The Old vs The New

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
K

kenisyes

Guest
#21
Logic is a specific method of presenting thoughts, in the hopes of convincing other people, It has become a system thought to be a flawless method of reaching the truth. It was invented by Aristotle (and several people he drew on) about 400BC. It is strictly a human invention, and has lots of problems. There are still tribal cultures that do not know how to do it. I think what you are trying to say is that God can be accounted for logically (which is why I am asking you for your definition). That is the most we can say, since we invented logic. I'm not sure even that much is true. Paul discusses this in I Cor. 1:18 ff. Another point is, that to every denomination, their theology is logical, and all that belief does is create fights.

Technically, it is not logic that tells us the sun is at the center, it is Ockhams Razor (the prinicple that we should always take the simplest explanation). That is an arbitray choice, not necessarily a logical one. It does not even apply. Sun center is simpler in algebra, earth center in Greek geometry as seen in the Antikythera Device. Ockam's razor is sometimes thought to be logic, again a reason I was asking for your definition.

I was simply proposing a conclusion of logic, which is that any philosophical system large enough to include counting, can put forth undecidable statements, one of which is whether or not it is always true. (This is the Godel incompleteness Theorem). Basically, the proof generates the conclusion that if you want the truth, you must step outside the logical system for more data. Hence the fact that "God cannot be proven by logic" can be proven by logic.

My reason for posting it, was that I see quite a lot of argumentativeness in the threads posted by "Provemewrong", and, like anyone else at CC, I would like him to reach the truth of Jesus as soon as possible. I wanted to let him know that he is going about it the wrong way.
 
Oct 31, 2011
8,200
182
0
#22
It isn't the OT vs the NT. God is eternal, to God it all simply IS. We need to see it that way, too.

The entire bible is about God wanting us to live with Him eternally, and while we are in this life live with tranquility and harmony. Everything is either how to do that, or examples of how to do that and how God is working with us.

It is first important to, up front, learn that God sent Christ and learn why He was send and what Christ means to us. That is in the four gospels.

The first five books are extremely important for us to know and understand because it lays out the principles of God, and reading it is sort of like getting to know a parent well, and how a family operates. It is who God is and how God operates the world we live in. We are so separated by the people God uses to tell us these things by changes we have made in ourselves through time that even the original language that was first used hasn't been used for a long time. God gave us the dead sea scrolls that opened up some of what was lost so we can better understand, now.

Christ is the key to our salvation, and the OT uses only a shadow of Christ. A shadow is the same as the real thing, but it is only an outline without the details filled in. We can learn a lot about how we are to use the real thing by studying how God had them use the shadow. Man has done a real number on this difference. They say there is no relation, but there is.

Another way man has mixed up God's word is not understanding that God chose a small group of people to use to tell the world about Him. To get them to stay apart and keep God in their minds always, God laid out a day to day plan for spending their days, from how they dressed to how they ate. It is a good plan if it is used right, but what an upset it caused, even in the bible. When the gospel was taken to the gentiles, they wanted no part of those things and the people who had always lived that way wanted no part of anyone who didn't want to. Most of the NT from the gospels on is talking about this fuss. However, as we read these letters, we learn a lot about our Father, and how we are to use Christ.

As you can see, it isn't the NT and the OT at all, it is one book of scripture.
 
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
#23
Salaam (Peace)
The Old Testament vs The New Testament. A very big topic. Very confussing and has no logic to it
Care to explain my Christian friends
The short version: very logical and not confusing.
 
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
#24
I believe it is 1 book no old no new

Words of Yahshua the Messiah (called Jesus)

Mattithayh 5:18, "For truly I say to you; Unless heaven and earth passes away, one yodh--the smallest of the letters--will in no way pass from the Law, until all things are perfected."

Luke 16:17, "But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one yodh of the Law to fail."

All Laws are still intact, the book of Hebrews makes it clear the the Priestly Laws have been transferred to Yahshua.
Actually, Hebrews makes clear the priesthood in the order of Aaron has been changed to the priesthood in the order of Melchizedek, and Jesus made its eternal High Priest in fulfillment of God's promise in Ps 110:4 (Heb 7:17, 21).

Since the Sinaitic law was given on the basis of the Aaronic priesthood (Heb 7:11), the change of the priesthood meant there must also be a change in the law (Heb 7:12).

So the Levitical law was set aside because it was weak and useless to attain righteousness, and the New Covenant was introduced by which we draw near to God (Heb 7:18-19).

The New Covenant renders the Old (Sinaitic) Covenant obsolete (Heb 8:13).

And even Sacrificial Laws are not done away, us having been born 2000 years later, need those Laws in place to have our past sins for given. If they were done away, we could not accept cleansing.
You do realize that is totally contrary to Jesus' revelation of the NT.

Where are these sacrifices being offered to forgive our past sins so that we can accept cleansing?

All sin, past, present and future, is forgiven by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ for those who believe in him.
 
Last edited:

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,707
3,650
113
#25
Logic is asking if God can make a stone so big He cannot roll it. Are you sure you want to stand by "logical" without further qualification? The order in the universe is so logical, we can't even decide if the earth or the sun is at the center.
Couldn't it be neither, where yes, the earth revolves around the sun but also where both earth and sun together revolve around an even greater distant object?
 
K

kenisyes

Guest
#26
Couldn't it be neither, where yes, the earth revolves around the sun but also where both earth and sun together revolve around an even greater distant object?
Oh, my, you mean that all logic isn't two valued?
 
C

CoooCaw

Guest
#27
CoooCaw, it suprises me how you have the internet to help you out with the spelling of names and yet you make a mistake. Firstly you spell his name is Prophet Muhammed. Second it surprises me how of every argument I get into with a christian they always use something from Judaism to prove their point in this case the Rabbi . A Jewish person himself would disagree with what you say. Where on earth did you get these allegations from
Israel, America & Islam
 

Bookends

Senior Member
Aug 28, 2012
4,225
99
48
#28
Perhaps my understanding of logic is flawed, I always thought logic was rational truth, or truth that can be explained by reasonable proof. For example, those who hold to evolution for the origins of life are illogical, because the proof to support it's claims are nonexistent and that all life itself, when examined closely, points to a masterful designer because all the intricate parts involved and environmental requirements that have to come together at once to support it.

Well the guy got banned, so it illogical to continue this thread, for now at least, for neither of us can reason with him.
 
H

Hoffco

Guest
#29
I will not mention names; BUT, it is obvious that some in here are FOOLS according to Proverbs and Jesus. Some are so lost in their pride that they can not see the truth. Sorry ,Love to all who love our LORD Jesus. Eph.6:26 Hoffco
 
H

Hoffco

Guest
#30
Jesus is the light, He has no shadows. The shadows of the O.T. have no meaning with out Christ to explain those shadows. Pure logic and ethics are good disciplines. Jesus is the touchstone , He judges all studies. Love to all, Hoffco
 
K

kenisyes

Guest
#31
Perhaps my understanding of logic is flawed, I always thought logic was rational truth, or truth that can be explained by reasonable proof. For example, those who hold to evolution for the origins of life are illogical, because the proof to support it's claims are nonexistent and that all life itself, when examined closely, points to a masterful designer because all the intricate parts involved and environmental requirements that have to come together at once to support it.

Well the guy got banned, so it illogical to continue this thread, for now at least, for neither of us can reason with him.
Yes, we have different definitions, which was what I had thought. I use the word "sensible" for what you describe, because of my mathematical training. I wonder which one the banned OP had intended?