I think this point could use more commentary and context. There are many verses which deal with “what now if the law?”, and I think a fuller understanding requ

I think this point could use more commentary and context. There are many verses which deal with “what now if the law?”, and I think a fuller understanding requires reading more than one of them. For example, there is, of course, the parts about the dietary restrictions part of the law. But that isn’t all. Male converts to Judaism were required to be circumcised, but NT verses say that this is not required to convert to Christianity (though, not phrased like that of course), and in talking about this, it also talks about what the law succeeds in, and what it, well, not fails in, but, it’s insufficiency in the face of human failure? I’m saying this not to say that the NT condones sex between two cisgender men (indeed, I believe that at one point after the resurrection, some apostles are on an island, and are telling the people there about Christ, and the text describes the homosexual sexual practices practiced by those native to the island as (in at least one common translation. This is by memory.) as “unnatural”, which seems to me to indicate disapproval, though I haven’t looked at commentary on how this was worded in the original Greek.) My apologies for not including links and citations; I haven’t gotten out of bed yet this morning, and am typing this on my phone.