Christians cant eat lobster, wear polyester, wear gold, eat rabbit, have tattoos, get divrced, have

reply to post by murphy22

Your confusing sin with ritual. Ritual doesn't apply to the new testament. But the sin does.

And I think the matter is being confused with a confusing Biblical tongue.

Look I am not arguing what is the proper way to be a Christian. Which it seems you are.

I am addressing the demonstrably truthful fact that it is very common for Christians to reference Old Testament in the formation of moral belief. So what exactly is the New Covenant nullifying when the anti-gay campaign calls upon Leviticus with a thunderous roar? This is but one example...we can leave the homosexual debate out of this I could still easily show it's wide-spread use.

Originally posted by paxnatus
The New Testament is speaking to the Christians it is all about Jesus' coming. Jesus came to fulfill the law, not abolish it. The jews do not believe in the New Testament because they do not believe Jesus is the Messiah.

You bring up another good point that I missed pointing out...
God had a covenant between himself and the Jewish people, those are the rules of that covenant. Gods part of the covenant is that he would send the Jews a Messiah through the linage of the House of David. When Jesus stated that he “came to fulfill the law” that is what he is referring too. The fact that he was the fulfillment of Gods part of the Covenant. To be honest, those old covenant laws no longer even apply to the Jews themselves, as the covenant is now fulfilled by God, and we now look to Christ as the ultimate sacrifice for the forgiveness of our sins. We need no longer rely on old Jewish traditions for our forgiveness. That is why God allowed the Temple to be destroyed shortly after the death of Christ, and the Jewish rejection of Christs forgiveness.

Many people misunderstand what this verse is actually about, and incorrectly attribute it to Jesuit Futurism's belief that its about an antichrist:

Daniel 9:27
And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

In reality, its about Christ fulfilling the covenant, as mentioned above, the Jewish rejection of that fulfillment, and Gods punishment of allowing the Romans to destroy Jerusalem and the Temple because of it.

This event happens here:

Matthew 27
50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

When the temple veil rent in two at Christs death, that was a message to the Jews that their old animal sacrifice would no longer be accepted for Forgiveness.

reply to post by murphy22

Again Sin is sin, OT or NT. The same sins are outlawed in the NT as they are in the OT.

So essentially Christians can reference the OT to understand sin but omit the atrocious extent of the punishments for those sins.

So Christians can look at the OT and read that homosexuality is an abomination and practice that as a moral belief but because of the New Covenant they no longer have to stone them to death. Is that what is meant by ritual?

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
Don't need...Yet they do. It's clearly demonstrably taught that the Old Law is still to be followed throughout Churches in Modern Christendom.

I don't know what supposed Christian group you learned this from, because none that I am aware of teach that the Old Testament still applies for any reason outside of following the Ten Commandments. The rest is just story that leads up to the New Testament. This is why most protestant Christian Bibles don't include the Apocryphal books, because they contain nothing in them that relates back to the New Testament, nor do they prophesy the coming of Christ.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


Let me ask where in the bible does it say for Christian to "roar" anything. Just be pleased to know a lot of those Christians will have to answer for their own sins. It does not change the fact the bible says it's wrong.

Here is a NT one for you 1 Romans v. 26. Does that make you feel better? It's not the OT.

LL I am not being smart.

Originally posted by VeniVidi

Originally posted by LifeInDeath
There's also the part where they say that if you break God's law by working on the Sabbath the punishment is death...DEATH!

So, don't mow your lawn on Sunday and don't have a bar-b-que because cooking is work, too. Otherwise you might be smited.

edit on 8/5/2012 by LifeInDeath because: (no reason given)

Actually the true Sabbath is SATURDAY...

Actually its from sunset on Friday until sunset on Saturday...
It doesn't matter though, because Christ himself abolished the “no work” on the Sabbath rule.

reply to post by b14warrior

It also says you should not wear two different types of cloth at the same time so silly fundamentalist Christians....... if you are cold and wearing a cotton T-shirt (and you best pray it's 100% or you go straight to hell!) you can't then pull on a woollen jumper.

What a bombastic concatenation of exaggerations ? OP believes that if you can't make a good story better, why tell it. Nothing to see hear but gossip.

Originally posted by defcon5
I don't know what supposed Christian group you learned this from, because none that I am aware of teach that the Old Testament still applies for any reason outside of following the Ten Commandments.

Like I said. Proof in the pudding.

I wouldn't need to reference Christian websites or forums. Reference articles. YouTube videos. Protests. None of that would be needed. One can simply randomly browse threads right here in the religious forum and see quite lucidly that it's taught as such.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


As for punishments? I'll not tell god he was wrong. Fact is though just about everyone walking today would have been stoned at one point or another in there life if it was applied today. Thank god for grace.

Well if only the NT applies to Christians then where does Jesus condemn Homosexuality?

Isn't that part about homosexuality also in the OT?

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
I am addressing the demonstrably truthful fact that it is very common for Christians to reference Old Testament in the formation of moral belief. So what exactly is the New Covenant nullifying when the anti-gay campaign calls upon Leviticus with a thunderous roar? This is but one example...we can leave the homosexual debate out of this I could still easily show it's wide-spread use.

The New Testament does not abolish the Ten Commandments, only the Jewish covenant laws. Under the Ten Commandments that would fall under “Thou shalt not commit adultery”.

There are rules that came from God and apply to everyone, Covenant laws that only applied to the Jews, and rules made by Jews that only apply to the Jews themselves. Only those in the first category apply to Christians.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

What religions actually teach, and what some of its members might misunderstand it to mean, are two different things. Please show me a statement of faith from a protestant religious organization that still applies the Old Testament rules with the same weight as the New Covenant?

reply to post by murphy22


No argument from me there.

I am thankful for our moral understanding has evolved enough that we are not stoning people to death for working on the Sabbath.

Now it's time for Jesus to come back and make a New New Covenant that abolishes both the sin and the ritual of the OT.

Originally posted by defcon5
Please show me a statement of faith from a protestant religious organization that still applies the Old Testament rules with the same weight as the New Covenant?

What you're asking of me is not inline with what I was saying nor in the scope of the OP topic. The whole of Christendom is the scope. My point would most certainly not be invalidated if I could not find instances for Protestants. I think Wiki has a figure of something like 30,000 denominations? Anyhoot... I feel you're sidestepping my challenge.

Actually you just redefined it. Like such.

What religions actually teach, and what some of its members might misunderstand it to mean, are two different things.

A very convenient way of twisting it imo.

It would be very silly imo to undermine the extent to which the Churches said Christians belonged to influenced the way they 'understand it'..... and subsequently practice it.

If the old testament doesn't count for Christians then why do they still believe in Noah's ark and Genesis and all that, pretty sure they still read genesis, at least the young earth creationists do anyway. Someone should tell them they are not supposed to read that part because its "not for them".

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
Now it's time for Jesus to come back and make a New New Covenant that abolishes both the sin and the ritual of the OT.

Its already been done.
We live under the New Covenant. That is why we ask Christ for forgiveness, rather then sacrifice a goat. Christ has already defeated sin, now its up to each individual to seek repentance through Christ. The “Harrowing of Hell” was all about Christs victory over sin and death.

Originally posted by b14warrior
reply to post by WhoKnows100

 

Nobody uses fundamental in the religious sense like that. I was using fundamentalism in the modern religious sense. The same way if I used gay in a sexual conversation it would be obvious that I was meaning the sexuality and 'n-word' in a racial sense would be a racial slur and not a word for somebody that is ignorant.
I was looking at how the Christians that are wanting to control how others live their lives take things out of the context they were meant in and how they pick at the bits they want.

edit on 5-8-2012 by b14warrior because: (no reason given)

You are actually exposing a lie that you believe as truth, do you not sense it? The fundamentals of any subject in this world are the truths, the base, the foundation etc of the subject. I'd like you to see that the use of the words 'fundamentalist Christian' should automatically mean the same - those that hold the fundamental truths of God's words. But instead, you parrot the new definition given to you by those who have no other motive than to lead you astray without realising what you are doing. Unfortunately, you further their work here on a public board, quoting scripture that you have no understanding of by claiming that Christians cherry pick scripture by choosing to wear mixed fabrics (for example), when you have no knowledge of what linen and wool truly represent in the Kingdom of God. So I ask, how can you judge that they are cherry picking scripture in this instance when you don't even understand the command? Likewise, the same people teach you that 'fundamentalists' persecute sodomizers by refusing to allow their children to be taught that sodomy is a valid sexual practice and lifestyle, yet you have no understanding that most of the mystery religions that those in power subscribe to include sodomy in their rituals? Knowing this, please look at your thread post again and realise that you are posting about something of which you have no understanding of whilst at the same time supporting those who give you the lies and untruths.

There really is no difference to those who post that the OT is not applicable to Christians. How can that be when the meaning of the names of Adam to Noah mean the following?
Adam - Man
Seth - Appointed
Enosh – Mortal
Kenan – Sorrow
Mahalalel – The blessed God
Jared – Shall come down
Enoch – Teaching
Methuselah – His death shall bring
Lamech – Despairing
Noah – Comfort and rest

Put those name meanings into a complete sentence and you get: Man (is) appointed mortal sorrow, (but) the blessed God shall come down teaching. His death shall bring (the) despairing comfort and rest .

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

Many Christians do not understand what it is that even I am explaining here. There are Christians at various levels of understanding, just as there are on any other topic. Do not take what someone wrote, possibly incorrectly, on the net to be an official “statement of faith” of any religious organization. All true protestant christian faiths that I am aware of understand that the old testament is the old covenant and we now live under the new covenant.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


Negative LL.
It is not a Christians place to stone people to death. The Apostle did not get all violent when he was confronted. He said, "come let us reason together".

That punishment was under the OT law. Where in the NT does it say for Christians to go forth and punish?

Christians are not suppose to force there beliefs on anyone. No place in the bible does it say to do this. Like in history, "recieve Christ or you die"! That was not Christian. And it urks me that this is the modern view of it in some circles.

There are more things that ment death than just homosexual acts. Christians can't judge, the bible does that. Sin is sin. One sin is no better than the other.

reply to post by defcon5

Its already been done.
We live under the New Covenant.

How it should be done and how it's practiced is currently experiencing some cognitive dissonance then.

Which is my point and that of the OP.