“Does that imply that incest is a moral sin that transcends all time? So God created a world where mankind in order to obey reproducing had to commit moral sin to do that? Was Abraham guilty of that also?”

As N.C. Christians, both you and I are beyond this static enumeration of sin. We both know it is not about that. Let me paraphrase Leo Cox. Perfect love is not perfect performance or perfect skill or perfect human nature. Rather, it is rendering obedience in relationship to both the God of love and the great principle undergirding His law. (Cox, Wesley’s Concept of Perfection)

With that understanding and the principles presented in Scripture all N.C. Christians should be fully aware of when and how these situations become sinful and when and how they would be appropriate in God’s eyes.

“I could just as easily ask why CT has the compulsion to cram everything together with covenants not mentioned or hinted at in the Bible and deny the explicit passages in the NT which demand a break from the OC.”

We can go around and around on this one, but it seems painfully clear that the NT does not teach the “break” that NCTs push into these texts. It is all about the experience, not the historical covenant in many of these texts.

Blessings,

The New Testament repeatedly speaks against inordinate and unnatural lusts.

Does that imply that incest is a moral sin that transcends all time? So God created a world where mankind in order to obey reproducing had to commit moral sin to do that? Was Abraham guilty of that also?

Is that the answer you were referring to? So a good answer to my question is the assumption that incest = inordinate and unnatural lust?

I do not advocate incest, I have stated why I am against it. I have a scripturally backed consistent position though.

As to this statement:

James, I just don’t understand the NCT compulsion to compartmentalize the Bible. This compartmentalization is just not supported by an accurate historical reading of the NT.

I could just as easily ask why CT has the compulsion to cram everything together with covenants not mentioned or hinted at in the Bible and deny the explicit passages in the NT which demand a break from the OC.

“None of the CTers answered my question: on what basis do you declare that incest is a sin today? Is it because it is found in the law and therefore binding?

How do you know it is still a sin? Is it because Paul said so?”

I believe Davide gave a pretty good answer from a “CT” point of view.

James, I just don’t understand the NCT compulsion to compartmentalize the Bible. This compartmentalization is just not supported by an accurate historical reading of the NT.

Blessings,

Both issues are not relegated to theory.

None of the CTers answered my question: on what basis do you declare that incest is a sin today? Is it because it is found in the law and therefore binding?

How do you know it is still a sin? Is it because Paul said so?

“Without the OT Sabbath we would never know that God calls us to corporately worship Him on a weekly basis, or to take regular time off from laboring for the necessities of life, or actually stopping what we need and love to do to consecrate time to the worship of the Lord. Simply because things aren’t explicit in the NT is no reason to abolish it; we don’t with other commands, we shouldn’t with the Sabbath.”

“I’m really tired of hearing the incest.”

I simply brought it up (on another thread no less) to demonstrate that NCT often does the very same thing it accuses CT of doing: taking what is explicit in the OT and implicit in the NT, and affirming a precept. But I agree. It is a silly issue.

Davide said:

“Can you name just one? Why not? Incest is something that is extremely unnatural.”

Actually, I know someone who has committed incest. Actually, you know him too. As a professing believer as well. He has since repented, though it was not easy for him to do. Paul also addressed this in 1 Corinthians. It is not as uncommon as you think. I would strongly prefer not to name names, and that you’ll trust me as a brother that I am not lying.

Davide said:

“The New Testament repeatedly speaks against inordinate and unnatural lusts.”

Yes, this is the point I was making with James. OT law is very specific in its application to Israel. We are in an entirely different age and covenant, so the word-for-word application of OT is often different, with the essence clearly remaining the same. Whether it be with idolatry, discipline of our children, sorcery, witchcraft, or sexual perversions, there are a variety of explicit OT commands that are only hinted at in the NT that all Christians agree are ’sin’. One example is how you and James do this with incest. Reformed theologians see the same with the Sabbath.

Davide said:

“Wow! What would we ever do without that chapter in Leviticus on incest?! If those four verses weren’t there, I’m sure believers and unbelievers alike would scramble to marry their sibling or parent, because, after all, the NT gives us complete license to to have sex with our siblings. (I hope you sense my sarcasm).”

What’s funny is that this statement undermines the NCT position. If it wasn’t explicit in the OT, we’d never know it was an inordinate and unnatural lust, implicit in the NT instruction. The Law of God cannot be delegated to one covenant or one testament alone.

Davide said:

“The NT never mentions the word “incest.” True. The NT never condemns the practice in principle? That’s absolutely a most ludicrous and myopic understanding of the NT.”

I agree. Which is why I brought the issue up. The Old is often explicit where the New is implicit; that is a proper understanding of the “appropriate historical context to the NT” that Eric mentioned above.

Again, my only point: we see the Sabbath explicit in the OT, and only hinted at in the NT. Without the OT Sabbath we would never know that God calls us to corporately worship Him on the Sabbath, or to take regular time off from laboring for the necessities of life, or actually stopping what we need and love to do to consecrate time to the worship of the Lord. Simply because things aren’t explicit in the NT is no reason to abolish it; we don’t with other commands, we shouldn’t with the Sabbath.

“The NT never mentions the word “incest.” True. The NT never condemns the practice in principle? That’s absolutely a most ludicrous and myopic understanding of the NT.”

You sure do sound like a CT:)

Blessings,

1. Question: How many people have you known in your entire lifetime, believer or nonbeliever that relished a sexual relationship with a close relative? Can you name just one? Why not? Incest is something that is extremely unnatural. If that’s not enough, incest is so unnatural and uncommon, it is not even preached against in our pulpits today. The New Testament repeatedly speaks against inordinate and unnatural lusts.

2. Ask 50 unbelievers if they think it is ’sexually immoral’ to have sex with your sister or mother and they would all reply with an absolute “yes.” The NT word “fornication” (pornea) includes any kind of ’sexual immorality’– be it, adultery, pornography, homosexuality, lesbianism, beastiality, incest. etc.

3. Wow! What would we ever do without that chapter in Leviticus on incest?! If those four verses weren’t there, I’m sure believers and unbelievers alike would scramble to marry their sibling or parent, because, after all, the NT gives us complete license to to have sex with our siblings. (I hope you sense my sarcasm).

The NT never mentions the word “incest.” True. The NT never condemns the practice in principle? That’s absolutely a most ludicrous and myopic understanding of the NT.

I will not respond back to any comments on this post.

“My objection was to his statement that those who also do not put special emphasis on that same day are in sin. That is where he crossed the line from biblical freedom to rabbinical bondage.”

Anyone who puts special emphasis on any law and tries to add to it and elevate it above the Biblical standard is danger of falling into rabbinical bondage, or more precisely pharisaic bondage. However, both CT and NCT proponents are guilty of this. In fact, we all are. The issue is not what is sin, the true issue is that we are SINNERS. I believe NCT in their attempt to redefine the Law, because of their unwillingness to apply appropriate historical context to the NT, have somehow missed this vital point.

Blessings,

I only brought up incest to demonstrate how the NT does not give us a strict code as to what to obey/not obey, and that we look to both testaments to understand our duties to God and man. And like incest, the Sabbath isn’t repeated, but still binds us to obedience. That’s all I wanted to point out.