It is just one of the ritual laws and so not binding on Christians.
I think the attempt to distinguish between “moral” and “ritual” laws breaks down in a number of cases, in particular the Sabbath, which is both a holiday and a matter of social justice.
The sexual rules in Leviticus regularly seem to be more concerns about ritual purity than what we would call ethics, do they not?
There doesn’t seem to be any such distinction in the “laws” themselves. Further, it appears that even the term “law” itself is anachronistic as to much of the material in Leviticus. The post passage itself is not really a “law” in any sense we would use the term.
Besides, in what respect does that passage come in as a “ritual”? Even if there were a distinction between “ritual” and “ethical”, that is something that I would consider to be ethical, as opposed to ritual. How you treat others is an ethical issue. When you go to church is ritual.
I agree; I was being blackly sarcastic. The dividing line does seem to depend on the group reading the Bible (and sometimes the author of a particular section; Malachi has a great deal of concern about what is being sacrificed before he gets to the problems of injustice). I note the rule against eating blood is usually considered ritual by modern Christians though it seems to have been followed by very early Christians (Acts 15).
I figured that you were being sarcastic since it’s clearly a **civil** law (neither a moral law nor a ceremonial law) and so naturally not binding on Christians.
You see? Even the Bible confirms that aliens exist. When is the government going to tell us the truth?!