A friend of mine mentioned to me via Facebook, that the so-called Dr. Laura letter is making the rounds on the Internet by way of email again. For those of you lucky enough to have escaped this collection of errors up until now, this letter was supposedly sent to Dr. Laura Schlessinger, probably sometimes around the year 2000, in response to “anti-gay” comments she made on her radio show. According to snopes.com, which uses their report on the letter to take various shots ar “Dr. Laura” but not to correct the letter’s obvious fallacies, the letter refuted the general argument of “homosexuality is wrong because the Bible says so” by illustrating how “ridiculous” other so-called “eternal truths” of the Bible cannot possibly apply in this day and age. The idea here is that, if many of the commandments given to the Israelites at Sinai are unobservable today, why shouldn’t that include any prohibitions regarding homosexual behavior?

Since Snopes created their web page in such a way to not allow copy and paste, I’m taking the letter from another source:

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God’s Law and how to follow them.

1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord – Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness – Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. Lev.25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. The passage clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination – Lev.11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this? Are there ‘degrees’ of abomination?

7. Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev.11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? – Lev.24:10-16. Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev.20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging.

How do I know that the writer of this letter believes they are more clever than they actually are? First some general info.

And God spoke all these words:

“I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. –Exodus 20:1-2 (NIV)

Who is God talking to? Moses? No, He’s talking to the Children of Israel, the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob who were enslaved in the land of Egypt for centuries and who Moses, at the direction of God, freed from servitude with the intent on fulfilling God’s promises to the Israelites.

He also said to him, “I am the LORD, who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to take possession of it.” –Genesis 15:7

That’s the core scripture but for the full context, including that it is all of Abraham’s descendants through Isaac and Jacob who will inherit, you probably want to read all of chapter 15. You’ll also want to see Genesis 26:1-6 for God’s confirmation that Isaac’s descendants will inherit the Land, and Genesis 35:11-13 for God’s confirmation that it is Jacob’s descendants who will inherit Israel. This leaves out inheritance by Ishmael’s descendants (Isaac’s brother) and Esau’s descendants (Jacob’s brother).

Now you might be asking “what land” did God promise Abraham and his descendants?

Then Moses climbed Mount Nebo from the plains of Moab to the top of Pisgah, across from Jericho. There the LORD showed him the whole land—from Gilead to Dan, all of Naphtali, the territory of Ephraim and Manasseh, all the land of Judah as far as the Mediterranean Sea, the Negev and the whole region from the Valley of Jericho, the City of Palms, as far as Zoar. Then the LORD said to him, “This is the land I promised on oath to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob when I said, ‘I will give it to your descendants.’ I have let you see it with your eyes, but you will not cross over into it.” –Deuteronomy 34:1-4

This is only one of the places in Torah where the borders of ancient Israel are defined (they aren’t always defined in exactly the same way, however).

So we’ve established that God promised Israel specifically to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and that at Mount Sinai, God, through Moses the Prophet, gave the specifications of the Torah to those very descendants, the Children of Israel. But what does all this have to do with the Dr. Laura letter? Plenty. I have to “set the stage” so to speak, in order to explain why the points brought up in this letter are utter foolishness, written by someone who has absolutely no idea about how to study the Bible (actually, the letter writer may be deceptively clever, but I’ll get to that).

All of the points in the Bible are specifically drawn from the Torah which in this case means, the Pentateuch or the first five books of the Bible. They’re also called the Books of Moses because supposedly God “dictated” their contents to Moses for him to record in a series of scrolls. The validity of this being literally true is hotly contested in religious and scholarly circles, but regardless of how you weigh in on this issue, the Torah is considered the foundation for Jewish (and arguably Christian) religion and theology.

I want to say at this point, that no modern religious Jew would rely on just the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings (otherwise known in Judaism as the “Tanakh”, which Christians call “the Old Testament”) as the sole arbiter of their religion. For an observant Jew, it would be impossible to understand what the Bible is saying without close and careful study of the Mishnah, Gemara, and the Talmud. These learned rulings and opinions are the interpreters of the meaning of the various portions of Torah and define how a religious Jew is to respond to its commandments in what has become known as the 613 mitzvot. I’m not scholar enough to present my counter argument from this perspective, but I can tell you that in Judaism, the full response to the fallacy of the Dr. Laura letter could not be given apart from a Talmudic understanding. That said, I believe I can effectively refute the points of the letter without resorting to Talmud.

(For those of you who are clueless about the Talmud but want to understand a little more about it, an excellent and easily read beginner’s guide is The Complete Idiot’s Guide to the Talmud by Rabbi Aaron Parry.)

To cut to the chase, so to speak, I propose that the reason the Dr. Laura letter is a waste of everyone’s time as far as a serious criticism against God’s commands in the Torah is that the writer of the letter completely failed to take it in its context (I realize that the writer’s main purpose was not to defame the Bible in general, but that’s the letter’s secondary effect). The vast majority of Torah commandments are meant to only be enacted in the ancient Nation of Israel! Is that enough emphasis for you? In other words, the Torah comprised the full body of civil and criminal laws as well as ethical and moral guides for all of the Israelite citizens in the Land. It’s like the U.S. Constitution, except that covers not only the legal basis of national sovereignty, rights, and freedoms, but all aspects of religious and social living. For Israel, there was no “separation of church and state” and originally, until Saul was anointed as King by the Prophet Samuel (1 Samuel 10), God was King of Israel in the world’s first and only functioning Theocracy.

Where do we find this? I don’t want this blog to be a thousand pages long. Here are a few examples:

“Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the LORD your God is giving you. –Exodus 20:12

Worship the LORD your God, and his blessing will be on your food and water. I will take away sickness from among you, and none will miscarry or be barren in your land. I will give you a full life span. –Exodus 23:25-26

I will send the hornet ahead of you to drive the Hivites, Canaanites and Hittites out of your way. But I will not drive them out in a single year, because the land would become desolate and the wild animals too numerous for you. Little by little I will drive them out before you, until you have increased enough to take possession of the land. –Exodus 23:28-30

“I will establish your borders from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean Sea, and from the desert to the Euphrates River. I will give into your hands the people who live in the land, and you will drive them out before you. Do not make a covenant with them or with their gods. Do not let them live in your land or they will cause you to sin against me, because the worship of their gods will certainly be a snare to you.” Exodus 23:31-33

In these few examples, we see obedience to God’s Torah being applied to the Children of Israel taking possession of and living in the area then known as Canaan and subsequently as Israel and Judea centuries hence. A full inventory of each of the connections between Torah obedience and the context of Israel are beyond the scope of his blog post, but I think you get the idea. The Torah commandments, including those referenced in the Dr. Laura letter, were only meant to be enacted within the national borders of ancient Israel and not outside of those borders nor even in the modern age (HINT: This is the letter writer’s real point).

Now let’s take each point one at a time.

1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord – Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

The Stone Edition Chumash commentary for Leviticus 1 outlines the specific conditions for the various offerings that were first enacted in the Mishkan (Tabernacle) in the desert, and later in both Solomon’s Temple and Herod’s Temple in Jerusalem. In general, these offerings could only be made where “God had placed His Name”.

You must not worship the LORD your God in their way. But you are to seek the place the LORD your God will choose from among all your tribes to put his Name there for his dwelling. To that place you must go; there bring your burnt offerings and sacrifices, your tithes and special gifts, what you have vowed to give and your freewill offerings, and the firstborn of your herds and flocks. There, in the presence of the LORD your God, you and your families shall eat and shall rejoice in everything you have put your hand to, because the LORD your God has blessed you. –Deuteronomy 12:4-7

Here we see that burnt offerings, and any of the other offerings, could not be sacrificed just any old place, not even within the borders of Israel. They had to be offered in either the Tabernacle (prior to the Israelites taking the Land) or in the Temple in Jerusalem. The fellow who wants to have a barbecue in his backyard might cook up a mean steak, but it has no relationship to Leviticus 1:9. Dr. Laura letter fail. Next.

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

According to the Chumash commentary for Exodus 21, this set of laws deals primarily with civil and tort law within the nation of Israel. Right here, we see that our fellow in point 2 who wants to sell his daughter is out-of-bounds, because he doesn’t live 3500 years ago in ancient Israel. Also, slavery in ancient Israel is not the entity we understand it to be in a larger context. Israel had no welfare system or other means to take care of the poor, so people could sell themselves into indentured servitude as a means of satisfying their debts or to avoid starvation. The Chumash specifically states regarding Exodus 21:7-11:

Until a girl reaches puberty, the Torah gives her father the right to “sell” her as a bondswoman, but, as the passage itself and the teachings of the Sages makes clear, this right is given him for her benefit. He is permitted to “sell” her because the sale is expected to result in her marriage to either her master or his son. In fact, if neither of the two marries her, the Torah regards it as a betrayal of the girl.

If the marriage contract is not fulfilled, then the girl goes free upon reaching puberty, at the end of six years, or upon the advent of the Jubilee year. This is a commandment that cannot be understood by the plain text alone and that must be interpreted through additional sources (in this case, the relevant sections of Talmud are Kiddushin 18b and Kiddushin 41a). When the writer of the Dr. Laura letter asks, in “this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?” he immediately disqualifies himself from being able to sell his daughter, for such a thing isn’t possible in this day and age outside the confines of ancient Israel and without a proper court system established by God (Numbers 11:16-30).

It should be noted that the Chumash commentary says a father should not enact this particular right but sometimes may to ensure a proper “match” for his daughter. This form of “slavery” amounts to an arranged marriage, and such arrangements are known across history and in many cultures up until modern times (hasn’t anyone ever seen Fiddler on the Roof?). They may not be politically correct in our day and age, but they’re not effectively slavery and in any event, this particular form of slavery cannot be enacted and enforced in even modern Israel, let alone anywhere else in the world.

Sorry. Dr Laura Letter fail #2.

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness – Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Oh brother. This one seems amazingly ridiculous to me, but let’s have a look at the source text. In fact, let’s see what happened when a man in ancient Israel did come in contact with a woman’s “impurity”.

“‘When she is cleansed from her discharge, she must count off seven days, and after that she will be ceremonially clean. On the eighth day she must take two doves or two young pigeons and bring them to the priest at the entrance to the tent of meeting. The priest is to sacrifice one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. In this way he will make atonement for her before the LORD for the uncleanness of her discharge. –Leviticus 15:28-30

This sort of contact was only a problem if the man intended to offer a sacrifice or otherwise enter into the Temple. He was considered ritualistically unclean and unable to perform various religious rites. As far as his day-to-day life, it had no impact. Obviously, if the writer of the Dr. Laura letter is living in modern times and thus (even if he’s a Jew, and if he is, he should know better than to engage in such a foolish letter) sitting on the same sofa where a menstruant woman recently sat has absolutely no effect on his life. In modern times, the only issue a Jewish man would have with a menstruating woman would have to do with the niddah or law of separation. This forbids a husband from having sexual relations with his wife during her period. This is observed primarily within the Orthodox Jewish community and may not even be observed by Reform or non-religious Jews. This restriction is not binding on Christians or anyone else in any way, so Dr. Laura letter fail for point #3.

4. Lev.25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?

The Chumash commentary for Leviticus 25:44-46 states:

Having said that an owner’s rights over his Jewish slaves are severely limited, the Torah states that one may purchase slaves from among the surrounding nations. Such slaves become the property of their owners.

Again, context, context, context. We are talking about ancient Israel and the surrounding nations. In the ancient near-east, slavery was common and legal. We’ve already seen an example of how “slavery” was more a matter of indentured servitude when one Jew owned another, but when an Israelite bought a slave from a neighboring country, they indeed were a slave. They had certain rights, but not nearly the rights of a born Jew. Having said all that, nothing in the context of this passage gives our (supposedly American) writer the legal leverage to buy a Canadian. In this case, the various laws of the U.S. and Canada apply and if said-writer ever seeks to buy another human being, he’ll end up doing a long stretch in prison. Letter fail for point #4.

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. The passage clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

According to the Chumash commentary for this verse, violation of the Shabbat was the equivalent of idol worship, which also carried the death sentence. However, it’s not a matter of a mob grabbing the offender and doing away with him as many people seem to imagine. The offender had to be observed violating the Shabbat by at least two reliable witnesses (Deuteronomy 19:15). The case was adjudicated in front of a court system and once the witnesses testified, the court considered the matter and issued a verdict. If the verdict was guilty, then the primary witnesses were obligated to “cast the first stones” (Deuteronomy 17:7).

Barbaric? Sure sounds that way. Stoning was a horrible way to die. Notice though that (again) this particular law only applied to Jews (non-Jews were and are not obligated to observe the Shabbat) in ancient Israel. Even modern Israel as a nation, does not have a unified law obligating all of its citizens to observe the Shabbat, though some sects within religious Judaism are lobbying for this. Our supposedly American letter writer has no legal right to enforce an ancient penalty out of its context, even if his “Shabbat breaking neighbor” happens to be Jewish. Dr. Laura letter Fail #5.

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination – Lev.11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this? Are there ‘degrees’ of abomination?

This is the real reason the Dr. Laura letter writer submitted his wee missive; to illustrate that homosexuality cannot be considered an “abomination” by God according to the Bible unless all of the other Torah commandments remained equally valid. So who shouldn’t eat shellfish? The Leviticus 11 kosher laws are specific to the Children of Israel. This set of laws is a tad different, because it applies to Jews regardless of where they live and regardless of when in history they live. Modern observant Jews keep kosher within both the confines of Leviticus 11 and the specific rulings of the Talmudic sages. This additionally specifies how meat animals are to be slaughtered in a kosher manner. Observant Jews can’t just buy a pound of ground round from Albertsons to satisfy their dietary requirements. There are also rulings that require that the kitchen used to prepare food must be kosher (kashering a kitchen is a rather involved process), and meat and dairy products cannot be served and eaten together.

These restrictions are observed mainly in the Orthodox Jewish community and varying degrees of kosher are kept by Conservative and Reform Jews. Most secular Jews do not keep any form of kosher, just as Christians do not and certainly no other people group (actually, Muslims have their own kosher laws which closely mirror the Jewish dietary restrictions). For the rest of us, it’s OK to eat a cheeseburger and not feel guilty. Bon appetit.

I don’t know how to compare the “degree of abomination” of eating a pork chop to performing a homosexual act relative to the Torah, so I have no response for this. Orthodox Jews still declare homosexual acts as immoral but Reform Jews are fully accepting of gays including the ordination of gay Rabbis and having gay members of the synagogue board and their various committees.

The attitude of Orthodox Judaism toward homosexuality may be changing, although rather slowly. About six weeks ago, I wrote a blog post called At the Intersection of Intolerance and humanity in response to what I understand is the first ever wedding of two gay Orthodox Jewish men by a gay Orthodox Rabbi. The story and the blog comments in response are very illuminating and I encourage you to have a look. As far as the letter writer’s query, it isn’t stated in such a way that a response is possible. I’m sure a Talmud scholar could render an answer as a matter of degree of offense, since both the kosher laws and restrictions against homosexual behavior remain observed in Orthodox Judaism, but I lack the qualifications to render an opinion. As far as my analysis is concerned, we’ll call it a draw on point #6.

7. Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

The Chumash commentary for this section of Torah states in part, “This verse forbids the blemished Kohen to perform the service…”. OK, the blemished Kohen. Kohenim (plural for Kohen) are a subset of the tribe of Levi and direct descendants of Aaron (the brother of Moses). By definition, they’re Jewish, so unless our letter writer is Jewish, a Levite, and a Kohen, he doesn’t have anything to worry about. Also, no Temple exists, thus no altar exists. This question is a red herring (they all are). No sale. Dr Laura letter fail on point #7.

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die?

I’m getting a little tired of writing long responses to silly questions. Remember the part in my response to #5 about the death sentence, court, judges, Israel, context, context, context? Apply that. Only the ultra-Orthodox and Chabad communities observe these restrictions in the modern age. If they violate them and try to remain within their communities, it’s up to the local Beit Din or rabbinic court to adjudicate the matter and their authority is only over their communities. The rest of us are free to have whatever haircut we choose. Dr. Laura letter fail on point #8.

9. I know from Lev.11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

“You shall not touch their carcass.” Here’s the Chumash commentary on this verse.

This prohibition applies only during the festival visits to the Temple, when everyone must be pure. At such times, no one may touch a contaminated carcass, because everyone is commanded to remain uncontaminated during the festival visits to the Temple.

While Jews around the world continue to celebrate festivals such as Passover, Shavuot, and Sukkot, because there is no Temple or priesthood, it’s impossible to celebrate in accordance to the descriptions we find in the Torah. Even if our letter writing friend were Jewish, unless he was planning on using his time machine to celebrate Sukkot in the days of Herod, he has no problem. Certainly as an American non-Jew, he can play football anytime he wants. Dr. Laura letter fail on point #9.

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? – Lev.24:10-16. Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev.20:14)

Is his uncle Jewish? If so, does his uncle live in the land of Israel around 1000 B.C. or so? No? Then this, like the other points in this letter, is a “non-event”. Fail #10.

That’s 9 for 10 fails with a draw for point #6 and that’s only because of the way the question is worded and the failure of a consensus in even the Orthodox community.

Now here’s the real point. I realize that the letter writer is not really being so foolish as to think you can take bits and pieces of the Bible out of context and try to apply them to a modern, non-Jewish world. His (or her) real point was to attempt to illustrate that the Bible cannot be viewed as an absolute and timeless source of truth, since some any of its conditions have indeed changed across time, if for no other reason than the Temple in Jerusalem no longer exists (but reading the book of Ezekiel, we can expect a third Temple to be built at some future time). Thus the Torah prohibitions against homosexual behavior should not apply outside of the Torah context as well. I get that. Of course, since particularly Orthodox Jews do keep the kosher laws (and most religious Jews of the different sects do so to varying degrees), it’s up to each Jewish community to determine their tolerance level for homosexuals in their midst. I also realize that the letter (supposedly) was aimed at Dr. Laura in response to her comments against gays based on the Bible. If we keep the letter in that context, then the ten points I’ve just belabored have nothing to do with the rest of us.

However, if we were to believe that the letter writer were also attempting to discredit the Bible (and the Christians and Jews who consider it holy) because it commands behaviors that don’t apply in the modern world, then he (or she) has failed miserably. As I previously said, I can’t say the letter is a 100% failure only because of the ambiguity of how point #6 is worded, though there is probably an answer out there somewhere. Still, the letter is a 90% failure and even if I give it 10% credit for point #6, that’s still an “F” in any teacher’s gradebook.

I know this is a very long write-up and it could have been much, much longer if I had gone into exquisite detail, but frankly, I think I’ve proved my point. All that stuff in the Bible doesn’t apply to you if you don’t want it to apply to you. Any part of the New Testament only starts applying once you decide you want to be a Christian (God will sort it all out at the final judgment, so if you’re not worried, neither is God). If you’re not Jewish and don’t live in ancient Israel, you don’t have to give the Dr. Laura letter a second thought. If you’re Jewish and religious, any questions you may have about the proper level of your observance need to be directed to your Rabbi.

As a parting note, I apologize for all of the typos you’ve found in my rather long “meditation”. I haven’t had the time to properly edit it but will do so in the hours and days ahead (so if the wording changes here and there, no worries). If you have a comment or rebuttal (please be nice), feel free to chime in. To my friend Leo, I hope this fits the bill.