The Old Testament and the New Covenant--help
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-06-2014, 09:12 AM
The Old Testament and the New Covenant--help
My sister and I were driving to our cabin and started talking about religion. She says that all the bad things in the Old Testament don't count anymore because Jesus made a new covenant. I thought that he said he didn't come to change anything, but she disagreed. I'm looking for help in countering her interpretation.

I find it odd that she can believe so heavily in a book that would condemn her to death for being a homosexual. She pulls thing out of her backside and says that God accepts her now because Jesus. I don't understand how she can ignore the fact that the God she believes in did all those horrible things in the Old Testament. How can she ignore the fact that this God told people to kill her?

Any help you can give me would be greatly appreciated. I have heard and read things about this subject, but I can't seem to put together a simple argument for her. I have ADHD and sometimes my brain just doesn't want to join ideas together in a coherent way. Thanks in advance.

I am still learning. --Michelangelo, age 87
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2014, 09:20 AM
RE: The Old Testament and the New Covenant--help
There are different strains of Christianity. It sounds like your sister believes in a system of bible study called dispensationalism. In that system, people actually believe that only a small section of the bible pertains to them, and that the rest were written for prior "eras". If I remember correctly, we're in the Church Era. The OT is not a factor, and amazingly enough the Book of Revelations don't come into play yet - but it will soon enough... Tongue

Others (including Catholics) believe that the covenants God created are still unbroken. There is a common saying I've seen among Catholic writings that state that the OT is revealed in the NT and the NT is hidden in the OT. If you want to counter her dispensationalist beliefs, I'd go to Catholic, Lutheran or other reformation era church sites. The various Christian denominations are good at hurling accusations and fighting amongst themselves.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Plan 9 from OS's post
11-06-2014, 09:25 AM (This post was last modified: 11-06-2014 09:33 AM by One Above All.)
RE: The Old Testament and the New Covenant--help
There's Matthew 5:17, which says this:
"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.

Then there's stuff like this:
Matthew 10:34
"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.

And this (different source, hence the numbers of the verses):
Matthew 11:20-30
20 Then Jesus began to denounce the towns in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. 21 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 22 But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. 23 And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted to the heavens? No, you will go down to Hades.[a] For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. 24 But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you.”

And this:
Revelation 19:13-15
13 He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. 14 The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. 15 Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter.”[a] He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.

Look, just check out this page, then show it to her: http://www.evilbible.com/what_would_jesus_do.htm
Ask her why she hasn't sold all her possessions and given to the poor yet (Matthew 19:21) or moved mountains with her faith (Matthew 17:20). Ask her why she hasn't healed the sick (James 5:14-15, Mark 16:18 - note that Mark 16:18 also says that believers will drink poison and handle poisonous snakes without harm, the latter of which already caused several people to die; do not tell this to your sister unless you are sure she won't try it) or done the impossible (Matthew 19:26).

This is just the basics, though. Other members should be able to put together a more coherent argument.

The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes One Above All's post
11-06-2014, 10:11 AM
RE: The Old Testament and the New Covenant--help
Shes gay and she thinks the bible says its ok?

Has she read Romans 1?

When I was church-going I also subscribed to the "new law" belief wherein the old law is done away with. I think Paul mentions that somewhere, so it always felt irrelevant to me to hear people quote Leviticus at me to accuse me of not fully following god's law. That law didnt apply to me.

What I'm saying is, I get where she's coming from on that point at least. But if she thinks Jesus is ok with the gays, she needs to read Romans 1. Unless she thinks the epistles don't apply to her, either. Then I got nothin'.

Atheism is the only way to truly be free from sin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Colourcraze's post
11-06-2014, 02:38 PM
RE: The Old Testament and the New Covenant--help
(11-06-2014 09:12 AM)ComradeBunny Wrote:   I don't understand how she can ignore the fact that the God she believes in did all those horrible things in the Old Testament. How can she ignore the fact that this God told people to kill her?

Honey, you can debate the bible, till the cows come home, and it won't make any difference. It was written in such a way that literally anyone, can pick and choose verses, to back up what they believe. Contrary to what the bible says, god is THE ultimate author of confusion.

Having said that, I also know the scriptures state that god does not lie, SO if you find one...just one lie, that makes the entire book null and void, and here's a couple examples that you could share with her...

Titus 1:2
In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;

2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned.

John 1:18
No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

Genesis 32:30
And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

Exodus 33:11
And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.

This is only a tiny sample of biblical errors. And, even though these verses clearly prove, the bible is fake, and that god wasn't a very good proofreader, Rolleyes, don't expect your sister to "get it". Brainwashing is powerful stuff.

Hope this helps. Good luck to you.

It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. ~Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes CindysRain's post
11-06-2014, 02:45 PM
RE: The Old Testament and the New Covenant--help
(11-06-2014 09:12 AM)ComradeBunny Wrote:  My sister and I were driving to our cabin and started talking about religion. She says that all the bad things in the Old Testament don't count anymore because Jesus made a new covenant. I thought that he said he didn't come to change anything, but she disagreed. I'm looking for help in countering her interpretation.

I find it odd that she can believe so heavily in a book that would condemn her to death for being a homosexual. She pulls thing out of her backside and says that God accepts her now because Jesus. I don't understand how she can ignore the fact that the God she believes in did all those horrible things in the Old Testament. How can she ignore the fact that this God told people to kill her?

Any help you can give me would be greatly appreciated. I have heard and read things about this subject, but I can't seem to put together a simple argument for her. I have ADHD and sometimes my brain just doesn't want to join ideas together in a coherent way. Thanks in advance.

According to the Bible, when Christ died on the cross, He did what the Law could not do in that it was weakened by the flesh i.e. He condemned sin in the flesh. This substitutionary atonement satisfied the sin debt that men owe and when Christ was risen bodily from the dead this was a public demonstration that God had indeed accepted Christ's atoning death as a sufficient payment for the debt incurred.

Thus righteousness under the New Covenant comes by grace through faith in the atoning and redemptive work of Christ on the cross and not by a covenant of works i.e. the Law. One when believing on and in Christ for the remission of sins does not set aside the Law but rather, believes in The One and trusts in The Only One who has fulfilled the Law.

That is why Christ said that He did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it. Thus all those who by faith trust in Him for the remission of sin no longer have to observe certain days or eat certain foods or participate in certain rituals for those things were a mere shadow or that which was to come. The Law was intended to make men see that they could not live up to God's perfect standard of holiness, not intended to be taken as the end in and of itself.

So your sister is right. The old covenant of works and the Law is no longer binding for the Christian in the sense that one must "do" certain things to be saved.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2014, 03:34 PM
RE: The Old Testament and the New Covenant--help
(11-06-2014 02:45 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(11-06-2014 09:12 AM)ComradeBunny Wrote:  My sister and I were driving to our cabin and started talking about religion. She says that all the bad things in the Old Testament don't count anymore because Jesus made a new covenant. I thought that he said he didn't come to change anything, but she disagreed. I'm looking for help in countering her interpretation.

I find it odd that she can believe so heavily in a book that would condemn her to death for being a homosexual. She pulls thing out of her backside and says that God accepts her now because Jesus. I don't understand how she can ignore the fact that the God she believes in did all those horrible things in the Old Testament. How can she ignore the fact that this God told people to kill her?

Any help you can give me would be greatly appreciated. I have heard and read things about this subject, but I can't seem to put together a simple argument for her. I have ADHD and sometimes my brain just doesn't want to join ideas together in a coherent way. Thanks in advance.

According to the Bible, when Christ died on the cross, He did what the Law could not do in that it was weakened by the flesh i.e. He condemned sin in the flesh. This substitutionary atonement satisfied the sin debt that men owe and when Christ was risen bodily from the dead this was a public demonstration that God had indeed accepted Christ's atoning death as a sufficient payment for the debt incurred.

Thus righteousness under the New Covenant comes by grace through faith in the atoning and redemptive work of Christ on the cross and not by a covenant of works i.e. the Law. One when believing on and in Christ for the remission of sins does not set aside the Law but rather, believes in The One and trusts in The Only One who has fulfilled the Law.

That is why Christ said that He did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it. Thus all those who by faith trust in Him for the remission of sin no longer have to observe certain days or eat certain foods or participate in certain rituals for those things were a mere shadow or that which was to come. The Law was intended to make men see that they could not live up to God's perfect standard of holiness, not intended to be taken as the end in and of itself.

So your sister is right. The old covenant of works and the Law is no longer binding for the Christian in the sense that one must "do" certain things to be saved.

Total bunk and twisting of scripture to support the desired conclusion. Jesus states more than once which commandments are important to abide by, therefore supporting gods laws found in the OT. How do you get to redefine what fulfill means? If the laws are no longer binding then it is a free-for-all concerning what we all can and cannot do.

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Timber1025's post
11-06-2014, 03:45 PM
RE: The Old Testament and the New Covenant--help
(11-06-2014 02:45 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(11-06-2014 09:12 AM)ComradeBunny Wrote:  My sister and I were driving to our cabin and started talking about religion. She says that all the bad things in the Old Testament don't count anymore because Jesus made a new covenant. I thought that he said he didn't come to change anything, but she disagreed. I'm looking for help in countering her interpretation.

I find it odd that she can believe so heavily in a book that would condemn her to death for being a homosexual. She pulls thing out of her backside and says that God accepts her now because Jesus. I don't understand how she can ignore the fact that the God she believes in did all those horrible things in the Old Testament. How can she ignore the fact that this God told people to kill her?

Any help you can give me would be greatly appreciated. I have heard and read things about this subject, but I can't seem to put together a simple argument for her. I have ADHD and sometimes my brain just doesn't want to join ideas together in a coherent way. Thanks in advance.

According to the Bible, when Christ died on the cross, He did what the Law could not do in that it was weakened by the flesh i.e. He condemned sin in the flesh. This substitutionary atonement satisfied the sin debt that men owe and when Christ was risen bodily from the dead this was a public demonstration that God had indeed accepted Christ's atoning death as a sufficient payment for the debt incurred.

Thus righteousness under the New Covenant comes by grace through faith in the atoning and redemptive work of Christ on the cross and not by a covenant of works i.e. the Law. One when believing on and in Christ for the remission of sins does not set aside the Law but rather, believes in The One and trusts in The Only One who has fulfilled the Law.

That is why Christ said that He did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it. Thus all those who by faith trust in Him for the remission of sin no longer have to observe certain days or eat certain foods or participate in certain rituals for those things were a mere shadow or that which was to come. The Law was intended to make men see that they could not live up to God's perfect standard of holiness, not intended to be taken as the end in and of itself.

So your sister is right. The old covenant of works and the Law is no longer binding for the Christian in the sense that one must "do" certain things to be saved.

"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.

Nothing changes until the earth disappears so NICE TRY!

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Timber1025's post
11-06-2014, 05:43 PM
RE: The Old Testament and the New Covenant--help
Xtianity is the ultimate cafeteria religion. Pick what you want. ignore what you like. The shit they wrote for 'jesus' can be twisted any way you want.

Total bullshit from the word 'go.'

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Minimalist's post
11-06-2014, 06:26 PM (This post was last modified: 11-06-2014 06:34 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: The Old Testament and the New Covenant--help
(11-06-2014 02:45 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  According to the Bible, when Christ died on the cross, He did what the Law could not do in that it was weakened by the flesh i.e. He condemned sin in the flesh. This substitutionary atonement satisfied the sin debt that men owe and when Christ was risen bodily from the dead this was a public demonstration that God had indeed accepted Christ's atoning death as a sufficient payment for the debt incurred.

Thus righteousness under the New Covenant comes by grace through faith in the atoning and redemptive work of Christ on the cross and not by a covenant of works i.e. the Law. One when believing on and in Christ for the remission of sins does not set aside the Law but rather, believes in The One and trusts in The Only One who has fulfilled the Law.

That is why Christ said that He did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it. Thus all those who by faith trust in Him for the remission of sin no longer have to observe certain days or eat certain foods or participate in certain rituals for those things were a mere shadow or that which was to come. The Law was intended to make men see that they could not live up to God's perfect standard of holiness, not intended to be taken as the end in and of itself.

So your sister is right. The old covenant of works and the Law is no longer binding for the Christian in the sense that one must "do" certain things to be saved.

What a hoard of crap.
1. "according to the Bible" .. really ? Where EXACTLY does it say that shit ?
Jesus NEVER ONCE said anything about "substitutionary atonement". Neither did the OT. The messiah was supposed to reestablish the Kingdom of David. Not die, ignominiously. What a fucked up (ancient angry) deity you have that REQUIRES his son to die before he can say "I forgive you". (It also means he is SUBJECT to spacetime).

2. Jebus never said anything about establishing a "new covenant". When the young man in Matthew asked him what he must do to gain eternal life, Jebus said to him (supposedly), "keep the commandments". He DID NOT say, "just wait, I'll be dying for you".

The original covenant the Hebrews made (with the deity they chose from the Babylonian pantheon for themselves) with Yahweh Sabaoth (the 70th son of El Elyon, and brother of Sin, who eventually turned into Allah), was that they would agree to worship him alone, of all the gods they believed in, IF he would help them in the expansionary land battles with their neighboring city-states. Why ? Because Yahweh (the lord of *hosts* ... a *host* is an arrayed battle formation) was the god of the armies in the pantheon of the ancient Near East.

So Germey, once again you are totally full of crap, and spout by rote the meaningless drivel they taught you in Babble College. It would be REALLY nice if you religionists actually took a course in your cults.

Jebus, (if he existed) was an apocalyptic. So were his followers. There would be no need for a "new covenant" for him as the the end-times (he thought and so did his followers) were immanent. "Wilt thou O Lord at this time restore the kingdom to Isra-el ?" One of THE LAST things they asked him. Even THAT late, they thought he was a political messiah. All the rest of that Christian theological bullshit was cooked up later, when the end-times did not happen, after Jerusalem was sacked.

But thanks for playing.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: