Split: Feminisim is Anti-Christ

[Floatingaxe]

Anti-woman-as-equal is antichrist.

[Emily~Anne]

God's design for husbands and wives is NOT anti-woman! I submit to my husband and he has the final say in this house and he loves and values me very much!

[apothanein kerdos]

Was it not you who said your faith is to destroy all humans? It stops being funny when you try to make a serious point out of what originated from "folly".

That's the point - under your idea of faith, how can you justifiably argue against my faith? How can you say what Hitler did was wrong when he thought he was justified for it? How can you argue against Stalin when he believe it was the proper thing to do? How can you condemn the Crusades when these actions were taken in faith by the Crusaders? When you remove reasoning from the Scriptures, when you state the Scriptures are in error, this is the moral and epistemological quagmire you fall into - you lose the ability to condemn any action in the world throughout history.

What exactly are you trying to prove here by continually twisting everything I say?

Stop saying I'm twisting what you're saying until you show how I'm twisting what you're saying.

You can. This, however, is written repeatedly all over the Bible and, again, must be read with Faith or it is useless knowedge.

Again, how do you know that it is not merely the opinion of a Jewish writer? I can find many people that are of the opinion that the US should be a "white only" nation. If I collect their books and put it all together, can I not just say what they are preaching is truth because it "appears over and over again" and "you need faith to read it"?

Mark 10:13-16

13)People were bringing little children to Jesus to have him touch them, but the disciples rebuked them.

14)When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.

15)I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it."

16)And he took the children in his arms, put his hands on them and blessed them.

Since you didn't specify what age, and neither did Jesus, I won't hold you to that.

And where in here does Jesus comment on someone's level of study? Where in here does He refer to what we know? He doesn't - instead the context shows that He is dealing with the arrogance of the people instead of the educational level of the people. If what you say is true - that this verse says someone who is stupid has an easier time getting into heaven than someone who is educated - anyone who was educated past the age of 13 would go to Hell. Likewise, we would have to throw out the writings of Paul.

That's where wisdom and discernment step into play, not to mention man's laws you seem to like breaking.

Wisdom and discernment based on what? Back then, man's law allowed for such actions, so did their wisdom and discernment. What, exactly, are you basing this "wisdom and discernment" on?

What you're refering to as "the entire scripture"(66 books) had not even been put together yet, at Paul's time.

Most of it had. When Paul wrote this, the Synoptics would have been written along with Paul's earlier epistles, James' epistle, John's epistles, Acts would be in the process (Luke would be finishing up), etc. Revelation, Paul's later epistles, and the Gospel of John would have come after this point.

Peter said "Paul, according to the wisdom given him". As we know, Peter was originally a fisherman. Paul was well educated in The Law. This is why God pulled Paul out of his path and set him up to teach in the first place, Paul was "well versed" to begin with in The Law and was a good -convincing- tool used by God, as were many of the prophets(some of those guys were pretty animated in their convincing). You say, "Paul elevated His epistles to the level of Scripture.", but where are the verses to back this claim?

I gave you the context and even explained it to you. If you can't see it, then you're blind.

I don't waste my time with people who purposefully ignore contexts.

God made no mistakes when He wrote the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone.

How do you know He did? Are you not taking that by faith?

He made no mistakes when He, in the form of Jesus, came down here and spoke in parables, KNOWING if He'd spoken plainly, man would have messed it up somehow. And just like it took a wise man(Paul) then to set the churches in order, according to the times they were in, so we can read the Bible and set our lives in order to meet Him one day. We can read the original commandments. We can believe that Jesus is the only Way to the Father and eternal life. We can abide by the rules Jesus Himself clarified -because- man always messed them up. Why else would God have had to come all the way down here and preach sermons, clarifying what men should already have known, having the Scriptures written down already, if man had them in perfect order. Are you trying to say Jesus was lying?

I'm trying to say your belief is inconsistent. You cannot hold that Jesus exists and at the same time hold the Scriptures have been tampered with. There is NO WAY to justify that the parables of Jesus are true if you believe man interjected his own opinion into scripture.

8)O Daughter of Babylon, doomed to destruction,

happy is he who repays you

for what you have done to us-

9)he who seizes your infants

and dashes them against the rocks.

Doesn't really contradict this:

Ezekiel 18:23

23)Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD.

Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?

1st verse talks about corporal, national punishment for things done against Israel. 2nd verse talks about personal wickedness.

A perfect example of the faithlessness in today's world full of extrabiblical knowledge.

The irony in this is that you don't even realize your belief comes from Karl Barth! You're entire belief, which you no doubt picked up from someone else, traces its ideological lineage back less than a century to a German theologian.

[apothanein kerdos]

Anti-woman-as-equal is antichrist.

I'll pay you $500 if you can tel me how this even comes close to touching on the subject matter of this thread.

Stop trying to cause problems.

[None]

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.

Amen.

I agree, too. It seems to me that sound doctrine is received by the rational mind through reading God's Word. When we replace this with experience, or so-called revelation knowledge, in the form of dreams and visions and other mystical experiences, received subjectively, we are in danger of wandering into the realms of the imagination at best, and spiritual deception at worst. The human heart is "deceitful above all things". I have read some preposterous "prophecies" and "revelations" that individuals claim to have received direct from God, yet they contradict His Word. It is fashionable in some charismatic circles to urge people to leave their brains/rational minds at the church door and receive spiritually/experientially. I can't think of anything more dangerous especially for new Christians who are not yet grounded in the Word. This is the old heresy of gnosticism creeping into the church under the guise of "moving in the Spirit". It is the "mind of Christ" that we are to have, not some vague, touchy-feely, subjective experience.

In Jesus,

Ruth

A perfect example of the faithlessness in today's world full of extrabiblical knowledge.

I don't believe anyone in this thread even has brought up having some sort of dream, vision or "touchy feely(whatever that is" experience. Unless you consider having faith outside of knowledge "heresy".

Hebrews 11:1 "...so that things which are seen are not made of things which do appear..."

There's no way to believe that verse with a faithless mindset.

Sorry, I don't fully understand, I can be very slow, and I would hate to respond incorrectly to your post. Are you saying that my post is anperfect example of the faithlessness in today's world?

Also, I wasn't suggesting that anyone on this thread had brought up extra-Biblical visions etc, rather that if we devalue the place of reason in favour of experience, we leave ourselves open to deception.

The verse from Hebrews that you quote is a wonderful testimony to faith - but it never suggests that we should believe that which has not already been verified in Scripture.

In Jesus

Ruth

Actually, that verse was written before "Scriptures" as we know them(The Holy Bible, 66 books), and every example Paul states in that chapter was an example of faith without foreknowledge. Only a direct command from God Himself.

Are you suggesting, then, that there is an ongoing revelation of God's Word and that Scriptures are still being written? I'm just trying to discover where you are coming from because I'm not sure and do not want to respond in an unhelpful fashion.

Ruth

Ruth, Emily Ann,

I never suggested, even once, that it was me who had any kind of "revelation" and I have occationaly found myself skeptical when I here of one in this day and age. That is not to say it doesn't happen, though. To suggest this would go against Paul's teaching, wouldn't it?

[Emily~Anne]

Any 'revelation' that goes against God's word is false teaching.

[apothanein kerdos]

Any 'revelation' that goes against God's word is false teaching.

Agreed.

As Francis Schaeffer states, there will always be disagreements over what is permissible and what is not permissible. There will always be disagreements between denominations. However, all doctrine, all claims, everything, must begin with the belief that Scripture is inerrant and inspired. Though we will still come to different interpretations at times, we can both hold respect for Scripture.

[None]

What you're refering to as "the entire scripture"(66 books) had not even been put together yet, at Paul's time.

Most of it had. When Paul wrote this, the Synoptics would have been written along with Paul's earlier epistles, James' epistle, John's epistles, Acts would be in the process (Luke would be finishing up), etc. Revelation, Paul's later epistles, and the Gospel of John would have come after this point.

Most is not all.

Peter said "Paul, according to the wisdom given him". As we know, Peter was originally a fisherman. Paul was well educated in The Law. This is why God pulled Paul out of his path and set him up to teach in the first place, Paul was "well versed" to begin with in The Law and was a good -convincing- tool used by God, as were many of the prophets(some of those guys were pretty animated in their convincing). You say, "Paul elevated His epistles to the level of Scripture.", but where are the verses to back this claim?

I gave you the context and even explained it to you. If you can't see it, then you're blind.

I don't waste my time with people who purposefully ignore contexts.

You won't hear me complaining if you ignore me.

8)O Daughter of Babylon, doomed to destruction,

happy is he who repays you

for what you have done to us-

9)he who seizes your infants

and dashes them against the rocks.

Doesn't really contradict this:

Ezekiel 18:23

23)Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD.

Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?

1st verse talks about corporal, national punishment for things done against Israel. 2nd verse talks about personal wickedness.

My whole point here was both were, as you keep saying, God breathed. If this is true, in one verse it stated that God enjoys killing babies and in the other it states He "takes NO pleasure in killing". Both verses states an opinion on how God feels on the act of killing. They both claim to know exactly what God is feeling. I'm more inclined to believe Ezekiel because he specifically spoke for God by saying, "declares the Sovereign LORD" whereas David did not. Keeping in mind that this is the self same David who pretended to be crazy to avoid being killed, now saying, "happy is he who repays you

for what you have done to us- he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks."

Karl Barth

Never heard of him(?).

You're entire belief, which you no doubt picked up from someone else...

You wouldn't, by any chance, be suggesting plagiarism? I'd never do that. If what you're suggesting is that I'm over here getting all of my beliefs from someone else, you're right, my beliefs come from the Holy Spirit, as all Christians should be able to say, with total honesty.

...traces its ideological lineage back less than a century to a German theologian.

Are you prejudice against Germans or something?

[apothanein kerdos]

How is any of what you said an actual reply? You didn't deal with half of what I said.

"That's the point - under your idea of faith, how can you justifiably argue against my faith? How can you say what Hitler did was wrong when he thought he was justified for it? How can you argue against Stalin when he believe it was the proper thing to do? How can you condemn the Crusades when these actions were taken in faith by the Crusaders? When you remove reasoning from the Scriptures, when you state the Scriptures are in error, this is the moral and epistemological quagmire you fall into - you lose the ability to condemn any action in the world throughout history."

"Again, how do you know that it is not merely the opinion of a Jewish writer? I can find many people that are of the opinion that the US should be a "white only" nation. If I collect their books and put it all together, can I not just say what they are preaching is truth because it "appears over and over again" and "you need faith to read it"?"

And where in here does Jesus comment on someone's level of study? Where in here does He refer to what we know? He doesn't - instead the context shows that He is dealing with the arrogance of the people instead of the educational level of the people. If what you say is true - that this verse says someone who is stupid has an easier time getting into heaven than someone who is educated - anyone who was educated past the age of 13 would go to Hell. Likewise, we would have to throw out the writings of Paul.

Wisdom and discernment based on what? Back then, man's law allowed for such actions, so did their wisdom and discernment. What, exactly, are you basing this "wisdom and discernment" on?

Most is not all.

But it does show us that what is considered Scripture is infallible. Furthermore, the best you can do is say that 3 or 4 books out of 66 aren't inspired.

You won't hear me complaining if you ignore me.

The point of what I was saying is you ignored my original point, which stated:

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.

Paul states that all Scripture is useful for doctrine and teaching...the same thing he said was useful of what he had said to Timothy. He elevated his writings to that of Scripture by doing so.

My whole point here was both were, as you keep saying, God breathed. If this is true, in one verse it stated that God enjoys killing babies and in the other it states He "takes NO pleasure in killing". Both verses states an opinion on how God feels on the act of killing.

Did you even read the passages before you copied them from the website you used? No where in Ezekiel does it say God takes no pleasure in killing. It says that He doesn't take pleasure in killing the wicked for their personal deeds when they could repent. He does, however, take pleasure in delivering justice on the wicked.

Never heard of him(?).

Doesn't matter, your belief is based on what he taught.

You wouldn't, by any chance, be suggesting plagiarism? I'd never do that. If what you're suggesting is that I'm over here getting all of my beliefs from someone else, you're right, my beliefs come from the Holy Spirit, as all Christians should be able to say, with total honesty.

I'm saying that your belief did not come from the Holy Spirit, but instead were not made until Karl Barth at the beginning of the 20th century. Your beliefs are less than 100 years old.

Are you prejudice against Germans or something?

German theologians aren't the Holy Spirit. Your belief is based on a German theologian, not the Holy Spirit.

[None]

AK...

Let go of the hate.

Let go of the pride.

Pray.

Then read what I said, again.

I'll do the same, because as of this point, we keep missing each other's understanding.

Good day.

PS:

The website i always use for pasting scripture is Biblegateway.

It's a good site.