Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!psuvax1!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: jclark@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (John Clark) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: I AM DISGUSTED! Message-ID: Date: 22 May 91 04:20:28 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of California, San Diego Lines: 21 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article hudson@athena.cs.uga.edu (Paul Hudson Jr) writes: +How is the case of an unrepentant homosexual any different from the +case of an unrepentant incest-commiter. The penalties for both crimes +were death under the Law of Moses. Homosexuality is specifically However, for Lot we seen 1) incest twice 2) no indication of repenance (second time drunkenness is used for 'extenuating circumstances). For Lot's wife we see 1) disobedience 2) no time for repentance. This what I consider to be an inponderable relative to legalistic arguements concerning moral law and the Bible. Why do I consider it 'inponderable', because in the case of Lot's wife her sin is to look back on her home as it was distroyed by the Diety. In Lot's case, as you have mention, the remaining biblical texts preach essentially death or excommunication as the punishment. Why should such a 'glance' be punished more that complete break down of you stated moral law? -- John Clark jclark@ucsd.edu