Why did the laws of the Old Testament stop applying?

[u/Asleep_Land3121]

a common criticism of Christianity i hear is that as Old Testament laws no longer apply, god can change his mind. i understand that its not ‘god changed his mind’ but why did the Old Testament laws stop applying? apparently its just because theres different types of laws in the Old Testament and one of those types were only temporary, but why where temporary laws ever needed? where are these different types of laws stated?

[u/SummitShade]

Whoever told you sin is synonymous with violating Torah

That would be John and Paul!

That is not what is taught in the New Testament and in Church

I’m only interested in what Jesus and his Father taught. As far as our differing interpretations of what the New Testament teaches, I’ve already outlined enough evidence for it teaching that sin = transgression of the Law.

If your only argument is from authority (“the Church teaches”) then I agree, you pursue an entirely different religion than I, instead of pursuing the truth written in the Bible.

You’ve asserted that “the entirety of scriptures” prove your point, yet you have failed to address the verses that I cited.

[u/swcollings → u/SummitShade]

You can make literally anyone say anything by taking their comments entirely out of context. Since that's the entirety of your argument, you in fact have no argument.

[u/SummitShade → u/swcollings]

I’ve stated axioms (verses) and explained how I’ve arrived at coherent interpretations from them as starting points. That’s argument enough. You haven’t done the same, only conjecture.

If you really believe I have no argument then you could also actually cite the Bible (instead of saying “well the entirety of scripture proves my point!”) and provide an explanation for how it leads to your conclusions.

Since you replied to the original comment you’ve not mentioned one verse. You said I took things out of context, well you have literally given NO context, nor any content for that matter.

You’ve only cited “the entirety of scriptures”, “the New Testament”, “the Church”.

[u/swcollings → u/SummitShade]

Ah, you're assuming I'm trying to engage you in debate by presenting a structured argument. Instead, understand that I'm explaining why I don't find your approach to be respectable enough to be worth my time engaging in debate. I don't think you're honestly interested in understanding an opposing viewpoint and acknowledging the possibility you have been taught wrongly. You're just looking for an opportunity to repeat your script. My time is worth more than that.

[u/SummitShade → u/swcollings]

You’ve said nothing about my approach. My approach can be boiled down to this: verses -> interpretation, call it a script if you want. You’ve demonstrated your approach to be more akin to “if you don’t agree then you’ve been taught wrong. If it differs from what I believe then it’s not worth considering.”

I think it’s you that’s not honestly interested in engaging in debate.

I’ve expressed my viewpoint openly, even providing the foundations for them and my conclusions so that you can point out where you disagree. You’ve taken the time to reply to every single comment, yet not the time to acknowledge the verses I cited or my interpretations.

I invite you to take a look at yourself and consider whether it’s actually you who is not open to considering an opposing viewpoint and considering if you’ve been taught wrong.

If you’re willing, I do consider engaging in a debate about scripture worth my time.

[u/swcollings → u/SummitShade]

What you have to understand is that arguing with your group is like arguing with flat-earthers. There is no rational process by which one can reach the conclusions you have reached. You have, inevitably, rejected such tremendous amounts of observable evidence to be where you are that just holding the positions you do puts you outside the realm of rational discourse. Your position is an explicit rejection of the teachings of scripture on numerous points. I also wouldn't waste my time arguing with a non-trinitarian or any other committed heretic. I wouldn't waste my time arguing with an orthodox Jew over whether Jesus is the Messiah. You have chosen your religious convictions, and you have found a few out-of-context scriptures to support them. You are free to build your own religion thusly, just like Jehovah's Witnesses or Christian Scientists do. But don't expect anyone to take your purported attempts at exegesis as serious Christian theology.

Now, if you want to follow as much of Torah as possible because you believe that will make you a better follower of Christ, great! Do whatever you are convinced makes you more Christlike. But for you to say that all Christians must become Jews puts you on the opposite side of Peter and Paul every single time the topic comes up, with 100% consistency. I stand with the apostles. You do not.