-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
- Status
M
Nothing like looking up an old post to bring to the discussion. 
For this post we're going to look at two general principles:
1. When a general rule is followed by specific rules, only what is specified applies. (R. Ishmael)
2. Whatever is not specifically prohibited is permitted.
Lev 18:6 gives a general rule: 'No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD.'
This is followed by several specifications-vv 7-20. Something that should be pointed out is that these rules apply to men and women. The 'you' is plural. Just as man is not to approach is mother, sister, aunt, etc. so too should a woman not approach her son, brother, nephew, etc. Negative commandments are binding on men and women.
Now, I will make the bold assertion that all of us don't have a problem with understanding and following these rules. I can't imagine even contemplating doing what is prohibited here, but apparently these sexual acts were common in Egypt and Canaan.
What does trouble me is what's missing. There's no command against having sex with one's daughter. I know, I know, it's disgusting to even mention it. But so are all the others. Why is this left out?
Is it conceivable that The Almighty did not consider this possibility? Can we say that since God didn't specifically rule it out that it must be ok? Perish the thought! Heaven forbid such a thing! A curse on anybody who would do such a thing.
Now, sisters, step sisters, aunts, mothers, step mothers, daughters in law, mothers in law, and granddaughters are all off limits. Wouldn't it stand to reason that a daughter is off limits as well?
I find it incredible that God would legislate against sex in all the ways listed in this chapter and not include daughters. I cannot fathom that "not forbidden means permitted" in this instance.
How to reconcile this? A father is to love his children, as our Father loves us. He is protect them, as He protects us. He is to teach them, discipline them, provide for them, nourish them, for so our Father does the same for us. A child should trust her parents, and honor and reverence them. And a parent must act in such a way as to be worthy of honor.
Now how can any of that be if a father violates that trust? If a father violates his daughter in such an awful manner, what honor is due him? Perhaps the horror of contemplating such actions was too much and God did not want to put such thoughts into the minds of the Israelites. Perhaps the other forbidden relationships were easier to see as being anathema. God says "I know you won't do these things, but I'm telling you anyway, just so as you know." And God doesn't want us to even think about daughters in this way.
For this post we're going to look at two general principles:
1. When a general rule is followed by specific rules, only what is specified applies. (R. Ishmael)
2. Whatever is not specifically prohibited is permitted.
Lev 18:6 gives a general rule: 'No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD.'
This is followed by several specifications-vv 7-20. Something that should be pointed out is that these rules apply to men and women. The 'you' is plural. Just as man is not to approach is mother, sister, aunt, etc. so too should a woman not approach her son, brother, nephew, etc. Negative commandments are binding on men and women.
Now, I will make the bold assertion that all of us don't have a problem with understanding and following these rules. I can't imagine even contemplating doing what is prohibited here, but apparently these sexual acts were common in Egypt and Canaan.
What does trouble me is what's missing. There's no command against having sex with one's daughter. I know, I know, it's disgusting to even mention it. But so are all the others. Why is this left out?
Is it conceivable that The Almighty did not consider this possibility? Can we say that since God didn't specifically rule it out that it must be ok? Perish the thought! Heaven forbid such a thing! A curse on anybody who would do such a thing.
Now, sisters, step sisters, aunts, mothers, step mothers, daughters in law, mothers in law, and granddaughters are all off limits. Wouldn't it stand to reason that a daughter is off limits as well?
I find it incredible that God would legislate against sex in all the ways listed in this chapter and not include daughters. I cannot fathom that "not forbidden means permitted" in this instance.
How to reconcile this? A father is to love his children, as our Father loves us. He is protect them, as He protects us. He is to teach them, discipline them, provide for them, nourish them, for so our Father does the same for us. A child should trust her parents, and honor and reverence them. And a parent must act in such a way as to be worthy of honor.
Now how can any of that be if a father violates that trust? If a father violates his daughter in such an awful manner, what honor is due him? Perhaps the horror of contemplating such actions was too much and God did not want to put such thoughts into the minds of the Israelites. Perhaps the other forbidden relationships were easier to see as being anathema. God says "I know you won't do these things, but I'm telling you anyway, just so as you know." And God doesn't want us to even think about daughters in this way.
- Status