People with Disabilities: Human Prejudice Enshrined in Scripture?

[Leviticus 21:16] The LORD said to Moses,
[17] "Say to Aaron: 'For the generations to come none of your descendants who has a defect may come near to offer the food of his God.
[18] No man who has any defect may come near: no man who is blind or lame, disfigured or deformed;
[19] no man with a crippled foot or hand,
[20] or who is hunchbacked or dwarfed, or who has any eye defect, or who has festering or running sores or damaged testicles.
[21] No descendant of Aaron the priest who has any defect is to come near to present the offerings made to the LORD by fire. He has a defect; he must not come near to offer the food of his God.
[22] He may eat the most holy food of his God, as well as the holy food;
[23] yet because of his defect, he must not go near the curtain or approach the altar, and so desecrate my sanctuary.

This is one of many passages in Leviticus establishing requirements that the priest, and the animal he sacrifices to the Lord, must be without defect. Defect, apparently, is an affront to the Lord, and disability or deformity desecrates the sanctuary.

Fortunately Christians with disabilities are absolved from the need to worry about whether or not their presence desecrates the sanctuary of the Lord. But to what extent does this passage indicate the Lord's attitude towards people with disabilities? Do we conclude that he has a different attitude today? If so, does that mean God's attitudes can change?

What is it about the nature of holiness that it cannot withstand to be in the presence of imperfection? How could a lame foot have "desecrated" the temple?

We might note that Jesus the emancipator was said to bring a lot of comfort and healing to lepers and those with other disabilities. But does this mean we were liberating them from his Father's attitudes towards them as well?  Or is it more reasonable to suppose that the passage above reflects a human attitude towards people with disabilities that never belonged to God?

Top / Biblical Inerrancy / Jesus and Paul were Not Literalists / An Alternative to Fundamentalism / Biblical Morality vs. Modern Ethics / Jesus' Litmus Test