I however think it runs completely counter to what's in the bible and what every traditional christian church has always preached from the begining this religion. It is an obvious heresy.
Well, let's talk about what's in the Bible on the subject. There are 6 instances of homosexuality being asserted as sin in the Bible, and I'll go over them here.
The first popular reference seems to be in Genesis 19 with the story of Sodom and Gommorah. The story has the Lord vowing to Abraham destroy the cities if he cannot find 10 righteous men, and that their sins were great. However, the word homosexuality is never used, and is certainly usurped by the sin of gang rape. It bears worth mention here that Lot does offer up his virgin daughters to be raped, and the angels in Lot's home don't condemn him for that, even though they hatched a plan to rape their father after the Lord destroys their mother (it's a really nice story). So this one is out.
I assume we can skip Leviticus 20 and 18's statements on the subject - that is, unless you're prepared to embrace a ban on mixed fabrics from Lev. 19 and the prohibition on priests with damaged testicles from Lev. 21. I'm operating on the assumption that you don't embrace these, so it would be a case of special pleading to argue that the verses from 20 are of any special importance. So this one is also out.
The only other explicit mentions of homosexuality exists in Paul's writings in the New Testament. Strange thing about that - Paul was inarguably an educated person, with a decent written vocabulary (we'll leave his writing skills and several-chapter tangents out of this). At the time, there were over a dozen Greek words that could have been used to refer to homosexuals or homosexual activity. There was rather a lot of it at the time - from the homosexual relationships we think of today, to ***** sexual favors traded for occupational apprenticeships. He didn't use any of those.
Instead, Paul chose to coin new terms without meanings we can easily define. The first of these is "arsenokoitai." This is the word used in Rom. 1:26-27 and 1 Tim 1:10. As far as we've been able to determine, there are no other examples of this compound word, broken down to mean "man" and "bed". Given his education, we can presume he did not mean "homosexuality" but rather something else, though we cannot be sure what that was.
The other word Paul seems to have invented is "malakoi," from 1 Cor. 6:9-10. Again we run into the problem that there aren't other examples of the word's context outside the Bible, and the Bible itself doesn't provide clear context either. The proposed meaning of this word by John MacArthur is "temple prostitution." The closest I've seen linguists get this word to "homosexuality" is "effeminate," but the words are not equivalent and should not be used as such. Either definition would be appropriate - temple prostitution would be associated with idolatry and infidelity to Jehovah, and effeminate men wouldn't be meeting the standards that Paul describes when he discusses gender roles.
It's hard to argue that any of these can be definitively a condemnation of same-sex relationships by Christians, so I have to reject the premise until conclusive evidence should come to light.
Posted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 3:21 am
Voxbury
Guy37
I however think it runs completely counter to what's in the bible and what every traditional christian church has always preached from the begining this religion. It is an obvious heresy.
Well, let's talk about what's in the Bible on the subject. There are 6 instances of homosexuality being asserted as sin in the Bible, and I'll go over them here.
The first popular reference seems to be in Genesis 19 with the story of Sodom and Gommorah. The story has the Lord vowing to Abraham destroy the cities if he cannot find 10 righteous men, and that their sins were great. However, the word homosexuality is never used, and is certainly usurped by the sin of gang rape. It bears worth mention here that Lot does offer up his virgin daughters to be raped, and the angels in Lot's home don't condemn him for that, even though they hatched a plan to rape their father after the Lord destroys their mother (it's a really nice story). So this one is out.
I assume we can skip Leviticus 20 and 18's statements on the subject - that is, unless you're prepared to embrace a ban on mixed fabrics from Lev. 19 and the prohibition on priests with damaged testicles from Lev. 21. I'm operating on the assumption that you don't embrace these, so it would be a case of special pleading to argue that the verses from 20 are of any special importance. So this one is also out.
The only other explicit mentions of homosexuality exists in Paul's writings in the New Testament. Strange thing about that - Paul was inarguably an educated person, with a decent written vocabulary (we'll leave his writing skills and several-chapter tangents out of this). At the time, there were over a dozen Greek words that could have been used to refer to homosexuals or homosexual activity. There was rather a lot of it at the time - from the homosexual relationships we think of today, to ***** sexual favors traded for occupational apprenticeships. He didn't use any of those.
Instead, Paul chose to coin new terms without meanings we can easily define. The first of these is "arsenokoitai." This is the word used in Rom. 1:26-27 and 1 Tim 1:10. As far as we've been able to determine, there are no other examples of this compound word, broken down to mean "man" and "bed". Given his education, we can presume he did not mean "homosexuality" but rather something else, though we cannot be sure what that was.
The other word Paul seems to have invented is "malakoi," from 1 Cor. 6:9-10. Again we run into the problem that there aren't other examples of the word's context outside the Bible, and the Bible itself doesn't provide clear context either. The proposed meaning of this word by John MacArthur is "temple prostitution." The closest I've seen linguists get this word to "homosexuality" is "effeminate," but the words are not equivalent and should not be used as such. Either definition would be appropriate - temple prostitution would be associated with idolatry and infidelity to Jehovah, and effeminate men wouldn't be meeting the standards that Paul describes when he discusses gender roles.
It's hard to argue that any of these can be definitively a condemnation of same-sex relationships by Christians, so I have to reject the premise until conclusive evidence should come to light.
Quote:
As far as we've been able to determine, there are no other examples of this compound word, broken down to mean "man" and "bed".
We? Where do you have this from?
Quote:
I assume we can skip Leviticus 20 and 18's statements on the subject - that is, unless you're prepared to embrace a ban on mixed fabrics from Lev. 19 and the prohibition on priests with damaged testicles from Lev. 21. I'm operating on the assumption that you don't embrace these, so it would be a case of special pleading to argue that the verses from 20 are of any special importance. So this one is also out.
You are mainly skipping Leviticus 20 because it doesn't affirm your already made up mind that Paul was not talking about homosexuality. It is cherry-picking as much as anyone not embracing the "damaged testicles from Lev. 21.
Paul was likely using the the Septuagint since he was a Greek educated Jew writing to gentiles in Greek.The Greek translation of these Leviticus passages condemns a man (arseno) lying with (koitai) another man (arseno). These words are side by side in the passages of Leviticus. Paul is simply joining these words together in a neologism, a new word, and with this 1Corinthians and 1Timothy condemns what was condemned in Leviticus.
As far as we've been able to determine, there are no other examples of this compound word, broken down to mean "man" and "bed".
We? Where do you have this from?
Quote:
I assume we can skip Leviticus 20 and 18's statements on the subject - that is, unless you're prepared to embrace a ban on mixed fabrics from Lev. 19 and the prohibition on priests with damaged testicles from Lev. 21. I'm operating on the assumption that you don't embrace these, so it would be a case of special pleading to argue that the verses from 20 are of any special importance. So this one is also out.
You are mainly skipping Leviticus 20 because it doesn't affirm your already made up mind that Paul was not talking about homosexuality. It is cherry-picking as much as anyone not embracing the "damaged testicles from Lev. 21.
Paul was likely using the the Septuagint since he was a Greek educated Jew writing to gentiles in Greek.The Greek translation of these Leviticus passages condemns a man (arseno) lying with (koitai) another man (arseno). These words are side by side in the passages of Leviticus. Paul is simply joining these words together in a neologism, a new word, and with this 1Corinthians and 1Timothy condemns what was condemned in Leviticus.
Since you've chosen to ignore a lot of my arguments above, I'll consider those to be without counter and accepted. Thank you. That leaves us to your points of contention, which I find interesting.
You're accusing me of cherry-picking, which I am not, while pointing out that you cherry-pick which commands from Leviticus to follow and which not to. I just pointed out that to use that verse as a condemnation of homosexuality, one would also be obligated to abide by the other more silly commands like those against mixed fabrics. I don't condemn homosexuality, nor do I condemn mixed fabrics or priests with damaged testicles, so I am not cherry-picking anything. Plank in your own eye, and all that. And the Lord's as well, since he doesn't seem to condemn the incest committed by Lot's daughters with their father (another command from Lev. 18 ). If you're happy to discard the commandments against other practices, it would appear inappropriate to reference Leviticus in this circumstance to condemn homosexuality, which was why I passed over it to begin with.
From there as an aside, it's a matter of which ones are appropriate to cherry-pick and which ones not to. Surely you're not recommending that rape victims be sold to their rapists as in Deut. 22:28-29, or that we stone people to death for eating seafood, or any of the other archaic commandments from the Old Testament. So isn't everyone doing a bit of cherry-picking in a good way? I'm all about feeding the hungry and treating the sick, but not killing kids for talking back. Aren't you?
Now we get to Paul's writings again. We've got a point of contention about only one of the new words he invented, arsenokoitai. The literal definition you gave is fairly close to that I gave "man/lie" vs. "man/bed." The word is disputed in meaning, again, because he seems to be the only person to have ever used it. There were words meaning homosexual in Greek that Paul would have known, as it wasn't an uncommon (or even frowned upon) type of relationship. I draw from this context that Paul did not mean homosexual, and you do.
Being that it's disputed, and used only by one author, that compound word doesn't have a definitive and conclusive meaning - for example, it could be suggested arsenokoitai has to do with lazy men who are constantly lying around. I'm not suggesting this, but I'm arguing that your Google results from Equip.org and my memory of having researched this over a decade ago aren't dissimilar enough to throw up one's hands and ask what nonsense I'm talking about.
If your argument that people should be ashamed of their sinful sexuality that is intrinsic to who they are is hinged on the disputed definition of one word in the New Testament, you should maybe drop it unless you have new and better arguments against it.
Might also be worth discussing the points of nurture and nature. The consensus doesn't seem to be people "become gay" among doctors and researchers in the field, which raises the question of why God would punish people with a sexuality he finds disgusting.
Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2021 4:31 am
musasgal
OtakuKat
musasgal
And again God created them that way. It's not a lifestyle choice or falling into. It is how God wired them. Just like how God created Caleb and who he is. And he most likely created him to be gay. That is one thing, we as a church as a whole keep forgetting about and still is asleep because of it. There are people in that community that is gay. Heck, I follow a pastor on tiktok who is asexual and there are other pastors who have woken up and became allies.
And yes, it is like loving the criminals, the addicts (there is more than drugs that people can get addicted to). Like I said, it's not easy, but it's not hard to do. Especially when they are God's children. I know. I been there. And like I said. Caleb will need you if his parents rejected him.
So we agree that loving gay people is like loving criminals, addicts, and others who do wrong. We are to love these people like anyone else. However, the thief is a thief for stealing. The drug addict is an addict for using/abusing drugs or something else in an unhealthy way. Does this mean we are to love theft and drug abuse too? Absolutely not. We are to help these people in a loving but truthful way. So it is with homosexuality.
Again, homosexuality is not a sin! It never has been a sin. God is telling you that. Please, listen to him. He's saying that homosexuality is ok. Those children he created was meant to be this way. Don't fall for the old teachings. Don't fall for the hypocrisy. He accepts them for who they are, and we should do the same. This doesn't not mean for accepting the other sins, he got that down pat. Just understand that this is what God wants us to do in this day and age and not use his word, the Sword of Truth to deceive or to spread hate. But to share that he loves them just the way we are. That's why I put down the genesis references, the 3 out of 4 gospel references, the parable. He wants you to read, and reflect. That's all he is asking.
And I did mistake you for angel so sorry about that.
Could you find Scriptural support for homosexuality not being a sin? Do you have any specific verses? I mean I have verses in the OT supporting that the interpretation of the Greek word arsenokoitai in the NT to homosexual in English is the right interpretation... If we use the Bible to interpret itself then I believe we are on a safer ground than if we allow someone to interpret it for us. There is no evidence for tampering with the Bible, deliberate or otherwise of the Greek texts into another language.
If I can make an observation: it seems to me that in different times and different periods in human civilization that the topics of contention, and questions about translation or interpretation have to do with the prevailing issues of the day. What I mean is that the problem people have with the text has to do with aspects of themselves that they are not willing to admit as sinful. Today culture is moving towards a normalization of homosexuality, and so it naturally follows that there will be made attempts to question or attempt to disprove teachings and texts that does not agree with this. Make note of that the majority of those who have a problem with the word arsenokoitai are already in a state where they are inclined to believe there is a problem with the text before examining it. They come into the text with the idea that we should challenge the translation, because surely it would not speak against their life and actions, and against what culture today generally accepts. Anyone can approach the Bible in this manner but it is a form of bias and self worship where you put yourself as God. "I can not be wrong. I can not be a sinner. I am born with these features. Therefore they are God-given". Anyone can come in an say t Looking at the word adopted by the LGBT movement, "PRIDE" to symbolize what it is about I think it is symptomatic. We can do it with the word liar for example as an exercise. The English word comes from the Greek word pseustes. Pseustes was also the genus of a snake. So the Bible is talking about snakes, not liars. The Bible doesn't want us to be like snakes. Crawling on the ground and biting apostles. This is eisegesi not exegesis. It is not really speaking of snakes. There is an unwillingness to be humble and even entertain the idea that it could be wrong in the LGBT movement, and that is the one defining thing more or less coloring all debates on the topic today.
And again God created them that way. It's not a lifestyle choice or falling into. It is how God wired them. Just like how God created Caleb and who he is. And he most likely created him to be gay. That is one thing, we as a church as a whole keep forgetting about and still is asleep because of it. There are people in that community that is gay. Heck, I follow a pastor on tiktok who is asexual and there are other pastors who have woken up and became allies.
And yes, it is like loving the criminals, the addicts (there is more than drugs that people can get addicted to). Like I said, it's not easy, but it's not hard to do. Especially when they are God's children. I know. I been there. And like I said. Caleb will need you if his parents rejected him.
So we agree that loving gay people is like loving criminals, addicts, and others who do wrong. We are to love these people like anyone else. However, the thief is a thief for stealing. The drug addict is an addict for using/abusing drugs or something else in an unhealthy way. Does this mean we are to love theft and drug abuse too? Absolutely not. We are to help these people in a loving but truthful way. So it is with homosexuality.
Again, homosexuality is not a sin! It never has been a sin. God is telling you that. Please, listen to him. He's saying that homosexuality is ok. Those children he created was meant to be this way. Don't fall for the old teachings. Don't fall for the hypocrisy. He accepts them for who they are, and we should do the same. This doesn't not mean for accepting the other sins, he got that down pat. Just understand that this is what God wants us to do in this day and age and not use his word, the Sword of Truth to deceive or to spread hate. But to share that he loves them just the way we are. That's why I put down the genesis references, the 3 out of 4 gospel references, the parable. He wants you to read, and reflect. That's all he is asking.
And I did mistake you for angel so sorry about that.
Could you find Scriptural support for homosexuality not being a sin? Do you have any specific verses? I mean I have verses in the OT supporting that the interpretation of the Greek word arsenokoitai in the NT to homosexual in English is the right interpretation... If we use the Bible to interpret itself then I believe we are on a safer ground than if we allow someone to interpret it for us. There is no evidence for tampering with the Bible, deliberate or otherwise of the Greek texts into another language.
If I can make an observation: it seems to me that in different times and different periods in human civilization that the topics of contention, and questions about translation or interpretation have to do with the prevailing issues of the day. What I mean is that the problem people have with the text has to do with aspects of themselves that they are not willing to admit as sinful. Today culture is moving towards a normalization of homosexuality, and so it naturally follows that there will be made attempts to question or attempt to disprove teachings and texts that does not agree with this. Make note of that the majority of those who have a problem with the word arsenokoitai are already in a state where they are inclined to believe there is a problem with the text before examining it. They come into the text with the idea that we should challenge the translation, because surely it would not speak against their life and actions, and against what culture today generally accepts. Anyone can approach the Bible in this manner but it is a form of bias and self worship where you put yourself as God. "I can not be wrong. I can not be a sinner. I am born with these features. Therefore they are God-given". Anyone can come in an say t Looking at the word adopted by the LGBT movement, "PRIDE" to symbolize what it is about I think it is symptomatic. We can do it with the word liar for example as an exercise. The English word comes from the Greek word pseustes. Pseustes was also the genus of a snake. So the Bible is talking about snakes, not liars. The Bible doesn't want us to be like snakes. Crawling on the ground and biting apostles. This is eisegesi not exegesis. It is not really speaking of snakes. There is an unwillingness to be humble and even entertain the idea that it could be wrong in the LGBT movement, and that is the one defining thing more or less coloring all debates on the topic today.
Ok, it's clear that you have forgotten that the Old Testament is originally from HEBREW, not Greek. And reading the response of the person you last headbutted with, you didn't have the guts to respond to that. Heck you didn't respond to my questions on the other thread directed at you. What do that say? That you are calling Jesus a hypocrite? Because he said love others, period while other verses say it's a sin? Or you don't like your views being challenged? This isn't "I have proof so I am right." This is about how we are treating God's creation like crap as a whole. And Homosexuality is part of that.
Again, we are ALL God's creation. He created the gays, the lesbians etc. But you are so obsessed with scriptural proof, that you blinded to that fact 100%. Plus you have a huge plank in your eye and it shows. You have failed to see that the version of those verses we got today can be traced back to the original King James version. People believe that it was changed in the King James era because he HATED gays and it stuck ever since. This is why we have the verses as they are today. That scriptural proof that you wanted was changed thanks to King James and his hatred. We been lead on that king's hatred for centuries and it's been used to spread hate! Do.Your.Church.History.Research! You be surprised for what you can find with the right keywords.
And on top of that, there are churches now who ACCEPTS that community because they woke up. They believe that everyone deserves God's love and believes that homosexuality isn't a sin because yet again, God created them that way. They have been called false prophets because of that but they know what God told them and they trusted him. Heck there are Christian ministers who are A PART of the LGBTQ+ community. But yet, there are still churches who believes that there is something wrong with a person who is like a lesbian for example. They try their best to get them "back on track" as it was, and one of the ways is conversion therapy. Do you honestly think that it's ok to do that? even for a kid to be scared like that? Or is it ok to kick someone out on the streets because of that 'sin'? Causing religious trauma? Or even taking their own life because they don't get accepted for who they are because of one thing? It's because of us, the church in general, is driving because of one man's hatred. And you gotta wonder why people are leaving the church and why it's dying in the US. This is one of the contributing factors to this. And if we keep following that, globally the church will die out.
The LGBTQ+ community isn't a movement. Never has been a movement. It's a community that supports each other. They can see love is love, period like God and Jesus does. They can show how to love more than us Christians do. Like I said, Christian Ministers are a part of that community. Yes, some of our brothers and sisters are part of that community. And even today, they get discriminated by the church for how they have been for centuries. They had to fight for their human rights. They have to fight for being treated as a human being. And it's way too late to say that it's moving to be normalized. It already HAS been normalized but yet, they are STILL being discriminated by the church, which is suppose to be open to all, but yet, somehow, they feel unwanted and unloved. Would've said the workplace too, but there has been an order issued to protect them from discrimination there recently. It has been going on so much that in the middle east area, you can be killed for being gay. And you still think that homosexuality is a sin knowing all of this? God is telling the church as a whole to wake up for a LONG time but we are still asleep. He is saying that he created this community but yet you are using the Sword of Truth as an actual weapon of hate, not love.
So again, I ask these questions to you. No scripture, just your answers and yes they have been fixed. How are you going to accept everyone like how God accepts them for who they are and not what they are? What can you do to improve on treating others, like the the way Jesus did? What can you do to save someone from either taking their own life or ended up having religious trauma from the church because someone's sexuality is different from you? And are you are for or against the LGBTQ+ community based on someone else's hatred from centuries ago?
Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2021 4:03 pm
musasgal
Garland-Green
musasgal
OtakuKat
musasgal
And again God created them that way. It's not a lifestyle choice or falling into. It is how God wired them. Just like how God created Caleb and who he is. And he most likely created him to be gay. That is one thing, we as a church as a whole keep forgetting about and still is asleep because of it. There are people in that community that is gay. Heck, I follow a pastor on tiktok who is asexual and there are other pastors who have woken up and became allies.
And yes, it is like loving the criminals, the addicts (there is more than drugs that people can get addicted to). Like I said, it's not easy, but it's not hard to do. Especially when they are God's children. I know. I been there. And like I said. Caleb will need you if his parents rejected him.
So we agree that loving gay people is like loving criminals, addicts, and others who do wrong. We are to love these people like anyone else. However, the thief is a thief for stealing. The drug addict is an addict for using/abusing drugs or something else in an unhealthy way. Does this mean we are to love theft and drug abuse too? Absolutely not. We are to help these people in a loving but truthful way. So it is with homosexuality.
Again, homosexuality is not a sin! It never has been a sin. God is telling you that. Please, listen to him. He's saying that homosexuality is ok. Those children he created was meant to be this way. Don't fall for the old teachings. Don't fall for the hypocrisy. He accepts them for who they are, and we should do the same. This doesn't not mean for accepting the other sins, he got that down pat. Just understand that this is what God wants us to do in this day and age and not use his word, the Sword of Truth to deceive or to spread hate. But to share that he loves them just the way we are. That's why I put down the genesis references, the 3 out of 4 gospel references, the parable. He wants you to read, and reflect. That's all he is asking.
And I did mistake you for angel so sorry about that.
Could you find Scriptural support for homosexuality not being a sin? Do you have any specific verses? I mean I have verses in the OT supporting that the interpretation of the Greek word arsenokoitai in the NT to homosexual in English is the right interpretation... If we use the Bible to interpret itself then I believe we are on a safer ground than if we allow someone to interpret it for us. There is no evidence for tampering with the Bible, deliberate or otherwise of the Greek texts into another language.
If I can make an observation: it seems to me that in different times and different periods in human civilization that the topics of contention, and questions about translation or interpretation have to do with the prevailing issues of the day. What I mean is that the problem people have with the text has to do with aspects of themselves that they are not willing to admit as sinful. Today culture is moving towards a normalization of homosexuality, and so it naturally follows that there will be made attempts to question or attempt to disprove teachings and texts that does not agree with this. Make note of that the majority of those who have a problem with the word arsenokoitai are already in a state where they are inclined to believe there is a problem with the text before examining it. They come into the text with the idea that we should challenge the translation, because surely it would not speak against their life and actions, and against what culture today generally accepts. Anyone can approach the Bible in this manner but it is a form of bias and self worship where you put yourself as God. "I can not be wrong. I can not be a sinner. I am born with these features. Therefore they are God-given". Anyone can come in an say t Looking at the word adopted by the LGBT movement, "PRIDE" to symbolize what it is about I think it is symptomatic. We can do it with the word liar for example as an exercise. The English word comes from the Greek word pseustes. Pseustes was also the genus of a snake. So the Bible is talking about snakes, not liars. The Bible doesn't want us to be like snakes. Crawling on the ground and biting apostles. This is eisegesi not exegesis. It is not really speaking of snakes. There is an unwillingness to be humble and even entertain the idea that it could be wrong in the LGBT movement, and that is the one defining thing more or less coloring all debates on the topic today.
Ok, it's clear that you have forgotten that the Old Testament is originally from HEBREW, not Greek. And reading the response of the person you last headbutted with, you didn't have the guts to respond to that. Heck you didn't respond to my questions on the other thread directed at you. What do that say? That you are calling Jesus a hypocrite? Because he said love others, period while other verses say it's a sin? Or you don't like your views being challenged? This isn't "I have proof so I am right." This is about how we are treating God's creation like crap as a whole. And Homosexuality is part of that.
Again, we are ALL God's creation. He created the gays, the lesbians etc. But you are so obsessed with scriptural proof, that you blinded to that fact 100%. Plus you have a huge plank in your eye and it shows. You have failed to see that the version of those verses we got today can be traced back to the original King James version. People believe that it was changed in the King James era because he HATED gays and it stuck ever since. This is why we have the verses as they are today. That scriptural proof that you wanted was changed thanks to King James and his hatred. We been lead on that king's hatred for centuries and it's been used to spread hate! Do.Your.Church.History.Research! You be surprised for what you can find with the right keywords.
And on top of that, there are churches now who ACCEPTS that community because they woke up. They believe that everyone deserves God's love and believes that homosexuality isn't a sin because yet again, God created them that way. They have been called false prophets because of that but they know what God told them and they trusted him. Heck there are Christian ministers who are A PART of the LGBTQ+ community. But yet, there are still churches who believes that there is something wrong with a person who is like a lesbian for example. They try their best to get them "back on track" as it was, and one of the ways is conversion therapy. Do you honestly think that it's ok to do that? even for a kid to be scared like that? Or is it ok to kick someone out on the streets because of that 'sin'? Causing religious trauma? Or even taking their own life because they don't get accepted for who they are because of one thing? It's because of us, the church in general, is driving because of one man's hatred. And you gotta wonder why people are leaving the church and why it's dying in the US. This is one of the contributing factors to this. And if we keep following that, globally the church will die out.
The LGBTQ+ community isn't a movement. Never has been a movement. It's a community that supports each other. They can see love is love, period like God and Jesus does. They can show how to love more than us Christians do. Like I said, Christian Ministers are a part of that community. Yes, some of our brothers and sisters are part of that community. And even today, they get discriminated by the church for how they have been for centuries. They had to fight for their human rights. They have to fight for being treated as a human being. And it's way too late to say that it's moving to be normalized. It already HAS been normalized but yet, they are STILL being discriminated by the church, which is suppose to be open to all, but yet, somehow, they feel unwanted and unloved. Would've said the workplace too, but there has been an order issued to protect them from discrimination there recently. It has been going on so much that in the middle east area, you can be killed for being gay. And you still think that homosexuality is a sin knowing all of this? God is telling the church as a whole to wake up for a LONG time but we are still asleep. He is saying that he created this community but yet you are using the Sword of Truth as an actual weapon of hate, not love.
So again, I ask these questions to you. No scripture, just your answers and yes they have been fixed. How are you going to accept everyone like how God accepts them for who they are and not what they are? What can you do to improve on treating others, like the the way Jesus did? What can you do to save someone from either taking their own life or ended up having religious trauma from the church because someone's sexuality is different from you? And are you are for or against the LGBTQ+ community based on someone else's hatred from centuries ago?
Your questions are begging the answer. Scripture should be the foundation for what those answer is not emotions. I want to align myself with Scripture and what it says about all topics. From love to judgement and sin. I am not claiming infallibility. On an emotional level knowing people who are gay I want to respond with it is ok. But the Bible clearly say it is a sin. You can even see it from book one. It is a diverging from God's plan for us as humans. Our relationships reflect God. Our genders are made to be completion of each other and to reflect God. God created man and women for a relationship to show us something about His own nature, and about the relationship of Christ and the church. The man being the head of the family, as Christ is the head of the church is one example. A family can not have two heads, just as the body, church, can not operate properly with two heads. There are truths that are not displayed in the lives of same sex relationships that God intended us to reflect as humans.
As for people killing themselves. I would rather that they repented from this identity and found their identity in Christ alone. There is forgiveness for all sins, and this is the message of love. Jesus came to save those who are sinners. Which is every one of us according to the Bible. It is just the nature of our sins that are different. When we take that away, we take away the foundation of the good new, that Jesus died for sinners that we can be reconciled with God, and that in Him we have power to overcome sin in our own lives. It is a dangerous road to take to claim someones sin is not a sin even if it is based on personal convictions. Their fate is our responsibility. Their mortal souls destination will be accounted to our response to their sin.
When we give up Scripture we give up any foundation of truth. Truth is then not fixed but based on opinions and feelings. No feeling being better or worse than the other, and all truths just relative to the situation. A dangerous path to take for a Christian. It is not loving, because to love others you also have to love the truth. Scripture is about Jesus, and Jesus is the truth. Stepping out of the truth to respond to situations based on emotions will get us into trouble. It will damage our credibility and the credibility of the Bible in other peoples eyes. When Jesus met people He was not all-accepting of them. He pointed out their sins. He forgave them, and encouraged them to live a holy life. If you want to live like Jesus you should emulate this. If you want to love other people then you should love them enough to do what Jesus did.
Killing someone for being homosexual is a sin according to Jesus, and one that will result in a judgement of the guilty. He said to leave judgement up to Him and let His angels do the harvest. Love however is not just love. That is the slogan of the world, not what Jesus said. He said: John 14:15 "If you love me, keep my commands". There are several different types of love. There is the self-sacrificial love, and that is the love Jesus wants us to emulate. Both in terms of our relationship to Him, and in our relationships with others.
Matthew 16:24-26 Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?
A movement is an organized group seeking to influence society. A social movement is a loosely organized effort by a large group of people to achieve a particular goal, typically a social or political one. This may be to carry out, resist or undo a social change. It is a type of group action and may involve individuals, organizations or both.
The LGBT by definition fits this description.
Sin is downplayed and attempted to be explained either by genetics or social influence today (it is the prevailing idea that everything a person does can be explained psychologically), but the truth of the matter is that sexuality in us humans is not undamaged by the fall, and when we are born we do not reflect God's image to the extent Adam and Eve does. I can see that in my own life. It is part of my fallen nature to want to do this what I read in the Bible it is wrong. It is not what God wants for me, or for anyone. Even if all of society says it is, and hook ups and cheating is more or less normalized. Sin can appear natural, and even right, but the standards of what is right or what is wrong can not be left for us as humans to decide. We have proven ourselves morally unable time after time. Our fleshly desires is a part of our old nature, striving to do what is opposite to God's nature.
The foundation of human rights must be something else than man. What I mean is that rights that are given by man by consent can just as easily be taken away. Our rights must come from a higher authority. I am not saying humans should not have rights, but what are human rights? How do we agree on what they are if we throw out Scripture and God as the moral authority?
How can we love the drug addict if he will not commit to the fact that drug use is a sin? How can we love him if we don't tell him that God has a different idea of how he should live his life? That the way he live his life is in direct disobedience to God? How can there be repentance if he is left in the dark as to what to repent of?
Two wrongs don't make a right. That gay people are mistreated (a sin) doesn't mean it is not a sin to be a practicing homosexual. A sin is a sin, even though people sin against you. It is illogical to think that because someone is mistreated they are morally in the right.The churches that die are the ones that succumb to the demands of the culture, not the ones keeping to the truth revealed by the Bible. We see the process described in the letters to the seven churches. Can you love someone that is a sinner - yes, certainly. But blind acceptance of all that person does is not love, and we are fooling ourselves and them if we think it is.
The sword of truth is a sword of love in that it corrects us, and cuts through everything to expose it for what it is. Love can sometimes be painful, and cut us in a way that hurts us. God certainly did this with many people in the Bible to get them to see the truth, and to love the truth. We should not take offense at correction, and just want someone to tell us pleasant words of comfort. That is not what God is.
Hebrews 12:5-7 God Disciplines His Sons …And you have forgotten the exhortation that addresses you as sons: “My son, do not take lightly the discipline of the Lord, and do not lose heart when He rebukes you. For the Lord disciplines the one He loves, and He chastises every son He receives.” Endure suffering as discipline; God is treating you as sons. For what son is not disciplined by his father?…
When we attempt to be all sweet we are not representing true love. Love is sometimes bitter to the taste. It sometimes offends our emotions. It sometimes feel like a personal attack. It is however for the sake of our souls. It feels like a personal attack because we identify with the sin, not seeing our own actions for what they are. Your argument of born that way, is not a good one. We are all born imperfect sinners. I don't see anywhere in the Bible that excepts sexuality from the effects of the fall of man. In fact I see it present in even heterosexual sexuality, and in human beings sexual relationships both described in the Bible and in current society.
I am saying you are ignoring Jesus example of how to love others and applying your own ideas of what it means to love others. It is a form of Scripture twisting, and self deceit. If we don't think it is a sin, we think it solely on what society is saying we should think, and we can not help anyone if we do not believe there is something wrong with them. We can not preach the gospel with effect unless we also preach the bad news. There is no good news if there is no bad news.
Not from cowardliness that I did not reply to her, but from being tired and exhausted. If I remember correctly it is more or less the exact topic I had debated just recently when that post was made.I often also forget what I am doing, and who I am debating. I have many things going on in my life. Other times I feel I am repeating myself, and that I am not driving the point home even though I am speaking to people reading and claiming to believe in what I am reading and believing. I can't say that it is not frustrating, and discouraging at times, and you end up giving up the debate. Not because you think you have lost, but because you think there is no convincing the other person. I am human and have to take time (find) to reply to the arguments made. It is exhausting being faced with the same arguments over and over. I think this is also part of the reason Scripture is so nice. I don't have to reason the arguments from my own mind every time I have a debate on a topic. Most topics are covered in the Bible.
As for the Hebrew translation. It (the Septuagint) was translated by seventy Hebrew scholars at the time. The dead sea scrolls where we have the oldest Hebrew text of Leviticus affirms their translation as being the correct one. The Masoretic text seem to have gotten everything else right, why should this one word have been mistranslated? It just seems like a very convenient argument to me...
Garland-Green
Friendly Gaian
Offline
cristobela Vice Captain
Offline
Posted: Mon Jan 25, 2021 6:33 pm
Because of the following...
Garland-Green
musasgal
Could you find Scriptural support for homosexuality not being a sin? Do you have any specific verses? I am closing this thread now as it has digressed into something else than advice. It is more of a debate thread now. If you wish to continue discussing we can do this here:Homosexuality
...in addition to how the OP has not granted me permission to continue in the topic, I'll address musasgal's pressing concerns in this here topic, though primarily not about homosexuality but the advice I gave (which I would've continued in the locked topic where it's most relevant if not for the OP's restriction).
That said,
---
@musasgal, I submit to Scripture as Jesus confirmed. How He explained the Scriptures. He would quote it when teaching, in conversation; every moment is a teachable moment. I don't mind addressing the issues you brought up in this topic [When Your Christian Friend "Comes Out of the Closet"] which is now locked and I do not have permission from the OP to continue responding there; so as the guild captain redirected our attentions to this topic, I'll respond here), but let me emphasize that my focus was: how to deal with sin (correct sin) in the church, identifying the punishments that Scripture is alluding to (verbal correction, to even more drastic expellings), and offering context to eliminate any doubts/fears/anxieties about applying things the way Jesus said to (contrary to how believers may self-impose their own ways, but He, Jesus Himself, taught in agreement with the Father [and so did Paul, when stably handled]). Whether you've developed a close relation with those in the LGBTQ+ community, or you yourself are a part of it, whatever you've heard from their camp, it's keeping you from seeing the simple context of “a male and its mate”. Adam and Eve. Male and female. Husband and wife. But that's not even the crux of what you have an issue with in my replies: primarily, that you don't trust what the Bible says in any of the English versions because of King James (or just the KJV considering more modern versions like the NIV use even older manuscripts available; they don't use the Textus Receptus of the KJB to translate anything, but go directly to the Hebrew and Greek).
Since what you brought up otherwise is not mainly about homosexuality, I questioned whether to address them at all in this topic, but you seem to be in unrest. So, I'll address the issues you had regarding how I went about giving advice to Aquatic_blue, and first dealing with your distrust of the manuscripts.
The earthly evidence, I'll leave second, but first a friendly reminder of the power of God that may help you dispel your distrust and keep everything in focus if you truly believe in an omnipotent God:
He merely Commanded and it all came to be: we/you/humankind have no such power over the galaxies, planets, stars, blackholes, in the expanse of space, the heavens, the skies beyond, let alone does our body have the power to withstand the forces on the earth (hurricanes, tornadoes; the pressures of the deepest depths of the seas, the intense temperatures of magma, you might even fall over at the force of an earthquake). But He is unmoved. God not only made those mighty forces, He controls them, dictates when they occur, their cycles, what they move around, what they preserve in rock. That God, who is not outmaneuvered and outwitted by man (nor angel), also has the power to preserve a piece of rock on the earth. Said rock bearing inscriptions. A piece of paper, many of them, scrolls copied thousands of times over the millennia. Tiny blips on the speck of dust that is the earth in this vast universe. He has the power over them and what happens to them. He can preserve the written revelation, which He Himself intervened into His own creation to give. He can guide His revelation's continued preservation on the earth, written on tablets of stone, scrolls of papyrus, even in “books”, and keep them safe from corruption. Have them buried in a desert for thousands of years to be rediscovered later in the Middle East, untampered with by an English king, who doesn't even control how people in the Middle East interpret their Scriptures.
God can also use faithful servants whose allegiance is to Him and to the careful preservation of His Word who guard it with their life (thus, of what's not buried, but in use, in addition to what was buried and “forgotten” / hidden [by God and man] somewhere). You are forgetting history: the vast amount of manuscripts (physical, handwritten copies) available—and, where they read differently across these different manuscripts, modern translations and printings make note of it as a footnote at the bottom of the page alerting of the alternate readings across these manuscripts, information they've gathered from all these manuscripts and compiled into book form for our convenience. The convenience of holding one book in your hand may have made you forget the thousands of physical, handwritten copies that exist prior to the English language).
A king cannot pervert all those handwritten copies that have been made; it's like having 25,000 handwritten copies scattered throughout your kingdom (not even that because it's not just your own, but across kingdoms in faraway places), in different languages that you may not even speak, you don't know who has a copy (some are buried unbeknownst to you) and edit them all on the planet to say the same deviant thing. If you sat down here, and by hand, wrote a copy of the entire New Testament, for example, it's obvious if someone tries to go in and write something over or into your handwriting. Often times, people would fill up the page entirely trying to use as much space as possible on the page because space was limited. Tablets of stone/slabs of rock and scrolls of papyrus are not a digital / virtual medium. This isn't type / text on a screen, with backspace, delete and an edit button, where editing is easy but tablets of stone and physical, paper scrolls. 25,000 individual copies (I'm referring to the New Testament alone, across various languages, some bearing no paragraphs, no verse numbers, some looking like this...
...not easy to find your place especially in a language you don't know, if those faithful servants even let you near it and don't guard it with their life]).
Romans 3:2 New International Version
2 Much in every way! First of all, the Jews have been entrusted with the very words of God.
And the Old Testament was preserved by Jews (like the Masoretes, and other Jewish groups) for centuries. The Old Testament's preservation is not reliant upon an English-speaking king (neither their preservation nor how they interpret the text) who may or may not have been “homophobic” (by the way, that term that gets tossed around but is practically meaningless when applied to the Bible; a phobia is an irrational fear. But if there's a rational basis for why you speak against using the body in a certain way, it's not a phobia. But based on reason / logic, acknowledging the design and purpose of the human body, including the mouth, the other digestive organs, just as much as the sexual reproductive organs whether God opens the womb or not, their purpose, and Lawful use, according to the One who made them. Same with human relationship, the purpose, the message in physical symbol that God wanted to convey by the design of male and female sexual pairing off, to become one with one another, uniting together in marriage, man and woman, husband and wife). The preservation of the Old Testament text came by the Jews who come from the Middle East. Their copies of the Tanakh (Old Testament — Torah Nevi'im Ketuvim [meaning: “Law, Prophets, Writings”, how they categorize/section off the Old Testament books/scrolls] — hence TaNaKh) has never been dependent (and is still is not dependent) on some English king. They are their own sovereign people / independent nation.
Quote:
The Aleppo Codex (c. 920 CE) and Leningrad Codex (c. 1008 CE) were once the oldest known manuscriptsof the Tanakh in Hebrew. In 1947 CE the finding of the Dead Sea scrolls at Qumran pushed the manuscript history of the Tanakh back a millennium from such codices. Before this discovery, the earliest extant manuscripts of the Old Testament were in Greek, in manuscripts such as the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus. Out of the roughly 800 manuscripts found at Qumran, 220 are from the Tanakh. Every book of the Tanakh is represented except for the Book of Esther; however, most are fragmentary. Notably, there are two scrolls of the Book of Isaiah, one complete (1QIsa), and one around 75% complete (1QIsb). These manuscripts generally date between 150 BCE to 70 CE.[1]
So we're talking BC (and for anyone who doesn't know: BC stands for “Before Christ” and BCE (Before the Common Era) referring to the past on the Julian and Gregorian calendars; in contrast, AD & CE — “AD” = Anno Domini (in the year of the Lord) & CE (common era) referring to the present day, thus sometimes not written because it's understood to designate “not the past” but present day, thus dropped from the written year— the latter two refer to the same thing.
BC / BCE vs. AD / CE
To put things in perspective:
When did the English language develop?
Quote:
English is a West Germanic language that originated from Anglo-Frisian dialects brought to Britain in the mid 5th to 7th centuries AD by Anglo-Saxon migrants from what is now northwest Germany, southern Denmark and the Netherlands. The Anglo-Saxons settled in the British Isles from the mid-5th century and came to dominate the bulk of southern Great Britain. Their language, now called Old English, originated as a group of Anglo-Frisian dialects which were spoken, at least by the settlers, in England and southern and eastern Scotland in the early Middle Ages, displacing the Celtic languages (and, possibly, British Latin) that had previously been dominant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_English
Give or take a year....
Quote:
According to the strict construction, the 1st century AD began with 1 AD and ended with 100 AD, with the same pattern continuing onward.[note 1] In this model, the n-th century started/will start on the year (100 × n) − 99 and ends in 100 × n. Because of this, a century will only include one year, the centennial year, that starts with the century's number (e.g. 1900 was the last year of the 19th century).[2]
In general usage, centuries are built by grouping years based on their shared digits. In this model, the 'n' -th century started/will start on the year (100 x n) - 100 and ends in (100 x n) - 1.[3] For example, the 20th century is generally regarded as from 1900 to 1999, inclusive. This is sometimes known as the odometer effect.[citation needed] The astronomical year numbering and ISO 8601 systems both contain a year zero, so the first century begins with the year zero, rather than the year one.
...that means:
1AD – 100 AD - 1st century 101 – 200 AD - 2nd century 201 – 300 AD - 3rd century 301 – 400 AD - 4th century 401 – 500 AD - 5th century 501 – 600 AD - 6th century 601 – 700 AD - 7th century
Somewhere between 401 – 700 AD.
I repeat: AD.
In contrast, the Old Testament manuscripts exist in the BC's and/or very close to the BC's before or within the first century AD...
When did the King James Bible come about?
Quote:
The King James Version (KJV), also known as the King James Bible (KJB), sometimes as the English version of 1611, or simply the Authorized Version (AV), is an English translation of the Christian Bible for the Church of England, commissioned in 1604 and completed as well as published in 1611 under the sponsorship of James VI and I.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_Version
When did King James live and die?
Quote:
James VI and I (James Charles Stuart; 19 June 1566 – 27 March 1625) was King of Scotland as James VI from 24 July 1567 and King of England and Ireland as James I from the union of the Scottish and English crowns on 24 March 1603 until his death in 1625.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_VI_and_I
AD / CE (hence why no letters; they were dropped).
That's at least 1,000 years after the development of the English language...
In contrast, non-English preservation by scribes:
Quote:
The Masorites produced an official text in A.D. 500. There are other versions that confirm the accuracy of the Masoritic Text.
Samaritan Pentateuch: 400 B.C. Septuagint Greek: 280 B.C. Dead Sea Scrolls: 0 A.D. Latin Vulgate: 400 A.D.
https://www.icr.org/bible-manuscripts
Two in the list of four above are not even in Hebrew, but Greek and Latin (so we have “two to three witnesses” to establish a matter in case people have doubts about the account written in the Hebrew language alone). The existence of Greek, as a second separate witness, that is also early in the BC/BCE's, is for our human benefit.
Still, God allowed scrolls to be discovered in a desert 300 years after King James had died, thus that King James wouldn't have even known about to go and tamper with...more independent witness.
Quote:
[...] Researchers have assembled a collection of 981 different manuscripts – discovered in 1946/47 and in 1956 – from 11 caves. [...]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls
in AD / CE. (...and these Dead Sea Scrolls dated to be from 0 AD, also very early).
King James died in 1625. He's not coming back from the dead to go find those scrolls and tamper with them. No one can outmaneuver God.
God was (and still is) able to preserve His Word that He entrusted to the Jews (really, Israel collectively, from all 12 tribes)—revealing Himself to them as a nation, specifically; the other nations had not received personal revelation like this just theorized about what they experienced in life and speculated about the heavenly realms, off worshiping their idols, the notions of their own minds, the desires of their own flesh to determine how they live upon the earth instead of The Way YHWH has revealed and testified of. Whether coming down onto a mountain to give Moses tablets of stones; or YHWH Himself, millennia later, manifesting onto the earth by incarnating through a woman's womb in the Middle East (Bethlehem, Jerusalem, in Israel). And what He—in His incarnation through a woman's womb thousands of years later, millennia after Moses—spoke did corroborate the Old Testament, the Tanakh, agreeing with it as He saw it preserved.
Mark 12:24-26 New International Version
24 Jesus replied, “Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God? 25 When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. 26 Now about the dead rising—have you not read in the Book of Moses, in the account of the burning bush, how God said to him, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’[a]?
Footnotes:
a. Mark 12:26 Exodus 3:6
That includes Genesis.
Quote:
Most of the Old Testament was written in Hebrew. More than four centuries before the time of Jesus, Judaism already had developed a venerable tradition of carefully copying, maintaining and preserving its written texts. The Jewish sopherim, or scribes, held such a high regard for the Scriptures as the Word of God that they regarded the copying of any error as a sin. No imperfection, no matter how small, was tolerated.
[...]
The Masoretes developed a system of checks to ensure that every copy was as nearly perfect as humanly possible. To make certain they had not added or left out even a single letter, they counted the number of times each letter of the alphabet occurred in each book. They noted and recorded the middle letter of the entire Old Testament. They recorded the middle letter on each page and the number of letters and words in each column. They examined every copy of the Old Testament and withdrew from circulation all copies in which any error was discovered. [...]
With respect to the New Testament, the letters that Jesus' disciples had authored were copied by the thousands—centuries before a particular English king ever existed, before the English language ever existed. He cannot go into all these foreign people's homes (much of the church was persecuted, so they would keep this hidden no less), and edit all their manuscripts (all the thousands of manuscripts that exist) which testify of YHWH-incarnate's independent witness of the integrity of Old Testament scrolls that existed AD / CE (let alone BC / BCE) during His earthly ministry that He was drawing attention to, reading from in their synagogues. Jesus trusted their manuscripts.
What's more, the Jews did not just speak and read in Hebrew at the time:
Acts 2:5-8 New International Version
5 Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6 When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. 7 Utterly amazed, they asked: “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans? 8 Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language?
The official language in Galilee was Aramaic. And whatever other languages these other Jews spoke in their own native nation, was not Hebrew either. That said, having their manuscripts in Hebrew and even Greek (Septuagint, BC/BCE) of the Old Testament do function as valid witnesses of the Scriptures, no tampering from a King James of Scotland and England and Ireland—a millennia removed—to be affecting how Jesus explained and what the Jews thought was the proper sexual pairing for human beings: a male and its mate, male and female, husband and wife. And the whole host of other Commandments that Jesus is agreeing with not just these.
Furthermore, Jesus' followers (like Paul, Peter, John, etc) were Jews and yet what language did they write the New Testament letters in? In Greek. Greek-speaking (Greek-writing, and Greek-reading) Jews. They would be agreeing with the Septuagint which is written in Greek.
Quote:
The New Testament was written in a form of Koine Greek,[1][2] which was the common language of the Eastern Mediterranean[3][4][5][6] from the conquests of Alexander the Great (335–323 BC) until the evolution of Byzantine Greek (c. 600).
They're not contesting but agreeing with their Old Testament Scriptures, even in the Greek manuscripts. King Jame's English does not affect how they think.
Things like this, written in Greek by Jews...
Luke 1:1-4 New International Version Introduction
1 Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled[a] among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3 With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.
Footnotes:
a. Luke 1:1 Or been surely believed
Revelation 1:11 New International Version
11 which said: “Write on a scroll what you see and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea.”
...and these were things they saw (the first passage, speaking of eyewitness accounts they received and preserved, and made orderly account of [referring to the events of Jesus' day; what His disciples reported of Him, attesting to what He did and taught]; the second was a vision that Jesus sent the apostle John after Jesus resurrected and ascended, and He told John to write down on a scroll to send this information to various churches). These existed as physical scrolls, shared as letters; they had a recipient, which later got passed around, and scribes even lay copyists wanting people to have a copy of the information for themselves, had copies made of what the scrolls said, copied by hand: hence “manu” (hand) “script” (written).
They're copying the letters that Jesus' followers penned to each other. And the faithful followers of Jesus—in their letters to each other, and to other fellow believers—would quote Scripture when giving advice as well. Hence the whole 2nd letter to the Church of Corinth that was discussed previously ([When Your Christian Friend "Comes Out of the Closet"]). Do you know how many times Paul quoted from the other books across the Scriptures, as I did, when giving advice to other believers in his letters? Even when the main topic is one thing (i.e. how to deal with sin in the church, properly correct/punish, forgive; repent of sin or his next visit will be distressing too), he also then touches on other subjects (and quotes from across all over the Old Testament) in the same letter:
Examples:
2 Corinthians 4:13 New International Version
13 It is written: “I believed; therefore I have spoken.”[a] Since we have that same spirit of[b] faith, we also believe and therefore speak,
Footnotes
a. 2 Corinthians 4:13 Psalm 116:10 (see Septuagint) b. 2 Corinthians 4:13 Or Spirit-given
Psalm 116:10-11 King James Version
10 I believed, therefore have I spoken: I was greatly afflicted:
11 I said in my haste, All men are liars.
2 Corinthians 6:16 New International Version
16 What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said:
“I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people.”[a]
Footnotes:
a. 2 Corinthians 6:16 Lev. 26:12; Jer. 32:38; Ezek. 37:27 Leviticus 26:12 New International Version
12 I will walk among you and be your God, and you will be my people.
Jeremiah 32:38 New International Version
38 They will be my people, and I will be their God.
Ezekiel 37:27 New International Version
27 My dwelling place will be with them; I will be their God, and they will be my people.
2 Corinthians 10:17 New International Version
17 But, “Let the one who boasts boast in the Lord.”[a]
Footnotes:
a. 2 Corinthians 10:17 Jer. 9:24 Jeremiah 9:24 New International Version
24 but let the one who boasts boast about this: that they have the understanding to know me, that I am the Lord, who exercises kindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for in these I delight,” declares the Lord.
...just to name a few, quoting all up and down the Old Testament—the Law of YHWH, the Prophets of YHWH, the Psalms. Are you going to restrict Paul, in a letter giving advice, to just talk about one thing if/when the Spirit moves him to address other relevant things they need to hear because He detects (and moves Paul to detect) it is necessary for them to hear it as encouragement to keep them soundly in the proper path? Without deviating?
You take issue with my quoting from the Old Testament and New Testament to give advice to Aquatic_blue, but that's no different in spirit than when Paul (and even Jesus) quotes from the Old Testament—to other believers in Christ—to substantiate their claim. I understand that you do have a problem with that because your trust in the Scriptures had been attacked, although baselessly. And after reading the information I offered above—historical facts, and plain logic that exposes the lies you've heard, especially when you focus on what Jesus confirmed the trustworthiness of, all of—hopefully you do not distrust anymore. The truth of history and the whole context of the Bible, not just relying upon a single verse, but all of the Bible establishing the honest, whole picture on the subject, substantiates the cohesive Biblical perspective and triumphs over whatever baseless suspicions people have tried to poison you with like serpents who want you to not trust God's Word (Did God really say? Yes, actually He did, and Jesus [YHWH-incarnate Himself] and His disciples confirmed it).
Also note, this is nearly two thousand years ago when writing was even more painstakingly slow [do you think Greek-speaking and Greek-writing Paul, a Jew [inhabitant of the southern kingdom of Judah/Judea] from the tribe of Benjamin, reading from His Septuagint and accepting Jesus as Messiah, and thus accepting Jesus' explanations, is going to waste his time with something he didn't trust and didn't know to be true, to be faithfully preserved, worth basing his advice on, still applicable and helpful to the human being, Jew and Gentile alike]? Paul's letters are several pages long, we call them books, divide them into chapters (for ease of reading and ease of reference) in modern day.
So, how I go about giving advice is not problematic, unfaithful, sinful, to anything you see in the righteous examples of Scripture. Nor is the thoroughness/length of what I'm doing anything unique. This is how I'm seeking to invest my God-given time on earth. I do think it's worthwhile, trustworthy (I've seen the Commands prove true and guards of safety on earth—more than the Ten), and it's been preserved well (by God in sovereign control of how the Scriptures get hidden, discovered, and preserved, even by two to three independent witnesses, and by faithful servants guarding it). It can be trusted. He can be trusted. How Jesus explains things can be trusted. Not surprisingly, I emulate those I've been discipled by (Moses, Jesus [YHWH, the Holy Spirit], Paul, Peter, John) and how they give advice to fellow believers.
The easiest way to communicate what the Scriptures say is to quote what the Scriptures say (and why people wanted their own handwritten copy so desperately, so that they could, verbatim, have a faithful reminder); they don't want distorted meaning nor their own speculations, but the eyewitness accounts of what happened by those who saw it happen and wrote about it, what they heard, what they saw, in person, in vision, in history. Information received. Experienced, Documented. Attesting to YHWH's existence:
...some of them physically saw Him from the earth.
Exodus 24:9-11 New International Version
9 Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and the seventy elders of Israel went up 10 and saw the God of Israel. Under his feet was something like a pavement made of lapis lazuli, as bright blue as the sky. 11 But God did not raise his hand against these leaders of the Israelites; they saw God, and they ate and drank.
...some were sent visions:
Ezekiel 1:1 New International Version
1 In my thirtieth year, in the fourth month on the fifth day, while I was among the exiles by the Kebar River, the heavens were opened and I saw visions of God.
...some interacted with Him (as the Son) in the flesh, face to face.
Genesis 32:30 New International Version
30 So Jacob called the place Peniel,[a] saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.”
Footnotes:
a. Genesis 32:30 Peniel means face of God.
John 1:1, 14, 18 New International Version
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
[...]
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
[...]
18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and[a] is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.
Footnotes:
a. John 1:18 Some manuscripts but the only Son, who
...these events happened several centuries, nearly a thousand years apart from each other, all BC (BCE) – Exodus vs. Ezekiel. Let alone Genesis in contrast to John.
Tablets...
Habakkuk 2:2 New International Version
2 Then the Lord replied:
“Write down the revelation and make it plain on tablets so that a herald[a] may run with it.
Footnotes:
a. Habakkuk 2:2 Or so that whoever reads it
...scrolls...
Deuteronomy 17:18 New International Version
18 When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the Levitical priests.
...letters...
2 Corinthians 10:9-11 New International Version
9 I do not want to seem to be trying to frighten you with my letters. 10 For some say, “His letters are weighty and forceful, but in person he is unimpressive and his speaking amounts to nothing.” 11 Such people should realize that what we are in our letters when we are absent, we will be in our actions when we are present.
They did not exist as a singular book, just one, that could be edited so now everyone had to make a copy from one corrupt work. No, these tablets and scrolls existed separately as their own pieces of information; people later wrote the information in scrolls and books, and now the information—across those tablets, scrolls, and letters—have been compiled as one in modern times as one book, but that's not how they physically exist (some may even resurface later).
The easiest way to preserve the text is by quoting it outright, simultaneously verifying that you yourself are not misquoting/distorting it nor ignoring context clues.
to be continued...
Posted: Mon Jan 25, 2021 6:34 pm
...continued
So, that said, musasgal, please read the full context of what you quote or cite to refrain from distorting its meaning; you said:
musasgal
It's never been our place to judge because we never got authorized to, even if it's righteous. If you have the guts to judge by taking a speck out of someone's eye, then you not only have a plank in your own eye (Matthew 7:3-4 NIV and Luke 6:41-42 NIV), be prepared to be judged upon too. God is extremely clear on this. Do. Not. Judge.
But you're ignoring the verse right next to it...
Matthew 7:1-5
7 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
...and in Luke, the second verse that you did cite but did not heed...
Luke 6:41-42 New International Version
41 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 42 How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
Take the log out of your own eye first, then you'll be able to see clearly to remove whatever speck is in your brother's eye.
That is not “Do. Not. Judge” ever. But do it correctly.
John 7:24 New International Version
24 Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly.”
Justly without hypocrisy or you'll be exposed for not obeying the same thing you're accusing the other of. Ergo the log in your own eye, remove it first. Then go ahead: judge correctly.
You're judging people for “ignoring Scripture” when, in fact, there is a bigger log in your own eye keeping you from seeing the actual speck in your brother's. You weren't even trusting all of Scripture and the surrounding context that determines proper interpretation nor were you allowing how Jesus explains to determine your view. But outside voices to determine your view. Other brothers and sisters in Christ are looking at Christ's Words in trust, they do trust, and are trying to discern how to apply it faithfully to how Jesus explained a matter (what I'm stressing in particular is that we must allow everything Jesus said to stand (not ignoring the slightest thing He said) or else we wind up at lawless interpretations as Peter warned. Genesis is also the Law, establishing foundational information to human behavior/design and even what happens when people defiantly rebel but on a much longer scale: expelled for a time [the expulsion suffered in the garden will take thousands of years in “time out” before we return to it] but it set the pattern that gets repeated on a smaller scale. That is how the Father established for the proper order for correction when people who already know Him defiantly sin refuse correcting by the Holy Spirit of God, the Word of God, fellow siblings pointing it out when they're ignoring the Father and Son's voice: handed over to Satan in the world).
So, on the one hand, the accusations you're lifting up, what you're alleging is:
you're “ignoring Scripture” for quoting it faithfully and soundly, explaining (and seeking to explain) as Jesus did and yet, at the same time alleging, that... you're “paying attention to Scripture” and “trusting what it says and that that's a problem (in your view, in your distrust of God's power and what is written). The latter (paying attention to Scripure and trusting what it says) is not a problem, and the former (ignoring Scripture) is not what I've done by heeding everything Jesus spoke.
I, for one, am not seeking to ignore anything the Bible says; I make an effort to notice its every detail, understand it in its full context, what all the Books taken together are conveying, and help others notice these details too for their good (as I went about doing in the [When Your Christian Friend "Comes Out of the Closet"] topic). I help others notice, with meticulous attention, what it says as Jesus helped others to as well in every statement in the Law (the Torah), which includes Genesis, and the Prophets, events that occurred in history even before Moses was born, soundly not lawlessly.
And yes, that means: how Jesus / God Himself interprets His own Commands [His own words] in contrast to how other people pervert the meaning by their interpretation/explanation. His interpretation is the One that matters. That's one of the reasons why He manifested onto earth. The sects / flavors of Judaism in charge of teaching His Word, were not consistently applying verses like Him / as He does / expected. So He explained it Himself as Jesus—undeniable for all to see and hear—thousands of years later.
Quote:
interpretation [ in-tur-pri-tey-shuhn ]
noun
1. the act of interpreting; elucidation; explication: This writer's work demands interpretation.
2. an explanation of the meaning of another's artistic or creative work; an elucidation: an interpretation of a poem.
3. a conception of another's behavior: a charitable interpretation of his tactlessness.
4. a way of interpreting. the rendering of a dramatic part, music, etc., so as to bring out the meaning, or to indicate one's particular conception of it.
5. oral translation.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/interpretation
His explanation. The Way of interpreting.
Don't be offended by the word “interpretation”. How I used the word has been faithfully applied to what Jesus / YHWH Himself is actually doing. He gives light (not supposedly "light" that is actually darkness merely passing for light, but true light. God is light. Jesus is the light). He explains. I have not used the word in a blasphemous way.
But those twisting His context to disagree with any of His Commands, including His design for male and female sexual pairing, to disagree that it's exclusively between a man and a woman, as husband and wife, are giving blasphemous interpretations. Disagreeing with Him. The Head (male) is supposed to be unified with the Body (female). You cannot have two different heads.
Ephesians 5:22-33 New International Version
22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”[b] 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.
Footnotes
a. Ephesians 5:26 Or having cleansed b. Ephesians 5:31 Gen. 2:24
That's why He has to spell it out in plain words / plain descriptions sometimes (and even then, some people still try to twist this to be lawless and deny Adam and Eve, and how male and female sexual attraction is suppose to be)...
Romans 1:24-27 New International Version
24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
If there is a sexual burning desire, then male is suppose to be sexually attracted to female; the female sexually attracted to male. Woman lusting after woman is sinful and shameful. Man lusting after man is sinful and shameful.
It's really that simple.
This is why you can't pick and choose what you want to trust about the Bible. It's either all trustworthy, it's every detail, or not at all because the Testaments corroborate each other (the Old speaks ahead of time of what the New would testify of thousands of years later. And the New, thousands of years later, agrees with and draws our attention back to what the Old had said thousands of year ago, making references to it in agreement); two testaments, two witnesses. They agree with each other when interpreted stably. God providing two to three other languages to function as two to three early witnesses of the Old Testament that preserved the truth of the Scriptures, as well.
There's no good reason to distrust what the Commands of Scripture say, even in plain speech; all the more because, when you read what His Word says with faith, and thus trust what He says as good, God guides you into seeing real life examples of why He prohibits certain things. Only when you pay attention to all of it, do you then see the reason why. It's not out of hate, but out of love, care, protection for His creation that He says, “don't use your body that way”. He made it; He knows how it functions best and what it was meant for. Don't eat poison, don't eat waste, urine, feces, even microscopic amounts of it. Unclean things entering your mouth can disease you.
Quote:
Waterborne diseases are illnesses caused by microscopic organisms, like viruses and bacteria, that are ingested through contaminated water or by coming in contact with feces.
In normal, healthy times and especially during a plague.
Quote:
The novel coronavirus is shed in the feces of infected people, which may help explain why it’s spread so fast, according to Chinese researchers.
[...]
The novel SARS-like coronavirus was found in oral and a**l swabs, and blood -- indicating that infected patients may shed the pathogen through respiratory, fecal-oral or body fluid routes, the authors said.
[thus alluding to what I went about explaining and carefully demonstrating about the unclean things in the New Testament that should not be eaten—as I carefully walked Aquatic_blue through]
...continuing...
musasgal
We are all created in God's image. Being gay or being a lesbian or any part of the LGBTQ+ isn't a choice because God created them to be that way.
Even if God is (and He is) sovereign over who is born with homosexual inclinations just like He's sovereign over who is born with bloodlust (those who find enjoyment, thus delight in, snuffing the life out of living things, even wicked ones) that doesn't mean He approves of the lust or the bloodlust. Adam and Eve's children are born with a predisposition to sin now. Sin may manifest differently across individuals: maybe that person is cowardly; this one is a little gluttonous (since the time they're born), this one lies/makes stuff up, you can't trust their words. This one rages / angers easily for no legitimate reason (murderous / lawless killer in the heart, thus baseless). Whatever it is, since little, God allowing them to inherit a sinful disposition doesn't mean He approves of it. Thus why we must be born-again.
John 3:3 New International Version
3 Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.[a]”
Footnotes:
a. John 3:3 The Greek for again also means from above; also in verse 7.
John 3:7 New International Version
7 You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You[a] must be born again.’
Footnotes:
a. John 3:7 The Greek is plural.
Ezekiel 36:27 New International Version
27 And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws.
Romans 8:13 New International Version
13 For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live.
Colossians 3:5-10 New International Version
5 Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. 6 Because of these, the wrath of God is coming.[a] 7 You used to walk in these ways, in the life you once lived. 8 But now you must also rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips. 9 Do not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices 10 and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator.
Footnotes:
a. Colossians 3:6 Some early manuscripts coming on those who are disobedient
Revelation 21:8 New International Version
8 But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”
Galatians 5:16-26 New International Version
16 So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever[a] you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
19 The acts of the flesh are obvious:sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26 Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.
Footnotes:
a. Galatians 5:17 Or you do not do what
Colossians 2:11 New International Version
11 In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh[a] was put off when you were circumcised by[b] Christ,
Footnotes:
a. Colossians 2:11 In contexts like this, the Greek word for flesh (sarx) refers to the sinful state of human beings, often presented as a power in opposition to the Spirit; also in verse 13. b. Colossians 2:11 Or put off in the circumcision of
So, this...
musasgal
cristobela
[...] suggesting following the sinful ways of our flesh / earthly nature that we're born with over the Father's Way is okay to do when Jesus clearly says, "no".
Jesus DID NOT say no. [...]
By saying that we must be born-again, thus not accept the way we are born, but put the sinful, earthly, fleshly nature in our bodies to death, He did say that was not okay. We must be born-again.
musasgal
And there is nothing in the 10 Commandments about sticking with one man and one woman either.
You limit yourself to the Ten Commandments as if Jesus limited Himself to the Ten Commandments only; He did not which I'll demonstrate even when He quoted the two most important Commands. Also relevant, considering the focus of my reply (in the [When Your Christian Friend "Comes Out of the Closet"] topic) included trusting Jesus' interpretation/ explanation in terms of punishment, which yes requires judgment, correction, rebuke, (verbal even expellings) look at what He's quoting from and notice what He agrees is loving to do... (but that you say “no” to, contrary to Him and the totality of what He said).
Matthew 22:39 New International Version
39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[a]
Footnotes:
a. Matthew 22:39 Lev. 19:18
Leviticus 19:17-18 New International Version
17 “‘Do not hate a fellow Israelite in your heart. Rebuke your neighbor frankly so you will not share in their guilt.
18 “‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord.
You say it's hateful to rebuke, to judge, to correct. But He says it is love to judge correctly, truthfully, frankly. If you rebuke (correct) someone, then you have judged something to be wrong; ergo, why you're correcting it. Telling them to pursue what is right instead.
You are redefining love and hate, inverting what He says, totally flipped. I would advise that you—as a Christian—fully submit to Jesus' example. He accepts more than the Ten Commandments. He is the Word made flesh. He embodies and agrees with all of YHWH's Word.
musasgal
cristobela
Wherever we take the Gospel and the Word of God in its completeness, we should be able to protect people, save them from the cultural practices that plague them, unbeknownst to them, that only God's Commands draw attention to
I have an issue with this part. God gave us free will for a good reason. At this point, saying save them from cultural practices that plague them is wrong on so many levels. [...]
Let's define the word “culture” to expose something:
Quote:
culture noun
cul·ture | ˈkəl-chər How to pronounce culture (audio)
Definition of culture (Entry 1 of 2) 1a : the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or social group also : the characteristic features of everyday existence (such as diversions or a way of life) shared by people in a place or time // popular culture // Southern culture
If it's not The Way, The Truth, and The Life...but other ways that seem right to man but in the end its ways are of death, not life (nor eternal life), that they think is healing but that's a lie (they've been deceived), the truth is that is a path of harm, will you warn them that what they're pursuing is wrong? To save them? Prove to them that their cultural ways are wrong?
Would you save someone from Ba'al culture/religion?
1 Kings 18:25-28 New International Version
25 Elijah said to the prophets of Baal, “Choose one of the bulls and prepare it first, since there are so many of you. Call on the name of your god, but do not light the fire.” 26 So they took the bull given them and prepared it.
Then they called on the name of Baal from morning till noon. “Baal, answer us!” they shouted. But there was no response; no one answered. And they danced around the altar they had made.
27 At noon Elijah began to taunt them. “Shout louder!” he said. “Surely he is a god! Perhaps he is deep in thought, or busy, or traveling. Maybe he is sleeping and must be awakened.” 28 So they shouted louder and slashed themselves with swords and spears, as was their custom, until their blood flowed.
Because if you would dare tell them to stop swinging their swords around all haphazardly/indiscriminately/crazily to make themselves bleed, lacerating themselves, risking amputation of limbs, even lawlessly hurting someone else who passes by randomly around them, then you're not respecting their culture / their “way of life”, but respecting The Way of Life—True Love—for judging their culture. I'd want to be saved from the crazy, wild, dangerously undiscerning practices of my own culture, brought into order, peace, self-control. Proper safe, orderly functioning.
YHWH and Elijah are going one step further by proving beyond a shadow of a doubt the worthlessness of their pagan practices. That is YHWH. That is God. That is love.
Would you accept practices from pagan cultures that poison people's bodies?
Quote:
While in Japan tattoos are taboo due to the related gang crime stigma, in Thailand the history of tattooing is strongly linked to the Buddhist religion and monks.
[...]
In the age-old custom, a Sak Yant tattoo was originally placed on the skin through the use of a bamboo rod with a needle at the end. This needle is used to hammer in ink created from a mix of charcoal and snake venom, along with other ingredients thought to be sacred.
How is putting snake venom into a human being's skin (their number one defense in their immune system) loving your neighbor? It's not.
Loving your neighbor would have you tell them:
Leviticus 19:28 New International Version
28 “‘Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves. I am the Lord.
That's not Ten Commandments either, but it is loving your neighbor to warn them and call it wrong.
Not just because of the venom, but tattoo-ing in general unnecessarily attacking the defenses of your immune system in this way.
And it is an attack on the immune system:
Quote:
Buckle up for a little science lesson. To understand how tattoos fade, let’s first tackle how they really work. Most people will answer that the ink is injected so deep into the skin that it stays put permanently. Well, sort of. Your tattoo artist actually applies ink to the middle layer of your skin, called the dermis. From there, you can thank your immune system for keeping your fresh design in place. Each time the needle pierces your skin, your body sends a fleet of immune cells called macrophages to the dermis. To you, you’re creating art; to these white blood cells, you’re being wounded. In order to clean the area up, they gobble up the tattoo ink and settle into the dermis permanently, causing the ink to stay visible for a lifetime.
[...]
Why, then, do our tattoos fade? Like all of our cells, macrophages will eventually die. When they do, the tattoo ink is released back into the dermis. Just like before, the suspended ink sounds an alarm within your body, calling a new fleet of macrophages to the site. Like the troopers they are, the new macrophages chow down the tattoo ink and replace their fallen brethren. Of course, no processes are perfect. Each time a macrophage withers and is succeeded by a new white blood cell, some tattoo ink is lost and drained away from the skin. This causes tattoos to fade over time. So, the next time you admire your body art, give it a little extra love for the constant battle your immune system takes on to keep your ink locked in.
The ink shouldn't even be there literally in your skin. A waste of your immune system's resources. When does your immune system rest and concentrate on more important matters if it's constantly waging war on the ink? Needless drain of resources.
Will you respect the Pharisee's way of worship? Though Jesus said of them:
Matthew 23:33-34 New International Version
33 “You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell? 34 Therefore I am sending you prophets and sages and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town.
Snakes because they belittle the truth. And they'd feed people lying, lawless explanations.
The people puffed up like the leaven of the Pharisees in their pride/arrogance/defiant rebellion, never allow people to truly obey the Commands of the Father as it is written that would keep them safe as He intended. Constantly trying to kill off the truth sent to them to remind them of what is written. Perverting, distorting, in their explanations, the simple truth as it is written.
If you loved your neighbor, you'd teach them the Law of YHWH (the Law of Love). And how to keep it in Spirit and in Truth. You'd only respect The Way to live on earth, not all the broad ways.
Jesus taught in accord with the narrow Way, He is The Way, and He Himself agreed with the Law and the Prophets:
John 10:7 New International Version
7 Therefore Jesus said again, “Very truly I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep.
Matthew 7:12-14 New International Version
12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.
13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it
Proverbs 14:12 New International Version
12 There is a way that appears to beright, but in the end it leads to death.
2 Corinthians 11:14-15 New International Version
14 And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. 15 It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.
1 Corinthians 10:20 New International Version
20 No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, notto God, and I do not want you to be participants withdemons.
Revelation 12:9 New International Version
9 The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.
Astray to what? The broad ways, the Baalim, the Asherim, their idolatry, of all the cultures of the world—what the nations (pagans) are worshiping by default. Distortions of whom YHWH revealed Himself to be, but is faithfully preserved in what is written; they're without YHWH's Way sufficiently revealed to them as He revealed and preserved through the Jews. The nations are not following the Way if they don't learn His Law.
Ezekiel 5:6-7 New International Version
6 Yet in her wickedness she has rebelled against my laws and decrees more than the nations and countries around her. She has rejected my laws and has not followed my decrees.
7 “Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says: You have been more unruly than the nations around you and have not followed my decrees or kept my laws. You have not even[a] conformed to the standards of the nations around you.
Footnotes
a. Ezekiel 5:7 Most Hebrew manuscripts; some Hebrew manuscripts and SyriacYouhave
Ezekiel 11:12 New International Version
12 And you will know that I am the Lord, for you have not followed my decrees or kept my laws but have conformed to the standards of the nations around you.”
Jeremiah 16:19 New International Version
19 Lord, my strength and my fortress, my refuge in time of distress, to you the nations will come from the ends of the earth and say, “Our ancestors possessed nothing but false gods, worthless idols that did them no good.
Micah 4:2 New International Version
2 Many nations will come and say,
“Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the temple of the God of Jacob. He will teach us his ways, so that we may walk in his paths.” The law will go out from Zion, the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
YHWH had to draw everyone back to The Way by manifesting on earth because even His own teachers of the Law were ignoring Him, not making disciples according to what is written, what He intervened to have written (as I went about proving from the New Testament, by Jesus' own words, in the topic [When Your Christian Friend "Comes Out of the Closet"]]). Jesus / YHWH does not accept all the “ways”. There's only one.
John 14:6 New International Version
6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
And one faith which we must be unified in, as we grow in the grace and the knowledge of Christ, reaching full maturity, not stay a baby tossed back and forth by every wind of doctrine.
Ephesians 4:3-6 New International Version
3 Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. 4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
Ephesians 4:11-15 New International Version
11 So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, 12 to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13 until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.
14 Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of people in their deceitful scheming. 15 Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him who is the head, that is, Christ.
...hence the advanced in development—with stable, sound discernment, not lawless—replies I made when giving advice to Aquatic_blue for how to deal with her situation to assuage her fears to do as it is written, trusting Jesus' words and example fully.
He's not for “all the ways” (there is only one) nor “every wind of teaching” (there's only One that comes from Him). He's for the good doctrine, not demonic doctrine, but good doctrine as YHWH Himself defined, the one in accord with the One, soundly agreeing with what the Son of God said, all of what He said (which actually agrees with the Father, when we heed everything Jesus says in the New Testament, as I went about highlighting to Aquatic_blue), as He explained in the Way that does not deny anything else He revealed/explained/gave light to.
After you've made your free will choice to follow after Him, what's lawless/sinful isn't the kind of thing you can choose to stay in / participate in, but must leave (we must leave our life of sin or something worse may happen to us; that is in contrast to the kinds of things in Paul's epistles that we're free to be convinced about in our own minds, which I offered in contrast—using Jesus' own definitions of words, not outside voices, the kinds of things more thoroughly covered in the aforementioned topic—that we choose to participate in [or not] because they're not lawless / condemned by the Law any of the written Torah, including Genesis), and still be walking in obedience not coming under church correction (correction which Jesus gave instructions for, on how to do, correct sin, even judge it as wrong, ergo why you're correcting it, as did Paul too, both based on the Father's teaching of how to correct sin). Once we fully trust and heed how Jesus explained Himself in the entirety of the New Testament, these things are easy to see.
