How goes it?

Thanks for the previous response. If you don't mind I would like to move on from hell and hear your opinion on another topic that concerns Christian morality.

So from what I can tell, Christianity seems to be a form of moral relativism. How so? Because the Christian God’s moral commands apparently changed from the old covenant to the new covenant. Does this changing of moral commands between covenants not imply that the Christian God could issue yet another covenant in the future where he changes the moral law once again? And then yet another covenant at an even later date, and so on, indefinitely? This is simply unacceptable! God’s moral commands should reflect his eternal and unchanging nature!

But I fully see the motivation to , due to the morally repugnant commands in the Old Testament. What are your thoughts on them? Do we need to follow them or not? One repugnant command I have in mind is Deuteronomy 21:18:

If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: 19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; 20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. 21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

And what about the doctrine of the incarnation’s butchering of the law of identity? If one accepts that Jesus is both man and God then you have pretty much thrown logic out of the window, which is particularly ironic (and embarrassing) for presupp’ apologists who argue that Christianity is a “necessary precondition” for logic. How can a religious philosophy based on a logical contradiction possibly serve as the basis for logic?!