What is the boundry between old and new testament laws(if any)? ?

Where do they overlap(if any)? ?

Where do they contradicts each other(if any)

Can one cancel the other? ?(example needed)

Can they both be applied ? ?

Are they meant to be adh
ered strictly? ? (who set the limits and when? ?)

can anyone be abolished? ? (with reasons)

^^^
Do you honestly want to learn or you just want to crtisize?

^^^ i know it will come to this. . . .
@ all.
Rhino does not belong to any organised religion.

Rhino can never belong to any party without fully knowing what it is

Rhino can never be an ATHIEST for sure.

Rhino uses strong WORDS whenever he pleases him

Rhino have an acceptable limits ineverything he does.

Rhino always wants the truths, hence resolved in the usage of strong terms and abuses in some instances.

Rhino doesn't joke with proves having involved in life saving projects wethin europe, asia and africa.

Rhino wants to know about all religions because he believes in creations not evolution(theories).

Rhino believes in God and science. Because he is a product of both.

So dont get twisted think about the above whenever you see Rhino.

The boundary was the completion of the work of the Christ. At that time, the veil in the temple was rent signifying that even if all men could not go behind the holy of holies, ths presence in that place had come out. There was no longer a need for a priest or arbiter - everyone had access

The laws of the old testament are true. However, "legalistically" speaking, that are unattainable and thus can only lead to condemnation. The NT provided grace to cover the legalism of the "perfect law" since motives will likely now be the criteria.Thus whist the NT "grace" covering does not cancel the law, it helps us. In this manner, they overlap yet without cancelling either and both remain applicable - "do we believe and then do anything we feel like? No, because faith without works is dead!"

We are not meant to continue in sin but where we fall having the limitations of flesh, we have an advocate who recognises our weaknesses and can plead (as it were) on our behalf.

The above explains the scriptural point of view.

Hey nuke! Easy easy easy! Your linquistic gymnastics always make me keep wondering weather Nuclear Boy is a group of persons in disquise taking the advantage of NL. In as much as how technical i might want the response, please bring it back in a more detailed manner.

How about this. . . . . .
Aloora! Perfavore, tu pensi quando tu leggere, perkay molto personi non capito.  Grazie.

@Rhino:

That horn you pushed into my back get as e be O. What I said was quite simple

[1] We find the boundary you asked about AT the point when Jesus completed His mission. The veil covering the Holy of Holies was torn at that time Matt 27:51 - That curtain was the demarcation between what was inside (God's Presence) and what was outside (humanity). In effect, God was no longer hidden or isolated from mankind and all mankind had direct access to Him. That presupposes that they actually decide to "get/be in touch" with Him.

[2] The Bible considers the old testament laws to be perfect BUT condemnatory. In effect, while they were perfect, they cannot be fulfilled by man. Therefore God provided a means whereby we still can receive justification - Jesus and the Grace He brought. Belief in His sacrifice cleanses and following His life pattern ensures we have Him, as it were, on our side pleading for us when we do wrong! That is why the Bible condemns those who believe it is just by making noise (mouth) that they have believed and thus can do whatever they wish.

Unfortunately, most supposed "christians" fall into this category and have changed the look of the "belief system" to more of "delusion, excitement, and self based". But where there are no originals, there cannot be counterfeits

I hope this is clearer.

KunleOshob:

^^^
Do you honestly want to learn or you just want to crtisize?

I think he asked a good question and even if he doesn't expect an answer others do!

^^^ very well. But then, before we go further i think this is case of easier said than done my sincere observation is that majority of christains i have met tend to apply 'selective approach' whenever the issue arises. For instance when tithe is been discuss they will hurriedly invoke OT, but when its an issue like say theft or capital punishment offences ' thy shall not judge will come in'
one of my discuss with a fellow keeps me bemused for a while by a statement he claims that a true born again will never seek redress in a court of law. He should always forgive!. I asked him what if the case involved murder, raped, cheating. . . dont he thinks that punishment is meant for correctness and deterrent? Be it capital or whatever. He paused and smiled with a slightly carefree mood and' christ has already paid for that'. I find it very difficult to come to trems with that uptil this moment. Honestly.
While i expect more comments from some NL warlords i think the above doesn't make any sense to me at all.

^^^

Selective approach is one the reasons we have many denominations. This does not mean that God isn't worshipped and feared in the other denominations. It is difficult to argue for or against but let the Holy Spirit that is within you teach you do as your heart convicts is the answer I have for now. Maybe one day as I continue to study the word, I may get better understanding.

People also use this approach hypocritically to champion a cause (slavery) OR to duck out of serving God (agnostics) BUT God remains God and we as his children have to continue to seek his face for better understanding of His word.

If his stance doesn't sink with you, then you will probably find a better place that would preach the word as it suits you. You are an adult and shouldn't need to be forced to attend a particular church or read the bible in a certain way.

@Rhino:

I'm not certain I get your "turn the other cheek" issue. And yes, mostly Christianity the "true" way is easier said than done. But people exist who do it, not just say it. The issue of tithes has been dealt with too many times on this forum and nobody has a monopoly on knowledge. My personal take is that christians are meant to build society. Call it gift, tithes, offering, whatever, just give. But I prefer to give myself rather than to another man to disburse as he sees fit. Most of the converts you see in the Bible believed because they saw love (they were healed, catered for, saw others helped, witnessed miracles etc) not because they received promises of "trillions" on earth if they brought money to the Apostles. The love they saw taught them to also give to others and so the love spread.

On selective approaches, I'm sure you know we're not all at the same stage in our understanding of God. And we're not all sincere about our woership too. If it walks, quacks, swims and looks like a duck, its likely a duck - is the decision aimed at self gain (no matter how beautifully justified) or based on an untainted conscience (and likely to cost the person)? You get my point.

@rhino
I hope the verse below helps:
Mattew 7:12 Do unto others as you want them to do to you: this is the meaning of the law of moses and the teachings of the prophet.

@post
Romans 13-10 could also be very helpful in answering your question.