The Instigator
GraceSaved72
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
HmblySkTrth
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

For a Christian, there is no such thing as sexual sin.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
HmblySkTrth
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/2/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,681 times Debate No: 19104
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (2)

 

GraceSaved72

Pro

For a Christian, there is no such thing as sexual sin. The only sin is not loving others as we love ourselves. In fact, a requirement that Christians obey a sexual morality code is a rejection of salvation by grace. Love of fellowman is the only rule for a Christian.

To prove my argument, I must establish with New Testament scripture and valid logical arguments that:
1. Christians are under a new covenant and not the first covenant;
2. This new covenant has a new high priest and a new law;
3. Under this new covenant, salvation is either by grace or by works of obedience to a morality code but cannot be by both;
4. Salvation is by grace through faith (justification by faith apart from obedience to any morality code, and salvation by grace as a free gift that cannot be earned);
5. Christ abolished or ended the Law of Moses in its entirety, including the Levitical morality code;
6. Christ freed Christians from the Law of Moses, and Christians cannot be justified by obeying its morality code; and
7. A Christian does all that is required of him when he believes in Christ, does not intentionally harm others, and helps those in need whenever he can; and
8. A requirement of obedience to a morality code is inconsistent with salvation by grace.

To prove their argument that there is such a thing as sexual sin for a Christian, my opposition must establish with New Testament scripture and valid logical argument that:
1. There are sexual activities that a Christian is prohibited from engaging in;
2. The prohibition(s) has/have a source other than the Law of Moses and are not merely repetitions of provisions of the Levitical morality code; or
A. that the Levitical morality code applies to Christians;
3. The activity is sinful only because of its purely sexual immorality and not because of harm to others; or
A. that the activity is itself inherently harmful to others; and
4. The requirement of obedience to the prohibition is consistent with grace; or
A. that salvation is by obedience and not grace or by both obedience and grace working together.

THE ONLY ACCEPTABLE AUTHORITY IS THE NEW TESTAMENT. WHAT SOME WRITER SAYS IT SAYS IS PROOF OF NOTHING.

Here we go!

1. Christians are under a New Covenant and not the first covenant.

Heb 9:15 For this reason Christ is the one who arranges a new covenant, so that those who have been called by God may receive the eternal blessings that God has promised. This can be done because there has been a death which sets people free from the wrongs they did while the first covenant was in effect. (GNB)

Luk 22:20 In the same way, after supper, Jesus took the cup of wine and said, "This wine represents the new agreement from God to his people. It will begin when my blood is poured out for you." (ERV)

There's my scriptural proof that Christians are under a new covenant or agreement with God.

2. The New Covenant has a new high priest and a new law.

Heb 4:14 Inasmuch, then, as we have in Jesus, the Son of God, a great High Priest who has passed into Heaven itself, let us hold firmly to our profession of faith. (WNT)

Heb 8:1 The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven,
Heb 8:2 and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man. (NIV)

Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. (KJV)

Being under a new covenant and a new law, we cannot continue to define sin according to the law of the prior covenant. That would negate the new covenant and its law!

3. Under the New Covenant, salvation is by grace or by works of obedience to a morality code but cannot be by both.

Rom 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. (KJV)

4. Salvation is by grace through faith and cannot be earned by obedience to rules.

Act 15:11 But we believe that we are saved through the grace (the undeserved favor and mercy) of the Lord Jesus, just as they [are]. (AMP)

Rom 3:20 For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.
Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it--
Rom 3:22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction:
Rom 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Rom 3:24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, (ESV)

Eph 2:8 For it is by grace that you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves. It is God's gift, and is not on the ground of merit--
Eph 2:9 so that it may be impossible for any one to boast. (WNT)

Tit 3:4 But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared,
Tit 3:5 he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit,
Tit 3:6 whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior,
Tit 3:7 so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. (NIV)

Clearly, salvation is by grace - the unearned and unearnable favor of God - a free gift!

5. Christ brought an end to the Law of Moses.

Eph 2:14 Christ has made peace between Jews and Gentiles, and he has united us by breaking down the wall of hatred that separated us. Christ gave his own body
Eph 2:15 to destroy the Law of Moses with all its rules and commands. He even brought Jews and Gentiles together as though we were only one person, when he united us in peace. (CEV)

Heb 7:18 The old rule is now ended because it was weak and worthless.
Heb 7:19 The Law of Moses could not make anything perfect. But now a better hope has been given to us. And with that hope we can come near to God. (ERV)

6. Christ freed us from the Law of Moses, and we cannot be justified by obeying its moral standards.

Gal 5:1 Christ has set us free! This means we are really free. Now hold on to your freedom and don't ever become slaves of the Law again. (CEV)

Gal 3:23 Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed.
Gal 3:24 So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith.
Gal 3:25 Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law. (NIV)

Gal 2:16 Yet, we know that people don't receive God's approval because of their own efforts to live according to a set of standards, but only by believing in Jesus Christ. So we also believed in Jesus Christ in order to receive God's approval by faith in Christ and not because of our own efforts. People won't receive God's approval because of their own efforts to live according to a set of standards. (GW)

7. A Christian does all that is required of him when he believes in Christ, does not intentionally harm others, and helps those in need whenever he can.

Rom 13:8 You should owe nothing to anyone, except that you will always owe love to each other. The person who loves others has done all that the law commands. (ERV)

Rom 13:10 No one who loves others will harm them. So love is all that the Law demands. (CEV)

If love of fellowman is ALL the law demands, it obviously cannot demand adherence to sexual rules that have nothing to do with how we treat others. That would render these passages blatantly false.

8. A requirement of obedience to a morality code is inconsistent with salvation by grace.

Grace is BY DEFINITION a free gift that cannot be earned. Requiring obedience to a morality code - a set of standards - requires that we earn our salvation by obedience and are justified not by faith but by that obedience.
HmblySkTrth

Con

Thank you for starting this topic. This is an ongoing debate in Christianity. What we see in this presentation is strong support in the Bible that people cannot "earn" salvation. This is pretty well agreed upon by Christians.

However, a Christian must accept ALL Scripture. While some only accept the New Testament, even this presents problems when we examine passages that show people must turn away from sin, including sexual sins. I will later show how to reconcile what appear to be contradictory passages. That will be the main theme of my response.

But before I address that issue, I would like to respond to the first paragraph:

For a Christian, there is no such thing as sexual sin. The only sin is not loving others as we love ourselves. In fact, a requirement that Christians obey a sexual morality code is a rejection of salvation by grace. Love of fellowman is the only rule for a Christian.

I have two problems with this:

1. Jesus said to Love God and love your neighbor. (Mark 12:29-31) Notice that the MOST IMPORTANT ONE is to love God. Now combine this with John 14:15, where Jesus says, "if you love me, keep my commands." And throughout the New Testament adultery is mentioned when the topic of commandments are mentioned. In fact, it is easy to find commands to keep all of the original Ten Commandments, with the possible exception of keeping the Sabbath.

2. If a man loves his wife, would he cheat on her and commit adultery? He cannot because it would hurt her too much.
****************************
Okay, now on to the main focus of my response. First off, I do agree that proper Bible interpretation says we are saved by grace (and faith). According to the Bible, all have sinned and are unworthy. Nobody can earn salvation. We are in agreement there.

My contention is that other passages show we must refrain from evil practices to enter heaven. Here are some examples:

**Note** Scripture passages are quoted in New International Version

**********************************
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Corinthians 6:9-11)

so faith without deeds is dead. (James 2:26)

8 But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death. (Revelation 21:8)
**********************************

While the above passages appear to contradict the message that we are saved by grace, there is a way to reconcile these two messages.

We do not follow the law IN ORDER TO BE SAVED. Instead, we follow the law BECAUSE we are saved. A Christian accepts Jesus, not just as Savior from judgment, but also as Lord of life. A Christian must submit to God's authority. When this happens, there should be a change of heart and lifestyle. Here are examples:
***********************************
Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come:[a] The old has gone, the new is here! (2 Corinthians 5:17)

I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. (Galations 2:20)

17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. (Matthew 7:17-19)
************************************
These passages show a changed person. Notice also that in 1 Corinthians 6, after Paul says wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of heaven, he later says they are sanctified. This shows they have cleaned up their lives.

Another revealing passage is the woman caught in adultery, where Jesus convicts them by saying, "He who is without sin cast the first stone." (John 8:3-11) Notice afterward, Jesus did NOT say, continue committing adultery. Instead, he said, "Go now and leave your life of sin."

If a person becomes a Christian, and does not change, then faith is dead, according to James 2:26.

This does not mean that a person must be perfect in order to enter heaven. It simply means a person must try to follow a Biblical code of morals, rather than simply follow personal beliefs that contradict Scripture.

Now I will turn this over to my opponent for the next round. Thanks for an interesting topic.
Debate Round No. 1
GraceSaved72

Pro

A Christian must accept ALL scripture? Absolutely not! A Christian must accept and adhere to the Law of Christ and not the Law of Moses found in Old Testament scripture. That is the difference between a Jew and a Christian. A true Jew must follow the Law of Moses, and a true Christian cannot. If we must accept all scripture, then we are REQUIRED to stone disobedient sons to death at the city gates. If a woman is found not to have been a virgin at marriage, we MUST stone her to death on her father's doorstep. We also MUST NOT cut the hair at the sides of our heads, plant more than one crop, eat certain "unclean" foods, or wear cotton-polyester blend clothes. We also MUST sew tassels on our coats and build railings around the roofs of our houses. We MUST stone to death any woman who is raped in any city, because she obviously didn't scream for help. All of this is in Old Testament scripture. Additionally, if we accept Mark 16:17 and 18, we will drink drain cleaner and not be harmed. That is what the clear text says.

About adultery … I agree that it is sinful; however, it is sinful not because of the sex but because of the harm done. Thus, it is not a sexual sin, as such. A sexual sin would be something considered sin exclusively because of the sex, such as the purported sexual sins of premarital sex, homosexuality/bisexuality, consensual incest, and bestiality. As it turns out, none of these are sins for a Christian. Things such as rape, abuse, and adultery are, of course, sinful but because of the harm – the lack of love of fellowman.

Your entire argument rests on the erroneous assumption of the continued applicability of the Levitical morality code. What you espouse is not Christianity but a hybrid of Judaism and Christianity where we are subject to parts of the laws of both and parts of the scriptures of both. The new Testament couldn't be more clear that we have a new covenant or agreement with God and that that new covenant comes with a new high priest and a new law. What you want to do is make us subject to the law of the first covenant – a covenant that is no longer in force. You want to define sin and thus regulate our behavior according to the morality code of a law that has no authority over us. We have a new law now, so we have to define sin and regulate our behavior according to it and NOT according to the law it replaced. There are two types of definitions. There is the intensional definition, which is the dictionary definition, and there is the extensional definition, which is all those things that fit the intensional definition. The intensional definition of sin is a violation of applicable moral law. The extensional definition will be different according to what moral law applies. If the Law of Moses, with it's Levitical morality code applies, then a certain set of things are sinful, but if it does not apply – if we are instead subject to a different law, then the extensional definition of sin changes to include only those things that violate the new law.

I have provided scriptures which state clearly and emphatically that a Christian does ALL that is demanded when he loves others. You have provided scriptures that seem to say other things are required. There is no way that requiring obedience to a sexual morality code does not blatantly contradict these scriptures. Which are to be given effect? They cannot both be true.

I have also shown that the New Testament itself makes it emphatically clear that grace and works are mutually exclusive. You want to add works back into the equation, just at a different place. No matter where you add it into the equation, it is still works and it still negates grace. Your argument is that we do not have to earn our salvation before it is given but after. No matter how you slice it, your argument says we are not justified and are not saved in the end unless we adhere to a morality code. You are saying that the gift, freely given irrespective of (in fact because of) our failure to obey that code can be then taken away if we do not obey that code. You're saying we have to earn justification and salvation after the fact by obeying the Levitical morality code.

You state that a person must try to follow a Biblical code of morals in order to enter heaven. This is works and is inconsistent with grace. The passage you referenced in James is often misunderstood because of its use of the word WORKS in the KJV. A survey of other translations makes it clear that the passage is about faith without good deeds – faith without love of fellowman, which is an impossibility. True faith will move you to truly love others. You offer a very few New Testament passages that seem, without deeper reflection, to require obedience to the Levitical morality code, but is that what they really say? For the most part, they use terms such as SIN and IMMORALITY and OBEDIENCE which have, since the earliest times, been interpreted by the Judaizers to refer to the Levitical morality code. This cannot be the case, because the Law of Moses, with its commandments and regulations, was abolished by Christ. We cannot interpret morality and sin according to a law Christ died to free us from. If we were required to still obey those ordinances, then there was no need for Christ at all.

Gal 2:21 I don't turn my back on God's undeserved kindness. If we can be acceptable to God by obeying the Law, it was useless for Christ to die. (CEV)

We are acceptable to God because of one thing and one thing only: our belief in Christ. Salvation is a free gift that cannot be revoked.

Now, there are a very few New Testament passages that clearly advocate requiring obedience to select ordinances of the Levitical morality code. Those, however, are inconsistent with grace. The very premise and the practical effect of a prohibition is that compliance is required, so your position requires that we earn justification not by believing but by obeying the principles of a code destroyed by Christ. What if we believe in the Christ the New Testament says freed us from those? You see a grace which must be earned by works of obedience to an abolished law. The New Testament talks of a grace that is a FREE GIFT. It is called grace because it IS NOT DESERVED. Your theology has grace being first given and then revoked if we do not prove we deserve it by obeying the morality of a law Christ nailed to the cross.

The New Testament presents us with a disjunctive syllogism. We are either saved by grace or works, but not by both. It can only be one or the other. Since the vast, vast, vast majority of the scriptures say it's by grace, and indeed the Good News itself was salvation by grace, it cannot be and is not by works of obedience to rules. Yet you and the rest of Judaized Christianity insist on adding works back in. By requiring obedience to moral rules, you require works. Rather than trust in the grace of God and the power of the blood of Christ to save us, you say that's not good enough. You say we must also strive to obey the moral rules he did away with. What an insult to Christ!

You completely failed to discredit the passages that say all that is demanded of a Christian is love of fellowman or explain how requiring that we try to obey a Biblical morality code is not works and therefore a rejection of grace. I would love to see these two things in your response.
Three choices for round 3:
whether the morality of the Law of Moses is still valid;
the scriptural requisites for justification and salvation; or
sin and the changed person.

You pick, and I'll start.
HmblySkTrth

Con

It looks like my opponent cannot get past a faulty view that salvation is one or the other, grace or works. Even though there is an undeniable case for BOTH, he continues to insist they are mutually exclusive.

When I said we must accept ALL Scripture, I was referring to his viewpoint that we only look at the New Testament. But it is clear that he does not even accept this. His insistence that we throw out the ENTIRE code ignores the fact that there is repeated support in the New Testament to avoid sexual immorality. Sexual immorality is clearly defined in several ways in the New Testament, but my opponent thinks we can ignore this and use our own definitions.

My opponent also wants to turn this into a contest about who can show the MOST Scripture, which is irrelevant. This approach is faulty because it is implying that the Bible has errors. His only response (?) is, "Ignore those passages and focus exclusively on the passages I want to talk about." This approach does not deal with problem passages; it only tosses them aside.

My approach shows how all Scripture works together and does not contradict itself. Yes, the Bible is clear that we cannot "earn" our salvation, since all have sinned. But we must not ignore a very powerful theme running throughout the New Testament: REPENTANCE

Putting faith in Jesus does not mean accepting a free gift of salvation and continuing our sinful ways. It means turning away from past sins and living for Christ. It requires a changed lifestyle. After all, Christians are ambassadors for Christ (2 Corinthians 5:19-21), and must properly represent Jesus. Here are several passages that show we must repent and turn away from sin when we become Christians:

********************************
21 You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God. 22 Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord in the hope that he may forgive you for having such a thought in your heart. 23 For I see that you are full of bitterness and captive to sin." (Acts 8:21-23)

19 "So then, King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the vision from heaven. 20 First to those in Damascus, then to those in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and then to the Gentiles, I preached that they should repent and turn to God and demonstrate their repentance by their deeds. (Acts 26:19-20)

31 Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law. (Romans 3:31)

20 For I am afraid that when I come I may not find you as I want you to be, and you may not find me as you want me to be. I fear that there may be discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, slander, gossip, arrogance and disorder. 21 I am afraid that when I come again my God will humble me before you, and I will be grieved over many who have sinned earlier and have not repented of the impurity, sexual sin and debauchery in which they have indulged. (2 Corinthians 12:20-21)

4 Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness. 5 But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin. 6 No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him.
7 Dear children, do not let anyone lead you astray. The one who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous. 8 The one who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil's work. 9 No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God. 10 This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not God's child, nor is anyone who does not love their brother and sister. (1 John 3:4-10)

4 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age 6 and who have fallen[a] away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. (Hebrews 6:4-6)

26 If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, 27 but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. 28 Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? (Hebrews 10:26-30)
**********************************
While I could try to make this a contest, seeing who has MORE Scripture to support their view, I will stop here because the message is clear: Christians must not only have faith in Jesus, but must also turn from sin.

The message of grace and forgiveness does not say to continue sinning; it only says we are not perfect and cannot "earn" our salvation. But total disregard of the law is unacceptable. When we sin, we must repent and move forward, rather than continue sinning and taking God's forgiveness for granted.

My opponent admits that the Bible says we must follow some rules, yet is very selective about which passages to follow and which to ignore. He is also selective about how to define sexual immorality.

He believes that adultery is only wrong because it harms spouse. If this is the case, then not all adultery would be wrong because some married couples agree to have an "open marriage." In these cases, adultery is not harmful because both agree and nobody is hurt. But there is no distinction in Scripture, because adultery is ALWAYS wrong, even if it is not dishonest or harmful to spouse.

Here is another problem passage for those who say there is no sexual sin for Christians:

*******************************
12 "I have the right to do anything," you say—but not everything is beneficial. "I have the right to do anything"—but I will not be mastered by anything. 13 You say, "Food for the stomach and the stomach for food, and God will destroy them both." The body, however, is not meant for sexual immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. 14 By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also. 15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! 16 Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, "The two will become one flesh."[b] 17 But whoever is united with the Lord is one with him in spirit.[c]
18 Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body. 19 Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20 you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies. (1 Corinthians 6:12-20)
************************************

According to my opponent, sex with a prostitute would be okay for a single, unattached man. This man has not cheated on wife or girlfriend, yet nothing in this passage singles out men who are in a committed relationship. Clearly, the passages is for ALL Christians.

While people can say that sex between honest consenting adults is okay, they cannot say this view is in agreement with the Christian Bible.
Debate Round No. 2
GraceSaved72

Pro

GraceSaved72 forfeited this round.
HmblySkTrth

Con

Please extend my arguments. Thanks.
Debate Round No. 3
GraceSaved72

Pro

GraceSaved72 forfeited this round.
HmblySkTrth

Con

Extending my arguments. Thanks.
Debate Round No. 4
GraceSaved72

Pro

GraceSaved72 forfeited this round.
HmblySkTrth

Con

Please vote. Thanks.
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Buckethead31594 5 years ago
Buckethead31594
Jesus didn't come to abolish the law, but to fufill it. He says so himself.

(Matthew 5:17)

God's law is not abolished, therefore, Christians are held accountable to the same sins that everyone else struggles with.
Posted by DAN123 5 years ago
DAN123
Did i say something about rejecting salvation by "grace through faith"?? No i did not! We both believe that! Except if you believe it by "faith only". And we are not talking about salvation here, we are talking about if there is such sin as sexual immorality! And why do you keep implying that if we believe that there's a sin like sexual immorality we reject justification by faith? Was Paul rejecting justification by faith when he said "Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body.". Was Peter rejecting salvation by grace through faith when he said " Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul.".
Posted by GraceSaved72 5 years ago
GraceSaved72
DAN123, you convinced me, so let's just reject justification by faith and salvation by grace and put our salvation back on ourselves. I agree. The plan of God sucks. God's power and the blood of Christ is just not good enough to justify and save us so let's earn our way into heaven, since our feeble efforts to obey an abolished morality code from a superseded covenant are obviously needed to supplement the power of God. Who was I to think that the design of God and the blood of Christ were enough? I am so ashamed. You have really taught me.

No! The New Testament is EMPHATIC that Christ destroyed the Law of Moses, including the Levitical morality code. It is also emphatic that our justification is by faith and NOT by obedience to the Law of Moses. It is also emphatic that we are saved by the grace of God and NOT by anything we do or don't do - that salvation is a free gift. This is what the Good News was all about. Your position completely and utterly negates grace. It replaces justification by faith with justification by obedience to the Law of Moses. It replaces salvation by grace with salvation earned by living according to a set of standards. That was the plan of justification and salvation under the first covenant. I guess you'd rather have that than the New Covenant Christ bought for us with his blood. I bet that makes him feel really good!

You use one single, solitary verse to negate all of the verses that say the Law of Moses was abolished, Christ freed us from that law, we are not to obey it, and all that is required of us is love of fellowman. In fact, you use that verse to negate the entire New Covenant by bringing back the plan of justification and salvation from the first covenant. You reject God's grace in favor of your efforts to obey rules. Good luck with that!
Posted by DAN123 5 years ago
DAN123
The New Covenant(Testament) says that the Old Testament is abolished..right? So what is written in the New Testament TODAY is the New Testament. And saying that "the New Testament also says in numerous places that the Law of Moses, which is where all those rules came from" is not a solid proof that we will exclude other NEW TESTAMENT COMMANDMENTS written by NEW TESTAMENT PEOPLE. Oh and Please take a look at these verses pertaining the old testament--Rom 15:4; 2Ti 3:16 etc.
Posted by GraceSaved72 5 years ago
GraceSaved72
DAN123, the New Testament also says in numerous places that the Law of Moses, which is where all those rules came from, is not for Christians and that if we try to obey it we reject Christ. It says repeatedly that ALL that is required of a Christian is that we love others as we love ourselves. Are there contradictions in the New Testament? There sure are, but the central message of the Good News is salvation by GRACE through FAITH according to the NEW COVENANT. We have to resolve the conflicts in a way that is consistent with grace, otherwise we render Christ's sacrifice meaningless.
Posted by DAN123 5 years ago
DAN123
uhh.. i have a question for GraceSaved72, so we do not sin if we commit sexual Immorality that the new Testament clearly says in I Cor. 6:18 :Flee from "sexual immorality". Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person "sins" against his own body. and other verses like: Hebrews 13:4; Ephesians 5:5; 1 Corinthians 7:2; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; Galatians 5:19 and other supporting verses.
Posted by HmblySkTrth 5 years ago
HmblySkTrth
Can I accept the challenge now, and still have three days to post my response? I would love to have this debate, but I need to formulate my response.

I don't know how this works yet.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Buckethead31594 5 years ago
Buckethead31594
GraceSaved72HmblySkTrthTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro loses points due to forfeiting.
Vote Placed by phantom 5 years ago
phantom
GraceSaved72HmblySkTrthTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Triple forfeit, and pro made ridiculous arguments from the very beginning.