Leviticus 12

I have skipped chapter 11 since all it talks about is what food is unclean and the what one does when they come into contact with them. Just dip whatever it is in water and after one day you are good to go.

I have written elsewhere that Christianity is life denying. This chapter is the embodiment of the christian dream.

Listen to the Lord’s command

The Lord said to Moses, “Say to the Israelites: ‘A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, just as she is unclean during her monthly period.

You all must remember that this good book tells us this god created the universe and then created man and after doing that, he puts a curse on the only way man can reproduce. Any Christians who are here, have you felt the need to petition this god of yours to revise some of these curses? Now tell me, why should a woman be unclean after childbirth? What does this do to children being told their mothers had to be purified after childbirth!

Just listen to this and tell me you are not irked

On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised. Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding. She must not touch anything sacred or go to the sanctuary until the days of her purification are over. If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean, as during her period. Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding.

Here we have two problems; Moses god obsession with foreskin of little babies and a further punishment of women for extended days for giving birth. Where are those Christian mothers, do you touch your bibles after childbirth? Or the bible ain’t sacred, just asking. Worse still with this chapter, we have discrimination from the time of birth. A son she is impure for 7 days and a girl for 14 and waits double the time to be purified. Where are the ladies? Can I hear the Christian women clap :-D.

And the priests are real opportunists. It seems they haven’t moved far off, they have only changed the trade

“‘When the days of her purification for a son or daughter are over, she is to bring to the priest at the entrance to the tent of meeting a year-old lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a dove for a sin offering. He shall offer them before the Lord to make atonement for her, and then she will be ceremonially clean from her flow of blood.

So unless this was used as a birth control measure, that is, only those with pigeons and flocks of sheep should have babies then it would make sense. Or else, this is the time to tell the priest to F-off!

And listen to more of this madness

“‘These are the regulations for the woman who gives birth to a boy or a girl. But if she cannot afford a lamb, she is to bring two doves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for her, and she will be clean.’”

Please tell me how this is life affirming! I need to know and real quick!

About makagutu

As Onyango Makagutu I am Kenyan, as far as I am a man, I am a citizen of the world

20 thoughts on “Leviticus 12

  1. archaeopteryx1 says:

    RE: “only those with pigeons and flocks of sheep should have babies” – actually, selling animals for use as sacrifices or offerings became quite a booming business – that was one of the primary purposes for the “money changers” Yeshua allegedly drove out of the temple.


  2. themodernidiot says:

    I think you have found your calling: a revised version of the bible for dummies, “Just dip whatever it is in water and after one day you are good to go.” haha brilliant 🙂


    • makagutu says:

      I should become a street preacher, don’t you think 🙂


      • themodernidiot says:

        I’m not sure-you might get knocked over the head for telling people to wise up


        • makagutu says:

          I think whereas pastors go into preaching to make money, I will be a broke ass pastor for telling people to wise up, that is, if I don’t get myself knocked over the head or committed to an asylum.


          • themodernidiot says:

            Hmm. Maybe stick to putting it in print and selling it over here 🙂 Right now we could freakin’ use it. Someone let our religious nuts out of their cells and they’re mucking up everything.


  3. john zande says:

    The First Council of Nicaea sure f*cked up when they decided to include the OT in the gibberish they were fashioning. I do believe just taking a few days to pen a NEW creation myth would have been far, far, far wiser!


  4. That is thought-provoking, Mak! I think these ideas of women being unclean are much older than the book. It’s interesting from a perspective of anthropology to look into the laws that people made about it; almost as if they were trying to impose their rules on nature in that way.
    I do agree with you that it would be very sad if a menstruating woman would refrain from touching a book, any book. If she would somehow start to believe that she needed purification. But again, looking from the outside in – I cannot help but think that women buy into these ideas. It’s almost a contract. I just can’t readily see what they are getting out of it… 🙂


    • makagutu says:

      These passages point to an all too human origin of the bible. These men failing to understand why women had Ps, thought them unclean and came up with rules to check it.

      Why women in this day and age still follow the teachings of this book becomes a bit difficult to understand, unless we assume that most of them are not aware of it’s teachings.


      • archaeopteryx1 says:

        Regrettably, many, if not most of those who claim to be religious, via the Bible, do so because they’ve been handed a package deal by someone they trust, a relative of member of the clergy, and never bother to investigate such a significant impact of their lives, on their own. This is why I do what I do on in-His-own image.com, to give those interested a deeper look into where their book came from.


  5. holly says:

    Interesting Noel. (sorry I am responding late to these but they have been left in my email box awaiting my response on the days i get to…”catch up” :D)
    I was taught that old testament law all has been justified by science, that it all had a purpose that was not understood at the time. this was gods way of protecting his people. giving them laws that they did not understand the meaning for (at that age of humanity) to protect them.

    (trust me theological justification is a fine art)

    For instance the foreskin thing..Interestingly enough…
    “Revising its policy on circumcision for the first time in 13 years, the American Academy of Pediatrics now says that the preventative health benefits of infant circumcision clearly outweigh the risks.”
    Here is an apologetic on the “8th day” wisdom of circumcision

    this is taken by many to be confirmation of the beauty of the commands in the bible…

    Other things like a woman’s uncleanness, were with regard to the dangers of the passing of the blood. (disease precautions)
    eating shrimp…dangerous unless kept at certain temperatures (something commonly known now…and not as possible then)



    • makagutu says:

      You know, Holly, we have a deal. You can never be late :-D.

      Theologians justify their pay by twisting texts of their good book to fit with the science of the day and not the other way. Given this ability, there is nothing they can’t justify given time. It would be better for everyone if it is agreed these texts represents different attempts by men, in our past, to explain phenomena around them. That we will treat as superstition based on ignorance. There is likely to be some wisdom in the text, the goat herders must have known a thing or two.

      What I find most interesting about the circumcision debate is the argument that cutting the foreskin helps to keep the area clean. It is the only part of the body other than trimming nails, that we cut off to keep clean 🙂


      • holly says:

        An excellent point. I have found that there is an apologetic explaination for every troubling thing found in the bible. Not a good one ….but nonetheless something. Oftentimes I have more respect for the person willing to say “I dont know” rather than the contrived rationalizations that failed to ben rational.


We sure would love to hear your comments, compliments and thoughts.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s