Split: Feminisim is Anti-Christ

[apothanein kerdos]

Guys - feminism is irrelevant to this thread. It is a SPLIT OFF of the other thread.

[firehill]

What is feminism? What do we mean by that term?

Good question. Most of the time I hear Christians using it on other Christians it's like a swear word. If you don't like what someone said, or if you disagree with them, call them a feminist! Doesn't matter if they are or not.

I don't think there are many who consider themselves Christian feminists. While the original suffragetts were called feminists and they did some great things for our country, bringing women the right to vote, own property, eventually have credit, and to NOT have an abortion

[None]

Again, how can you have faith if you have no factual basis for your belief?

I have faith that I'm supposed to kill all humans. You can't say I'm wrong - faith is supposed to be illogical.

Just in case that is your faith, I'm actually a cat, not a human.

[None]

Oh, and:

1 Peter 3:15

Two words in there: logos and apologia. Both, in Greek, refer to logical arguments.

Oh..almost forgot....how can you use scripture to justify what you believe? How can you trust scripture?

I "combine it with faith".

[firehill]

Oh, and:

1 Peter 3:15

Two words in there: logos and apologia. Both, in Greek, refer to logical arguments.

Oh..almost forgot....how can you use scripture to justify what you believe? How can you trust scripture?

I "combine it with faith".

Good defense.

How far does he want to stretch his BRAIN? Is he still attempting to show off his mental gymnastics and then some...? Absoulte Truth vs. Relativity is indeed the most exciting debate that I can fathom these days.

[None]

Oh, and:

1 Peter 3:15

Two words in there: logos and apologia. Both, in Greek, refer to logical arguments.

Oh..almost forgot....how can you use scripture to justify what you believe? How can you trust scripture?

I "combine it with faith".

Good defense.

How far does he want to stretch his BRAIN? Is he still attempting to show off his mental gymnastics and then some...? Absoulte Truth vs. Relativity is indeed the most exciting debate that I can fathom these days.

The Word is Truth and God's children know Truth when they hear it no matter where it's coming from or what texts have been around long enough to historically back it up. God's Truth, His Word, can come out of a small child's mouth if God so chose to allow it, He is no respecter of persons(no matter how well studied they think they are).

I research word variations, too. I'm guilty of over studying sometimes. But sometimes overstudying takes away from the core of our belief in Jesus, faith, and wraps it around ourselves.

[apothanein kerdos]

Again, how can you have faith if you have no factual basis for your belief?

I have faith that I'm supposed to kill all humans. You can't say I'm wrong - faith is supposed to be illogical.

Just in case that is your faith, I'm actually a cat, not a human.

Works for me. I don't value animals as much as I do humans. So under your reasoning I can torture you before I kill you, and that's okay because it's my faith.

I "combine it with faith".

Faith in what? All faith stems from the truth of scriptures. Thus, if you doubt scripture, how can you have faith?

The Word is Truth and God's children know Truth when they hear it no matter where it's coming from or what texts have been around long enough to historically back it up. God's Truth, His Word, can come out of a small child's mouth if God so chose to allow it, He is no respecter of persons(no matter how well studied they think they are).

How is the Word truth if you don't believe it?

[None]

Again, how can you have faith if you have no factual basis for your belief?

I have faith that I'm supposed to kill all humans. You can't say I'm wrong - faith is supposed to be illogical.

Just in case that is your faith, I'm actually a cat, not a human.

Works for me. I don't value animals as much as I do humans. So under your reasoning I can torture you before I kill you, and that's okay because it's my faith.

Since clearly this part of the conversation is my reasoning and not your faith, then I'm an invincible ninjacat and will be doing the torturing, mentally.

Faith in what? All faith stems from the truth of scriptures. Thus, if you doubt scripture, how can you have faith?

Believing in Jesus saves us from going to Hell and makes us children of God. When I recieved Christ as my personal savior, I was "reborn" in Christ, at which time, God wrote on my heart His commandments.

This is a promise that God Himself made.

Jeremiah 31:33

33) "This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel

after that time," declares the LORD.

"I will put my law in their minds

and write it on their hearts.

I will be their God,

and they will be my people.

I'd never even read one single scripture when I believed in Christ for the first time in my life, I was only five. I was taught that it was easier for a little child to enter the Kingdom of Heaven than a well versed man, why do you suppose that is? Because men trust to much in their knowledge and knowledge without faith is useless.

All faith does NOT stem from what you refer to as scriptures, it stems from the Word of God which can come from whomever God chooses, even a donkey, if God wanted. "As moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up..." When I accepted that, I became a child adopted by God, a Christian. Just as the Isrealites believed and were healed from the poisonous snake bites by looking at the snake, so I had been healed of my sin by looking up to the cross and believing on Jesus. I didn't know any of the dynamics at the time I believed, I didn't care. All I knew was I was now a child of God and going to Heaven one day. It wasn't until much later on that I searched God out through reading the scriptures, gaining a better understanding of Him and having conformation, in written word, of what I already knew in my heart to be true.

Deuteronomy 30:11-14

The Offer of Life or Death

11)Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach.

12)It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask,

"Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?"

13)Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask,

"Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?"

14)No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.

How is the Word truth if you don't believe it?

Just what "word", exactly, are you refering to? I'm certain you can elaborate on "scriptures" or "word", because I stated my case very clearly, while you're still twisting statements around.

When Paul said, "all scripture is given by inspiration of God..."

Here, scripture(graphe <1124>) mean can mean 1 of 3 things(?):

1) a writing, thing written

2) the Scripture, used to denote either the book itself, or

its contents

3) a certain portion or section of the Holy Scripture

Just a few verses earlier Paul states to Timothy, "You, however, have followed my teaching, my way of life..."

Nowhere in any of Paul's letters do you see that Paul is teaching Timothy that everything he(Paul) has written is what he refered to as "scriptures" in 2Timothy 3:16.

I believe that the scriptures in the 66 books were inspired by the Holy Spirit. I believe many books before and after those 66 books were also inspired...if this were not true, why is our conversation more than yes and no? Why not just hand everyone a Bible and tell them to read it for themselves? Why make thousands of "commentaries" on our own interpretation of the Bible?

The same reason Paul was sent out to teach his own understanding, this action was inspired by God. God told him to do it just as God tells many men even today to do the same, with references to our surrounding culture included. Note:this in no way means to water down God's "precepts" or commandments.

Correct me if I'm wrong, in more than just a one word question.

[apothanein kerdos]

Since clearly this part of the conversation is my reasoning and not your faith, then I'm an invincible ninjacat and will be doing the torturing, mentally.

Do you see where your belief leads though? Believing that God is opposed to logic, we can then deny reality.

Believing in Jesus saves us from going to Hell and makes us children of God.

How do you know this? Again, if you cannot trust Scripture, then how can you say this with authority? How do you know that Jesus isn't made up and a few Jewish authors were trying to prove a moral lesson?

Jeremiah 31:33

33) "This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel

after that time," declares the LORD.

"I will put my law in their minds

and write it on their hearts.

I will be their God,

and they will be my people.

You're using Scripture to justify your point. You cannot do this if you don't trust Scripture. I can easily come back and say this was simply Jeremiah's opinion.

I was taught that it was easier for a little child to enter the Kingdom of Heaven than a well versed man, why do you suppose that is?

You might have been taught that, but it's no where to be found in Scripture. In fact, it contradicts Scripture. I'll pay you $1,000 if you can find a verse in the Bible that says that a child has an easier time getting into Heaven than someone who is educated.

All faith does NOT stem from what you refer to as scriptures, it stems from the Word of God which can come from whomever God chooses, even a donkey, if God wanted. "As moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up..." When I accepted that, I became a child adopted by God, a Christian. Just as the Isrealites believed and were healed from the poisonous snake bites by looking at the snake, so I had been healed of my sin by looking up to the cross and believing on Jesus. I didn't know any of the dynamics at the time I believed, I didn't care.

So what if my view of God contradicts yours? You say that the "Word of God" can come from anyone, but this simply is not true. If it were, then we could say the Crusades were justified, as well as the Inquisition, the Witch Hunts, and other tragedy's simply because the "Word of God" came to those people at those times. Do you realize I could justify believe in all religions going to Heaven, committing genocide, or rape by what you're saying? I could do none of these if I believe in the inerrancy and total inspiration of Scripture.

When Paul said, "all scripture is given by inspiration of God..."

Here, scripture(graphe <1124>) mean can mean 1 of 3 things(?):

1) a writing, thing written

2) the Scripture, used to denote either the book itself, or

its contents

3) a certain portion or section of the Holy Scripture

You're not going to win a debate on the Greek with me.

Paul states that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God. When graphe refers to a certain section, it is simply addressing a specific section. It does not nullify the idea of the entirety of scripture being inspired.

Just a few verses earlier Paul states to Timothy, "You, however, have followed my teaching, my my way of life..."

Nowhere in any of Paul's letters do you see that Paul is teaching Timothy that everything he(Paul) has written is what he refered to as "scriptures" in 2Timothy 3:16

First, you just saw the point where he did. By stating Timothy has followed his [Paul's] doctrines and then going on to say that "all Scripture is given by inspiration," Paul elevated His epistles to the level of Scripture. He wasn't the only one that thought His writings were Scripture; Peter also followed this line of thought:

2 Peter 3:15-16 - and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

Notice that he says people misunderstand Paul as they do with the rest of the Scriptures. Peter, being Jew, referring to "the Scriptures" would have left no doubt He was referring to [at least] the Old Testament.

I believe that the scriptures in the 66 books were inspired by the Holy Spirit. I believe many books before and after those 66 books were also inspired...if this were not true, why is our conversation more than yes and no? Why not just hand everyone a Bible and tell them to read it for themselves? Why make thousands of "commentaries" on our own interpretation of the Bible?

If the 66 Books are inspired then they cannot have error as you originally asserted. To do so would mean God inspired error. If they are inspired then they have no error. If they they have errors then they are not inspired. The two are mutually exclusive concepts.

Likewise, the problem is with your understanding of theological epistemology. The reason we have commentaries on the Scriptures is because, being fallible, we have a difficult time understanding that which is inspired. The Bible is not an easy book to read. The core message is easy enough a child could understand it, but the whole of the Bible is so difficult that no amount of study can ever allow for complete comprehension. The commentaries, likewise, are not infallible or inspired - they are explanations of what people think about the scriptures. Though the Holy Spirit MUST be involved in this interpretation, there is no 100% epistemological test to tell if an interpretation is true or not. The more core the concept, the easier it is to understand if the interpretation is correct (such as the deity of Jesus Christ, salvation by faith alone, God's hand behind the creation of the world, etc).

Under your idea, I could write a book on why it's okay for husbands to beat their wives, claim it is inspired by God, and there is not a thing you could do to logically contradict what I'm saying.

[apothanein kerdos]

So you're saying all we need is human reasoning and not God's word?

I'm not sure who this was aimed toward, but if it were me:

I'm saying that the cornerstone for man's knowledge and rational thinking should be God's Word, but that we have to accept that God's Word is infallible. Though we will inevitably disagree over every interpretation of God's Word (look at Butero and I), this is the fault of the interpreter and not Scripture.

It's saying that man's rationality is vitally important because it has been given to us by God, but the cornerstone for this epistemology needs to be God's Holy Word.

Put into practice, this would mean we would approach any supposed contradictions of God's Word as problems with translation, not as actual contradictions.