I responded as follows.
Yeah, but I can't imagine an omnipotent and omnibenevolent god would write the truth on our hearts with various intensities or not all for some people. Nor one that would write different laws for different times and cultures.
The laws varying according to time and place are a different matter. Look at the practical laws concerning harvesting. I live in a city. Was that law written for me? The ceremonial laws were for ancient theocratic Israel meant to point to Christ, why do you think they should apply today given that Messiah has already come?
To which replied:
I'd be curious to know where you find scriptural support for the idea that there are divisions in the law, such as ceremonial law, dietary law, etc..Ryan claims to have been a Christian yet he seems to have forgotten all the places where the ceremonial laws are directed to the people of Israel and not all of humanity. However instead of focusing on such passages, why don't we look at how Paul dealt with his question. I'm amazed how often it comes up because it should have been put to rest 2000 years ago. To follow the ceremonial laws would mean to become a Jew. From the beginning there were those thought to be Christian means you must also be a Jew. Paul dealt with this head on.
And even if you find some or stretch something else to accommodate yourself, you are still stuck with the very inconvenient line about jots and tittles. Surely even the parts about the harvest are included in every jot and tittle
15Brothers, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case. 16The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say "and to seeds," meaning many people, but "and to your seed," meaning one person, who is Christ. 17What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 18For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on a promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise.
19What, then, was the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was put into effect through angels by a mediator. 20A mediator, however, does not represent just one party; but God is one.
21Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. 22But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.
23Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. 24So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. 25Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.
- Galatians 3:15-25
Paul affirmed the Law not set it aside. IT has it's place but Jesus fulfilled the Law. The New Testament is very clear point. I did ask Ryan the following question:
how do you explain those who become born-again who were not raised as Christians or in a Christian context?
Missionaries? Also, probably the same way I'd explain Christians leaving the faith or becoming Muslim, Buddhist, etc...
He is making my point for me. It is silly to argue that the only reason people are Christians is because they are raised in Christian families. He said: "I think the "pull" of Christianity for today's westerner is that western civilization has been steeping in the story for 1650 years. Probably the same reasons Muslims like Islam." He just admitted that isn't the case.