while first of all its not why Christians don't follow it it's how the bible says something and then says something that contradicts that later

and also why do Christians do that? why do they pick and choose what to follow? why can you eat whatever you want even though it says no to but then you go preaching about how you can't be gay because of what your bible says?

but the bible was written in older times like it was so long ago if it was real I don't see who any of the rules would still apply today sense so much has changed

why*

and I'm not gonna listen to people going oh you can't do this because look what the bible says because A) I don't believe in the bible so why would I even care what it had to say? and B) I'm not gonna follow its rules when people who believe can't even follow the whole thing

and don't you guys follow the Ten Commandments and aren't those in the Old Testament?

so then aren't you picking and choosing out of the Old Testament?

but what makes them any more important it's the who bible "gods teaching" and stuff?

I just find it stupid how people must follow this line but choose to ignore others but I really don't care cause I don't believe in any of it so

well I've been forced to be Christian my entire life so I get more the you think

thanks your better then some religious people I know who do force religion on people so good job on that :) (not in a mean way)

The Genesis verse was before the Fall, when everything was good. The Leviticus verse was after the Fall, and evil came into the world.

Verses* AND Christians don't follow the laws of Leviticus anymore. Read Acts 10:9-16.

We don't follow that specific law, that is.

but why not follow others why do Christians do that?

if youre going to follow the bible and God shouldn't you actually follow the thing as a whole?

you're*

cause you go around telling people this is wrong and this is wrong but don't follow the whole bible yourselves

If you read the verses I told you to read, you would understand. The Lord spoke to Peter in a vision, revoking the laws of Leviticus about clean and unclean animals to eat. I am following what the Bible says. Jews are the ones that still follow that law, not Christians.

so the bible does contradict itself like this post says

No, it doesn't. You aren't listening. Here, maybe you'll understand better with an example of a similar situation. Say that a country has a law because it's in a certain situation. After several years, the country manages to get out of that situation, so the law is no longer needed, and is abolished. The laws don't contradict each other because the first law doesn't apply anymore. The laws about what to eat and/or not eat were made to keep the people clean from sin, since the Savior, who is Jesus Christ, hadn't come yet. After Jesus came and died on the cross for our sins, there was no need for the people to be careful about what they eat to stay clean, because they could become spiritually clean by accepting Jesus as their Savior.

contradicting means going against your original thought of what you said so they may not need it but it still contradicts itself

So if American law says that gays aren't allowed to marry, then a new law comes along and says that they are, then the law is contradicting itself and therefore all American law should be ignore and counted as discredible?

You have no argument for this now. I just explained it clear as day.

but the laws do contradict themselves

this post is about them contradicting themselves

which they do

so it's right

No, it's not. If a law is not in affect, then it cannot be contradicted because it is no longer in use to be contradicted.

and when did the law come out of effect? was it when these where said be issue then it still is contradicting

and why does it even matter? you believe I don't a contradicting bible isn't going to make either of us change our opinions so why bother?

The law came out of effect during New Testament times. Read Acts 10:9-16, and you can read about it.

It matters because I believe I should defend my faith, and so that others who see your posts won't be influenced the wrong way.

well is acts before or after those quotes?

well if people have a strong enough faith these shouldn't effect them

"if they think an artist can destroy their faith then their faith is rather fragile" -Marilyn Manson

(that's just what came to my mind when I read what you said ^)

Acts happened several thousand years after the verses on your post.

I meant people who aren't sure. The agnostics. OR people who aren't sure about their own religion outside of Christianity, and are looking for answers about it.

so then these verses contradicted themselves before it came out of effect

well people who aren't sure should see opinions of people who believe in God and atheists so they should be able to decide for themselves

No. The Genesis verse was before The Fall, before sin entered the world. The Leviticus verse was after the Fall, therefore they are separate. Because Adam and Eve sinned, laws had to be put in place. The Acts verses I mentioned were after the coming of Christ, and those laws were no longer needed.

But they don't need to be given false information about Christianity and the Bible.

ok where both of these verses before or after acts? it's that simple

the quotes aren't false they say that in the bible

Both were before, but they were also in different time periods themselves. It's pretty simple.

But they are being misinterpreted.

no you see you said the law didn't come out until acts which was after both

which means they contradicted until acts

which means the bible did contradict so it's not misinterpreted

that's pretty simple

NO. I said that the Genesis and Leviticus verses were separated by the Fall. The Fall caused new laws to have to be put in place. Sin was not in the world when the Genesis verse was written. In Leviticus it was present. Sin caused the Israelites to have to do things to keep themselves from being unclean.

but you said act was the one that took it out of law?

Yes, the law that was made in Leviticus.

so that means they contradicted themselves at one point before one was taken away

it's like if I saw you cant sit there and then I say you can until I take back one they contradict each other

I apologize for a previous error I made. The Genesis verse was after the Fall, but it was directly after the Great Flood, in which the world was nearly renewed to its state before the fall.

In Leviticus, God was telling them new laws, since even though Hod had eradicated all sinful men through the Flood, the people still returned to their sinful ways. The laws were made because of this change.

but we're either said to my be valid? or did he hair give a new thing?

because if one wasn't taken back it would still contradict

oml that made no sense autocorrect changes it sry

were either Said to not be valid or did he just give a new law*

The Lord gave them a new law that would apply to their situation. The old law was then no longer used by the Israelites.

they didn't eat animals in genesis 9 because there wasn't sin in the picture yet

soy here was something saying it wasn't a law anymore?

so there*

^dont act like you know more about someone's religion than they do. you don't.

I've gone to church my whole life because my parents make me so I know more then you think

hearing it isn't the same as taking it into your heart

but that doesn't mean I can't understand what contradicting means

the post says two points go against each other's meaning you don't have to have God in your heart to understand that it's pretty simple

you just don't get it

what don't I get?

the meaning of this post is pretty simple

these are Mosaic Laws. When Jesus died, they became obsolete. these aren't laws that apply to Christians. they apply to Jews

the Bible is like a story. when sin came, everything changed. Leviticus gives the laws on how to please God despite your sin. and then Jesus came, making those laws obsolete

but it's not saying they don't apply to Christians

it's saying the contradict which they do

that's because the bible is a story

they*

they contradict because there were different circumstances when each of them was said

they contradict because one was said when there was no sin, and the other two we're said as a law on how to please God despite sin. that's why they contradict

so they contradict as this post says

but they never said one was cancelled they said they just made a new law

but it's still said it and then later contradicts it so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

but if I say you can't sit here and then later change my mind saying you can sit here those statements still contradict it's like the 18th and 21st amendment of the 21st amendment didn't take away the 18th then they would contradict even tho time went on in between them

if*

ok believe what you want that's fine all I was doing was posting what I believe

the bible specifically states that the old law passed away, meaning it wasn't supposed to be used anymore, and that Jesus became the new law. and before that, it was specifically stated that the laws were created to atone for sin. so, no, they don't contradict because one was first nullified

I really don't care anymore so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I still don't believe in the bible so what's the point I'm tired of debating over a pretty stupid subject