Talk:Holiness code

Bible Low‑importance

	Bible portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Judaism

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Entire article might constitute WP:OR and certainly doesn't meet WP:V. --King of the Arverni (talk) 20:08, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

seriously?

so there's a large section on the sexual bans in the bible, but nothing on the lists of what you can't eat? nothing about gleaning? could we get an equal level of detail here please?Sompm (talk) 06:51, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, the sexual prohibitions are written 'twice': in Leviticus 18 and 20.--Jules.LT (talk) 17:04, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Who is this law intended for?

Some think it's for everyone, some for Christians, some for jews, some for the Levite people only... so which is it? --Jules.LT (talk) 17:04, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Modern view of Leviticus"

This entire section should be deleted. There is no "modern view" of Leviticus; modern views of Leviticus are many, varied, and contradictory -- unless you want to make the case that the Gerrer Rebbe, the Pope, Pat Robertson, the Dalai Lama, and Richard Dawkins all hold the same view. The single view presented as the modern view is unattributed, leaving the reader with no indication of whose view it is or the rationale for it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScenicHeights (talk • contribs) 03:10, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sexually transmitted diseases

While there is a lot of evidence that sexually transmitted diseases have been around long before Leviticus was written, it's unlikely that the motive for the rules in Leviticus are the prevention of them as they likely didn't understand how they were transmitted. It's more likely that "these diseases were considered a divine punishment"^[1]. If that sounds incorrect, I think a citation is needed to justify the statement as it's currently written.Thirdwaver (talk) 06:00, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thirdwaver. As currently written, the section that mentions sexually transmitted diseases does not cite any sources, so you are free to remove any content you think is wrong. If you'd like to add material, I'd recommend citing sources while doing so. Alephb (talk) 06:27, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25969906

[1] ttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25969906

[1]