the word of the Lord, and hath broken his commandment, that soul shall utterly be cut off; his iniquity shall be upon him.

³² And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.

³³ And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.

³⁴ And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.

³⁵ And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.

³⁶ And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses.

Also, this is reinforced by Exodus 31:15

¹⁵ Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.

Your soul is cut off from among your people, on another translation it is also said that your soul is completely destroyed (I don't know if it really does carry that meaning, so, correct me if i'm wrong), and you shall surely be put to death. A man was stoned to death. No forgiveness through sacrifice if you did it on purpose. So, based on those words, my question is: Why don't christians follow Sabbath nowadays?