So, the Church has been rather empty, for a while... and I thought maybe I could see if anyone was still willing to discuss things.

I just finished my second week of school, and this year I am doing Government and Civics. I am homeschooled, so I use a Christian curriculum. Two of the books I will be reading are Biblical commentary-type books that discuss how the OT Law is still applicable and alive today. I guess I've been like most Protestant kids, being taught that the old Law does not apply to us anymore. However, although I have just begun these books, the authors' seem to have a different approach. They believe the New Testement does not cancel the Law, or say Christians should ignore it. They believe Jesus and Paul are critical of using the Law as justification rather than as sanctification, but they aren't saying we should completely ignore the Law. One example of this is in Acts 13:38-39: “Therefore, my friends, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. Through him everyone who believes is set free from every sin, a justification you were not able to obtain under the law of Moses." A justification issue, not sanctification.

Thoughts? Do you think the OT Law is completely obsolete? Why or why not? I will probably keep commenting in throughout the year, as I read more of these books and see how the authors' argue.

(By the way, I am reading The Institutes of Biblical Law by Rousas Rushdoony and Tools Of Dominion: The Case Laws Of Exodus by Gary North)

Well I would agree here that the OT is not completely obsolete. I mean, the very fact that God wanted it recorded in the Bible is a clue that it's still important in some way. I have always been taught that the OT points forward to the Jesus... and the NT looks back at Jesus. So there is going to be harmony is some way.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this.

Please keep in mind I am talking about the Mosaic Law, not the OT exactly...

Well, my Mom said I need to pay attention to my books a little bit more, so maybe I'll give a quick summary of what I am learning from these books everyday, so I actually have to read the books. xP Plus, the Church is pretty empty, so a "Bible Study" (with myself ) may be fun. ^_^

Today, I read page 735-738 of The Institutes of Biblical Law. Rushdoony talked mainly about Paul and his usage of the Law. The first verse discussed is Romans 6:14, where the author says the word "Law," in this case, as used throughout the most of the New Testament, is talking about using the Mosaic Law as salvation. This can be seen by when Paul says "but under grace," meaning he is talking about Salvation. In Romans 7:1-6, Rushdoony points out that Paul is talking about our release from the death sentence of the Law. We have died to the Law with Jesus, but are risen with Him, so we are no longer bound to the punishment of the Law. In these following passages, the author points out that Paul says the "Law is good," and that Paul, being saved, and dead with Christ, delights in the Law of God. And in verses 23-25, Paul talks about his new life following the Law of God, and his old self following the law of sin. It seems obvious Paul is saying that following the Law is what a Christian should do.

The reason it's in there is because the stuff in there is still a sin, wheether you get killed for it or not. The punishments don't apply but the guidelnes do.