[Vision2020] New Covenant vs Old Covenant

[Paul Rumelhart]

Could you or someone else explain to me about the new vs the old 
covenants in the bible?  I thought I understood that the old covenant, 
which includes the proscriptions against homosexuality as well as the 
dietary laws and such, was replaced by the new covenant.  Is it still a 
sin to wear a shirt made from two or more fibers, or not to rotate your 
crops?  Does the new covenant say anything about homosexuality?  I've 
never really understood this.  I've noticed from other debates here and 
elsewhere that the homosexual parts of the old covenant seem to be used 
commonly, but the other parts aren't. 

I thought the idea was that the laws of the Old Testament were specific 
to the peoples of that time, and that Jesus' sacrifice brought into play 
a new covenant that replaces the old one.

I'm not a biblical expert, and not a christian.  I'm not bashing here, 
just trying to understand it.

Paul

Taro Tanaka wrote:

>"Tony Simpson" <tonytime at clearwire.net> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>You have me concerned, Royal One.  In your last post you suggested that 
>>homosexual behavior should be criminalized.  Now, while I agree that such 
>>behavior is inappropriate and against the obvious design of the human body, 
>>I certainly don't think those who persist in acting thus should be jailed.
>>Could you please clarify?
>>    
>>
>
>Sure, Tony. I think we should obey the Bible in this area as in all other 
>areas. Two witnesses are required for prosecution every crime, although I 
>suppose the testimony of DNA evidence could be accepted as one of the 
>witnesses in cases of rape, etc. If there are no witnesses, there is no 
>criminal prosecution. Witnesses must participate in the execution of the 
>penalty if it is a capital crime, and perjurers are in all cases liable to 
>receive the penalty that would have been meted out to the victim of their 
>false witness.
>
>As we see from Jesus' confrontation with the adulterous woman and the 
>Pharisees, in such cases both offending parties must be dealt with equally. 
>Contrary to biblical law, the Pharisees brought only the woman and not the 
>man, even though they "caught her in the very act." She was obviously set 
>up, and by calling the accusers to cast the first stone, Jesus was telling 
>them in effect, "You want to play rough? -- I can play rough. I know the 
>rulebook better than you guys. Which of you is willing to put his own life 
>on the line in perpetuating this farce?"
>
>What we *don't* see in that confrontation is an abrogation of the death 
>penalty for adultery.
>
>It should be added, as Doug Wilson has made clear repeatedly, the death 
>penalty is not automatically required for adultery, homosexual acts, and 
>other forms of "porneia." When guilt is established, such crimes are to be 
>dealt with severely, but the meting out of the death penalty is just one 
>option available to the judge.
>
>We also need to remember that in the case of consensual homosexual acts, it 
>would be very easy for the consenting parties to keep their acts a secret. 
>The existence of laws criminalizing such behavior is not a mandate to set up 
>sting operations or to spy on people. What homosexuals do in the privacy of 
>their own bedrooms is in the nature of the case very difficult to prosecute. 
>And that is just fine and dandy. God does not call the civil magistrate to 
>root out and destroy every last homosexual, or even every first homosexual. 
>All God demands, in essence, is a situation where homosexuals must remain in 
>the closet. Official disapproval of homosexual behavior, on religiious 
>principles, sends a message to God that we take His word seriously. Even if 
>homosexuals continue to operate in the shadows, that is a much different 
>situation in God's eyes than a situation where homosexuals are welcomed with 
>open arms and officially protected, again on religious principles -- the 
>wrong religious principles.
>
>There is not a single recorded case of an individual being put to death in 
>the Bible for homosexual acts. The notable exception to that is Sodom and 
>Gomorrah, but even they were not executed for homosexual acts per se, so 
>much as for a general wickedness, of which attempted homosexual rape was 
>just one manifestation. Homosexuals who stay in the closet have little 
>reason to fear for their physical safety in a Bible-believing society . . . 
>although they may have good reason to fear for the eternal safety of their 
>souls.
>
>-- Princess Sushitushi
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! 
>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
>
>=======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet, 
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>               http://www.fsr.net                       
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>=======================================================
>
>  
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060815/f237678d/attachment-0001.htm