"So the ten commandments no longer apply?" was my reply. He responded that Jesus upheld the ten commandments specifically, but I only remember Jesus talking about the "law" or "old law"...... I think, never specifically THE ten.
I don't know how he can reconcile this in his head. Oh well, here are his responses in full. Tell me what you think. To me it's just another example of wanting to have your cake and eat it too, no matter what mental gymnastics you have to do to get there. In Wayne's defense, he's young and was heavily indoctrinated.
Wayne wrote:Ur reasoning is very logical from the fleshly standpoint.When Jesus was baptized God passed all things to him. Saying this is my son, hear ye him. The old testament spoke in Isaiah of him and how he would fulfill the old law prophecy and create a new law.I will give u scriptures later.Then in the new testament which is seperate from God's old testament being that it is Christ's says that buy being nailed to the cross he nailed down the old law. People who follow the old law today cannot do it because it is obsolete which is why they can't even tithe right. We don't stone because its inhumane and bunches of other stuff. When Jesus took on the Sadducees and Pharisess they uphelp the old law and Jesus thwarted their attempts with his law which had not come into effect yet until he died. New testament also says that the old testament is the school master of the new and that the bible confounds the wise in the flesh. Its kinda like our look to for juducial review in our constitution. The Jews thought that they were the holy priest hood but when christ came and they would not hear or accept his new law which God allowed, he made salvation accessible to the gentiles which is anyone now jew. That is the second thing that makes the new testament The new law. When it speakes that the law wil never change it speaks of the new testament being that the old prophets themselves spoke of the turning of the people and a savior to come.I'll get the scriptures later when I am not busy.Maybe sunday
Wayne wrote:There is no altercational relationship between the two.Christ had to use the old law against the jews in reference to himself simply because his law was not in effect yet, but he used to to tell them that he was God himself and that he was coming with a more complete law. To use the scripture that says that scripture can't be unbroken,is valid. But God being the creater can obviously destroy and remake whatever he chooses as he did when he did die. Before that he said that he would destroy and rebuild the temple in 3 days. The jews thought he meant their physical temple and they were mocking him and were equally offended but eh spoke of himself, not the physical temple and so his resurrection reflected the destruction of the old temple(which was the old law) and when he rose again the new law was then in effect by his sacrifice, as God himself in lowly flesh sacrificed himself. He killed his own law to remake one for all with all new power reflecting still upon the old law but with his own divine revising which no mortal man could do because he is not God. All the explanations were clear because all he did was explain but the Jews didn't recieve it while gentiles readily did.
Cos of course he'd have nothing to do on Sunday...
