Quick YEC Debunks

[RoadRunner79]

Do you understand that the old covenant was made with the people of Israel?

You yourself don't understand it (or consider it bullshit) for you just wrote:

nor do I reject any part of the Bible that I am aware of.

So you do reject parts of it which you feel are not meant for you.

We all know the story when Jesus stopped crowd that wasn't doing anything unusual, but simply applying Old Testament laws of stoning a woman that wasn't fateful to her hubby. But Jesus also said in "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets," Matthew 5:17

So we all know that job of faithful Christians isn't easy. Jesus, in fact, never spells out which parts of the OT should be kept and which ones should be abandoned. So, how are good Christians to decide? The typical rule of thumb goes something like this: if the OT says stuff you like but that is not mentioned by Jesus (i.e. that homosexuality is a sin, etc.), then you'll firmly argue that it's clearly an important part of Christian theology since it's found in the Old Testament. If, on the other hand, it says something you don't like, then you can just go ahead and ignore it since real Christianity is about New Testament anyway. The beauty of this game is that you can make the Bible say pretty much anything you want it to say.

Ok... I wouldn't call not following parts that where not meant for me, rejecting parts. 

 When I was on a Christian forum, we had a few Pentecostal people who would come around, and tell  someone like me, that I needed to tarry until the Holy Spirit came (which for them meant speaking in tongues).  They always seem to use the word "tarry" as well.  They didn't like it when I asked them how long they stayed in Jerusalem waiting to speak in tongues (they always seemed to leave the Jerusalem part out (I don't think they actually looked at the verse).  The part, that they didn't seem to be able to understand was that this was a specific command for the people at that time.  They went to the city, and the Holy Spirit was poured out upon them. 

I would strongly disagree, that it is about choosing what someone wants, and condemning those thing which don't effect me.  While this may be a natural inclination, it is not what you should be doing. Frank Turek [here] distinguishes between three categories of the old testament law.  Cerimonial Laws - Judicial/Civil Law - Moral Law

Ceremonial laws - where those laws, which where given specifically to the Nation of Israel to tell them how to worship God.  This included laws such as those meant to set the Hebrews apart as God's chosen people.  This would include practices such as circumcision, the cleansing and purity rituals surrounding the temple, and even wearing mixed fabrics.  These might also be called conventional laws.

Judicial/ Civil laws - These where laws that applied to Nation of Israel.  The included rules and categories for penalties for various crimes, rules for business transactions, and guidelines for the treatment of slaves.  Even though there might be some overlap, I'm not subject to the laws of Canada while I'm here in the US.  I can't go before a judge in the U.S. and start citing U.K.  law to get out of a crime. 

Moral Law - There has been a lot of ink spilled here, talking about morality.  What is Moral/Immoral doesn't change based on what the culture wants or what the culture allows.   Beating a slave to death because you want to, is never moral.  It's not subjective, and therefore, you cannot make it moral, because you want to, or if you and your buddies say it's OK, and not even if you get enough of the culture on your side, it's still wrong.  Moral laws transcend nations, and people, and individuals.  

Now, I would agree, that Jesus never laid out a set of laws to be carried over into the New Testament.  He didn't say, to do this, and don't do this.   In actuality the Christian is no longer bound by the law at all.  In another article by Frank Turek [here] he points out that the law was never meant to be permanent ((Jer. 31:31-34; Ezek. 16:59-63; Hos. 2:18).  That the this is the New Covenant that is shown in the New Testament.

So, if we are free from the laws, then are we free to do as we please.  Yes and No.  We are free from the law, but we are instead bound to Christ.  Paul says in Romans 6:14-15 that we are no longer "under the law, but under Grace".  He says in 1 Corinthians 9:21 that we are "under the law of Christ"  Jesus says that the entire law, can be summed up by just two.  To love God, and to love your neighbor.  I sometimes make a comparison, that it is as if the speed limits for driving where removed, but we are still to drive responsibly and safely both for ourselves, and those around us.  In Matthew 23:23, Jesus criticizes the pharisees for following the letter of the law, while neglecting the spirit of the law.  It's not about following a strict set of rules, but about fulfilling what it means to be a part of Christ.

So then, of the three categories of laws mentioned above; do any still apply?  Yes the universal or moral laws still apply.  They apply to both the nation of Israel and to the gentile.  They applied before the Old Covenant and after it was completed.  It was wrong for Cain to murder Abel even before there was a law or rule given.  They include things like Murder, theft, sexual immorality.  We are told that the law was given so the the trespass may increase ([Rom 5] The law was given, that we may know that we are sinners [Rom 7]  So not being under the law, doesn't mean that we are free to do whatever we want.  If I want to sleep with my neighbors hot wife, it doesn't make it right or something that as someone in Christ, no matter how much I want it, can make it right.  And if you are only following what you want, then you can you really say that you are following Christ?