Subject: why don't people study the old testmant |
Bible Note: Ischus, """Things that were valid in the OT, the Law, aren't any longer." This is absolutely false. The Law, apart from its cultural components, is completely valid. Where do you think Jesus got his priciples from? I am saying that God's principles and His nature are represented in the OT in a very unique way, and the NT cannot be a sufficient substitute for this."" Well, having 'prinicples' is very different from having 'practices', that's my point that's been missed this whole time due to semantics. The NT is sufficent, different, but sufficent none the less. Granted it would be better to have both, if a case arises where one can't, then go with the NT. ""The OT is not intended to give us information about the past,"" Of course it was, it's a very, very valid historical record. ""(It is) God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness."" Yes, I agree. But once again, we aren't under it in practice. Jesus and the writers of the NT were the fulfillment and application of the Law. Take care, SUEDE |