comment: >
  
  because I'm curious where you're going with that, let's say yes (I am not OP)
context: /u/LiaTheGamer (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
  All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
  Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
  ^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards >
  
  A good number of Christian denominations say that Jesus fulfilled the laws described in the old testament and now those laws no longer have to be followed. Under this interpretation of Jesus, which is argued by most mainstream Christian faith groups, Leviticus and other old-testament lists of laws are no longer relevant.
  Based on this view, you can accept homosexual people and still be in-line with the teachings of the bible and therefore be a good Christian >
  
  That seems like a cop out. Did Jesus ever say he was doing any of that? did Christians stop observing those laws after Jesus? or was this something made up 2 millenia after the fact to make Christians look less mean?
  And even if it were well-justified by the text, that would still mean any gay people before Jesus were wrong, and deserved to be oppressed, arrested, and stoned like they were. Do you believe that was right? >
  
  I can't access the text as I am not from the US.
  But those are different laws, presumably with different importance. The Bible specifies some pretty extreme punishments doesn't it? so those laws do not seem to be ones that are taken lightly.
  And what do you think of gay people who lived before Jesus? >
  
  If you look at a lot of many of the old testament laws, they have some basis in health, safety, etc.  Such as restrictions on foods that if not prepared properly can easily lead to health issues, and this could also have a basis in gay sex being far more likely to transmit certain diseases than heterosexual sex.  
  Another nuance with the mention of gay sex was that while they were to be put to death, it never said anything about if that particular sin would exclude them from heaven.  People can commit all sorts of sins and still enter heaven.
  So gay people before jesus who are outed would probably be killed, but they may still enter into heaven, only god knows for sure. >
  
  My question was whether you think people would be right, and whether they would be doing what God wanted, to execute someone for having gay sex before Jesus? If you think they should be executed, but they can go to heaven, that isn't much consolation. >
  
  I think if an eternal afterlife exists, dying and going there is an absolutely huge consolation. 
  It would be similar to how lepers were cast out of society.  being cast out of society on your own would often lead to a relatively soon death.  They weren't directly killing them, but they were still causing their death.  But the alternative would be risking an outbreak of leprosy sweeping through the population.  
  being killed for being a leper resulted in you being dead, but not banning you from heaven, so you have a pretty nice end result even if your final days are far from pleasant. >
  
  Gay people are not infectious and do not cause any kind of harm to those around them through being gay. Moreover, casting someone out is very different than executing them. There is simply no justification for executing people for being gay, in any time period. >
  
  Do you apply the same logic to other rules in Leviticus?