Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Why was the Old Testament Bible set aside ?

The point is, as the title of this thread asks, why was the Old Testament set aside? Some suggested that they didn't set it aside, that they 'still lived by it'.

Do you believe adulterers, disrespectful children, perjurers, drunken sons, and homosexuals should be put to death?

Do you eat shrimp or lobsters, pork chops or bacon, rabbits or blood sausage?

Do you think young women who are virgins and are not engaged, if raped, should have to marry their rapists?

If your wife helps you in a fight by grabbing the guy by the nuts who is whippin' you, do you think her hand should be cut off?


Do you believe in this stuff or not? It's from the Old Testament. Is it all or none? Or do you get to straddle both sides? Are you a non-practitioner, or a sloppy and inconsistent practitioner? Do you have to throw some of it out (like the stuff above) to make your belief system more palatable?

I think God is smart enough to see through fake ID's.

So, antlers, do you understand why I am not bound by the OT ceremonial laws?

I get the vibe that yours are not really questions, in that you truly want an answer, but want to attack the Bible (or Christianity, in general).

He said He came not to change it but fulfil it .If the Law had outlived its' usefullness , then -being God - He could have changed it .[I mean , who's gonna tell God what He can and can't do?] If you consider that the dietary LAWS were established for the good of the people , not for God's benefit , it's easier to look at the rest of the laws in that same light .

Eating pork in the desert with no refrigeration is a certain way to come up sick or dead , just to use one example .By the same token , His chosen people had to have a code of conduct that - unlike their neighbors - didn't change with each new ruler and wasn't grounded in situational ethics .Nobody has improved on the Ten Commandments as a blueprint for a just society .

It is amusing how non-believers want to argue Christian THeology by quoting the OT and the Gospels .That ain't where the Theology is found . You gotta get into the Letters to find that .

For some reason , the post I am responding to comes up down here :

Yeah, but Jesus said "I come not to change a jot nor a tittle of the Law," the Law being the first five books of the Old Testament. How, then, can you say you are not bound by Old Testament Law based on something Jesus did?

Yeah, but Jesus said "I come not to change a jot nor a tittle of the Law," the Law being the first five books of the Old Testament. How, then, can you say you are not bound by Old Testament Law based on something Jesus did?

There are, however, plenty of contradictions in the Old Testament.

Yep.

No, my specific questions were not answered. Every question I asked remains unanswered by people here who say they still live by the Old Testament. Instead of "yes, I still believe that", or "no, I don't believe that", I was given explanations of 'why' those particular laws were written. It's been like asking questions of a politician...they address the subject of the question, and go on and on about it, without ever answering the question!

Seems like I recall that unless the bride's mother could produse the ruptured hymen from the wedding bed , the groom was entitled to ask for double [or maybe triple] the dowrey , so there were financial consequences for the de-flowering of a virgin.

� too odd not to be true. Nobody makes up schitt like that!

By the arguments of some, how does anyone know which laws of the Old Testament were nullified by Jesus sacrifice? OK, some are no longer in effect. But how about the others. It also says not to kill peoole, tell lies, etc., you know.

� maybe someone else can tell me where it is or where it originated from