2 Corinthians 6:14

Not encouraged but yes you can.

Nope no scorn or but the differences will definitely cause problems if both parties refuse to compromise.

Firstly, lets get the basics right Christianity isnt a religion. The core of christianity is this: God loves man( as in mankind includes women) and desires to have a relationship with him. The price however required the sacrifice of his only son; his death on the cross. If you are a Christian (Christ follower) its your relationship between God and you that matters.

You can step away from a relationship; the same way God will welcome you into His arms should you return.

This post has been edited by stefanong: Feb 21 2012, 01:34 PM

Because this same God of mercy and love is also a God of justice. Sin unfortunately required the death penalty; no exceptions.

which also explains why the need of animal sacrifices; ie the animal died in the place of the sinner in the old testament.


and yes this is better suited in another more theologically focused channel.

This post has been edited by stefanong: Feb 21 2012, 01:43 PM

There is no whitewashing. Sin = death. it is absolute and non negotiable.

We fail to realise that God (whether or not we believe in His existence) by virtue of being God dispenses judgement with or without our consent. He is neither moved or affected by man's justification, scorn or rationalisation. So really it is futile.

No, to be correct, the Old Testament is the basis of the New Testament and were not myths to console. The book of Deuteronomy, Judges and Lamentations were really judgements and quite frankly depressing.

People have the misconception that the Old Testament was superceded by the New Testament since Jesus was all peaceful like (also a misconception). The truth is He came to not only reinforce but to bring the laws of the OT to a whole new level. eg. If the actual act of untoward behaviour towards a woman was sin, Jesus said now the mere thought of commiting sin is already sin...YIKES!

What He did stress was religious law led to death but a relationship with God leads to life which was really the essence of the NT. but again this is better answered in a more theological channel also it helps to actually read and research first the OT and NT before making assumptions on what Christians do or do not believe. Just saying...

I notice you are rather riled up by this but again our emotions does not contribute one iota to the outcome. But if you want to continue to flog a dead horse you can.

no sin = death. Again to correct you, adultery is a sin; as for polygamy in the old testament it was rather a cultural acceptance during those times for kings to have multiple wives (for political reasons ie alliances with rival kingdoms) and concubines. In no way this is accepted in this day and age and again in the New Testament, Jesus came to up the ante.

Your arguments are founded on one premise. How is it that a Holy God deems it fit to wipe out people because they sin? and again the answer is simple, we are not God and no amount of justification will change the fact. You wanted answers, I give facts as they are written. If you want justification ask God.

Also again do proper research please. many of your questions are stated in the OT and NT or at least the relevant commentaries on the sections. I think what you are asking is covered in basic theology and doctrine which quite frankly is not suitable for this channel.

To be precise this verse must be taken into context.

26 Those who consider themselves religious and yet do not keep a tight rein on their tongues deceive themselves, and their religion is worthless. 27 Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

religious here means piously observant of the external duties of the faith (amplified & greek). So in proper context (and to paraphrase in layman language); If you really think of yourselves as piously observant of the external duties of the faith but cant even contain your tongue you mess up...if you wanna be religious fine, start from the basics loving the orphans and the widows who need your help and live a righteous life.

No. in Matt 27:51 it describes Jesus's death. You are partially correct that it was an atonement of sin for in that instance He who knew no sin took upon the sins of the world...but when He died the curtain in the sanctuary of the Temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. This is terribly significant. The Veil that seperated the Holy of Holies in the Temple of God was ripped in two...man has direct access to God now. Reconciliation through death which is why we can call him Abba Father and friend.

Again this is basic doctrine. Should be discussed in another channel though.

I do agree though that yes just because we have right standing before God doesnt mean we continue to use it a passport to continue to sin.

This post has been edited by stefanong: Feb 22 2012, 02:46 PM

Nice.

even from verse 21 -27 still doesnt negate what ive said. Pure and undefiled outward expression of your faith is this which is merely the definition of religion. thats all.

again you are partially correct. Sin yes but also restoring relationship back to God. The original reason why man was created from the Garden.

Agreed. This is doctrine and theology pretty heavy stuff and not suitable for a channel like this.

Yes you are right polygamy is never allowed by God. The kings of the time because of their failure to abide to scripture and followed the local culture ended up paying for it most severely. Sorry for the confusion.

As much as I would like to; I fear that the results will be unacceptable to you. You desire to be convinced with compelling justification. But I am no spokesperson or representative for God. Im neither Judge or Jury. What I can do is merely answer questions with the little that I know from what has been written. I have avoided the Religious thread like a plague because really at the end of the day it is all a question of faith. If you do not believe it is your perogative no amount of arguing will convince you otherwise. It is not my place to win you over or judge. Everyone is entitled to what he/she believes. So if its ok I would prefer to keep discussions light and more Q&A.

God Bless

Actually what you stated isnt proof that the OT is a collection of Jewish myth but a statement that God is dicriminatory and practises favoritism. Again who am I to justify who gets forgiven or not? Matt 20:1 (well the whole passage actually).. its is His perogative. I dont understand it frankly but again it doesnt change a thing.

This post has been edited by stefanong: Feb 22 2012, 05:15 PM

I think the dead horse has been flogged way too much already.


Anyways here is a beautiful story:

A doctor entered the hospital in hurry after being called in for an urgent surgery. He answered the call asap, changed his clothes & went directly to the surgery block. He found the boy's father pacing in the hall waiting for the doctor. On seeing him, the dad yelled:
"Why did U take all this time to come? Don't U know that my son's life is in danger? Don't U have any sense of responsibility?"

The doctor smiled & said:
"I am sorry, I wasn't in the hospital & I came as fast as I could after receiving the call...... And now, I wish you'd calm down so that I can do my work"

"Calm down?! What if your son was in this room right now, would U calm down? If your own son dies now what will U do??" said the father angrily

The doctor smiled again & replied: "I will say what Job said in the Holy Book "From dust we came & to dust we return, blessed be the name of God". Doctors cannot prolong lives. Go & intercede for your son, we will do our best by God's grace"

"Giving advises when we're not concerned is so easy" Murmured the father.

The surgery took some hours after which the doctor went out happy,
"Thank goodness!, your son is saved!" And without waiting for the father's reply he carried on his way running. "If U have any question, ask the nurse!!"

"Why is he so arrogant? He couldn't wait some minutes so that I ask about my son's state" Commented the father when seeing the nurse minutes after the doctor left.

The nurse answered, tears coming down her face: "His son died yesterday in a road accident, he was in the burial when we called him for your son's surgery. And now that he saved your son's life, he left running to finish his son's burial."

This post has been edited by stefanong: Feb 23 2012, 09:44 PM

Amen.

No actually to his credit he claims to be skeptic agnostic so faith has no place in this; considering that a skeptic agnostic finds no compelling reason to believe in the existence or the non existence of God. Unfortunately, if one is truly skeptic agnostic there is no reason to attack or criticize another person's faith in a deity just because one believes that ultimately the human mind is incapable of knowledge of the supernatural.

That is being rude and judgmental. His arguments really are repetitious and I have already summarized and answered them. Flogging a dead horse and trying to revive the whole argument by baiting and taunting others really is futile at the end of the day.

Hmmm.. ok here is something to wrap your brains on. There are some here discussing whether the need to observe the 10 commandments vs grace etc...

First of all lets set the proper tone. Jesus was a Jew.

Doesnt mean much does it from just that simple statement.

Let me elaborate. As a Jew, he had to be circumcised. He has to observe the traditional festivals which includes observing the Halakha including the biblical law (613 mitzvot).

All Jewish boys learned to read and write in their own family. Dressed in His “tallit”, Jesus as a child would be expected to learn the history of his own people by hearing commentaries on the texts proclaimed each Shabbat in the synagogue.

He would be expected as a Jew to gradually assimilate the history of Israel; the election, the promises, the covenant, the gift of the land, the law. He would learn how to sing the psalms, in particular the “Hallel”. Two times a day, he recited the “Shema Israel” and the prayer of “Shemone Esre”. He wore “phylacteries” and did not shave the hair of his temples, as prescribed in the Bible.

The Gospels also indicate that he was quite Jewish in his dress. When the woman with the hemorrhaging reached for him, she grabbed the hem of his clothes (Mk. 6:56; Mat. 9:20; Lk 8:44). The Greek term used here, kraspedon, commonly translates the Hebrew, tzitzit or fringes,[13] which God had commanded the Jewish people to wear (Num. 15:37-41).

The term Rabbi is not used loosely at the time. The title ‘Rabbi’, in first-century contemporary literature, could refer both to Torah teachers (”Teachers of the Law”) and sages/rabbis with s’mikah (authority). Jesus, who was clearly recognized by this title, would have fallen into one of these two categories, though clearly – from scripture – it was the latter.

According to Hebrew tradition, for a sage/rabbi to have s’mikah – authority to make new teachings to interpret scripture – he had to be recognized as a prophet from God, himself, or – as Aaron and Moses had traditionally given authority to 70 elders – they had to be recognized as having s’mikah by two other rabbis with s’mikah.

Additionally, when Jesus was questioned by the Sadducees as to where he got his s’mikah (authority), his answer (via the rabbinic technique of answering in questions) would indicate that John – a prophet – had heralded (not granted) his authority from God.

With this proper context in mind. I ask you then was the 10 commandments important? Yes, in fact it was the observence of every Jewish male more so a Rabbi. In Matt 23:3 Jesus told his disciples to observe and practise what the scribes and Pharisees do acknowledging their observance of the Law of Moses but.. critcised their hypocrisy of following rituals and the law but not understanding the spirit behind it.

So with this context. Jesus did not abolish the mosaic law..in fact His death was required on the cross as atonement of our sins, (sacrifice of an unblemished lamb). The element of grace comes into the picture reminding people just blindly following the law is futile..leading ultimately to death since its impossible to fulfill them by one's own strength. A savior is required; an eternal atonement of our sins.

So yes the Shabbat is important, so are the festivals but we who arent Jews; gentiles; are like olive branches grafted into the main tree. Yes we are christians followers of the Way but we should not forget the Jewish heritage. It is important that we understand scripture in its proper context.


PS Forgive me for the wall of words...So very sorry

This post has been edited by stefanong: Oct 17 2012, 06:33 PM

No actually that is partially true. The 10 commandments can be summarised in this two essential fundamentals: Love God and Love others.

They are not meant to replace or subtract the 10 commandments. Remember the context of the Book of Hebrews also .. that while the book addresses Jewish believers the point was not to alienate them...they were jewish in culture background but were having difficulties trying to balance observing the Jewish laws rituals and festivals and being a Christian and this whole element of Grace.

In short, Hebrews did not say the old practises were rubbish but rather with Jesus, there is a higher way.. that is all.

I do not understand why you guys are taking this and turning a simple discussion into a baseball bat to bludgeon and hurt others.

Come on..people. No need to start with insults and character assisinations. No point being able to expound the scripture if you cannot even have love and the grace to overlook. Correction is to be done with love. So everyone please...relax

Actually both are correct. While the main target audience are the Jews, the application and learnings also apply to the Gentiles; we who are grafted into the main olive tree...

There is no contradiction just go back to the context.

As explained earlier, the Shabbat is still important and relevant but as the Book of Hebrews is explaining; to move from the mere ritual of observance for the sake of observance but to understand that Jesus is the better way. Essentially rituals cannot save you; its still important the meeting together of the saints and worship but its not the ticket of one's salvation.

brother, Romans 4 talks that just following the law is not enough. Faith is important. Which is true because without Faith it is impossible to please God. Nevertheless, this is not the proper context to use it and has no relevance.

You can love others and not love God. Some non-christians I know are much more socially active in welfare and charitable works than most christians I know. But that isnt enough.

To be precise, the statement should be (paraphrased)... You say you love God? Well prove it! Do you even love your brother? You dont? Well how can you claim to love God if you can't even love your own brother?

Essentially saying this to us: You cannot claim to follow a God of Love and not help but love others. This scripture is not to be used in incorrect context to cover the commandments.

just saying.


This post has been edited by stefanong: Oct 19 2012, 02:56 PM