Bible college, what a nerd.

Hey Norman, so what i take from what you wrote is that in your view, the Old Testament still applies to the Jews? My concern is this: how can a Jew ever follow Christ, since following Christ would essentially be denying The Law of the OT. Are you saying that Jesus never intended for Jews to follow him? Does it mean that Jesus wants the Jews to still kill homosexuals and follow every rule of The Law, as He first revealed it to them?

The first Christians were all Jews so naturally quite some questions poped up. For example in Acts 10 the Apostle Peter refused Gods command multiple times to eat unclean animals (http://biblehub.com/niv/acts/10.htm). Apart from probably Luke all new Testament authors were Jews. In the first couple of years there was kind of a transitional period where the Christian Jews still still partook in Jewish celebrations like the Passah festival however at least since the Epistle of the Hebrews God made a clear distinction between Judaism and Christianity. In Christ there is no distinction between a Jew and a gentile.

As the Jews crucified their messiah the nation of Israel is currently cast aside by God. Since the destruction of the temple 70AD Judaism is dead anyways. Just a tiny piece of wall is left to wail.

For Varys:

This guy is a perfect example of someone who interprets the supposed teachings of Jesus to mean that Christians must keep the OT commandments (all of them, not just the 10 famous ones). He also makes a comment about quoting out of context, so that tipped the scales over the several other videos I found ;-) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30sdlv1_mE4

Do you think this guy's got it wrong? He quotes from the Bible, providing some context as well.

If you disagree with his interpretation, how do you know that *your* interpretation is right, and his is wrong?

Most Christians barely read the Bible.

If you want to actually answer your questions, consult a theologian who has gone through a few years at a Bible college. I'm sure they'd be more than happy to answer your questions.

My question wasn't addressed to 'most Christians', it was addressed to *you*. Here it is again:

How do *you* understand scripture, and how do you know you are *right* in your understanding?

Asking a billion theologians couldn't possibly answer that question. The only one qualified to answer it is you. It also doesn't matter if you consider yourself a Christian or not. You made some claims about how Christian scripture should be interpreted, and I'm asking you what you think those scriptures actually say, and how you know your interpretation is right.

Another one for Varys, but it's also very relevant to Conservative's OP.

"Why Do Christians Ignore Other Old Testament Laws But Condemn Homosexuality?"
by Real Truth. Real Quick.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bz6kRg4w4I4

Ahem, Saint Paul wrote many of the New Testament letters and was a staunch supporter of allowing Gentiles (non-Jews) into the Christian Church. Because of his efforts to these ends, Christianity broke away from Judaism (I'm aware that he was at one point a Jewish leader).

Oh my gosh this thread went to hell quick ( no pun intended )

Here's the Hindu perspective on this issue:

"When a person responds to the joys and sorrows of others as if they were his own he has attained the highest state of spiritual union." - Bhagavad Gita 6:32

It is not always possible to readily sculpt Politics and Government into the mold of Religion.

Edited 2/3/2016 02:03:22

OP ( overall point? )



if anyone challenged by argument then say it again


Also Hitch, I am not abandoning OT, all i am saying is that the NT is more important.

WCT:
I'm ignoring this thread.

It's pointless.

I'm not going to take the time to describe something neither of us care about to you.

I have been waiting for varys to say this.......since he first posted

Simply because I have better things to do... like play CK2

This is why we can't have nice things

What is this cancer?

^

This cancer is called...

neo-offtopiciititis.

OP == Original Post

WCT:
I'm ignoring this thread.

It's pointless.

I'm not going to take the time to describe something neither of us care about to you.

Well, that was easy.

If you don't care about it, then why did you go to the lengths of saying The Conservative isn't "really a Christian"? (Side note: Notice the " quotation marks here. They mean something.)

If you don't care, why do you make such a big deal of it?

@Norman

As the Jews crucified their messiah the nation of Israel is currently cast aside by God. Since the destruction of the temple 70AD Judaism is dead anyways.

Isn't it the Romans who crucified Jesus though? Crucifiction was a custom among Romans, not Jews. And even if some Jews played a role in it (i know the NT claims so, but it is not so clear for historians), does it mean that all ancient Jews are cast aside by Jesus because of it? And does it mean (as you seem to suggest) that the modern jews are also still being punished for it?

Do you think that this rethoric,* the blaming of all the Jews for the death of Jesus * wich was professed for centuries in Europe, had a role in preparing the groundwork for the Holocaust? Do you think that it can be viewed as bible-inspired antisemitism, or is it harmless and happen to be a Holy Truth?

When you say that Judaism is dead, apart from it being factually wrong, isn't it different from the question of the Jews as an ethnicity (sons of Israel)?

Also, in light of what Jesus said about the Law of Moses being still valid to the letter, since you say that it isn't valid for Christians, then to whom exactly is it still applicable?
Whoever moses' Law is still applicable to, do you agree that it essentially prohibit them from following Christ, since Jesus' New Testament contradicts and overrides the Old Testament.(for example, many Christians think that the NT prohibit the killing of homosexuals, while the OT explicitly commands it)

Edited 2/3/2016 18:43:46

Isn't it the Romans who crucified Jesus though?
The Jews were the driving force behind his crucification.
---

does it mean that all ancient Jews are cast aside by Jesus because of it?
It depends on how you define "ancient". Let me quote from John 8:

"They answered him, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?” Jesus replied, "[...] I know that you are Abraham’s descendants. Yet you are looking for a way to kill me, because you have no room for my word. I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence, and you are doing what you have heard from your father.” “Abraham is our father,” they answered. “If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would do what Abraham did. As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. You are doing the works of your own father.”" [...] Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.

God justifies both Jews and gentiles for free under the requirement of faith. The holy people of the Old Testament faithfully awaited the coming of the Messiah however if Jews nowadays still believe that the Messiah hasn't come yet then this automatically means that Jesus had to be a fraud, worthy of death penalty (if you follow the law).
---

When you say that Judaism is dead, apart from it being factually wrong, isn't it different from the question of the Jews as an ethnicity (sons of Israel)?
I haven't actually counted however I'm quite sure that way over 50% of the law has the requirement of there being an intact temple. The centre of biblical Jewish faith is the temple. Without the temple there aren't any sacrifices and thus there is no way to approach God. I'm not an expert on nowadays Jewish everyday life faith however if someone would tell me something like "The temple is gone but whatever, we manage just fine without." then this would be obviously complete nonsense.
---

Do you think that this rethoric,* the blaming of all the Jews for the death of Jesus * wich was professed for centuries in Europe, had a role in preparing the groundwork for the Holocaust? Do you think that it can be viewed as bible-inspired antisemitism, or is it harmless and happen to be a Holy Truth?
I don't know. In his antisemitism Hitler could probably fall back on Luther. However then the Third Reich was an obviously atheist society inspired by Darwinism and not by any biblical values.
---

Also, in light of what Jesus said about the Law of Moses being still valid to the letter, since you say that it isn't valid for Christians, then to whom exactly is it still applicable?
Let me quote here from Romans 2:

Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin. But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness is given through faith in[ Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.

Gods written requirements are still applicable for every Jew trying to get justified by the law and also all of mankind has an understanding of God written inside their heart. The point of the law is that it requires works on human side and everyone falls short of those works and thus can't get saved but only condemned by the law. Nothing of Gods requirements can be taken away and whoever breaks the smalles bit is guilty of breaking the whole law. Facing Gods commands a homosexual is just as condemned as every straight guy.

Edited 2/3/2016 19:57:17

I'm just gong to put my response to OP into the thread. I'm not really sure if these points have already been brought up since I didn't read the entire thread, but here I go.

The issue here is not really whether gay marriages within christian churches is moral from a christian standpoint; We both seem to agree that it isn't. Case in point: Matthew 19:4-6

4 And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”

Instead, the issue of debate is whether It should be legal at a federal level in the United States.

Looking at the way it was legalized, Judicial Review via Obergefell v. Hodges, It's pretty clear that this particular decision should not have happened. Besides it being a clear violation of states rights, It effectively attempted to silence debate on a very controversial issue.

How Controversial? Well, even the most conservative polls put the percentage of americans opposed to Obergefell v. Hodges at 35-60%. That is 112-200 MILLION People who's opinions have simply been disregarded as outdated and irrelevant. This is not democracy. This is fascist-style disregard for what your people want.

What's even worse is that this decision was not handed down by an elected body, such as State legislatures who had previously banned gay marriage in several states, or congress, an actual nationally elected body. Heck, it was not even given out by executive order via the President, another nationally elected official.

No, this decision was made by what amounts to an appointed aristocracy. This is simply inexcusable.