Homosexuality is a sin? Well, Xtians, what about these other 76 things?

[Drich]

Because you asked an invalid question. You assumed one part of the law carries over and you were looking for scriptural support to undergird this assumption. When I told you none of the law carries over as a means to righteousness I thought you would see how your question then became invalid, thus not requiring an answer from me.

I assumed nothing. I see nothing in the Bible which says anything about which laws, if any, are no longer in effect. Matt 5 says that they are all in effect until all is accomplished and Heaven and Earth passes away. While Heaven doesn't exist, the earth is still very much here. All of the events predicted in Revelation have yet to occur, so all is obviously not yet accomplished. I'm just curious to know which chapter/verse in the Bible contradicts this so grandly that you believe that the law no longer has to be followed in spite of how obviously wrong that position is, considering all the requirements Jesus laid out which have not yet been met.

Read it again. Mat 5 says one must seek a righteousness that surpasses that of the pharasees. The righteousness of the Pharasees is based on the Law. If Christ came to complete the Law then it is through His completeing the Law that Righteousness must be sought.

Now ask yourself what did Christ do? He died to atone for sin. Which does not abolish the Law, as the law makes a provision for atonement. To 'Complete the Law' in His act is to Make a sin sacrifice so complete no other sacrifice is needed. In turn it offers a righteousness greater than the righteousness the pharasees boasted of. (Based on their best efforts to follow the law)

If you are going to quote the passage in Mt 5 you can not cherry pick you must account for everything stated not just the section that pertains to your specific argument.

---

Because you asked an invalid question. You assumed one part of the law carries over and you were looking for scriptural support to undergird this assumption. When I told you none of the law carries over as a means to righteousness I thought you would see how your question then became invalid, thus not requiring an answer from me.

He didn't assume anything. He was asking you to justify the assumption you made when you said this:

Take note that under the new covenant established by Christ and outlined in the NT of the bible, only the Moral law is used as a guide to determine who is a follower of Christ, and subsequently saved by Grace, and not through our works so no man can boast.

I don't see it rev.

I did not say any part of the Law carried over as a means to righteousness. I specifically said that the Moral code is use as a guide line or 'fruit' to determine who is a follower of Christ. No one is being saved by their deeds under the new covenant. (as no man can boast. We are saved by faith through Grace, apart from works.) This does not mean we can not or should not do 'works' it means our works have nothing to do with out salvation. That makes our works an effect of our salvation and not the cause. As Jesus put it in John 14 "if you love me you will keep my commands." Love is our saving grace, not our adhearance to the Law.