Controversial Christian theology

[Askthepizzaguy]

It wasn't trolling, it was a serious point. But I will stop posting on your threads as per your request.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

It wasn't trolling, it was a serious point. But I will stop posting on your threads as per your request.

It's very simple, the Old Testemant isn't accurate; if it was we wouldn't need the New Testemant.

As I said though, you know my position on this (or you should by now.)

[Sigurd]

I would like to point out that any "God changed his mind" arguments can be countered. I know as I have gone through them all in my pro-agnostic debates. Even the ones where it is translated to "God changed his mind" in the OT can be explained in such a way as to be pre-meditated on God's part and support His omniscience.

The circumcision thing is a covenant and even though it is worded as everlasting - it was not everlasting. You have the Abrahamic covenant of circumcision and later a Mosaic circumcision and then the New covenant where the physical symbol of circumcision of the flesh was replaced with a symbolic circumcision of the heart.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Calvin goes as far as to argue that the Old and New Covenant are one and the same, simply under different administrations.

In the old one, all the ceremonial laws point to Christ. In the new one, we know of Christ more directly. So all the OT saints were saved by Christ's blood, just like the rest of us.