English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If Old testament is the "old covenant" than why are certain things chosen as 'still sins' while others are not? How do you know which laws and sins to pick and choose from?
How do you know which books not to take seriously, or literally, or practice them?
So if the OT says that one thing is wrong, then why don't we have to abide by when God tells us exactly when it's ok to have sex around the week of menstuation??

2006-12-28 11:31:16 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

23 answers

I want to know why women shouldn't braid their hair. Thats in the NT, in Timothy 2:9.

2006-12-28 11:33:43 · answer #1 · answered by ÜFÖ 5 · 5 0

The first is a matter of morality, which never changes. The second is a dietary rule of the Mosaic Law which is restricted to the Old Covenant. Under the New Covenant the Mosaic Law is not in effect, but morality still is. And incidentally, there are very strong condemnations of homosexual acts in the New testament as well as the Old.
.

2006-12-28 11:50:27 · answer #2 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 0 1

Hello =)

That's a very good question..

There is no valid reason to "pick and choose" which mosaic laws are appropriate and which are not... One should either follow them, or abandon them.

While lying with members of the same sex is mentioned, perhaps more than once, for example. There is a particularly long section of Leviticus devoted to not eating Rock Badger, in particular.

So, I would say, that if you are basing your morality on mosaic law, the very worst offenders would be those people who ate "Rock Badger", and not homosexuals, or pork, or shellfish eaters, because those particular offenses are not stressed nearly as much as the Rock Badger bit.

The Buddha liked to put things into perspective with numbers. If he were to have analyzed mosaic law, he would have said something like this:

It is better for a man to eat the flesh of 10 pigs, than to have sex with another man, but it is better for a man to have sex with 1000 men, than to eat one single, solitary Rock Badger.

I know its an absurd example, but the point of picking and choosing from the mosaic "salad bar" of morality, is equally absurd.

Namaste, and Happy New Year,

--Tom

2006-12-28 11:41:01 · answer #3 · answered by glassnegman 5 · 0 0

i could make up a list of things that have killed people,
dosnt mean doing it will kill ,only that in the past they did

it was soon noticed certain people didnt appear in heaven after they shed the mortal flesh god sewn them into
their spirits ,just never appeared where the seers were seeing thus they created a list of the qualities of these and called them sin
we either go with what we know or have been told till time or experience reveals it to be not fun any more
jesus said love god love neighbour
jesus proved we still live even after physical death ,are born again
god has grace
we should have the grace to keep things between us and god and our lovers
and whats with the mens-tuation ,god has grace but there is more to life than rules.
timming is everything.

2006-12-28 11:48:20 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Your right the new covenent says nothing about homosexuality. The only commandment in the the New Testiment is "love you God with all your heart, mind and strength. But the word Christian means Christ Like, and to be trully saved we must remember the teachings of Christ. God created Eve because Adam was lonely. He wanted man and woman to love and charish each other. Family is the key to Love. If two men or two women could make a baby then that would be God's plan. But since homosexuals cannot make babies than maybe Thats proof that homosexuals are wrong

2006-12-28 11:43:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

Well, the dietary laws were made obsolete by Jesus Himself. The sexuality laws remained.

"...(Thus he declared all foods clean.)" (Mark 7:19c)

But, the laws about sexual immorality remain in the New Testament. Jesus spared a woman caught in adultery, (John 8:3-11) but also told her "Go home, and from now on do not sin any more." (John 8:11c)

There are numerous other New Testament requirements against homosexuality (along with other sexual perversions). They include:

Romans 1:24ff
I Corinthians 6:9-10
I Timothy 1:10
Jude 1:7

2006-12-28 11:38:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

the 1st time we see "abomination" used in scripture is whilst it replaced into an abomination for the Egyptians to consume with their Hebrew slaves. purely? It replaced into an unacceptable social prepare. All sin is an abomination to God. Sin is sin, yet some sins carry greater severe punishments than others. insurrection is by way of the fact the sin of witchcraft, the God did not enable that witches could stay.

2016-12-11 17:58:19 · answer #7 · answered by hannigan 4 · 0 0

>>How do you know which books not to take seriously, or literally, or practice them?<<

Great question. I believe Jesus established a Church (Matthew 16:18) and entrusted His flock to the Apostle Peter (John 21:15-17) to instruct us in these matters.

2006-12-28 11:46:10 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You have to consider which laws were given as special laws to set the Israelites apart form the heathens as God's chosen people and which laws are timeless laws reflecting God's character and his purpose for mankind.

In the New Testament Jesus made it clear that eating certain foods was an outward sign of holiness that was meant to reflect an inward spiritual truth. He said that what goes into a person doesn't defile them but what comes out of their mouth is what defiles them because from the overflow of a person's heart their mouth speaks (Mark 7:15-23).

But sleeping with another person goes against what God's specific design for mankind was back in the book of Genesis where it says that a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife (Matthew 19:4-5). It doesn't take a degree in theology to be able to see that God designed men to have sex with women and for children to be born as a result of that union. It isn't some "special" law that was given only to the Israelites.

When it comes to things like having sex during the time of menstruation, that falls into the category of how God places a special emphasis on blood because it was by the blood of his dear son Jesus that He would pay our sin debt.

Here are two passages from the New Testament that help to explain how a person can distinguish between Old Covenant laws and eternal precepts that God has laid down for us to obey. The first passage refers to eternal commands.

Romans 13:9 The commandments, "You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet," and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." (10) Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

This second passage refers to some of the ceremonial commands that were pointing to Jesus.

Colossians 2:11 In him (Jesus) also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, (12) having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. (13) And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, (14) by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. (15) He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.

(16) Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. (17) These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.

2006-12-28 11:46:17 · answer #9 · answered by Martin S 7 · 2 0

Jesus did say both that it is not what goes into a man's mouth (LOL just thought of a second interpretation of that one) that makes him unclean, and something about a husband and wife cleaving to each other, so it could be argued (by the first interpretation of the mouth thing) that Jesus upheld that distinction.

2006-12-28 11:40:34 · answer #10 · answered by Goddess of Grammar 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers