The division between OT worship and NT worship

[Minimalist]

Yeah - as in

In the King James Version, Leviticus 18:22 is translated: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

We REALLY, REALLY like this part.......



but ole jesus must have died so we don't have to worry about this one so much.

Leviticus 19:19

King James Version (KJV)

19 Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.

Fucking morons.

[Drich]

How have you determined that the moral law remains, and how have you determined what is under the remit of moral law? Why is atonement incomplete or insufficient for all transgression?

Answer in the OP.

To recap:

How have you determined that the moral law remains,

It is repeated in the NT, as a testament to the faith/life of the believer.

and how have you determined what is under the remit of moral law?

Because it has been spelled out in the books that compile the NT.

Why is atonement incomplete or insufficient for all transgression?

This answer divided our churches even today into two groups: The Legalists, who claim we must earn our way to righteousness through strict adherence of the law, and those who teach of the freedoms found in books like Romans and Galatians.

Where the "moral law" is the template of what a true believer naturally exudes. If you truly belong to Christ you automatically follow the Moral law and the law simply becomes signage confirming the path you have taken. Rather than a standard one works to achieve, and must beg for forgiveness when ever he strays from it.

So in the Paulinian system of belief, when a true believer strays from that path, atonement covers said transgression like it does with the civil and ceremonial law. This principle is outlined in detail in the book of Romans.

---

Had to make an adjustment to make your statement read correctly.

Alternative OP: We're basically going to take the entire thing as written.

Which is why we have divided the law as we have and followed the teaching in Romans and the book of Galatians as expressed in this thread.

[Annik]

Don't worry, there are plenty of horrors in the NT. :3

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

One thing I like about The Torah is that I don't think you'd have to look very hard to find a justification for sacrificing a virgin. (or ex wife)

[Cinjin]

Apologetic OPs are such a joke.

You site the non-believers for picking and choosing and you go and constantly do the exact same thing. Hell, you even do it right in the thread, responding only to the questions posed that you have your rehearsed answers for. It's pathetic. A perfect god that has the most confusing horse-shit rules and regulations ever concocted. Your own Bible contradicts your OP (Matthew 5:18) not to mention your own fellow believers. It's just so painfully stupid.

Watching you contort around all the confusion and contradictions is laughable. If it was legit, you wouldn't have to do ANY of this. There would be NO apologetics if your silly faith was real.

[The Grand Nudger]

Sounds like the authors assume that faith and grace would lead to a virtuous life, but I don't see why that means that the moral law remains. I didn't ask you what the effects of faith and grace would be and what that meant for a believers life (a hilarious subject in and of itself). I asked you why the moral law remained.

Don't just tell us it's "spelled out", chapter and verse..lol.

So to make a long story short, y'all have a disagreement on that one?

[Drich]

Sounds like the authors assume that faith and grace would lead to a virtuous life, but I don't see why that means that the moral law remains.

It doesn't for the believer. (Romans 7 The whole chapter)http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?sea...ersion=ERV

I didn't ask you what the effects of faith and grace would be and what that meant for a believers life (a hilarious subject in and of itself). I asked you why the moral law remained.

Romans 7:4 In the same way, my brothers and sisters, your old selves died and you became free from the law through the body of Christ. Now you belong to someone else. You belong to the one who was raised from death. We belong to Christ so that we can be used in service to God. 5 In the past we were ruled by our sinful selves. The law made us want to do sinful things. And those sinful desires controlled our bodies, so that what we did only brought us spiritual death. 6 In the past the law held us as prisoners, but our old selves died, and we were made free from the law. So now we serve God in a new way, not in the old way, with the written rules. Now we serve God in the new way, with the Spirit. 7 You might think I am saying that sin and the law are the same. That is not true. But the law was the only way I could learn what sin means. I would never have known it is wrong to want something that is not mine. But the law said, “You must not want what belongs to someone else.”

Don't just tell us it's "spelled out", chapter and verse..lol.

always when ever any of you ask lest I be accused of "preaching"

So to make a long story short, y'all have a disagreement on that one?

Hence the split between legalist and those who follow the Biblical model of Grace.

[Aiza]

Its funny how many atheists try to cite their own strange interpretation Matthew 5:18, but then fail to read the rest of Matthew 5, which explicitly talks about the weaknesses of the old law. Read the rest of Matthew 5, and then give me your interpretation of Matthew 5:18.

And yes, even within the OT, OT law is applicable to Jews. This is why not a single branch of Christianity follows or ever has followed OT law.

[Epimethean]

Yet another piss-poor drich sap attack. Too boring to even engage at this point, you cross-zombie.

http://www.evilbible.com/do_not_ignore_ot.htm

[Ryft]

How could anything ordained by "God" be a curse? It makes no sense.

Are you only just realising that most of the bible makes no sense?

Of course it doesn't make any sense ...

It does not make sense!



(The devastating "Chewbacca defense" from atheists. What a hoot.)