It goes further, for there are many seemingly "victimless" parts of the Law we are bound to as well, such as obeying the Sabbath, not sleeping with a menstruating woman, not freely offering consensual usury, etc.
Which is why Christians who reject the Law and think they aren't "under it" are basically rejecting the core of everything Jesus taught.
All those who call themselves "Christians" should consider going by what Jesus actually teaches and not looking for manmade Antinomian theologies to get out...
Well if it makes no sense to you that a Supreme Being might have the same emotive and interpersonal concepts that His creation has, I can't help you with that. It makes perfect sense to me, and I've been asking you to explain why this being wouldn't, but each time this question has been left...
There may have been some prophecies that didn't make it into the Tanakh.
The Ascension of Isaiah for example, is mentioned in 2 Chronicles, but for some reason didn't make the cut. Many books are mentioned like "Gad the Seer" and the "Annals of the Kings of Judah" (mentioned in Kings) that for...
Apparently to these antinomians, God was just kidding or he had a timeframe in question or something. And when Jesus said the Laws would endure until heaven and earth collapse, he was just talking about for a few days until he was crucified apparently.
Let's put it this way.
Think of it as a loyalty thing.
Imagine a Wise old white-haired Chinese emperor presiding over the Kingdom.
Suddenly some rascally rebel comes in and calls him a $h!t-head out of nowhere.
Or say the wise, powerful, King of Siam finds out one of his wives has...
So granting free will and the ability to break away is ineptitude?
So your dichotomy is to either have total deterministic control without testing humans and making them robots, or to be infantile.
When do I get to hear reasons behind the repeated assertion why a "Supreme Being" is somehow above legitimate righteous indignation?
Apparently, it's just a "hissy fit" and "ego" if you are angry at being betrayed if you are a "Supreme being" as opposed to a "Simian"? I fail to see how that...
Bah, the Vikings were notorious for slaughtering and pillaging and raiding and enslaving civilians. They would have totally wiped out the British isles clean if they could.
Ok so from what I'm reading, Asatru does in fact believe that Valhalla is reserved for Odin's warrior elite who proved valor on the battlefield, do you agree to this?
Apparently Asatru is a Revivalism of Norse Paganry.
Hmmm....if I recall right, Norse beliefs indicated the way you could get to heaven was by slaughtering enemies and dying in battle. Does Asatru do away with that part?
Doesn't your own texts indicate that people will be destroyed if they commit abominations? How does wanton destruction fit karmicly within your Eastern philosophy?
How do you suppose the Jews went on to occupy the land? The Canaanites were far numerically superior to them, had reliable supply bases, and were a very battle-scarred people who had much war experience fighting the Egyptians.