Quote:
Quote:
I don’t know of anyone who’s even suggested applying the OT law to US citizens.

Uh, there was this judge who decided that this monument of the ten commandments (Exodus 20:1-17) belonged in a courthouse in Alabama...
Sure, but I don’t think having a monument of OT law and applying those laws is the same thing. I don’t really know all of the facts, but I doubt he pointed to that monument and said “you were not honoring the Sabbath so I’m throwing you in jail”. Even he wasn’t expecting to enforce those laws; only pay respect to them (or so I suppose).
Quote:
Quote:
what I take from the OT law are the principles behind them
Which is understandable , but what about this?

Do not think I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the law until everything is accomplished. (NIV Matthew 5:17-18)

or this?

The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it. It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the law. (NIV Luke 16:16-17)

or this one?

All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. (NIV 2Timothy 3:16-17)

. . . .But in reading these in context with the rest of the book, do they not say that you should not be eliminating any part of OT law?


Right. We should not be eliminating the law. However, what is key is the PURPOSE of the law. Both Paul and Jesus went through grate pains to illustrate that people were missing the point. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus gave several illustrations designed to show how those who thought they could keep the rules to the letter were failing. He was essentially calling the Pharisees out for taking the law and using it as a stick to beat other people over the head. His message: “You guys aren’t following it either, so quite whining about it!” (My paraphrase).

The alignment people needed was this: the law was not meant to be a list of rules that by obeying you pleased God. The law was an outward demonstration of a heart that loves God. Sacrificing an animal was a symbol of regret for sin, not a magical procedure that somehow erased sin. The law (and the sacrificial system) was not a means to God, but a description of man’s relationship with Him AND a foretelling of Jesus Christ and His ultimate sacrifice.

Paul says in Romans 3 that the purpose of the law was to reveal man’s sin:

Quote:
20Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin. 21But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.


Thus, the law’s purpose is fulfilled in Jesus Christ. His sacrifice did not undo the law, but it fulfilled it by giving us grace as it demonstrated we needed. The law was much greater than a list of rules for us to follow; in fact God is more interested in the “circumcision of the heart” than our actions. The law was ultimately created to drive us toward Jesus Christ and His unique ability to meet our needs.

Quote:
[ I ] have been told many times by Evangelical Christians that Catholics are not Christians but kind of a cult instead(not you, but if you could you explain that one to me, I'd be most interested)
I wouldn’t’ classify Catholics as a cult, but that might be semantics. There are some irreconcilable differences between the Catholic Church and Protestants, most notably around the issues of grace and the role of the church. Protestants believe that salvation is received by grace and that works are produced after a person is saved. Catholics believe (I think, I’m not exactly a Catholic apologist) that works are necessary for salvation, but that works are enabled by God’s grace. Most protestants don’t understand the distinction of the latter half of that statement and focus in on the “works are necessary for salvation”, which is completely against what we believe. So you can imagine this creates a huge barrier that is difficult to overcome between the two churches. The use of tradition is also a source of contention, as the Catholics believe the Church (meaning the “Catholic Church” as an organization in this instance) is equal to the bible in discerning truth about God. Protestants believe only the bible is the absolute source of truth about God. So while the Catholics can create new doctrine (the bodily assent ion of Mary) and base it on inspiration, Protestants reject this and require any doctrine must be supported biblically. While sometimes some extra biblical beliefs are adopted by Protestant churches, we have the option of going back and rejecting them. Once the Catholic Church makes a doctrine official, it cannot be changed. One of these doctrines that is of particular interest to Protestants is one that says (paraphrased) “If anyone says that works are not required for salvation, let him be cast out of the church”. As salvation by grace alone is the core of Protestant beliefs (and in my opinion the bible), this creates a huge disconnect between the two churches that cannot be reconciled (since it has now been solidified in Catholic Tradition).

All that being said, I personally regard Catholics as Christian, only with some (what I consider to be) flawed believes that are irreconcilable with my own. This is different from an Episcopal church, because while I might disagree with many of their doctrines (infant baptism, their view of the Lord’s Supper), we agree on the most important thing: salvation by grace alone through faith. I don’t regard the difference as a “cult”, but people use that word in different ways. There are some serious repercussions to that allegation, as Jesus said the world will never prevail over the church (meaning the church will endure in some form until His return) and there was a time when Catholicism with its present non-compatible beliefs (which it has not always held, BTW) was the only real Christian church. So to say it is a cult means that there was a time when there was no Christian church, which defies the words of Christ. Or at least that’s my take.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.