Homosexuality - difference between Bible ceremonial and moral laws

The Distinction Between the Ceremonial and Moral Law As Necessary for Biblical Interpretation

Recognizing this distinction between the ceremonial and moral law is vitally important in properly understanding such passages as 1 Samuel 15:22: “Has the LORD as much delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed than the fat of rams.” The Lord has commanded of His covenant people adherence to both His moral and His ceremonial law; however, in this passage, obedience “is better than sacrifice.” 

How can this be since God has commanded both? The answer is that, even for the children of Israel who were commanded to offer sacrifices in accordance with the ceremonial law that regulated their lives and worship, loyalty to the Lord by obeying His moral law came first. Persons who disregarded the commandments of God’s moral law were not welcome to present their offerings. This fact is clearly seen in Psalm 40:

  Sacrifice and meal offering Thou has not desired; my ears Thou hast opened; burnt offering and sin offering Thou hast not required. Then I said, “Behold, I come; in the scroll of the book it is written of me; I delight to do Thy will, O my God; Thy law is within my heart” (vv. 6–8).

The psalmist declares that God “does not desire” sacrifice and meal offering, burnt offering, and sin offering. How can this be when God has commanded such offerings to be brought to Him? The worshiper is not allowed, in either the Old or New Testament, to come before the Lord in some stale, perfunctory manner without regard for obedience: “I delight to do Thy will, O my God.” This is seen in Psalm 51 as well:

For Thou dost not delight in sacrifice, otherwise I would give it; Thou are not pleased with burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, Thou wilt not despise. By Thy favor do good to Zion; build the walls of Jerusalem. Then Thou will delight in righteous sacrifices, in burnt offering and whole burnt offering; then young bulls will be offered on Thine altar. (vv. 16–19)

The Lord desires “righteous sacrifices” offered by one whose heart is broken and contrite—by one who is striving after righteousness. God desires adherence to His moral law before ceremonial offerings are made. Those who reject or disregard God’s moral requirements are unwelcome in worship. 

For this reason, Proverbs 15:8 and 21:27 teach: “The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the LORD.” Later, in Proverbs 28:9, we read, “He who turns away his ear from listening to the law, even his prayer is an abomination.” The Lord, through the prophet Amos, who primarily rebuked the northern kingdom of Israel, also rejected the religious offerings of His people because of their disobedience.

  I hate, I reject your festivals, nor do I delight in your solemn assemblies. Even though you offer up to Me burnt offerings and your grain offerings, I will not accept them. And I will not even look at the peace offerings of your fatlings. Take away from Me the noise of your songs; I will not even listen to the sound of your harps. But let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream. (Amos 5:21–24)

The distinction between the ceremonial and moral law is one that is made in the Bible; it is not something that has been foisted upon the text of Scripture. Recognizing such a distinction allows us to properly interpret the Bible. In conclusion, one author stated the matter this way:

 The defender of homosexuality must produce a viable criterion for distinguishing between the moral and ceremonial laws, or else consistently reject them all (contrary to the emphatic word of Christ). We have New Testament warrant for discontinuing the sacrificial system (Hebrews 10:1–18), and the failure to observe the symbols of separation from the Gentile no longer displeases God (Acts 10:9–20). 

However, the Scriptures never alter God’s revealed law regarding homosexuality, but leave us under its full requirement (Deuteronomy 8:3; 12:32; Matthew 4:4). Indeed, the Bible repeatedly condemns homosexuality, the New Testament itself stressing that it is contrary to God’s law (1 Timothy 1:9–10), bringing God’s judgment and exclusion from the kingdom (Romans 1:24 ff; 1 Corinthians 6:9–10). Therefore, the prohibition against homosexuality cannot be viewed as part of the ceremonial system prefiguring Christ or as temporary in its obligation.

The moral law, on the other hand, referred to those aspects of divine requirement that were binding upon all peoples, in all places, and in all times. Murder looked like murder before and after the Law was given. Idolatry, murder, adultery, homosexuality, covetousness, and theft all look pretty much the same from Creation to today. As a matter of biblical record, Peter refers to the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah as “lawless deeds” (2 Peter 2:8). 

Their deeds, committed before the Law was given on Sinai and before Abraham was made into a great nation, are described as lawless, illustrating the operative presence of God’s Law in the world long before Moses. For this reason, some people refer to the moral law as “Creation law.” 

In contrast to the ceremonial law, which was not required of the nations that surrounded Israel, the moral law is required of both Israel and the nations that surrounded it. The Bible is unambiguous on this point. As far as this discussion is concerned, one of the ways that we are able to biblically distinguish between the ceremonial and moral precepts of God’s Law is to recognize that the moral law was required of persons outside of Israel.

To whom did the prophet Obadiah address his prophecy of imminent judgment? To Edom. 

To whom did the prophet Jonah eventually warn of God’s judgment? Ninevah. The prophet Nahum also addressed Ninevah. The prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel addressed several of the nations that surrounded Israel (Isaiah 13–23; Jeremiah 46–51; Ezekiel 25–32). One will search in vain for a word of God’s judgment upon these nations for failing to make it to Jerusalem in order to offer their sacrifices. God’s judgment upon them is in accordance with His moral, Creation law, not His ceremonial law.

We also learn to recognize the distinction between the ceremonial and moral aspects of God’s Law by their permanence. Was the legislation temporary, or was it permanent? To answer the question, determine whether the legislation in any way pointed forward to, or prefigured, the person and work of the Messiah who was to come. Those requirements that pointed forward to the person and work of the coming Messiah had to be, by definition, temporary. 

So what practices were temporary and prefiguring? The sacrificial system, for example, qualifies (Hebrews 10), the tabernacle and the temple clearly qualify (Hebrews 3:6; 1 Peter 2:5; John 1:14), and, finally, as we have already noted, the priesthood most certainly qualifies (one of the main arguments of the book of Hebrews). In what way did God’s legislation regarding homosexuality point forward to, or prefigure, the Messiah who was to come? 

It did not in any way. This deduction is one way that enables us to recognize God’s prohibition of homosexuality as a moral law and not a temporary, ceremonial one. In addition, one more very significant matter in Scripture firms up the category into which laws against homosexuality must fall: the death penalty.


White, J. R., & Niell, J. D. (2002). The Same Sex Controversy: Defending and Clarifying the Bible’s Message about Homosexuality (pp. 82–86). Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers.