I get that you believe in Jesus, but not the Bible. Since you claim this, I assume you mean you follow the New Testament but not the old. [Don't mean to be putting words in your mouth, and if you feel that I am feel free to disregard this.] The New Testament describes Jesus, but the old describes the world He sprang from. The Jews of Jesus' time made the same unfortunate error many leaders do now: they failed to realize Jesus was a continuation of the OT, not a new thing. He hadn't come to nullify the law, but to fulfill it. He wasn't just a gentle, kind, wise person, He was the son of God. To interpret Jesus without the help of the OT leads to the creation of a composite personality based on a dearth of info: and this wouldn't be bad, except there's no dearth of info: we know what He believed.
Although the Jewish leaders had been interpreting God's law wrong, it was still true.
Claiming none of the OT is in force is dangerous to the truth. Jesus didn't live in a vacuum: what He believed wasn't a rejection of OT values, but a new interpretation of them.
Those who reject the OT wholesale end up with no cultural context for Jesus, so they invent values for Him, and often what they come up with is the opposite of what He actually believed.
For instance, we know Jesus was against, for instance, stealing, lying, gays and fornication. How do we know this? Because the OT has obvious, firm, rules against them all and Jesus never changed them. [But He changed lots of other things.]
He was also against women leaders in the church. How do we know? Because God had initiated that value and Jesus never changed it. Jesus was gentle and fair with women, maybe even took advice from them, but never invited them to be leaders. If it was just cultural He would have invited us to change it when we could. He wouldn't be swayed by the notion that women might feel left out not to be in leadership: disappointment's part of life, and He knew that. He knew that in light of eternity, being held back from leadership [if it does happen to be wrong] for a mere 70 years is meaningless.
Just as meaningless, in light of eternity, as any life disappointment.
Yes!
Thank you Kevin!
Thank you, Andrew!
Well said and 100% spot on.
Thank you John!
I get that you believe in Jesus, but not the Bible. Since you claim this, I assume you mean you follow the New Testament but not the old. [Don't mean to be putting words in your mouth, and if you feel that I am feel free to disregard this.] The New Testament describes Jesus, but the old describes the world He sprang from. The Jews of Jesus' time made the same unfortunate error many leaders do now: they failed to realize Jesus was a continuation of the OT, not a new thing. He hadn't come to nullify the law, but to fulfill it. He wasn't just a gentle, kind, wise person, He was the son of God. To interpret Jesus without the help of the OT leads to the creation of a composite personality based on a dearth of info: and this wouldn't be bad, except there's no dearth of info: we know what He believed.
Although the Jewish leaders had been interpreting God's law wrong, it was still true.
Claiming none of the OT is in force is dangerous to the truth. Jesus didn't live in a vacuum: what He believed wasn't a rejection of OT values, but a new interpretation of them.
Those who reject the OT wholesale end up with no cultural context for Jesus, so they invent values for Him, and often what they come up with is the opposite of what He actually believed.
For instance, we know Jesus was against, for instance, stealing, lying, gays and fornication. How do we know this? Because the OT has obvious, firm, rules against them all and Jesus never changed them. [But He changed lots of other things.]
He was also against women leaders in the church. How do we know? Because God had initiated that value and Jesus never changed it. Jesus was gentle and fair with women, maybe even took advice from them, but never invited them to be leaders. If it was just cultural He would have invited us to change it when we could. He wouldn't be swayed by the notion that women might feel left out not to be in leadership: disappointment's part of life, and He knew that. He knew that in light of eternity, being held back from leadership [if it does happen to be wrong] for a mere 70 years is meaningless.
Just as meaningless, in light of eternity, as any life disappointment.