New Testament vs. Old Testament

[Upchurch]

In several threads, I've kinda picked up that the teachings of Jesus supercede those of previous, Old Testament prophets like Moses and such. If that's true, then why continue to include the Old Testament in the Holy Bible, other than as a really big footnote or preface? Further, why continue to reference the Old Testament as the "Word of God" if it has been repealed (for lack of a batter word)?

What led me to this question was a comment by c4ts, "Jesus never said anything about hating fags." Which, I believe is correct, if memory serves. And with Jesus's "Love thy neighbor" motto, one would assume that that would include homosexuals.

 

[Ruby]

In several threads, I've kinda picked up that the teachings of Jesus supercede those of previous, Old Testament prophets like Moses and such. If that's true, then why continue to include the Old Testament in the Holy Bible, other than as a really big footnote or preface?

Some Christians do look at the Old Testament as just a preface. Most would say it's part of the inspired Word of God and must be included in the Canon. I don't read the OT much.....but love Song of Solomon!

What led me to this question was a comment by c4ts, "Jesus never said anything about hating fags." Which, I believe is correct, if memory serves. And with Jesus's "Love thy neighbor" motto, one would assume that that would include homosexuals.

Exactly!!

 

[LCBOY]

In several threads, I've kinda picked up that the teachings of Jesus supercede those of previous, Old Testament prophets like Moses and such. If that's true, then why continue to include the Old Testament in the Holy Bible, other than as a really big footnote or preface? Further, why continue to reference the Old Testament as the "Word of God" if it has been repealed (for lack of a batter word)?

What led me to this question was a comment by c4ts, "Jesus never said anything about hating fags." Which, I believe is correct, if memory serves. And with Jesus's "Love thy neighbor" motto, one would assume that that would include homosexuals.

The OT and the NT are linked through Jesus Christ. There are many references to Jesus Christ in the OT beginning in Genesis. Also remember during Jesus's three year ministry he quoted the Scriptures frequently. The ONLY Scriptures he had at the time was the OT. The NT hadn't been written yet. I must admit some of the OT is difficult to understand. And yes Jesus never said to hate homosexuals. He didn't really speak to this specific topic, or at least in was not documented in the NT. There are some anologies in the NT, however. There was an incident when some men brought an adultress to Jesus and asked Him what should be done with this woman. It was a trap, really. They wanted to get Jesus to say someting heretical. Jesus told them that if they are without sin they can stone her. They all walked away. What happened next is very important. He told the woman if these men do not condemn you neither will He. Then He told her to go in peace and SIN NO MORE. Jesus didn't hate the woman for being an adultress, but he told her there is a better way for her to live her life. This is how Jesus deals with many things in life. He will point you in a better direction, not with hate but with love.

 

[Upchurch]

Re: Re: New Testament vs. Old Testament

Jesus didn't hate the woman for being an adultress, but he told her there is a better way for her to live her life. This is how Jesus deals with many things in life. He will point you in a better direction, not with hate but with love.

Huh.

But what is the better direction? Using the c4ts' homosexual example from above (and because I have lots of gay friends these days, so the subject interests me), we know that Jesus would love homosexuals, but is homosexuality the worse direction? In other words, would Jesus call homosexuality a sin?

The OT is fairly clear that gays should be killed (i.e. that it's a sin), but does the NT address the issue, and if not, what are we to assume?

 

[LCBOY]

Re: Re: Re: New Testament vs. Old Testament

Huh.

But what is the better direction? Using the c4ts' homosexual example from above (and because I have lots of gay friends these days, so the subject interests me), we know that Jesus would love homosexuals, but is homosexuality the worse direction? In other words, would Jesus call homosexuality a sin?

The OT is fairly clear that gays should be killed (i.e. that it's a sin), but does the NT address the issue, and if not, what are we to assume?

Some of my closest friends are homosexual also. We've had great discussions about homosexuality. Usually we agree to disagree but they are still my friends.

The Bible describes thee types of sexual sin:

1) fornication
2) adultry
3) homosexuality

Basically any sex outside of marriage is a sin, at least that what I understand the Bible to say. Sex is not just a physical act but a spiritual as well. Yeah, yeah, I know I will be accused of being "woo-woo", but's that ok. It's my understanding of the Bible that God sees all sin as the same. Homosexuality is no more sinful than fornication or adultry. Jesus loves all people, doesn't matter if one is gay or straight, believer or non-believer, etc. But he would also tell a person go in peace and sin no more. At least that is my understanding on the Bible. I could be wrong, though. I hope this helps.

 

[Ruby]

Re: Re: Re: Re: New Testament vs. Old Testament

Some of my closest friends are homosexual also. We've had great discussions about homosexuality. Usually we agree to disagree but they are still my friends.

The Bible describes thee types of sexual sin:

1) fornication
2) adultry
3) homosexuality

Basically any sex outside of marriage is a sin, at least that what I understand the Bible to say. Sex is not just a physical act but a spiritual as well. Yeah, yeah, I know I will be accused of being "woo-woo", but's that ok. It's my understanding of the Bible that God sees all sin as the same. Homosexuality is no more sinful than fornication or adultry. Jesus loves all people, doesn't matter if one is gay or straight, believer or non-believer, etc. But he would also tell a person go in peace and sin no more. At least that is my understanding on the Bible. I could be wrong, though. I hope this helps.

You explained that very well.

 

[Upchurch]

Re: Re: Re: Re: New Testament vs. Old Testament

I guess what I'm really asking is: does the Jesus or the New Testament actually refer to homosexuality or is it a carry over from the Old Testament?

 

[LCBOY]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: New Testament vs. Old Testament

I guess what I'm really asking is: does the Jesus or the New Testament actually refer to homosexuality or is it a carry over from the Old Testament?

As far as I know Jesus does not speak on homosexuality. I'll go check it out, though, to make sure.

 

[Tricky]

New Testament vs. Old Testament?

I'll take "The Old Testiment" in a grudge match by two falls to a submission. It is much meaner.

 

[Upchurch]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: New Testament vs. Old Testament

As far as I know Jesus does not speak on homosexuality. I'll go check it out, though, to make sure.

Assuming that he didn't (I really don't know), one could assume that the act of homosexuality wouldn't be a sin. Why would it be when it is about love, after all? Or, at least, it is as much as heterosexuality is.

The only thing that would make homosexual sex a sin would be adultry, given that the two people aren't likely to be married. Correct?

 

[stamenflicker]

Upchurch,

Good question. The New Testament without the Old Testament is like having the Redemption without the Shawshank. If you've seen the film you know what I mean.

Flick

 

[LCBOY]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: New Testament vs. Old Testament

Assuming that he didn't (I really don't know), one could assume that the act of homosexuality wouldn't be a sin. Why would it be when it is about love, after all? Or, at least, it is as much as heterosexuality is.

The only thing that would make homosexual sex a sin would be adultry, given that the two people aren't likely to be married. Correct?

I wouldn't make that assumption. The foundational nature of marriage is described in Genesis. Marriage is described as the coming together of a man and a woman to become one. Any sex outside marriage then is sin. Of course my gay friends disagree with me on this point.

 

[Upchurch]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: New Testament vs. Old Testament

I wouldn't make that assumption. The foundational nature of marriage is described in Genesis. Marriage is described as the coming together of a man and a woman to become one.

(I'm sure everyone saw my next argument coming. I saw it when I made my last post.)

But, Genesis is in the OT. Why would that be maintained when other aspects of the OT were discarded?

 

[LCBOY]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: New Testament vs. Old Testament

(I'm sure everyone saw my next argument coming. I saw it when I made my last post.)

But, Genesis is in the OT. Why would that be maintained when other aspects of the OT were discarded?

If we were to throw away the OT then the NT would not make any sense. As a Christian I do not disgard the OT. A lot of the OT is historical. It is describing what happened NOT what to do. God gave the Israelites very specific laws to abide by. Jesus came to earth to what the Bible calls "fulfill the Law". This means the intent of the Law was to allow people to have build a relationship with God. The problem was they couldn't do it. So instead of the people have to do all the work to build their relationship with God, Jesus came to do all the work for us to build that rerlationship. Also marriage is defined in Genesis before the Law was given to the Israelites.

Some would ask why do we care what happened to the ancient Israelites? It is important because the same problems that plagues them also plagues the world today.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Here are to bits from the NT(King James Bible), dealing with homosexuality

Romans

1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

And another bit:

Corinthians I

6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

I think "effeminate" in the Corinthians bit alludes to homosexuality, but I'm not quite sure.

 

[Guest]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: New Testament vs. Old Testament

Assuming that he didn't (I really don't know), one could assume that the act of homosexuality wouldn't be a sin. Why would it be when it is about love, after all? Or, at least, it is as much as heterosexuality is.

The only thing that would make homosexual sex a sin would be adultry, given that the two people aren't likely to be married. Correct?

You seems to be worried and focused in the homosexuallity topic only.

Are you gay? Do you have difficults to express yourself as an open gay , if you are ?


Thanks,
S&S

P.S.
Just curious. Because you can start a thead about the "Gay Philosophy" if you are most worried on the topic.
Just in case : Nothing wrong with me IF you are homosexual.

 

[Upchurch]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: New Testament vs. Old Testament

You seems to be worried and focused in the homosexuallity topic only.

Are you gay? Do you have difficults to express yourself as an open gay , if you are ?

Cute.

No, I am not gay. I'm straight and even getting married in November. The reason I focus on the homosexuality issue is because I play tuba in the local GLBT community band so I know a lot of gay men and women. Homosexual issues are relatively new to me and I don't understand why people would be violently opposed to homosexuality.

The one who really gets under my skin is this Rev. Fred Phelps. I've read his website and the idiocy simply blows my mind. That's why I want to know if there is something specifically in the New Testament that is anti-homosexual and, if there isn't, why does it carry over from the Old Testament? Or even why it was in the Old Testament in the first place, now that I think about it.

 

[Guest]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: New Testament vs. Old Testament

Cute.

No, I am not gay. I'm straight and even getting married in November. The reason I focus on the homosexuality issue is because I play tuba in the local GLBT community band so I know a lot of gay men and women. Homosexual issues are relatively new to me and I don't understand why people would be violently opposed to homosexuality.

The one who really gets under my skin is this Rev. Fred Phelps. I've read his website and the idiocy simply blows my mind. That's why I want to know if there is something specifically in the New Testament that is anti-homosexual and, if there isn't, why does it carry over from the Old Testament? Or even why it was in the Old Testament in the first place, now that I think about it.

Hi Upchurch :

Congratulations for your next marriage .
I hope you do it with a woman, ( just a bad joke).

Since all books and texts are subject of interpretations , The Bible is not the exception(...).

Readers should focuse and notice that like all ancient books , the style is according to culture that rules those days in those specific places. Is necesary to stablish a relation time - space to study the OT and the NT.
According to Jesus Philosophy , he was just giving the real interpretation of the OT , considering that the words were missinterpretated in his present time. That's why he used the "parabola "(...) as an literature artiluge (...) to make more understable the OT to his followers or retracters..

In your specific point about homosexuality : I am not complete sure now if Jesus named it, but the Golden Rule should cover all the different kinds of "tastes" and "colors".
I will try to investigate a little more.

Now go play louder with your friends and just enjoy the music.

Thanks,
S&S

 

[Gregor]

Just can't let some statements go un-challenged.

While it's not on the thread topic (and a thousand lashes to me for doing so), but LCBOY is incorrect.

1. Much of what the OT claims to be historical (pre-exile) is highly doubted due to the lack of archeological evidence.

2. There are no references to Jesus in Genesis (although there are plenty of references to polytheism).

3. While I would assume a Jew would quote some Torah passages, we don't know what "Jesus said about gays."

- At best we have: a scroll from an unknown author, who heard it second, third, fourth hand or more, writing 50 years after a dialogue says Jesus was nice to an adulterous woman vs. Paul saying God (and Jesus by extension) wants to see all sinners burn - including sexual sinners.

 

[arcticpenguin]

I think there's a bit in the gospels about J.C. coming to fulfill the old covenant, not replace it. Sorry, I don't do chapter and verse.

Also, concerning the quotes from Romans and Corinthians, those are from letters by Paul, correct? So there could be argument over whether Paul is correctly interpreting J.C.'s message.