Talk:Book of Leviticus

[Untitled]
I apologize I thought you meant the Book of Leviticus was written during this Persian Period, not that the last edits were made during that time. I misinterpreted what was meant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndrewP609 (talk • contribs) 13:20, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Isaiah.
Isaiah, Chapter 1, states that the Lord is angered and disgusted by animal sacrifice, which seems to suggest an evolution of spirituality that supersedes that part of Leviticus. (Note that animal sacrifice was common practice in ancient times among the Greeks, Romans, Druids, and on other continents, a practice that disappeared in places that became civilized.) Given that Jesus quoted Isaiah extensively, and is also directly quoted in non-canonical sources as opposing animal sacrifice, it seems to me that it is an error for Christians to quote the ancient book of Leviticus as a foundation for modern morality. It is my observation that it is primarily US "fundamentalists" who make this error. I am referring to the breakaway denominations invented in the US over the last couple of centuries, that are based largely on Calvinism, along with the innovative doctrine that the King James Version (translation) of the Bible was itself divinely inspired, and therefore inerrant, and to be taken literally (e.g. one-week Creation). These denominations often are denoted by terms such as "evangelical", "pentecostal", and "born again", and place undue emphasis on Leviticus and the book of Revelations, while largely ignoring Jesus' teachings as presented in the four Gospels, and they also believe that the Apocalypse is coming soon, maybe next week. Because these denominations are heavily represented on television ("televangelists"), many non-Christians receive a false impression of Christianity. Jesus said not one recorded word about homosexuality, for example. So, to set the record straight, it would be better to say, "some evangelical Christian denominations quote Leviticus to support their view that homosexuality is immoral", rather than "Christians quote Leviticus". My own view is that the whole topic of Leviticus, evangelicals, and homosexuality doesn't belong in an article about Leviticus. To me, those early books of the Bible reveal the early stages in the spiritual progress of a tribe trying to bring order into the primitive times they were living in, and are of interest for that reason, and the misuse of those books by misguided people in the 21st Century belongs in an article about American Christian Fundamentalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.147.120.224 (talk • contribs)


 * We do not WP:CITE the Bible in order to WP:V statements. See WP:RSPSCRIPTURE. tgeorgescu (talk) 23:29, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The Bible is not a reliable source, nor a scholarly one. Dimadick (talk) 11:10, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Vayikra (disambiguation)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Vayikra (disambiguation). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:39, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

BC or BCE
Might we consider changing this article's format from BC to BCE? As a text from multiple religious traditions, such a neutral approach would seem appropriate. BibleScholar (talk) 09:26, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I would agree to the change, since the usage of CE / BCE is now widespread in academia, meaning simply "Common era" or "Before the Common era".---Davidbena (talk) 13:32, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Heretic statement
&mdash;actually: not! Liberal Protestants, Conservative and Reformed Jews, mainstream Catholics, many Eastern Orthodox have no problem with higher criticism. tgeorgescu (talk) 23:26, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * "heretical and ridiculous" A contradiction in terms. Heretics are the people who poke holes in the absurdities of mainstream Christianity. Dimadick (talk) 11:12, 31 March 2023 (UTC)