(February 1, 2016 at 2:13 pm)Nihilist Virus Wrote:(February 1, 2016 at 1:03 pm)Drich Wrote: What is the difference between the absolute standard of God and 'morality'?
If you knew this distinction, I don't think you could make this argument and not feel stupid. If you don't know this distinction then why make this claim?
I'm just confused on why the absolute standard of God changes as humanity progresses...
Quote:1. As expected half of Deuteronomy 22 has nothing to do with sex. And also as expected, there's no age of consent given in the chapter, which is exactly what we were supposed to be talking about. Remember I said pedophilia is not outlawed in the Bible, and you're like, "Yes it is, read this chapter that has the famous passage about a rape victim marrying her rapist. Viva la Absolute Morality."
2. Regarding Hitler using actual science to determine that his race was superior, I gave you a nudge to present me with the science. I'm arguing with history, not with you... OK... so what science did he cite as the reason for Jews being swines or whatever he called them? What science did he cite for Africans being whatever he called them?
3. I showed in the OP you said that the Bible is the source of absolute morality... you later backpedal and say that the Torah is a perversion of absolute morality... I ask where in the Bible I can find this absolute morality... you tell me to google it. Sir, you're the one making the claim here. If you don't tell me where the Bible gives absolute morality, you're not backing up your own claim.Quote:....
Before I spend another minute chasing you down this rabbit hole, you do know that for a Christian The precepts found in the NT are the law explained through the lens of atonement right? and that unless one is an OT Jew trying to follow the OT law to it's letter (including being born a OT Jew) that the rules do not apply under the Covenant of atonement?
I have no problem showing book chapter and verse, breaking the passage down into the hebrew and helping understand the syntax and composition of it all... that said unless you are a OT jew tring to live under that law, then know one can only be condemned by that standard. Why? Because the Law's only purpose is to show sin. It is not a standard to try and live by (morality.)
Please explain WTF sin is if it is not violation of the OT laws. Because it seems quite clear that's exactly what sin is. Turns out that you recognize the Torah was written by a bunch of savages, so you conclude that Jesus must've died for something else? But what? Are you saying this:
1. Jesus tells us that his father made garbage laws, and Jesus invents new ones
2. Jesus dies for our transgressions against the new laws he invented
Does that sum it up?
No. Sin is anything not in the expressed will of God. This includes action and thought. Jesus did not change the Law He completed it. Meaning he expanded it to include thought, and to provide atonement that would cover all sin.. That way Everyone could self identify as being in sin all the time. Thus requiring a need for a new way to God's righteousness. (Atonement) rather than 'moral actions.'
Their is a difference between the OT and NT because after atonement we are free from the law as a means to define our righteousness. Yet the Law remains to judge those who do not have atonement.
That said Paul tells us not all of us can understand or handle this freedom in its unrestricted form. So for those who need 'rules and morality' He gave us a basic set, and told us if anything falls out of this basic set and we think it is a sin then for us it is a sin and shall be treated as such. However not all are bound by those rules, but to those who weren't, we were given a warning not to do something in front of our weaker brothers to cause them to sin or do something in their mind was a sin. Lest we be judged harshly for causing our weaker brothers to stumble.
Paul's basic guideline set simply reflect the life we naturally begin to live once we have sought atonement.