Originally Posted by Randy Wise
Then how do you explain that we all (including you) accept some parts of the law and reject others? Obviously, the reason cannot be that we found fault with God.
Then how do you explain that we all (including you) accept some parts of the law and reject others? Obviously, the reason cannot be that we found fault with God.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 LaughingPaul DeBaufer - "thanks" for this post
In the context Kevin seems to be placing it, it sounds more like dealing with rationalization than anything else. In these instances catharsis is often achieved apart from intentional therapeutic technique (IMO). I would agree though that pastors shouldn't be representing themselves as professionals purely in terms of psychological treatment, unless of course they are.
Loving God . . . Loving others.Post Thanks / Like - 3 Thanks, 0 Laughing
What Randy said was that we cannot choose which parts are wrong (with any certainty). Personally I feel that we disregard far too much of the law. I know for certain that I don't keep it, there is no doubt there. Yet something within me reminds me that God's preference for us is contained there. Your point is taken that all of us disregard parts of the law, myself included. I must say that I feel uneasy about this, and I agree wholeheartedly that we have no certainty that our disregard is proper and holy. Surely we do have parts that have been proclaimed to be no longer valid in the NT, I believe that any attempt to broaden this perspective is flawed.
-Jim
To know and to serve God, of course, is why we're here, a clear truth, that, like the nose on your face, is near at hand and easily discernible but can make you dizzy if you try to focus on it hard. But a little faith will see you through.
Garrison Keillor
How then does one state the bible is wrong to justify their stance unless they find fault with God or they believe in this subject that the law was man made.?
How or my foundation in the act in question? I read the OT & NT and in the NT I still read of some acts that can lead to spiritual death. I don't believe in the act in question that the bible is wrong. (OT and NT)
Randy
"The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? The Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?"
(Psalms 27:1)Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Randy, I may misunderstand you. Do you mean to say you intend to keep each and every OT commandment and try to live accordingly?
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)
So, for instance, when the Law says you should not wear garments that contain mixed fabric, and I do not recall any statement in the NT against this commandment, you feel we should keep it?
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)Post Thanks / Like - 2 Thanks, 0 Laughing
You are quibbling Hans. Here are some counter questions for you. Name some OT Laws that were not either physically or spiritually harmful to the Israelites. Name some OT Laws that are currently physically or spiritually harmful.
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
You're not being serious. When you come back, I'll gladly answer.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)
I'm Serious
Honestly I haven't given it much thought. While I'm not envisioning that I will now avoid wearing garments that contain mixed fabric, I'm not comfortable saying that it's ok to do so. Nor would I be comfortable saying that it's ok to do so, unless I had spent some time researching it first. So I guess I can't comment specifically here.
I can say that I do take seriously the law regarding a protective fence or parapet upon ones roof. Should one construct a home in such fashion that the roof is accessible, that person is surely responsible if someone should fall due to improper guarding of the roof edge. Our building codes reflect this as well.
At the same time I must agree with Dan, this is quibbling, it isn't to the point nor is it helpful to the discussion.
We are talking about homosexual behavior here, and on this the scriptures are clear. It is sinful, no question in my mind. I'm not sure which would contribute to spiritual death, the acts themselves or the thought that these acts are not sinful. My guess would be toward the latter, as it can be said that we all suffer from besetting sin in some fashion, I cannot condemn those who suffer differently from me in that regard. On the other hand, yes I fear greatly for those who would call something good which God has declared sinful, I do believe that the greater danger lies there.
-Jim
To know and to serve God, of course, is why we're here, a clear truth, that, like the nose on your face, is near at hand and easily discernible but can make you dizzy if you try to focus on it hard. But a little faith will see you through.
Garrison Keillor
I'm serious as well, Dan raises a much better way to have this discussion. This follows naturally with Matthews thoughts regarding his disregard for anything found in Leviticus. I believe he makes a grave mistake with this thought.
-Jim
To know and to serve God, of course, is why we're here, a clear truth, that, like the nose on your face, is near at hand and easily discernible but can make you dizzy if you try to focus on it hard. But a little faith will see you through.
Garrison Keillor
Do you want a discussion, Jim? If so, this is not the way to proceed. Just tell me what you want. With some optimism, that you should recognize, I'm trying carefully to discuss an issue with you again. This is the certain way to close it down. I am and was dead serious.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)
I was talking to Dan.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)
Then you are insulting and I am out.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)
What does the Matthew verse (mat. 5:17) mean? Seems to me to mean that Jesus is the embodiment of the law. When we look at Him, His life and ministry, death and Resurrection this is where we see what the law actually is. And that is not a list of prohibitions, but one thing: Love. This is the entirety of the law and prophets, the rest is commentary.
You can be right or you can be in relationship
I envy you. I wish that I could generate enough emotion to be insulted. I relish feelings, even anger, they are rare and brief for me.
Are you still trying to justify homosexuality?
I don't have to.
You can be right or you can be in relationshipPost Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
The quintiscential post-modern answer. Of course you do.
Because you say so? Your posts today reflect a high degree of arrogance and self aggrandizement. I've made my position perfectly clear throughout this thread. Just because it is beyond what you can or will accept has nothing to do with me.
ETA: I'm really not trying to make people accept that being LGBT and living it in a monogamous, loving, committed manner is not a sin.
You can be right or you can be in relationshipPost Thanks / Like - 2 Thanks, 0 Laughing
I'm in an arrogant mood today. If I'm going to be arrogant, I'm going to keep my arrogance pure. I see no need in trying to mask it with pseudo intellectiualism or half- baked hermeunetics.
Post Thanks / Like - 2 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Well, at least you are honest. I can respect that.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)Post Thanks / Like - 2 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Okay. I can't argue with being in an arrogant mood.
In your opinion pseudo-intellectualism and half-baked hermeneutics. An opinion to which you are more than welcome. But to make an absolute statement of fact out of your opinion violates and/or negates your posts on precision where you decry such tactics.
You can be right or you can be in relationship
But it definitely is quite revealing.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Correct. So right now I'm annoying myself as much as I'm anoying you. Misery loves company.
I sit corrected. I'm too tired to stand.
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Hey, I annoy myself more than I'll ever admit.
You can be right or you can be in relationship
Honestly, I'm not sure. I have read the words above a few times and I'm not sure where you are coming from. As I read "Just tell me what you want. With some optimism, that you should recognize, I'm trying carefully to discuss an issue with you again. I'm hearing that you are willing and somehow we have gotten off. In which case I'm willing as well.
On the other hand I'm reading "this is not the way to proceed." and "This is the certain way to close it down." in which case I'm thinking, no, I don't need this sort of abuse, not at all. You see, I was being polite when I agreed with Dan regarding quibbling. I could have used the words that you have used here in response, rather I did take the time to respond to your query regarding mixed fabric garments. Would you have rather that I spare the kindness and simply have responded that your query regarding mixed fabric garments was a good way to shut this conversation down?
Yes you were. While at the same time, I was indicating that Dan's thoughts were indicative of a meaningful way to continue this dialog. I was speaking to our relationship to the OT in a general manner. Your introduction of hyperbole into the conversation is not appreciated. I thought that if we could redirect the conversation, then maybe we would have a chance. Right now I would say that it doesn't look so good.
-Jim
To know and to serve God, of course, is why we're here, a clear truth, that, like the nose on your face, is near at hand and easily discernible but can make you dizzy if you try to focus on it hard. But a little faith will see you through.
Garrison Keillor
And yet this is an admission, no?
-Jim
To know and to serve God, of course, is why we're here, a clear truth, that, like the nose on your face, is near at hand and easily discernible but can make you dizzy if you try to focus on it hard. But a little faith will see you through.
Garrison KeillorPost Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Shhhh, don't tell anybodyAnd yet this is an admission, no?
You can be right or you can be in relationshipPost Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 2 Laughing
Almost there.
"Fully embracing the Gospel, fully engaging the world"
At the request of several, including the originator of this thread, it is closed.
Post Thanks / Like - 7 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Posting Permissions
