Fruitlessly, it appears. I can't find the unaltered, verbatim King James text on any of the usual sites, at least not yet. Surely there is an online version of the Bible that might be found via a Google search.
I'm on a mission, you see. Recently, New Hampshire permitted gay marriage. Opponents of gay marriage claim that homosexuality is against the Bible. The refutation to this argument is found, in part, in the Book of Leviticus. I recall reading a litany of offenses, all of which are practiced by the vast majority of Christians today. There is a prohibition in Leviticus against eating shellfish, for example, which would encompass oysters. There are many other strange taboos, but that is the only one I remember in exactitude. The point is that, if society is to start heeding the Bible, we must change dietary customs, in addition to marriage customs, because marriage customs as practiced today are in direct contradiction of the Bible. This is a statement that cannot be refuted by any Christian, of whatever sect, that holds the King James Bible as an article of faith. Thus, all Christian sects today, to the extent that they oppose gay marriage based upon Scripture, are hypocrites, because they have chosen not to heed the other laws in Leviticus.
Picking and choosing which texts of the Bible to follow, and which texts to ignore is specious at best. Either go whole hog, or admit that the Bible is unsuitable as a guide for secular law--which is my position.
At any rate, when I find a copy of Leviticus, I will post it on my blog in its entirety, and highlight the portions that the fundamentalist Christians prefer to ignore. The only one they seem to give any credence is the one concerning homosexuality, but that is such a very small portion of Leviticus. They would conceal what else is contained in that book. Concealment won't do. Let's be out with Leviticus, and put it front and center of the public debate, and see where the American public wants to go. Back to Ecclesiastical courts, heresy trials, and the Inquisition, or on with granting civil rights to gays.
No comments:
Post a Comment