so i was reading the bible...

[trexpesto]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
But in Judaism, most of the rules only apply to Jews; they feel no need to impose those rules on outsiders. IIRC gentiles are more or less supposed to follow the ten commandments, and live 'good' lives. Being Jewish is considered a combination privilege and burden.

that is not quite correct, while orthodox jews do not have "missionaries" they will tell you no one is outside God's law. although i would agree jews(and not jsut orthodox) consider being jewish "a combination privilege and burden".

also the 10 commandments are also part of "the law" in fact mosaic law is the foundation of the law. other laws added later on were for the most part "clarification" of the preceding mosaic law.

for example the comandment "remember the sabbath, to keep it holy" does not really do much to tell the devout jew HOW to keep it holy... most people knew no work could be done but how exactly does one define "work"? rabbi's sat down and debated what could and could not be done on the sabbath and gave numerous pronouncements on the subject.

You're quite right - no one is supposed to be above God's law, but the many and varied restrictions on diet and the like are not applicable to gentiles. The most restrictive rules are reserved for the Israelites.

I thought the most restrictive rules were reserved for Palestinians....

 

[jjzelinski]

Actually some cultures percieve our pursuit of leasuretime, self gratification, and overall fun as childish. You could saythey see Americans as infants with the keys to the death star.

George Lucas is teh gay

 

[PatboyX]

No one is born hetero either.

makes sense.
i choose my sexual behavior...but not who i am attracted to.

 

[jjzelinski]

Saw a show on CNN last night that suggested %50 of the couples in this nation have committed adultery. Now, I coulda done swored that ten commandments thingamabobber listed that as one of the seven deadly sins. But we all choose are sexual behavior, not who we're attracted to...

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: trexpesto
I hope this makes all of us stop and wonder how little we have really examined the fabric of our lives, especially our education and religion. How many of us "inherit" the politics and religion, etc. of our parents without making an effort to understand why?

"Why?" is the question to ask yourself recursively on any issue, and if you end up saying, "Just because", or "That's the way I was raised", or "That's what so and so said", you need to rethink the issue.

That is why my religion is based on questioning. The prophet (SAW) "A good question is half of knowlegde"

 

[FlyingShawn]

I'm going to skip the flame war above and try to get back to the original topic of the thread. I thought about writing a long post detailing where and how the Bible says homosexuality is wrong and talking about a couple of my close friends who were gay and have found healing in Christ Jesus. For the first part, I will just link to an article that deals with the question well:
Bible.com answers on Homosexuality

For the second part I will ward off any accusations that I hate homosexuals and/or don't know any. First, I do not hate them. To paraphrase a Christian concept that is admittedly overused: Hate the homosexual sex, love the homosexual.

I have seen why this concept is true in the lives of the friends that I mentioned above. Both are close friends of mine and are formerly gay (they don't know each other), one of them was very actively gay (70+ partners in three years), and both have found healing and forgiveness in the love of Jesus Christ. After they accepted Jesus into their lives, they both went through a long and difficult journey of leaving homosexuality, emphasize long and difficult. It is not because of group pressure of their family or churches or other people around them, it is part of the process of sanctification (being made more like Christ over the course of our lives) that God is working in them.

I realize that this sounds like wishy-washy spiritual crap to many of the posters on this thread, but it's true. For the record (and a little off topic), it might help some to know why I am a Christian. I am a very rational person and am very skeptical of things around me, so I need evidence to believe something as difficult/unusual/unscientific as the claims of the Bible. But the evidence that I need is there; so much so that one of the founders of Harvard once said that the evidence of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ after being executed on a Roman cross is so strong that it would stand up in a court of law today. If anyone is interested in that evidence, I highly recommend the book The Case For Christ by Lee Strobel.

With that I will end my digression from topic and my post. I hope that some of this has been useful to the original poster or anyone else interested in the topic.
FlyingShawn

 

[imported_tss4]

Originally posted by: FlyingShawn
I'm going to skip the flame war above and try to get back to the original topic of the thread. I thought about writing a long post detailing where and how the Bible says homosexuality is wrong and talking about a couple of my close friends who were gay and have found healing in Christ Jesus. For the first part, I will just link to an article that deals with the question well:
Bible.com answers on Homosexuality

For the second part I will ward off any accusations that I hate homosexuals and/or don't know any. First, I do not hate them. To paraphrase a Christian concept that is admittedly overused: Hate the homosexual sex, love the homosexual.

I have seen why this concept is true in the lives of the friends that I mentioned above. Both are close friends of mine and are formerly gay (they don't know each other), one of them was very actively gay (70+ partners in three years), and both have found healing and forgiveness in the love of Jesus Christ. After they accepted Jesus into their lives, they both went through a long and difficult journey of leaving homosexuality, emphasize long and difficult. It is not because of group pressure of their family or churches or other people around them, it is part of the process of sanctification (being made more like Christ over the course of our lives) that God is working in them.

I realize that this sounds like wishy-washy spiritual crap to many of the posters on this thread, but it's true. For the record (and a little off topic), it might help some to know why I am a Christian. I am a very rational person and am very skeptical of things around me, so I need evidence to believe something as difficult/unusual/unscientific as the claims of the Bible. But the evidence that I need is there; so much so that one of the founders of Harvard once said that the evidence of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ after being executed on a Roman cross is so strong that it would stand up in a court of law today. If anyone is interested in that evidence, I highly recommend the book The Case For Christ by Lee Strobel.

With that I will end my digression from topic and my post. I hope that some of this has been useful to the original poster or anyone else interested in the topic.
FlyingShawn

This link above about homosexuality relies almost exclusively on the old testament as its source of proof that homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of god. The old testament is full of contradictory statements that are clearly not the message of god. Please don't make me repost all the retarded stuff thats written in the old testament.

 

[FlyingShawn]

First, many of the 'contradictions' in the old testament are not contradictions at all when taken in context. But I will not go into that any farther, because I won't have the time to get into that sort of discussion in the near future, because I don't have the time to post at length on the topic, and finally because I've been in enough of those disscussions before to know that anyone who cares enough to post is usually trenched in enough on their side that nothing productive comes from it (or as we've seen elsewhere in this thread, a flame war starts).

The key part of that article I would like to focus on are the references to Romans 1. It very clearly makes the point off that passage. I would also like to point out that there are is only one more passage of the old testament quoted than the new, and the new testament is quoted at much greater length. So I find your claim that "link above about homosexuality relies almost exclusively on the old testament as its source of proof that homosexuality is a sin" unfounded. Yes, it does use the old testament, but not "almost exclusively."

FlyingShawn

 

[jjzelinski]

I still don't understand what makes homosexuality more of a sin than the entirety of the nature of man. That's why Christ died for our sins, right? We are sinful creatures, we take the lord's name in vain, we covet, we, knowingly or not, worship false idols, we are greedy and lustful. No man is free from sin, and yet there are ample "he's" who a more then willing to cast the first stone.

That's what bothers the hell out of me about evangelism; it's so utterly hypcritical! If evangelism we strictly performed on the basis of spreading the Lord's word thatn great, go for it. But in almost every case I've ever been witness to I see Christians judging their fellow man! Just the other day someone told that the Pope was going to hell since Catholicism is based partly on the worship of Mary, in affect a false idol. Wtf?!?

Now, this may not appear to some as "judging" but to me it very well suits my case. To assume you know the Lord's intention and to try to quantify the another persons relationship with God is sacreligious as far as I can tell. These are the same people who will condemn another for homosexuality, despite that all sins are equal and it is not within their right as Christians to cast judgment onto others.

I recommend reading one of William Sloan Coffins books sometime, he's a fascinating man. To me he makes a far more compelling argument on behalf of the word of Christ than does anyone else I've ever heard.

 

[imported_tss4]

Originally posted by: FlyingShawn
First, many of the 'contradictions' in the old testament are not contradictions at all when taken in context. But I will not go into that any farther, because I won't have the time to get into that sort of discussion in the near future, because I don't have the time to post at length on the topic, and finally because I've been in enough of those disscussions before to know that anyone who cares enough to post is usually trenched in enough on their side that nothing productive comes from it (or as we've seen elsewhere in this thread, a flame war starts).

The key part of that article I would like to focus on are the references to Romans 1. It very clearly makes the point off that passage. I would also like to point out that there are is only one more passage of the old testament quoted than the new, and the new testament is quoted at much greater length. So I find your claim that "link above about homosexuality relies almost exclusively on the old testament as its source of proof that homosexuality is a sin" unfounded. Yes, it does use the old testament, but not "almost exclusively."

FlyingShawn

The only new testament example you gave that specifically says homosexuality is wrong was the Corinthians verse. All the others refer to sexual behavior that could describe unsavory heterosexual practices too. However, the bible is heavily influenced by man. For example, the corianthians verse you quote in your article when quoted from a different source says:

006:009 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

006:010 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

These passages are form the King James Bible.

In this version, there is no mention of homosexuality. The only thing that is close is the use of the word "effiminate". This refers to feminine in quality. Contrary to popular stereotypes most gays are not feminine. This could just as easily refer to cross dressers as opposed to homosexuals. But that misses my point. The point is the bible was written by men. Men are not perfect. Hence, there are passages that mean very differenct things in different translations. There biases influenced the translation.

Thus, there are no new testament passages with most translations saying that homosexuality is a sin. The old testament is full of conflicting and ridiculous statements even when taken completely in context. Obviously some people like to take things out of context but that is not what I am refering too.

Thus, Your references do not show that homosexuality is a sin.

Interestingly enough, twenty years ago, many people were using bible passages to support thier anti-interracial marriage stance.

 

[gutharius]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
Sorry, but I think a billion people are wrong. Religion is nothing but superstition and folklore. When people were ignorant of science it was easy to convince them that magic and imaginary beings were real. I am truly amazed at the people that still believe in religion, astrology, fortune tellers, etc.. Peace will never come to this world untill people realize that they themselves have the only real influnce over their lives.
That there are no rewards or punishments in some afterlife. All you have is what you do here. Hard to raise an army if everybody knows that death is final. Same for terrorists; no rewards in heaven, no point.

What if there were a generally unknown state of mental health equivalent to being in heaven that people had in the Garden of Eden before they ate of the tree of knowledge, or rather before they became separated from that heavenly state of self unity through the invention of language which made possible the concept of good and evil which in turn made it possible to put children down and make them hate themselves and divide against themselves loosing that state of unity; and further the few people here and there who somehow managed through good luck or personal effort overcame those feelings and discovered that state of health, being as how they would easily be able to recognize each other banded together to study how best to awaken the rest of hell dwelling humanity, and concluded that a succession of three waves of Monotheism would provide the evolutionary spiritual advancement necessary to raise people up in sufficient numbers to maintain a teachable number to man a hidden inner school of teaching that could guide and keep humanity alive. In such a case religion wouldn't be superstition about nothing, but misinformation about a hidden advanced science, a science so advanced as to be known to almost nobody. In such a case one could be tempted to say that religion is a placebo which brings some not illusions, but a real cure. What if religion is a blueprint and analogy of something happening at a higher dimension the sincere practice of which allows an occasional transformation of the mind. Such a scenario might be quite possible if there is actually nothing wrong with people but a feeling there is. All that would be necessary is to somehow loose that feeling.

But then again, who would ever imagine there could be something wrong with them. That would simply be impossible. Surely you would feel it if it were true, right?

Language begat Good and Evil??? uh, dont see how the ability to communicate brought about good and evil. In my eyes the ability to feel pain and happiness begat good and evil. People would want to be happy cause it made them feel good never mind how a persons persuit of happiness caused suffering for another... Language, Good and Evil? I think not. It is possible to cause someone to think and believe you are Evil with out even saying one word. I submit this, Good and Evil came into being the moment we as humans could experience feelings and emotions NOT language.

 

[gutharius]

Originally posted by: tss4

Originally posted by: FlyingShawn
First, many of the 'contradictions' in the old testament are not contradictions at all when taken in context. But I will not go into that any farther, because I won't have the time to get into that sort of discussion in the near future, because I don't have the time to post at length on the topic, and finally because I've been in enough of those disscussions before to know that anyone who cares enough to post is usually trenched in enough on their side that nothing productive comes from it (or as we've seen elsewhere in this thread, a flame war starts).

The key part of that article I would like to focus on are the references to Romans 1. It very clearly makes the point off that passage. I would also like to point out that there are is only one more passage of the old testament quoted than the new, and the new testament is quoted at much greater length. So I find your claim that "link above about homosexuality relies almost exclusively on the old testament as its source of proof that homosexuality is a sin" unfounded. Yes, it does use the old testament, but not "almost exclusively."

FlyingShawn

The only new testament example you gave that specifically says homosexuality is wrong was the Corinthians verse. All the others refer to sexual behavior that could describe unsavory heterosexual practices too. However, the bible is heavily influenced by man. For example, the corianthians verse you quote in your article when quoted from a different source says:

006:009 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

006:010 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

These passages are form the King James Bible.

In this version, there is no mention of homosexuality. The only thing that is close is the use of the word "effiminate". This refers to feminine in quality. Contrary to popular stereotypes most gays are not feminine. This could just as easily refer to cross dressers as opposed to homosexuals. But that misses my point. The point is the bible was written by men. Men are not perfect. Hence, there are passages that mean very differenct things in different translations. There biases influenced the translation.

Thus, there are no new testament passages with most translations saying that homosexuality is a sin. The old testament is full of conflicting and ridiculous statements even when taken completely in context. Obviously some people like to take things out of context but that is not what I am refering too.

Thus, Your references do not show that homosexuality is a sin.

Interestingly enough, twenty years ago, many people were using bible passages to support thier anti-interracial marriage stance.

Never mind the fact the Bible is simply nothing more than a "Selection of Famous Works of Inspiried Christian Visionaries". My problem is not with the Bible being written by "Inspired Christian Visionaries" my problem begins with the fact the Bible was pieced together from MANY MANY various submitions of enlightened text written by those who said their writing was spoken to them by God. My problem also begins with who did the assembling, the Early Roman Catholic Church. RED LIGHT FLASHING!!! Inspired/enlightened men wrote the Bible, BUT Every day Christians who lacked the inspiration and direct guidance of God decided what was a good read and what was not?!?!?!?! That is why I and anyone else who knows the history of the Bible, besides not being able to directly question God, cannot say Homosexuality or even Homosexual Sex is not loved by God.

I cite a Google search result on the origins of the bible: http://www.bidstrup.com/bible.htm

[Rant]Yes, I know there are those who know it in their heart that God does not approve. Well, you know what? In my heart I KNOW God loves me. In my heart I KNOW God loves what I do with my partner. I KNOW God loves all of us because we are his Sons and Daughters. I know God loves us (even hatim) even when we show hate and anger, because he knows we know not what we do when we have our minds and eyes turned from his love. [/Rant]

So as far as what the bible has to say. I say this whole discussion is MOOT! The Bible it self is not a rule of law. It is a creation of MAN and cannot be read as God's entire word and doctrine because it was Edited by MAN to fit MAN's perception of the world not God's. Now if this thread were based on does GOD think Homosexual Sex/Homosexuals are bad well that would be a very subjective thread based entirely on each posters perception of God and how that perception was fed or, sometimes, force fed to them.

 

[jjzelinski]

I thought God was something of a vengeful bastard with a penchant for barbarity, whereas Jesus is the nice one with the backstage pass...

 

[gutharius]

Originally posted by: jjzelinski
I thought God was something of a vengeful bastard with a penchant for barbarity, whereas Jesus is the nice one with the backstage pass...

In some acient versions of Christianity Christ was nothing more than God incarnated in flesh.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: hatim
ofcourse not. In our society being homosexual is totally unacceptable + I dunno why people become homos. Noones gay here TBH.

You're full of $hit. I happen to know many Filipinas, in fact I live with one, and it's commonly known that there are plenty of gay men in the Philippines.

Get over yourself, hatim. Oh, and why not come out of the closet while you're at it... :disgust:

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: FlyingShawn
I'm going to skip the flame war above and try to get back to the original topic of the thread. I thought about writing a long post detailing where and how the Bible says homosexuality is wrong and talking about a couple of my close friends who were gay and have found healing in Christ Jesus. For the first part, I will just link to an article that deals with the question well:
Bible.com answers on Homosexuality

For the second part I will ward off any accusations that I hate homosexuals and/or don't know any. First, I do not hate them. To paraphrase a Christian concept that is admittedly overused: Hate the homosexual sex, love the homosexual.

I have seen why this concept is true in the lives of the friends that I mentioned above. Both are close friends of mine and are formerly gay (they don't know each other), one of them was very actively gay (70+ partners in three years), and both have found healing and forgiveness in the love of Jesus Christ. After they accepted Jesus into their lives, they both went through a long and difficult journey of leaving homosexuality, emphasize long and difficult. It is not because of group pressure of their family or churches or other people around them, it is part of the process of sanctification (being made more like Christ over the course of our lives) that God is working in them.

I realize that this sounds like wishy-washy spiritual crap to many of the posters on this thread, but it's true. For the record (and a little off topic), it might help some to know why I am a Christian. I am a very rational person and am very skeptical of things around me, so I need evidence to believe something as difficult/unusual/unscientific as the claims of the Bible. But the evidence that I need is there; so much so that one of the founders of Harvard once said that the evidence of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ after being executed on a Roman cross is so strong that it would stand up in a court of law today. If anyone is interested in that evidence, I highly recommend the book The Case For Christ by Lee Strobel.

With that I will end my digression from topic and my post. I hope that some of this has been useful to the original poster or anyone else interested in the topic.
FlyingShawn

Has your 'formerly gay' friends started courting/dating/marrying people of the opposite sex yet?

 

[cquark]

Originally posted by: Rob9874

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
The old testament is where slavery is ok, stoning people to death was righteous then too.

I never read that old testament. Just because they mention it happening, doesn't mean it was supported. I read about a murder in the paper today. Does that mean it's legal?

No, but the OT explicitly says that slavery is condoned, not just that it happened.

 

[cquark]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Leviticus? You mean these guys? Some serious rock'n goin' on. 😀

Seriously though, isn't most of what's contained in Leviticus considered the extreme fringe of Christianity. Nobody follows the stuff in there, do they?

orthodox jews.

But in Judaism, most of the rules only apply to Jews; they feel no need to impose those rules on outsiders. IIRC gentiles are more or less supposed to follow the ten commandments, and live 'good' lives. Being Jewish is considered a combination privilege and burden.

Moses was a Jew and his 10 commandments are part of the 613 commandments that are only for Jews.

Gentiles are supposed to follow the 7 laws given to Noah, who according to myth is father to all modern humanity, Jews and Gentiles alike.

 

[cquark]

Originally posted by: gutharius
Never mind the fact the Bible is simply nothing more than a "Selection of Famous Works of Inspiried Christian Visionaries". My problem is not with the Bible being written by "Inspired Christian Visionaries" my problem begins with the fact the Bible was pieced together from MANY MANY various submitions of enlightened text written by those who said their writing was spoken to them by God. My problem also begins with who did the assembling, the Early Roman Catholic Church. RED LIGHT FLASHING!!!

While the Protestants largely use the Roman Catholic Bible, Bible versions differ in several ways:

1. The books that are included. The Ethiopian Bibles includes 3rd Corinthians and the Shepherd of Hermas, whild the Orthodox Bible includes the epistles of Cyril.
2. The original manuscripts used to make the translation. No one has the first copy of any book of the Bible and none of the earliest manuscripts of any of the books of the Bible is complete, and the various early manuscripts that we do have are not identical.
3. Translation. Few modern Christians can read Greek, so many translations exist. As there is no 1:1 correspondence between Greek and English, many translations exist within a single language too, even if the two groups chose the same set of early manuscripts, which rarely happens.

Early Christian Writings is an excellent site, where you can find multiple translations of almost all Biblical writings, including some of my favorites like the Gnostic Gospels, which the Catholic/Orthodox church suppressed when Roman Emperor Constantine declared them to be the official version of Christianity.

 

[cquark]

Originally posted by: gutharius

Originally posted by: jjzelinski
I thought God was something of a vengeful bastard with a penchant for barbarity, whereas Jesus is the nice one with the backstage pass...

In some acient versions of Christianity Christ was nothing more than God incarnated in flesh.

Some Gnostics solved this problem rather neatly, by realizing that the true God of the New Testament was a different entity from the Yahweh of the Jews, who was an evil or incompetent demiurge responsible for all the miseries of life on Earth. Jesus was sent to save us from this terrible mistake of Yahweh's inept creation.

 

[cquark]

But the evidence that I need is there; so much so that one of the founders of Harvard once said that the evidence of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ after being executed on a Roman cross is so strong that it would stand up in a court of law today.

While one may admire his faith, his claim is absurd. How would you argue a case where you have:

1. No physical evidence.
2. No witnesses that you can bring to the stand.
3. No testimony written by those supposed witnesses.

The best anyone can do are our earliest manuscripts, which are fragmentary copies of supposed copies of documents written by people who tradition claims to be the original witnesses, but even the Gospels themselves are silent as to who their authors are and none are written in the first person. There's no chain of evidence tying the Gospels to the Apostles, and worse yet, our earliest manuscript fragments disagree in places where they overlap, so we know for certain that copyists made some mistakes.

 

[Fritzo]

Do what I always do when it comes to bible teachings:

"You know what the bible says about that, don't ya?'

"No..what?"

"Well....it's against it."

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: cquark

But the evidence that I need is there; so much so that one of the founders of Harvard once said that the evidence of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ after being executed on a Roman cross is so strong that it would stand up in a court of law today.

While one may admire his faith, his claim is absurd. How would you argue a case where you have:

1. No physical evidence.
2. No witnesses that you can bring to the stand.
3. No testimony written by those supposed witnesses.

The best anyone can do are our earliest manuscripts, which are fragmentary copies of supposed copies of documents written by people who tradition claims to be the original witnesses, but even the Gospels themselves are silent as to who their authors are and none are written in the first person. There's no chain of evidence tying the Gospels to the Apostles, and worse yet, our earliest manuscript fragments disagree in places where they overlap, so we know for certain that copyists made some mistakes.

id like to see the stuff the harvard guy said/wrote about the evidence. do you happen to remember a name?

 

[LordMagnusKain]

Originally posted by: hatim

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: hatim
It would be better if you read all argumentations between Mongose and myself. Then decide for yourself. He has been constantly calling me stuff and my religion also. Im sure you wouldnt find any of my posts attacking him personally before this or his religion.

I have shown opposition to your support of the execution of atheists, homosexuals, and non-Muslims. If that means I am 'constantly calling you stuff and your religion also', then I suppose it's true.

Sorry, but your views are sick. The fact that you also wished death upon me is also disturbing.

I'm not even anti-Islamic. However, I do think you have a perverted view of Islam and I am anti-whatever you truly are as your beliefs are inhumane.

"Yeah, I hate Muslims because I dislike comments where you say that you want to kill atheists, homosexuals, and want to force convert non-Muslims or kill them."

contradictory?

bro, you can't change someone's heart by fear, and you can't show someone the path to God by blowing their brains out.

Or does God just not love those who disagree with you?

I know he loves you, me, and the homosexual atheist all, and that he wants to see none of his children kill one another? how can you disagree with that?

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
For a serious answer...

The Old Testament.. people were servants of God. They needed to live under rules and laws.
Christ, supposedly, came to fulfill the law.
The New Testament... People are now Sons & daughters of God and live under Grace. There is no longer a need to live under rules and laws. The Old Testament is considered, by many, a kind of history book, of what God expected of them. The New Testament is kind of like a guide book of what God wants for and and how we are to achieve that.

You mileage may vary here...

🙂

finally, someone gets it right! the Bible bashers are allways trying to bash and berate, but have little knowledge of what theyre doing.

Although I wouldnt say that there was no longer a need for Christians to live under the rules and regulations set forth by God in the Old Testament. God still expects us to follow the Ten Commandments, still consideres homosexuality an abomination, etc. But, pork is now allowed to be eaten, and I believe that punishments were less strict [such as no more stoning and such]