|
Post by sephora on Aug 26, 2007 15:02:56 GMT -5
The idea that homosexuals are not loved by God, or that sexual preference has ANYTHING to do with spirituality, is the most ludicrous, ridiculous thing ever. I don't CARE what Paul says, quite frankly, because his opinions on women were also less than savory. I think he was bigoted, ignorant, and not inspired by anyone but himself. It turns my stomach that people even consider any of the prejudiced words that have come out of his mouth. He has said some good things, but to me they are poisoned by his partiality and judgmental spirit. Furthermore, it is a known fact that the Roman empire changed parts of the King James bible to match their own beliefs: that women and homosexuals were inferior. So perhaps Paul was not bigoted and ignorant at all- perhaps the poor guy didn't even say any of those things. All I know is that you never read of Jesus belittling women OR homosexuals. He doesn't really even broach those topics. The lack of tolerance and lack of loving spirit towards other people makes me sick. That's all I have to say right now.
|
|
|
Post by Are you on Aug 26, 2007 15:24:30 GMT -5
Are you a lesbian?!?
Sounds like your the one being a hater.
|
|
|
Post by randall on Aug 26, 2007 17:05:18 GMT -5
Sephora, thank you for your thoughts on Paul. I also have wondered abought Paul. There is a lot of legalism that comes from some of Pauls letters. Some of his thoughts are practised and some of them are not. It is what ever fits then the workers us it. We have to remember that paul was a Pharrise before. I do not believe that Paul ever overcame all of that. He had some marks of Pharrisism in his life to the end. So many of these( one true way) groups take and use Pauls letters as a pattern. Randall
|
|
|
Post by wingsofaneagle on Aug 26, 2007 17:11:30 GMT -5
I think it is Pauls teachings that have given the workers free rein to make whatever rules they decide. It couldnt be Jesus.
|
|
|
Post by To Sephora on Aug 26, 2007 18:05:44 GMT -5
The idea that homosexuals are not loved by God, or that sexual preference has ANYTHING to do with spirituality, is the most ludicrous, ridiculous thing ever. I don't CARE what Paul says, quite frankly, because his opinions on women were also less than savory. I think he was bigoted, ignorant, and not inspired by anyone but himself. It turns my stomach that people even consider any of the prejudiced words that have come out of his mouth. He has said some good things, but to me they are poisoned by his partiality and judgmental spirit. Furthermore, it is a known fact that the Roman empire changed parts of the King James bible to match their own beliefs: that women and homosexuals were inferior. So perhaps Paul was not bigoted and ignorant at all- perhaps the poor guy didn't even say any of those things. All I know is that you never read of Jesus belittling women OR homosexuals. He doesn't really even broach those topics. The lack of tolerance and lack of loving spirit towards other people makes me sick. That's all I have to say right now. You don't think sex is a spiritual issue? Wow you are pretty superficial. I bet you are young and idealistic and naive and gullible too. You remind me of me when I was your age. I was the gingerbread man.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2007 18:30:43 GMT -5
Sex is a strong spiritual issue with God. It astonishes me when people who read the bible try to say it isn't. Paul was a Pharisee, but do you think God allowed a Pharisee's voice to guide us? Do you think that God gave us His Son, and the New Testament, only to see His message corrupted or defeated by a church?
|
|
|
Post by randall on Aug 26, 2007 18:47:35 GMT -5
I have seen times when people have acknowledged Paul's teaching of that of Christ. Has made me wonder if they are a disciple of Jesus or Paul. And as far as sex and marriage, it is from the beginning of the Bible all the way through. Randall
|
|
|
Post by Jessi on Aug 26, 2007 19:30:04 GMT -5
The idea that homosexuals are not loved by God, or that sexual preference has ANYTHING to do with spirituality, is the most ludicrous, ridiculous thing ever. I don't CARE what Paul says, quite frankly, because his opinions on women were also less than savory. I think he was bigoted, ignorant, and not inspired by anyone but himself. It turns my stomach that people even consider any of the prejudiced words that have come out of his mouth. He has said some good things, but to me they are poisoned by his partiality and judgmental spirit. Furthermore, it is a known fact that the Roman empire changed parts of the King James bible to match their own beliefs: that women and homosexuals were inferior. So perhaps Paul was not bigoted and ignorant at all- perhaps the poor guy didn't even say any of those things. All I know is that you never read of Jesus belittling women OR homosexuals. He doesn't really even broach those topics. The lack of tolerance and lack of loving spirit towards other people makes me sick. That's all I have to say right now. I take it you don't believe the Holy Bible? I always thought God was the one who gave Paul the idea about homosexuals in Lev 18:22 and other places in the giving of the law to Moses . . . but I could be wrong. Maybe he didn't realize the law said that, but just thought it up on his own and it just happened to coincide with the Levitical Law? it is a known fact that the Roman empire changed parts of the King James bible to match their own beliefs: that women and homosexuals were inferior.I have read that the Roman Empire in its heighth of glory (relatively peaceful years) ruled most of Europe, Africa and Asia from Approx. 27 B.C. to A.D. 14? The King James Bible was translated around 1600 . . . I have never heard before what you are saying. Tell me more. Christ's Forever, Jessi
|
|
|
Post by Brother Schrock on Aug 27, 2007 10:56:02 GMT -5
The idea that homosexuals are not loved by God, or that sexual preference has ANYTHING to do with spirituality, is the most ludicrous, ridiculous thing ever. I don't CARE what Paul says, quite frankly, because his opinions on women were also less than savory. I think he was bigoted, ignorant, and not inspired by anyone but himself. It turns my stomach that people even consider any of the prejudiced words that have come out of his mouth. He has said some good things, but to me they are poisoned by his partiality and judgmental spirit. Furthermore, it is a known fact that the Roman empire changed parts of the King James bible to match their own beliefs: that women and homosexuals were inferior. So perhaps Paul was not bigoted and ignorant at all- perhaps the poor guy didn't even say any of those things. All I know is that you never read of Jesus belittling women OR homosexuals. He doesn't really even broach those topics. The lack of tolerance and lack of loving spirit towards other people makes me sick. That's all I have to say right now. Utterly brilliant. Thanks for opening my eyes to this. As such, I've taken an pair of scissors to my Bible and removed the following books by Paul: Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus and Philemon. I couldn't be entirely sure about Hebrews, so to be on the safe side, I cut it out too.
|
|
|
Post by Good for you on Aug 27, 2007 11:52:40 GMT -5
Utterly brilliant. Thanks for opening my eyes to this. As such, I've taken an pair of scissors to my Bible and removed the following books by Paul: Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus and Philemon. I couldn't be entirely sure about Hebrews, so to be on the safe side, I cut it out too. Good for you. I'm sure you'll become a kinder and more loving person and more of a credit to the human race.
|
|
GoBlue
Senior Member
Posts: 201
|
Post by GoBlue on Aug 27, 2007 11:52:52 GMT -5
Bro S, What an approach! I'm still chuckling. Without God showing Paul the mysteries of grace, we as Gentiles really have missed out and we're all still under the law. Notice: Romans 15:8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers: compared to Romans 15:15 Nevertheless, brethren, I have written the more boldly unto you in some sort, as putting you in mind, because of the grace that is given to me of God, 16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost. And we'd have to scrub out Peter's testimony about Paul's epistles: II Peter 3:16 As also in all his (Paul's) epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest (or twist), as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Pauline The idea that homosexuals are not loved by God, or that sexual preference has ANYTHING to do with spirituality, is the most ludicrous, ridiculous thing ever. I don't CARE what Paul says, quite frankly, because his opinions on women were also less than savory. I think he was bigoted, ignorant, and not inspired by anyone but himself. It turns my stomach that people even consider any of the prejudiced words that have come out of his mouth. He has said some good things, but to me they are poisoned by his partiality and judgmental spirit. Furthermore, it is a known fact that the Roman empire changed parts of the King James bible to match their own beliefs: that women and homosexuals were inferior. So perhaps Paul was not bigoted and ignorant at all- perhaps the poor guy didn't even say any of those things. All I know is that you never read of Jesus belittling women OR homosexuals. He doesn't really even broach those topics. The lack of tolerance and lack of loving spirit towards other people makes me sick. That's all I have to say right now. Utterly brilliant. Thanks for opening my eyes to this. As such, I've taken an pair of scissors to my Bible and removed the following books by Paul: Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus and Philemon. I couldn't be entirely sure about Hebrews, so to be on the safe side, I cut it out too.
|
|
|
Post by Brother Schrock on Aug 27, 2007 13:18:40 GMT -5
Bro S, What an approach! I'm still chuckling. Actually, because of the way the pages fell, I had to give up the last page of Acts as well as the first page of James too.
|
|
|
Post by Almost convince me on Aug 27, 2007 13:27:02 GMT -5
Bro S, What an approach! I'm still chuckling. Without God showing Paul the mysteries of grace, we as Gentiles really have missed out and we're all still under the law. Notice: Romans 15:8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers: compared to Romans 15:15 Nevertheless, brethren, I have written the more boldly unto you in some sort, as putting you in mind, because of the grace that is given to me of God, 16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost. And we'd have to scrub out Peter's testimony about Paul's epistles: II Peter 3:16 As also in all his (Paul's) epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest (or twist), as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Pauline Utterly brilliant. Thanks for opening my eyes to this. As such, I've taken an pair of scissors to my Bible and removed the following books by Paul: Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus and Philemon. I couldn't be entirely sure about Hebrews, so to be on the safe side, I cut it out too. WOE!!!!!! Your writing stile. You almost convinced me you were GIT. I had to go back and do a retake. I just took it for granted this was another post by GIT.
|
|
GoBlue
Senior Member
Posts: 201
|
Post by GoBlue on Aug 27, 2007 15:53:41 GMT -5
I had similar thoughts about Paul in the past. Ever notice how few F&W speak from Paul's epistles? And I don't mean just cherry-picking a verse here and there. I mean really tearing a book, a chapter, a verse and a phrase apart to get the deeper meaning. I suppose that tendency to avoid Paul is not limited to our fellowship. When I began to understand how God was using Paul in a special way with a ministry different than the 12, I believe Paul to be at times a solitary voice against legalism. (Read Galatians). If it weren't for Paul's epistles, where would we find the gospel of grace? Sephora, thank you for your thoughts on Paul. I also have wondered abought Paul. There is a lot of legalism that comes from some of Pauls letters. Some of his thoughts are practised and some of them are not. It is what ever fits then the workers us it. We have to remember that paul was a Pharrise before. I do not believe that Paul ever overcame all of that. He had some marks of Pharrisism in his life to the end. So many of these( one true way) groups take and use Pauls letters as a pattern. Randall
|
|
|
Post by Jessi on Aug 27, 2007 17:24:31 GMT -5
I don't think anyone meant any harm -- but in a good-natured way, the poster is trying to show the folly of disbelieving one who wrote most of the NT.
Interesting and beautiful, though, stories of some persecuted Christians who hunger and thirst for the Word of God, who were not allowed -- as we are so free in this country to carry an entire Bible on our person, or as many as we like -- survive on a page or two of the Bible. ANY of it CAN DO . . . because it is inspired by the Great God, through whom all things are possible.
God is good to us in this country, to have the freedom to have the entire Bible--it may not always be so. Memorize it, all. The day is coming in the US, a country born in anarchy . . . It can't last. Especially when citizens spit on the Bible as they do. He will, if He hasn't already, give America over to its own lust for sex, money, and power.
I pray that many will not be overcome with surprise when God removes His protection from the U.S. He did it with his erring Israel and scattered them like sheep before the slaughter (Ps 44:11). He could have no qualms about doing it with this country.
We have so many resources to SEND Christ's disciples to reach the peoples and nations! This country is so blessed right now. It's interesting that the one thing that could save it from ruin and the withdrawal of protection as a Christian nation is the thing people are trying to get rid of . . .
Christ's Forever,
Jessi
|
|
|
Post by sephora on Aug 27, 2007 18:06:39 GMT -5
Thank you for your thoughts. I agree about Paul’s word being used sometimes more often than Jesus’ word in meeting sometimes. In the book “Lost Christianities” there is documented evidence to suggest that some of Paul’s writings were tampered with and altered. The book is simply a historical account of biblical events as well as a compilation of research from historians and translators comparing what is written in the King James bible to the events that historically occurred and to actually accounts of the people who “wrote” parts of the bible. The theories are evidence and research based, and do not take into account any particular religious beliefs. This book maintains that Paul in fact endorsed women in the church, and even had a female companion, and that all accounts of his respect for prominent females in the church, including his companion, were destroyed during the Council of Nicea. The Council of Nicea was overseen by Roman emperor Constantine, and during this meeting, the predominant religion, the early Christian or Catholic church, met and decided on what scriptures were to be included in the King James bible. During this meeting, it is thought that some authentic scriptures were destroyed, some were manipulated, and some were kept. That said, it’s hard for me to know what’s true and what is not. I realize that many parts of the bible are metaphorical and not to be taken literally. Even so, do I believe the people credited really said the things they did? Do I believe in the Holy Bible so to speak? I’m not sure. I still believe in the concept of religion, and even in the concept of the Truth to some extent. But so much of the bible contradicts historical facts. I know there are people who are professing who would automatically jump to the defense of the bible being divinely inspired, not up for questioning, and something that should be prayed about. They would question the accuracy of a historical account of that time. But would they question a historical account of say, the Civil War? No! I think that the bible, and any other book should be taken with a grain of salt. Something passed down through that many generations, something handled by dishonest people, something translated that many times, is bound to wind up slightly or entirely different than how it started. I don’t know what to think anymore. I guess Paul doesn’t really have anything to do with my original feelings of rage. In response to one of the posts I received, how am I “superficial, naïve, idealistic and gullible”? I don’t see ANYTHING superficial about my original post. Secondly, gullible and naive? Gullible people are ones that blindly follow and believe what others say. I am unsure about blindly following people who maintain potentially false passages from the bible. Naïve people never seem to question anything because they don’t know any better. That certainly isn’t me. Finally, I can live with idealistic. That to me is good. Finally, I am not a lesbian. I wasn’t going to dignify that question with an answer, but I don’t want anyone to think I’m presuming to understand what it’s like to grow up as a homosexual in a professing home. I do not know what it is to face ignorant people who will tell them that God does not approve of them. I do not think it’s a choice, and I think people who complain about it should really try to find a life. I maintain my opinion on God not caring about sexual preference.
|
|
|
Post by To SEPHORA on Aug 27, 2007 18:48:30 GMT -5
Thank you for your thoughts. I agree about Paul’s word being used sometimes more often than Jesus’ word in meeting sometimes. In the book “Lost Christianities” there is documented evidence to suggest that some of Paul’s writings were tampered with and altered. The book is simply a historical account of biblical events as well as a compilation of research from historians and translators comparing what is written in the King James bible to the events that historically occurred and to actually accounts of the people who “wrote” parts of the bible. The theories are evidence and research based, and do not take into account any particular religious beliefs. This book maintains that Paul in fact endorsed women in the church, and even had a female companion, and that all accounts of his respect for prominent females in the church, including his companion, were destroyed during the Council of Nicea. The Council of Nicea was overseen by Roman emperor Constantine, and during this meeting, the predominant religion, the early Christian or Catholic church, met and decided on what scriptures were to be included in the King James bible. During this meeting, it is thought that some authentic scriptures were destroyed, some were manipulated, and some were kept. That said, it’s hard for me to know what’s true and what is not. I realize that many parts of the bible are metaphorical and not to be taken literally. Even so, do I believe the people credited really said the things they did? Do I believe in the Holy Bible so to speak? I’m not sure. I still believe in the concept of religion, and even in the concept of the Truth to some extent. But so much of the bible contradicts historical facts. I know there are people who are professing who would automatically jump to the defense of the bible being divinely inspired, not up for questioning, and something that should be prayed about. They would question the accuracy of a historical account of that time. But would they question a historical account of say, the Civil War? No! I think that the bible, and any other book should be taken with a grain of salt. Something passed down through that many generations, something handled by dishonest people, something translated that many times, is bound to wind up slightly or entirely different than how it started. I don’t know what to think anymore. I guess Paul doesn’t really have anything to do with my original feelings of rage. In response to one of the posts I received, how am I “superficial, naïve, idealistic and gullible”? I don’t see ANYTHING superficial about my original post. Secondly, gullible and naive? Gullible people are ones that blindly follow and believe what others say. I am unsure about blindly following people who maintain potentially false passages from the bible. Naïve people never seem to question anything because they don’t know any better. That certainly isn’t me. Finally, I can live with idealistic. That to me is good. Finally, I am not a lesbian. I wasn’t going to dignify that question with an answer, but I don’t want anyone to think I’m presuming to understand what it’s like to grow up as a homosexual in a professing home. I do not know what it is to face ignorant people who will tell them that God does not approve of them. I do not think it’s a choice, and I think people who complain about it should really try to find a life. I maintain my opinion on God not caring about sexual preference. Gullible people are easily manipulated by using their own momentary thoughts and feelings for reference instead of the word of God. They get "caught up" in things They do not see their own wants as their downfall They are blind to everything but themselves, but think they got it all figured out They are putty in the hands of the devil
|
|
Gloryintruth Unlogged
Guest
|
Post by Gloryintruth Unlogged on Aug 27, 2007 19:20:19 GMT -5
As last some discussion meat to get my teeth into! This post perfectly captures the new spirit of liberalism - which I believe to be a muted form of gnosticism - in which transient social values form the objective reality, rather than the word of God itself.
Rest assured! I shall be revisiting this post tonight! Just one point for now:
Furthermore, it is a known fact that the Roman empire changed parts of the King James bible to match their own beliefs: that women and homosexuals were inferior.
The Roman Empire changed the King James version of the Bible! Such a comment is a striking reminder to us that it is now more important these days than it has ever been, to have a good understanding of Church History and the issues surrounding the canon of scripture, and the text itself.
The King James Bible is an English translation of the textus receptus ("the recieved text") which is derived from a Latin translation of the Septaugint (Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament used in the time of Christ) and Greek manuscripts.
(Newer versions go directly to the textual source - the oldest existent Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, thereby giving a clearer and more accurate translation of the Bible).
The King James Version of the Bible was published in England in 1611. It was a translation undertaken by Anglican clergymen, under commission by King James the First. (The year 1611 should be stamped into the mind of all those who use this text for more than one reason, to which I will later return). England is miles away from the Roman Empire, and ceased to be under its influence early on in the Imperial Decline.
The Roman Empire was in a state of decline for hundreds of years after Christ, eventually suffering complete political collapse around the emergence of Islam in the 7th century (Mohammad referred to the Eastern Roman Empire - governed from Byzantium, and lasting longer than the political entity of the Western Roman Empire - in his "prophecies"; see the Hadith of Abu Bukhari, which make for fascinating reading. I can still remember passages and the last time I read this document was way back in college).
How the Roman Empire could change the King James Bible a full thousand years before it came into existence is anyone's guess!
This is a common tactic of liberals. A hundred years ago the main form of attack was to compare Christianity to mythologies; then it was an attack on the Historical Christ; and these days, criticising the purity of the texts that form the scriptures themselves.
The only motivation for this kind of behaviour is to avoid the authority of divine scripture, and thus, God himself. It is a form of disbelief; rebellion; and unwillingness to confront the real issues in view regarding homosexuality (i.e. health implications) and the role of women (which the Christian Church advanced immeasurably).
|
|
|
Post by I have wondered on Aug 27, 2007 19:46:34 GMT -5
I have wondered why Paul wrote and said to the people follow me, and why he did not say, to follow Jesus Christ, the Messiah? Jesus Christ, the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
|
|
|
Post by Me Too on Aug 27, 2007 20:00:01 GMT -5
I have wondered why Paul wrote and said to the people follow me, and why he did not say, to follow Jesus Christ, the Messiah? Jesus Christ, the Way, the Truth, and the Life. I wonder too I don't want to mislead anyone Jesus can lead us so perfectly, why settle for anything less?
|
|
|
Post by randall on Aug 27, 2007 20:27:43 GMT -5
Paul was a Pharisees before he was converted. The Pharisees where very much influenced by Rome.
|
|
|
Post by Jessi on Aug 27, 2007 23:04:56 GMT -5
I have wondered why Paul wrote and said to the people follow me, and why he did not say, to follow Jesus Christ, the Messiah? Jesus Christ, the Way, the Truth, and the Life. I Cor 4:16 is a pretty bold statement for Paul to make. But he seems justified considering that spiritual leaders are to be examples of how to live a Christ-filled life (I Tim 4:12, Heb 13:7). Not only was he a leader, he was an apostle in every way as the others were, working miracles and coming with the power of the Gospel. He had the right, it seemed to tell people to follow him. Certainly, he does not ALWAYS say, "Follow me." Can't think of another place he says it. Christ's Forever, Jessi
|
|