If Jesus believed in the OT, then why did he break OT law? If he truly believed in the OT, then he would of obeyed all the laws in it.
I think it is important for you to recognise that Christ is God, on Earth. As such He was incapable of sinning.
He not only provided a means for mankinds salvation, but clarified many of the teachings of the OT. In some cases, this meant the rejection of some aspects of the Mosaic code, for example the stoning of people who have done wrong, and in others it meant no change, for example when Christ quoted the OT in regards to marriage and divorce.
Furthermore, being God, He would have been free to break the rules the Father set for mankind. Being God however He was incapable of sinning. The OT is not perfect. Christ also came as a means of
fufilling the OT. Some aspects of it remain relevant to us still, others are not anymore binding on Christians today. Looking at the NT is the way by which we determine what is relevant within the OT.
Jesus said; in Matthew 5:17-20
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.”
Hahahaha talk about picking and choosing what bits of the bible to listen to and what not to ^__^
Hypocrite much?
still never answered me as to what gives you right over the divine father to know what applies or is relevant.
I havn't decided what is relevant or not... Being Christian I follow the NT.
The OT is still important, but it is not binding as it once used to be. When looking for guidance, a Christian turns to the NT. Some issues are addressed in the same manner in both the OT and the NT, and in such a circumstance, referring to the OT is OFC acceptable.
The NT is the manner by which we determine what is relevant in the OT.
That said there is still much to be learnt through the OT, both about God and about moral living.
But in your christian world, it doesn't have a place, except perhaps in hell...
Well.. god forgives I guess... so maybe just outside a confessional?
When did I ever say sex was in itself an evil thing?
OFC people can have sex, and OFC they can enjoy it. It has its place however, and practising it outside of the context for which it was designed is a sin, regardless if the offender is involved in a heterosexual or homosexual affair (in the case of a homosexual affair however, it cannot not be a sin though on the basis that it is a perversion by its very nature).
More of people cheat on their spouses in heterosexual affairs... I miss your point...
My point was they are both perversion of sex and love, neither have a place in the life of a morally righteous person.
No doubt your own twisted notions of what the bible is allows you sex before marriage, (because surely that old law is no longer relevant!
- P.S. You're starting to sound like a gay man who says "I believe in god, just not the bit about him hating homosexuals") - In which case, what is wrong with a little Promiscuity before marriage?
Except I am actually against sex before marriage... Fornication is a sin as well.
It could be that this experimentation and willingness to experience what else is out there before you commit is one of the key causes that (statistically) homosexual long-term relationships are more stable and longer lasting that heterosexual ones. - Even if more homosexual couples practice polygamy, polygnandry.
Lol...
Family Research Council
Knock yourself out
P.S. A fun fact: Biologically, we are worse than dogs!
- humans have a very large relative size of testes to body mass versus most primates
- humans have a comparatively large ejaculate and sperm count versus other primates
- as compared to most primates, humans spend more time in copulation
- as compared to most primates, humans copulate with greater frequency
- the human female's estrous is hidden, compared to most mammals that have outward signs of ovulation
- for most mammals, the estrous cycle and its outward signs bring on mating activity, but due to the hidden estrous, humans copulate throughout the reproductive cycle
I don't see what you are trying to demonstrate with this at all...
And I seriously don't get what dogs have to do with anything.
Is this where you say that Leviticus doesn't apply to the modern world but insist that the rest of the bible does?
See above
Its important, just not binding on us.
As a general rule of thumb (there is usually more to it than this but w/e) if something is in the NT, then OT passages relating to the same issue and with the same stance are relevant.
This is the case with homosexuality, as it is with monogamous, heterosexual marriage being the only acceptable "form" of marriage and the only appropriate context for sexual intercouse to take place. Biblically speaking, there is no dispute on these issues.
But as Paul wrote in 2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.