Subject: why don't people study the old testmant |
Bible Note: Kalos, """What did Jesus and the NT writers quote -- the NT or the OT? I am more concerned with what Jesus and the NT writers quoted than with what is quoted more.""" Strawman arguement/holier than thou attitude. Are we really to believe that you are more concerned with what King Soloman said than Jesus? Come on. Why didn't Jesus quote the NT? Because it was about him and events after he ascended? """'The law cannot be altogether invalid since the New Testament affirms its abiding applicability. "All Scripture is … useful" (2 Tim 3:16-17), including Old Testament laws. Jesus came not to abolish the law, but to fulfill it (Matt 5:17-20).""" The second statement refutes the first. Besides, Romans 10:4 "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes." Also, Paul quoting and/or referring to the Law is of no surprise, nor does it place any precident or authority in it. Paul after conversion pushed salvation by grace and justification by faith, not by the law. Paul was a Jew. He was a Jewish thinker. Not only that, Paul was a Pharisee and many believe he was a Shammaite Phariesee, which means he was a Phariesee's Pharisee. He is drawing on information that he grew up with and studied, he's incorporating that information in his teachings. Look at what you wrote, "Paul derives a principle" "originally limited to courts, is applied more broadly to a church conference"; "derived from a law"; "Paul maintains the law's moral principle, yet in view of the changed redemptive setting, makes no attempt to apply the law's original sanction." We can see that we aren't exactly under the law here. This to me doesn't stand up to scrutiny. We can see that we aren't under the law as in the day of the OT. I understand the broad picture being painted here, don't get me wrong, but I also see the details. Take care, SUEDE |