One of the ones which is emerging just now, for instance, is the whole sexuality, sex and gender debacle. The (self-styled) Christian LGBT advocates will challenge all the OT prohibitions on gender-deviate behavior because it's obsolete Mosaic law: "We are not under the Law."
Then they'll challenge the NT prohibitions because --- they will argue ---they don't refer to ALL homosexuality in general (a word that didn't even exist until the 19th century) but only against certain specific corrupt practices of late-classical antiquity, e.g. the practices of the arsenokoitai and malakoi.
Those are the Greek words used in the Epistles for those who engage in specific kinds of sexual conduct.
These --- they will argue --- specifically refer to temple prostitution and pederasty. (Or some such thing --- they have various explanations.) But not to men with mutual, consenting, and stable life-partnerships, like that sweet darling Mayor Buttigieg and his "husband". And why? Because they--- unlike the arsenokoitai and malakoi --- are "married."
Concluding their interpretation: dear Pete and Chasten are not arsenokoitai or malakoi, and also not whoremongers or adulterers, either. No, indeedy. They are "married," and "Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge."(Hebrews 13:4)
But the point is, that it can't be definitively refuted n the basis of the Bible alone, because if can be plausibly argued that Mosaic law IS inapplicable to us, and that Paul DID condemn only temple prostitution and pederasty, there's no way for Christian moral advocates to argue further except by referring to either Tradition (what the Church has always taught) or Natural Law (what can be known by reason.).
And some people, even here at FR, will reject that out of hand.
OK. So that's just one example.
There are tons of similar examples, but I hope you can see the overall challenge.
"Not applicable in terms of salvation"?
Scripture says that "all those who practice such things deserve death, and not only those who do them, but those who approve of those who do them." Paul says says that none of those who practice such things will inherit the kingdom of God.
I think it has something to do with salvation.
Arsenokoitai is a compound word: arseno is the word for “a male,” and koitai is the word for “mat” or “bed.” Put the two halves together, and the word means “a male bed”—that is, a person who makes use of a “male-only bed” or a “bed for males.” And, truthfully, that’s all the information we need to understand the intent of 1 Corinthians 6:9.
https://www.gotquestions.org/arsenokoitai.html
This is one of the reasons we study the Greek.
It is incumbent upon the believer to know this and to do their homework.
An appeal to Romans 1 would bring this issue into clarity.
Also, an appeal to Jesus talking about marriage being between a man and woman and why the man leaves his home.
But the point is, that it can't be definitively refuted n the basis of the Bible alone,...
Well, yes it can...if one knows their Scripture.
Will there be some who are "hard of hearing" and reject the message?
Yep.
because if can be plausibly argued that Mosaic law IS inapplicable to us,
again...as far as a requirement for salvation, the Mosaic Law does not apply to the believer in Christ.
... and that Paul DID condemn only temple prostitution and pederasty, there's no way for Christian moral advocates to argue further except by referring to either Tradition (what the Church has always taught) or Natural Law (what can be known by reason.).
Again, all of this can be refuted using Scripture, the New Testament, if one knows their Scripture. I'd have no problem in appealing to anatomy either as there are some body parts not designed for certain uses and the ensuing health problems associated with these.
But this is different discussion than a requirement for salvation.