C
Castor Muscular
Guest
Here is a quote from the Internet:
C
Castor Muscular
Guest
I forgot to mention -- please respond in a way that allows me to pull out an isolated scripture or commentator quote that makes you look bad while making me look more righteous. Thank you.
EDIT: And, as someone suggested, please leave room for me to change the original question.
EDIT: And, as someone suggested, please leave room for me to change the original question.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,397
- Reaction score
- 2,411
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Thoughts?
It's generally a correct statement, but sort of simplistic.
I don't know the context of the remarks, but I would imagine it has to do with your typical Internet atheist wondering along the lines of why Christians regard homosexuality as an egregious sin but don't abstain from pork or wearing mixed fabric, hence the basis for the accusation that we are selective in our morality.
To which my answer would be: "It depends on the command's historical and literary context. To whom is it addressed? What is the moral logic behind the command? Is it something that is consistently reiterated throughout the Bible, or is it modified or qualified at some point? If it's repeated, is it repeated transculturally, or is it consistently addressed to the same group? Is it a command at all, or just a piece of narrative being misinterpreted as a command?" And so forth.
In other words, there's actual homework that has to be done. If a Christian condemns homosexuality while sitting in a pair of polywool pants in a restaurant on the Sabbath, enjoying a meal of pork ribs, there is a reason behind it, even if that particular Christian might not be informed enough to articulate it clearly. But moral theology is not bound by the ignorance of uninformed Christians or reductionistic atheists.
It's generally a correct statement, but sort of simplistic.
I don't know the context of the remarks, but I would imagine it has to do with your typical Internet atheist wondering along the lines of why Christians regard homosexuality as an egregious sin but don't abstain from pork or wearing mixed fabric, hence the basis for the accusation that we are selective in our morality.
To which my answer would be: "It depends on the command's historical and literary context. To whom is it addressed? What is the moral logic behind the command? Is it something that is consistently reiterated throughout the Bible, or is it modified or qualified at some point? If it's repeated, is it repeated transculturally, or is it consistently addressed to the same group? Is it a command at all, or just a piece of narrative being misinterpreted as a command?" And so forth.
In other words, there's actual homework that has to be done. If a Christian condemns homosexuality while sitting in a pair of polywool pants in a restaurant on the Sabbath, enjoying a meal of pork ribs, there is a reason behind it, even if that particular Christian might not be informed enough to articulate it clearly. But moral theology is not bound by the ignorance of uninformed Christians or reductionistic atheists.
C
Castor Muscular
Guest
Ransom said:
Jesus said, "For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled."
Last time I looked, heaven and earth hadn't yet passed away. So if you're not obeying every jot and tittle of rules of the law, then you must be worshiping some Jesus other than the Jesus of the Bible. "Every jot and tittle" includes every law, not just the ones about homosexuality, etc.
Oh, and thank you for cooperating, you wicked antinomian.
Castor Muscular said:
Early entry for "Quote of the Year"
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,397
- Reaction score
- 2,411
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Castor said:
Oh, and thank you for cooperating, you wicked antinomian.
LOL!
But seriously, that (typical) non-answer just brings us right back to what I said. Who is that Law, that will never pass away, intended for?
And if the Law will not pass away until all is fulfilled, then what does Romans 13:8 mean when it says loving one another is the fulfillment of the Law?
Oh, and thank you for cooperating, you wicked antinomian.
LOL!
But seriously, that (typical) non-answer just brings us right back to what I said. Who is that Law, that will never pass away, intended for?
And if the Law will not pass away until all is fulfilled, then what does Romans 13:8 mean when it says loving one another is the fulfillment of the Law?
C
Castor Muscular
Guest
Ransom said:
It's clearly intended for people like me, so I can feel superior to you when you admit to not feeling like it is necessary for you to follow it. Later, in some other thread, I'll find you and harass you about it.
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2012
- Messages
- 566
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 0
Are we at the part where we need to quote Albert Mohler or Alistair Begg yet?
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2012
- Messages
- 566
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 0
Castor Muscular said:
Also, don't forget to append the question with another question if the original question isn't getting the desired results. Throw in some fancy words and say "whilst" every so often.
Castor Muscular said:
Uh huh. And what do you think "till all is fulfilled" means? I think Paul in Galatians gives us enough to take that as meaning the crucifixion and resurrection. The need to follow the Law was nailed to the cross along with Jesus.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 9,127
- Reaction score
- 1,144
- Points
- 113
The part about long hair and short skirts only applied during the Dispensation of the Hippies!
The part about wearing a suit, tie and not using a screen are for today.
The part about obsessing over all things Schaap will end when he is sentenced.
The part about wearing a suit, tie and not using a screen are for today.
The part about obsessing over all things Schaap will end when he is sentenced.
C
Castor Muscular
Guest
ALAYMAN said:
Looks like the troll saw his reflection in the mirror and recognized himself.
