The 'Holiness Code' is the name Jewish scholars gave to the chapters 17 to 26 of the book Leviticus. The word 'Holy' had at that time an additional meaning to how we would use it today. Holy meant 'set apart' and especially to be set apart from their neighbors, both in behavior and worship. Whilst the tribes, that later would become Israel, worshiped only one God, its neighbors were polytheistic, worshiping many deities. And some of them even included Shrine (Temple) or Sacred Prostitution into their worship, see Deuteronomy 23:17 "No Israelite man or woman is to become a shrine prostitute."
The other need for these type of holiness stemmed also from the need of preserving one distinctive cultural identity as 'The Chosen People of God' amongst the many and varied neighboring tribes. So, the Holiness Code, at that time, helped people to:
- Be ritually clean in order to be able worship God in the right way.
- Be different from their neighbors in order to preserve their cultural identity.
- Be healthy by following dietary laws important for that time and climate.
- And, with regard to Leviticus 18:22, to procreate and increase in numbers.
Regarding the last point, it is important to note that at that time people believed that procreation was achieved when a man 'planted his seed' in the womb of a woman, the role of the woman was merely that of 'incubator' for his seed. This might explain why most Bible verses concerning homosexual acts were only concerned about those between two men, and not about those between two women. Procreation was incredibly important at that time as the Jewish tribes were outnumbered by powerful neighbors and one way to overcome this disadvantage was to grow the tribe. And the union of two men, or of two women, wouldn't have had any offspring.
Jews followed the Holiness Code until the year 70 of our time completely, but with the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem by the Romans, their main sanctuary, many of its laws and commandments regarding temple worship and sacrifice couldn't be followed anymore. Most Jews today will indeed still follow the dietary laws and all the others that don't relate directly to temple and sacrifice. Some Christians will make a kind of 'pick and choose' decision and will follow only a handful of these laws and commandments, normally ignoring all the dietary laws, but insisting that all the rules for sexual behavior laid out in the Holiness Code have to be followed.
On the other hand there are small groups of Christians that do follow the Jewish dietary laws still today and some Churches that don't teach that Homosexuality is a sin, but instead see it as a normal variation of human sexuality and even bless same-sex couples. The best known example for this is perhaps the Episcopal Church in America which ordained the first openly gay and partnered bishop in modern history, +Gene Robinson, Diocese of New Hampshire.
So, what is right? Whose interpretation is the correct one? What decides which laws we should still follow and which not? For this we have to delve deeper into the text.
Comments
SamJul 1, 2013
cazortJun 22, 2013
I've seen people slowly change their views on this issue over time. I think it's important to look at things like how people's actions affect others, and also what the scientific and psychological literature has to say. I think that there is substantial evidence that most people have an innate sexual orientation that they can't change, and I also think the evidence is strong that same-sex relationships are just as healthy as hetero relationships.
I do think though that it's important to respect people who have a wide range of views on the issue. Sometimes I hear people attacking, demonizing, or labelling as "bigots" or "homophobes" people who believe that homosexuality or homosexual acts go contrary to their religious beliefs. I think it's important to respect people regardless of what their views are--even if, like me, we see those views themselves to be problematic.
SamMar 29, 2013
frankbeswickMar 29, 2013
SamMar 29, 2013
frankbeswickMar 29, 2013
However, there is another Scripture that the article forgot. In Genesis 1:27 it states that God made man and woman in his own image and likeness, so many Chrisians believe that this indicates that the union of man and woman is part of God's plan for humanity.
Having said all this,homosexuals exist and have emotional needs as strong as those of heterosexuals.
SamMar 29, 2013
Todd R.Mar 29, 2013
AdamJan 30, 2013
I feel compelled to bring this up having read some of the comments below... I am a devout Christian and I can honestly say that I do not hate homosexuals. If I do not share the same beliefs as a Muslim individual, or someone who is Hindi, do I automatically hate those people? I choose to love unconditionally (agape also makes for a great word study), desiring for those who do not believe to believe. It is not out of arrogance, but because I have seen physical, mental and spiritual abundance in my own life by practicing the principles in the word (as well as the pitfalls of failing to obey) and I desire for "all men to be saved and come unto a knowledge of the truth." I believe it is possible to disagree, but I believe the love of God reaches beyond any of the boundaries we can imagine. People are not evil, but sincerity is no guarantee for truth, or for truthful living.
Having said that mouthful, I respect the time and effort you have put in. It's good to know that this is something you are passionate enough about to look it up for yourself. It's farther than most Christians get.
JeanBakulaJan 17, 2013
RebeccaEJan 11, 2013
AmberOct 24, 2012
SamOct 18, 2012
katiem2Oct 17, 2012
SamOct 16, 2012
dustytoesOct 16, 2012
SamOct 10, 2012
GreekgeekOct 10, 2012
Isn't that the same section of the Bible that bans bowl haircuts, mixing different kinds of materials in garments (no wool/cotton blend for YOU!), touching (not just eating, touching) pigskin -- so much for football -- or tattoos? I can't remember if all of those are labeled as unclean, but I think they're all banned just about as forcefully in Leviticus.
SamOct 3, 2012
Sheri_OzOct 3, 2012
SamOct 3, 2012
ThamisgithOct 3, 2012
SamOct 3, 2012
SamOct 2, 2012
Sheri_OzOct 2, 2012
Great article.
SamOct 2, 2012
JoHarringtonOct 2, 2012
SamOct 2, 2012
JoHarringtonOct 2, 2012
As an historian, I'm right there with you on the history elements. (History, by the way, comes from a word meaning 'stories' or 'testimonies', so the Bible really would fit right in there.)
I also own and have read 'Same Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe' and I thoroughly recommend it. Then again, you might not want to take any recommendations from me at the moment. (Leviticus 15:19)
SamOct 2, 2012
RagtimelilOct 2, 2012