Helo

Why do many Christians cite pieces of the Old Testament to justify certain stances and then almost never follow the Old Testament even in partial?

The most common use is citing Leviticus and Genesis to denounce homosexuality. Yet in the same set of books, we find:

Leviticus 20:9 All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense

Leviticus 20:13 The penalty for homosexual acts is death to both parties. They have committed a detestable act and are guilty of a capital offense

Leviticus itself is filled with laws and rules that hardly any modern Christian follows and yet the Old Testament is continually cited to justify certain opinions or actions.

noah

Keep going Helo. These are exactly the points xians don't like to talk about.

Helo

I actually brought up these points at CF. I was given a rather round-about answer that did a good job of dancing around the question rather than answering it.

It was basically an exsercise(sp) in talking volumes without actually SAYING anything.

noah

Hi Helo. What's CF? Christian Forum?

fromdownunder

Posting as "bornagainaussie" (my evil twin)

The New Covenant has done away with the old law and we are no longer bound by it, nor under it's influence.

Paul fully explained this in his letters, and any Old Testament texts that are still followed are solely for overarcing moral purposes.

The laws of the Penteteuch are no longer valid, except those we select as true and pure.

Austin 3:16.

Posting as Norm:

That's pretty much it as I understand it. Select what you want and ignore the rest.

Norm

Helo

Yes

Roland

Hell, Xians don't even follow half of what's in the NT either.

I mean didn't Jesus say that all people who got divorced and remarried (except for the reason of adultery) were committing adultery? Yet, how many Xians fit this description and how many churches welcome them in as members without so much as a by-your-leave?

And why don't modern Xians give all their money collectively to the church as they did in Acts? Remember what happened to Ananias and Sapphira?

Roland

Damn, and what about giving everything to the poor and following Jesus?

Sheshbazzar

As you wrote "we are no longer bound by it", I'll accept at face value that you are posting here as a believer: I reply as a believer.
"We establish The Law", for The Law remains in its full force, and in all of its particulars, against all who are uncircumcised in the heart, and in the lips.

We that believe on Him, are through the watery grave of baptism (immersion), and confession of His Name, accounted as dead, and therefore no longer under those curses which are in The Law.
Being -exempted-, even as were those under Moses, who came through The Wilderness and into The Promised Land, uncircumcised, being -exempt- from the requirements of the letter of The Law, and thereby were Delivered. (while all of their circumcised fathers died undelivered)
The Messiah, who died for us, IS our -"exemption"-, that is to say, our "Pass-over", because of His blood we are -exempted- or "skipped over".

The Law is yet totally valid against ALL who hear its words, but refuse to accept the terms of The -Exemption- (Passover).
For even at that first "Passover", prior to being Delivered out of the bondage of Egypt, there were terms which had to be obeyed;
"Thus shalt thou DO"... a "mixed multitude" obeyed all of the instructions and escaped

gstafleu

I guess the short answer is that both the OT and NT are such a mess of contradictions that you pretty much have to cherry-pick your way through them. And given that you have to cherry-pick anyway, why not pick the cherries you like?

As long as you are an uncritical believer, this poses no problems. It is only when you actually start to think about it, and actually read all of the bible rather than just the palatable tidbits, that you run into trouble. Real trouble if you believe the bible is inerrant. The problems then are just not solvable, hence the excercises in using lots of words without saying anything. What else can you do?