Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-24-2018, 08:15 AM
 
18,911 posts, read 6,919,266 times
Reputation: 3554

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy View Post
You can assume anything you want, but that doesn't make it logical. At the time that letter was written, the only possible understanding of the term "Scripture" was in reference to the documents used in the Jewish synagogues.

If that letter had said that it was divinely inspired, and assuming anybody believed at that time that it was, it would have been enshrined in a special display and an entire building constructed to preserve it.

Where is the original letter?
Except that Paul’s writings were identified as Scripture by Peter. They knew they were writing Gods Word.

 
Old 12-24-2018, 08:59 AM
 
Location: West Virginia
16,626 posts, read 15,574,252 times
Reputation: 10869
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie View Post
Except that Paul’s writings were identified as Scripture by Peter. They knew they were writing Gods Word.
Nope. Not a chance. Paul was writing letters; some obviously in response to letters he had received.
__________________
Moderator posts are in RED.
City-Data Terms of Service: http://www.city-data.com/terms.html
 
Old 12-24-2018, 09:03 AM
 
Location: New England
37,337 posts, read 28,183,898 times
Reputation: 2744
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie View Post
Except that Paul’s writings were identified as Scripture by Peter. They knew they were writing Gods Word.
No they were not. The scriptures are the OT.
 
Old 12-24-2018, 09:11 AM
 
28,621 posts, read 18,668,277 times
Reputation: 30899
A few years ago I had lunch with a pastor of my church, and over the course of a number of subjects, we spoke of how the issue of homosexuality was being handled in the church.

While we agreed that homosexuality was incompatible with Christianity, he had this further to say:

"Let's say we had a brother who was wrestling with pornography or adultery or gambling or beating his wife or alcoholism or anything else. I could call up the elders and say, 'Brother Smith is wrestling with adultery--he told me he needs brothers to come together with him to help him resist it.' I could say that about any other sin, and the elders would all rush to help. But if I said, 'Brother Smith is wrestling with homosexuality,' they'd all run away like roaches. This is the problem with the way we handle this sin in the congregation compared to other sins: It's the only sin we require a man to have resolved before we'll have anything to do with him."

Since then, it's gotten even worse. If you'll notice, any Christian who is working to bring the love of Christ to homosexuals--anyone who is actually evangelizing homosexuals as Christ would evangelize them--will be persecuted by other Christians.

The bottom line there is that Christians are approaching homosexuality the way Jonah approached the Ninevites: Christians don't want anyone to say "Jesus loves you" to homosexuals because that might cause some of them to investigate Jesus and--oh, my gawd--accept Him.
They don't even want to risk homosexuals being saved...they want homosexuals to be condemned.
 
Old 12-24-2018, 09:32 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
10,688 posts, read 7,681,110 times
Reputation: 4674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk View Post
A few years ago I had lunch with a pastor of my church, and over the course of a number of subjects, we spoke of how the issue of homosexuality was being handled in the church.

While we agreed that homosexuality was incompatible with Christianity, he had this further to say:

"Let's say we had a brother who was wrestling with pornography or adultery or gambling or beating his wife or alcoholism or anything else. I could call up the elders and say, 'Brother Smith is wrestling with adultery--he told me he needs brothers to come together with him to help him resist it.' I could say that about any other sin, and the elders would all rush to help. But if I said, 'Brother Smith is wrestling with homosexuality,' they'd all run away like roaches. This is the problem with the way we handle this sin in the congregation compared to other sins: It's the only sin we require a man to have resolved before we'll have anything to do with him."

Since then, it's gotten even worse. If you'll notice, any Christian who is working to bring the love of Christ to homosexuals--anyone who is actually evangelizing homosexuals as Christ would evangelize them--will be persecuted by other Christians.

The bottom line there is that Christians are approaching homosexuality the way Jonah approached the Ninevites: Christians don't want anyone to say "Jesus loves you" to homosexuals because that might cause some of them to investigate Jesus and--oh, my gawd--accept Him.
They don't even want to risk homosexuals being saved...they want homosexuals to be condemned.
I knew a terrific Christian homosexual in college. He wasn't "out" as it was in the early seventies and we were at a Southern Baptist college----back when homosexuality wasn't even addressed by the SBC and they actually had "liberal" college professors.

He was a great witness for Christ, played a gospel piano like nobody I'd ever heard in person, and could preach as well. Many years after we'd left college, he came back to our church in Kentucky and conducted a revival. Our pastor and he had been close friends in school.

So, yes, there are gay Christians as well as people calling themselves Christian who deny the right of salvation and freedom to people born as God wanted them---gay.

There have been gay musicians in Christian music---every single one shunned upon coming out--showing just how "christian" evangelicals truly are:

Quote:
Way back in the 80’s, before recent LGBT social movements came into play, Marsha Stevens came out of the closet. She faced similar issues as Knapp – Christian label Maranatha Music dropped her following her announcement, according to Forbes.
“I was completely taken aback by the reaction,” Stevens said. “I spent about five years saying ‘I don’t need Jesus,’ but I absolutely do. I couldn’t make myself not be a Christian.”
Publishers dropped many of her concert bookings and her albums were removed from retail outlets.
A few years following her coming out, she joined the LGBT-friendly Metropolitan Community Church as an active member. Since then, she has written songs for their general conferences for the past two decades.
---------

Fort Lauderdale’s own Ray Boltz came out to his family in 2004.
“Their reaction was incredible. They affirmed me and told me they loved me,” Boltz told SFGN in a 2010 interview. ““It was not easy coming out, but it was good. I had grown up in the Bible Belt, and when I was 19, I went to a Christian music concert that changed my life, and yes, I had some gay sexual experience as a teenager and I thought it was sinful but…for the next 30 years I had this great family and career and after 30 years I said to myself ‘This just isn’t working.’ I had been in counseling and on anti-depressants and then I finally came out to them.”
Two years later, the artist, who sold 4.5 million records, made his sexuality public.
“I was very well known in the Christian music world when I came out. I had some people tell me to buy a gun and shoot myself. Other people demanded that I return the music awards I had received. Some people mailed my CDs back to me. They never bothered to understand that I wasn’t going out and picking up hustlers during all those years. Some people hunted me down here and knocked on the door to give me a piece of their mind.”
http://southfloridagaynews.com/Music...musicians.html


P.S. My gay colleague became an SBC pastor in Indiana for over a decade before ultimately succumbing to Aids. But some on this board will say he got what his "sin" wrought, just as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson claimed 9/11 was the result of "rampant" homosexuality in America.

The number of evangelical liars on this very thread is not at all astonishing. Most actually BELIEVE they are being kind to gay people regardless of the number of reports that their attitude and words as well as the bullying it encourages has caused many in the gay community to commit suicide. They sit smugly in their pews on Sunday mornings and they will tonight at their Christmas Eve services. God may not hold them responsible for complicity in the deaths of hundreds, if not thousands of homosexuals. But I do.

Last edited by Wardendresden; 12-24-2018 at 09:52 AM..
 
Old 12-24-2018, 09:49 AM
 
Location: New England
37,337 posts, read 28,183,898 times
Reputation: 2744
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post
I knew a terrific Christian homosexual in college. He wasn't "out" as it was in the early seventies and we were at a Southern Baptist college----back when homosexuality wasn't even addressed by the SBC and they actually had "liberal" college professors.

He was a great witness for Christ, played a gospel piano like nobody I'd ever heard in person, and could preach as well. Many years after we'd left college, he came back to our church in Kentucky and conducted a revival. Our pastor and he had been close friends in school.

So, yes, there are gay Christians as well as people calling themselves Christian who deny the right of salvation and freedom to people born as God wanted them---gay.

P.S. My gay colleague became an SBC pastor in Indiana for over a decade before ultimately succumbing to Aids. But some on this board will say he got what his "sin" wrought, just as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson claimed 9/11 was the result of "rampant" homosexuality in America.
It makes you want to throw up when you hear them say this kind of crap. Fundamentalists have made christianity about what they assume is sin instead of Jesus Christ the righteousness of God, and the reason being is they don't have a clue what righteousness is, i'm sure they think its trying not to sin anymore and condemning everything they think is sin. How sad is that.
 
Old 12-24-2018, 10:03 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
10,688 posts, read 7,681,110 times
Reputation: 4674
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie View Post
Except that Paul’s writings were identified as Scripture by Peter. They knew they were writing Gods Word.
Understood in the original Greek, Peter criticizes Paul:
Quote:
Paul spoke with "wisdom given unto him," not inspiration. Thus, in the early church, when Paul is quoted, it is not "the Bible" tells us, or "Paul by the Holy Spirit said," as we incessantly are told today. Instead, in the early church, we were told to "hear" Paul who "proclaims these things 'according to the wisdom given him in ministry'...," quoting Second Peter. (Origen ca. 200 AD, Homolies on Genesis & Exodus, Book 8 (Ed. Ronald Heine, 2010) p. 316.)

Polycarp (69-155 AD) spoke likewise. Polycarp was an early enthusiastic supporter of Paul's doctrines in the next generation. However, listen in this famous quote whether inspiration or wisdom is the source of Paul's words: "For neither am I, nor is any other like unto me, able to follow the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul, who when he came among you taught face to face with the men of that day the word which concerneth truth carefully and surely; who also, when he was absent, wrote a letter unto you, into the which if ye look diligently, ye shall be able to be builded up unto the faith given to you...." Joseph Barber Lightfoot and J. R. Harmer, The Apostolic Fathers (London: Macmillan and Co., 1891) at 178.
Please note that Polycarp says "he cannot follow" the wisdom of Paul, meaning it is hard to comprehend or understand -- just like Second Peter says.

Paul speaks of some things "hard to be understood." This is more correctly translated as that Paul speaks some "nonsensical" things or things "destructive of good sense." The Greek word is "dysnoetas."
In Greek, DYS as a prefix means "DESTROYING THE GOOD SENSE OF A WORD" that follows
(Liddel & Scott quoted at Dictionary.com]. Then the word that follows is NOETAS, and it means SENSIBLE. See Francis E. Peter, Greek Philosophical Terms: An Historical Lexicon(1967) at 130 ("logoi noeton" = "sensible things"); 128 (noeton = "intelligible") Cf. NOETA = thought.

Hence, DYSNOETAS means "nonsensical thoughts" or "unintelligible thoughts" to reflect that the writer lacks any sense to what he or she is writing. The problem is the words simply don't make any good sense. They defy common sense. Thus, it is clear the problem is Paul's fault by the word DYSNOETAS used by Apostle Peter, according to its traditional authorship. Some of Paul's writings are said to suffer from DYSNOETAS. What does that convey?

In the Latin Vulgate of 2 Peter 3:16 from the early 400s, it is translated as "difficulty in intelligence" -- a Latin expression meaning similar to the Greek that the writer has a deficiency in making intelligent sense. If the reader misunderstands, the mistake began initially with the writer. Hence, Second Peter is a criticism of Paul's content - his writing is sometimes lacking sense, with grave consequences -- a lawless life and personal destruction of Paul's reader.

It is true that Second Peter then blames the readers in part for having an unstable ignorance, likely of Jesus' words. This then leads them to accept their understanding of Paul's nonsensical words, and adopt "lawless" principles, so says Second Peter, "to their own destruction," and thereby lose their "steadfastness in Christ." (2 Peter 3:17-18.)

Peter thus lays at Paul's feet PART OF THE BLAME for the loss of stedfastness in Christ and falling into a lawless and destructive life of error.
https://www.jesuswordsonly.com/books...e-to-paul.html
 
Old 12-24-2018, 11:19 AM
 
Location: West Virginia
16,626 posts, read 15,574,252 times
Reputation: 10869
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post
Understood in the original Greek, Peter criticizes Paul:

Quote:
Paul spoke with "wisdom given unto him," not inspiration. Thus, in the early church, when Paul is quoted, it is not "the Bible" tells us, or "Paul by the Holy Spirit said," as we incessantly are told today. Instead, in the early church, we were told to "hear" Paul who "proclaims these things 'according to the wisdom given him in ministry'...," quoting Second Peter. (Origen ca. 200 AD, Homolies on Genesis & Exodus, Book 8 (Ed. Ronald Heine, 2010) p. 316.)

Polycarp (69-155 AD) spoke likewise. Polycarp was an early enthusiastic supporter of Paul's doctrines in the next generation. However, listen in this famous quote whether inspiration or wisdom is the source of Paul's words: "For neither am I, nor is any other like unto me, able to follow the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul, who when he came among you taught face to face with the men of that day the word which concerneth truth carefully and surely; who also, when he was absent, wrote a letter unto you, into the which if ye look diligently, ye shall be able to be builded up unto the faith given to you...." Joseph Barber Lightfoot and J. R. Harmer, The Apostolic Fathers (London: Macmillan and Co., 1891) at 178.
Please note that Polycarp says "he cannot follow" the wisdom of Paul, meaning it is hard to comprehend or understand -- just like Second Peter says.

Paul speaks of some things "hard to be understood." This is more correctly translated as that Paul speaks some "nonsensical" things or things "destructive of good sense." The Greek word is "dysnoetas."
In Greek, DYS as a prefix means "DESTROYING THE GOOD SENSE OF A WORD" that follows
(Liddel & Scott quoted at Dictionary.com]. Then the word that follows is NOETAS, and it means SENSIBLE. See Francis E. Peter, Greek Philosophical Terms: An Historical Lexicon(1967) at 130 ("logoi noeton" = "sensible things"); 128 (noeton = "intelligible") Cf. NOETA = thought.

Hence, DYSNOETAS means "nonsensical thoughts" or "unintelligible thoughts" to reflect that the writer lacks any sense to what he or she is writing. The problem is the words simply don't make any good sense. They defy common sense. Thus, it is clear the problem is Paul's fault by the word DYSNOETAS used by Apostle Peter, according to its traditional authorship. Some of Paul's writings are said to suffer from DYSNOETAS. What does that convey?

In the Latin Vulgate of 2 Peter 3:16 from the early 400s, it is translated as "difficulty in intelligence" -- a Latin expression meaning similar to the Greek that the writer has a deficiency in making intelligent sense. If the reader misunderstands, the mistake began initially with the writer. Hence, Second Peter is a criticism of Paul's content - his writing is sometimes lacking sense, with grave consequences -- a lawless life and personal destruction of Paul's reader.

It is true that Second Peter then blames the readers in part for having an unstable ignorance, likely of Jesus' words. This then leads them to accept their understanding of Paul's nonsensical words, and adopt "lawless" principles, so says Second Peter, "to their own destruction," and thereby lose their "steadfastness in Christ." (2 Peter 3:17-18.)

Peter thus lays at Paul's feet PART OF THE BLAME for the loss of stedfastness in Christ and falling into a lawless and destructive life of error.
https://www.jesuswordsonly.com/books...e-to-paul.html
So, let's see if I got this right. Peter said what Paul wrote was nonsense. BaptistFiundie said Peter said it was Scripture. Is that about it? They can't both be right, so who do we believe, Peter or BaptistFundie?
__________________
Moderator posts are in RED.
City-Data Terms of Service: http://www.city-data.com/terms.html
 
Old 12-24-2018, 12:07 PM
 
Location: On the brink of WWIII
21,088 posts, read 29,132,415 times
Reputation: 7812
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy View Post
So, let's see if I got this right. Peter said what Paul wrote was nonsense. BaptistFiundie said Peter said it was Scripture. Is that about it? They can't both be right, so who do we believe, Peter or BaptistFundie?
I tend to believe what god has told me...both Peter's and BaptistFundie's opinions hold no weight...

What matters is god's use of the word ALL....

 
Old 12-24-2018, 02:39 PM
 
10,800 posts, read 3,572,165 times
Reputation: 5951
Quote:
Originally Posted by zthatzmanz28 View Post
I tend to believe what god has told me...both Peter's and BaptistFundie's opinions hold no weight...

What matters is god's use of the word ALL....
How would you know you're right?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.



All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top