Originally posted by Cow Poke
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Which OT Laws are carried over to the NT?
Collapse
X
-
"I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill
-
Originally posted by KingsGambit View PostProblem is, this argument is big among the pro homosexuality crowd, who dont see it as a violation of the two great commandments. We have more work to do.Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
Originally posted by NorrinRadd View PostPer Eph. 2, Col. 3, Gal. 3, Heb. 7, and others, I believe that the entirety of the Law of the Obsolete Covenant -- each and every decree, ordinance, and Commandment -- has been abolished, cancelled, nailed to the Cross, hung on the Tree. The "laws" of the New Covenant are to have faith in Jesus as I AM, and to love one another / love our neighbors as ourselves / treat others as we wish others to treat us.
Jesus is our peace who has broken down the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances. What are these ordinances?
What did Jesus mean when He said that He did not come to abolish the Law and the Prophets, but to fulfill them?
Comment
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostTeaching them the true meaning of love would mitigate that - if they were willing to learn."I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hornet View PostSome people say that the Law of Moses was a unit and that it cannot be divided up into different parts such as the moral law and the ceremonial. How would you respond to this?"I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Hornet View PostDoes God's institution of marriage in the Book of Genesis rule out homosexuality?
Awhile back, a couple of people tried to use natural law theory to argue against homosexuality. I pointed out that this would prove more than most people wanted. For example, the act of pitching a baseball overhand is inherently unnatural to the arm (this is not controversial within baseball circles, and pitcher injury rates are fairly high), but nobody was willing to concede that baseball was thus sinful. I think it's best if we simply conclude that homosexuality is sinful because God directly said so."I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hornet View PostSome people say that the Law of Moses was a unit and that it cannot be divided up into different parts such as the moral law and the ceremonial. How would you respond to this?
Comment
-
Following the Law as a basis for our morality is still valid and IMO, good, what was done away with was the reliance on obedience to the Law in order to have right standing with God...that was replaced with the Cross. "There is now no more condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus..." But, if you life doesn't change, then maybe your future home location has not changed as well."What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer
"... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen
Comment
-
Originally posted by NorrinRadd View PostPer Eph. 2, Col. 3, Gal. 3, Heb. 7, and others, I believe that the entirety of the Law of the Obsolete Covenant -- each and every decree, ordinance, and Commandment -- has been abolished, cancelled, nailed to the Cross, hung on the Tree. The "laws" of the New Covenant are to have faith in Jesus as I AM, and to love one another / love our neighbors as ourselves / treat others as we wish others to treat us.
Comment
-
Originally posted by KingsGambit View PostBy itself, I think it would be an inconclusive argument though it can help explain why homosexuality is prohibited elsewhere. I prefer to stick with the direct prohibitions in Scripture.
Awhile back, a couple of people tried to use natural law theory to argue against homosexuality. I pointed out that this would prove more than most people wanted. For example, the act of pitching a baseball overhand is inherently unnatural to the arm (this is not controversial within baseball circles, and pitcher injury rates are fairly high), but nobody was willing to concede that baseball was thus sinful. I think it's best if we simply conclude that homosexuality is sinful because God directly said so.
I think it is hard to make a natural law argument against homosexual marriage. One could say that homosexual marriage does not fulfill all of the purposes of marriage, but who defines the purpose of marriage? I think its best to say what God says about it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hornet View PostThat's true. The Book of Genesis does not prohibit homosexuality.
I think it is hard to make a natural law argument against homosexual marriage. One could say that homosexual marriage does not fulfill all of the purposes of marriage, but who defines the purpose of marriage? I think its best to say what God says about it.
One could quite justifiably say that homosexual 'marriage' fulfills NONE of the purposes of marriage.Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Thoughtful Monk, 04-14-2024, 04:34 PM
|
4 responses
39 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
|
||
Started by One Bad Pig, 04-10-2024, 12:35 PM
|
0 responses
28 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by One Bad Pig
04-10-2024, 12:35 PM
|
||
Started by Thoughtful Monk, 03-15-2024, 06:19 PM
|
35 responses
184 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
03-27-2024, 08:28 AM
|
||
Started by NorrinRadd, 04-13-2022, 12:54 AM
|
45 responses
342 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by NorrinRadd
04-12-2024, 04:35 PM
|
||
Started by Zymologist, 07-09-2019, 01:18 PM
|
367 responses
17,331 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 09:55 AM
|
Comment