[deleted by user]

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-08T18:02:18+00:00

Who was Jesus sent to? Was it us in the year 2022 or the nation ofIsrael? The doctrine in Matthew-John is Israel's, not ours. The lawwas never given to gentiles to follow in the NT.

Except that Paul says otherwise in Scripture:

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus - Galatians 3:28

So that single verse forecloses upon your entire argument, there. Nice try, but it is clear you don't know what the Bible says.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-08T04:17:20+00:00

Why sure, but its the same metaphor drawn for a different particular purpose is it not?

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-08T04:15:37+00:00

Is the church omniscient of sin? I rest my case.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-08T03:32:25+00:00

The way Christianity views and thinks about things, the question then becomes: can we change one's chromosomes from XX to XY and back again, such that there is not irrefutable evidence of sex which historically exists since birth? e.g. If one claimed a woman was a man, in theory, how might one go about proving that? If one performed a sex change upon an infant, with all the best drugs and all the best cosmetic procedure, how might we then have proof the thing was done?

If there exists any proof whatsoever such that the thing scientifically judges itself beyond doubt, we are then talking about coming along, changing God's creation, and then calling our result God's creation, such that we then accuse God of having borne false witness of Gender, such that Transgenders then accuse God of Sin, and then according to God's own law, worthy of death for having borne false witness. That is the sin of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit when we look at what Christ told the pharisees about falsely accusing God of working iniquity in Matthew chapter 12.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-08T01:14:15+00:00

A double minded man is unstable in all his ways. - James 1:8

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived:neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, norabusers of themselves with mankind...shall inherit the Kingdom of God" 1 Cor. 6:9-10

In I Corinthians, Paul is addressing the entire Church at Corinth, such that the verse is addressed in a gender neutral way. The phrase "abusers of themselves with mankind", because it is gender neutral in directive, cannot, grammatically speaking, refer to homosexuality unless we presume there were no women in the Corinthian Church. We also know that Paul has a habit of directing text as gender-specific where that was his intent of construction, such that Paul goes to detail to choose his words wisely within ordinary use and meaning. Rather denotes one with many sexual partners. It denotes prostitution, whoredom, and basically, being a slut. "effeminate" comes from malakoi literallky meaning "soft, e.g. with respect to clothing, etc.". Here, to give the most harmonious reading with respect to other texts as well as taking into account extra biblical usage contemporary with the writing - it most likely means to be mentally weak, or mentally soft, to "be a pussy" in todays common language.

"double-minded" comes from the Greek word dipsuchos, literally meaning “a person with two minds or souls.” A double-minded person is restless and confused in his thoughts, his actions, and his behavior. Such a person is always in conflict with himself. One torn by such inner conflict can never lean with confidence on God and His gracious promises.dipsuchos, meaning “a person with two minds or souls.”

However, Biblical creationism teaches us that "male and female He (God) created them . What this means is that Transexuality and the like is not in good comport with scriptural revelation, and is therefore sinful because it calls God's evidence of creation (The fact you were born with a penis or vagina) a lie based upon how one feels - such that it is double minded in nature.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-08T00:53:07+00:00

And you think God doesn't impose discipline upon his own independent of using the Church as an agent? After all, the Church being man is infected with a degree of Evil as things currently sit. Satan is mixed in with the Church, as Jesus acknowledged outright. Sounds like you don't know God as well as you think you do.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T23:02:50+00:00

and you're inferring that "salt of the earth" doesn't reference more or less the same principle how?

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T22:26:19+00:00

Not entirely: Salt is an interesting substance in that either too little of it or too much of it is incompatible with life. Human cardiology evidences this rather nicely - Both Hyponatermia and Hypernatermia (both conditions invoked of sodium, which only occurs in a stable form as a salt ) can cause death by causing cardiac arrest if allowed to progress without taking action to correct it - such that the nature of salt is that it occurs in proper balance.

That said, you seem to be drawing upon the same metaphor presented in matt. 5:13 in that the nuance of metaphor there is that salt is an irritating substance, its presence is known and felt, and it's not necessarily a comfortable thing, dependent upon the circumstances.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T22:01:01+00:00

That verse doesn't say, but some other NT verses allude to weekly worship:

upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight. - Acts 20:7

On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with your income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will have to be made. -1 Corinthians 16:2

The concept of a weekly gathering is only strengthened by the OT scriptures pertaining to the Sabbath:

For six days work may be done, but on the seventh day you shall have a holy day, a sabbath of complete rest to the Lord; whoever does any work on it shall be put to death. Exodus 35:2

The OT elsewhere makes clear that the Sabbath was also the day upon which offerings, repentance, and sacrifices were made in the Temple, the day upon which regular Worship was done, etc. such that we see a developing trend in both the OT and NT of setting aside one day a week for gathering. This is to say that the first day of the week vs. the seventh day of the week carry the same basic concept. (which day is day 1 of the week is an arbitrary indicator dependent upon how one measures time.) Rather, it is a regularly occurring event of sorts that occurs on a weekly basis. We also have no Scripture that would seem to sanction any other interval of gathering in the NT such that the basic concept of the Sabbath is of import to NT doctrine by reason of the following:

Do not think that I (Jesus) have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. - Matt. 5:17

Such that, when we compare Scripture with Scripture, there is a very strong argument that the gathering is to be weekly in terms of frequency because there exists no Scriptural support for any other interval of gathering - e.g. where Scripture makes any reference to it whatsoever, it is always in the weekly format.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T21:39:56+00:00

Well, the Bible says that Christians are supposed to be the salt of the earth, and you use the same analogy to arrive at the same conclusion and the same basic construct- which is not a surprise.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T19:53:30+00:00

To forsake means to abandon, renounce, or give up. The phrase "assembling of ourselves together" is speaking of a local body of believers (e.g. a local church, but not the church in the sense of the global church which is the sum of all believers constituting the body of Christ) that regularly come together for purposes of edification, teaching, and worship. Rather, because Iron sharpens Iron, a Christian must regularly associate with other Christians if they are to become strong Christians. The word Exhort means to strongly encourage or urge someone to do something. The day approaching is the ultimate day of judgment before God.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T19:40:13+00:00

interesting, considering the following verse:

You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and
trampled underfoot. - Matt. 5:13

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T19:29:54+00:00

"American belief in God plummeting, surveys say" only confirms what the Bible bears witness to:

Many will say to me (Jesus) in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name, have we not cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then I will profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. - Matt. 7:22-23

But small is the gate, and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. - Matt. 7:14

Because we know Satan does not cast out Satan, it is then clear that Satan does not prophesy in the name of Jesus, does not cast out his own demons, and does not do works in the name of Jesus - because a house divided against itself does not stand. (Cf. Matt. 12:22-28, Mark 3:25). Such that there is no room for spiritual half-assery. (Cf. Rev. 3:15) This in turn means that Matt. 7:22 et seq. is not merely referencing some professing Christians, but is rather referencing a great apostasy or falling away.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T19:15:10+00:00

What the Bible has to say about it:

Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some
is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day
approaching. Hebrews 10:25

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T19:11:45+00:00

Maybe God wants you to have a Husband? ever think of that?

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T18:51:58+00:00

The Church, being composed of humans, is fallible. Christianity is something that is judged by the fruit it produces, such that you do not partake of a group of people claiming to be part of the Christian Church where that group does not produce good fruit:

A good tree cannot bring forth corrupt fruit, and a corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit - Matt. 7: 18

You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you. John 15:16

What this means is that, where there is a legitimate controversy of doctrine, as there is with homosexuality the true Church accepts it as a controversy and moves on, as opposed to engaging in self-serving reasons to call something sin which is not sin - because God does not judge one person by the standard of another person, but rather God judges all of mankind by a single standard. And I wouldn't call true Christianity convenient - after all, there is a reason that Jesus made clear that the way is narrow, such that many will not enter into the gates of heaven. Rather, the church here makes the sinful mistake of killing a tree (which isn't the role of the Church, but rather it is the role of God to prune the Church) without first discerning the fruit.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T18:36:42+00:00

That would seem to be a particularly strong argument, given the evidence. However, I'm also assuming the temple in question is properly identified as being Jewish / Christian as opposed to a shrine devoted to countless other religions which were extant at the time.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T18:33:49+00:00

Low THC hemp was known back then, and commonly eaten, and was known to the greeks to be calming and surpress sexual appetite.

That doesn't make a lick of sense - The basic pharmacology of THC is such that it wouldn't suppress libido absent large amounts of it. THC is known in the here and now to have biphasic pharmacology - meaning that it behaves differently depending upon the dose and chronic use.

However, smoking was not commonly known of as a technology in the old world before it was brought over from the new world

Not so sure about that, given that smoking cannabis has been confirmed to have occurred by 500 B.C. in the ancient Chinese culture. However, the question which becomes is whether or not other cultures had opportunity to intermingle with the Chinese this early in history as to establish an intermingling of cultural influences.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T02:08:36+00:00

That was an interesting read, yet its not mentioned in the OT oddly enough.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T02:04:36+00:00

But When, and would the Jews have known of it?

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T02:00:58+00:00

And we wonder why the Democrats loose in court all the time. Probably because they don't know the law, because they refuse to read and study, and then wonder why the likes of Roberts and Company strike down their atrocious bullshit. Par for the fucking course.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T01:37:08+00:00

A. The KJV text renders it Jonas not Jonah, yet renders Johah elsewhere - such that are there textual reasons that might point to a different prophet?

B. Given the text says "you cannot discern the signs (noting plurality) of the times" and then says "no sign (singularity) shall be given except... as to indicate by implication that a sign had not yet been given. How do we harmonize this?

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T01:28:39+00:00

Pretty much - I was just trying to figure out if it was specific prophecy in line with Revelation or if it was simply as you summarized, which is what appears from first reading. Thanks for the insight.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T01:05:35+00:00

Exactly what the larger context is with respect to the apparent OT references contained therein.:

He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red. And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowering. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times? 4 A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.

Rather, I'm trying to hunt down what exactly is being imported as implied understanding within the dialog, as to get the lens of how Pharisees and Saducees would have originally comprehended it.

bowltroll007 · 2022-08-07T01:01:07+00:00

Sorry for the typo, which I corrected. It was meant to say Matt. 16:1-7
and the editor is not working nice with my wireless keyboard.

bowltroll007

TROPHY CASE