Originally posted by FreakyKBHOh dear sir. You appear to have left yourself open to the rebuttal:
How I view it is only applicable to me.
The fact that many other people who are also higher in intelligence and better equipped at critical analysis have historically considered the whole of the Bible as divinely inspired, however, speaks volumes in condemnation of your silly, juvenile perspective.
"The fact that many other people who are also higher in intelligence and better equipped at scientific analysis consider the Earth as being a globe, speaks volumes etc etc..."
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayHe did not give a reference for it but Chrekbaiter did -
You'll have to give the scripture for the point I gave him my word we were done with respect
to not responding to his posts so I attempt to not or respond to him.
But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
(Galatians 5:18 KJV)
Is it correct to interpret such a statement by Paul to mean that the Christian has no laws or commandments to follow?
1 edit
Originally posted by Rajk999Can it be concluded that maybe there are conflicting teachings in the Bible? If there are other verses where Jesus said something different, does it mean we must now ignore Galatians 5:18? Conflicting verses seem to be a problem when trying to look at all of His teachings as a whole.
He did not give a reference for it but Chrekbaiter did -
But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
(Galatians 5:18 KJV)
Is it correct to interpret such a statement by Paul to mean that the Christian has no laws or commandments to follow?
Edit: That's why people are cherry picking verses that make sense to them, because in its entirety, the messages are different.
Originally posted by chaney3The bible does not contradict itself. Never. Rajk is the cherry picker here. He never responds to the ones I post, but I responded to his incorrect interpretations many times.
Can it be concluded that maybe there are conflicting teachings in the Bible? If there are other verses where Jesus said something different, does it mean we must now ignore Galatians 5:18? Conflicting verses seem to be a problem when trying to look at all of His teachings as a whole.
Edit: That's why people are cherry picking verses that make sense to them, because in its entirety, the messages are different.
Originally posted by checkbaiterAhem.
The bible does not contradict itself. Never.
PSA 145:9 'The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'
JER 13:14 'And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.'
Originally posted by Rajk999You deserve a little more time and effort than I can give you now, I'll come back to this
He did not give a reference for it but Chrekbaiter did -
But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
(Galatians 5:18 KJV)
Is it correct to interpret such a statement by Paul to mean that the Christian has no laws or commandments to follow?
when I have a little more. Sorry for the delay!
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeOne would think so, but it's common knowledge that one never bets with a Sicilian when death is on the line!
Oh dear sir. You appear to have left yourself open to the rebuttal:
"The fact that many other people who are also higher in intelligence and better equipped at scientific analysis consider the Earth as being a globe, speaks volumes etc etc..."
The application also fits the flat earth model... both in the past as well as the present with a growing number of allegedly educated folks who are now seeing the globe as the biggest con game since, well, a long time.
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeLOL.... This is not a contradiction. The Lord is good to all. When it comes to saving the entire race of humans, he has to take action when there are "diseased" ones. They at times need to be eliminated.
Ahem.
PSA 145:9 'The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'
JER 13:14 'And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.'
Originally posted by checkbaiterIn John 8:31-35, Jesus explicitly states that His true disciples will be made free from committing sin and that only those "made free" will "remain in the house forever".
I think you are the one being disingenuous and posting loaded questions.
It is not as simple as 1,2 and 3. What Jesus is saying is not simple. All his words are deep.
He spoke to many in such a way that they would not understand, [b]not because he wanted people confused, but because he wanted genuine disciples, who would dig deeper to uncover truth ...[text shortened]... e totally free of the sin nature.
Thus Jesus words fulfilled, we will finally be free from sin.[/b]
For post after post, all you've done is prevaricate rather than actually address the words of Jesus.
You have dismissed what Jesus said in John 8:31-35, evidently because you don't believe it possible for anyone to stop committing sin.
As I wrote to chaney3 earlier:
"Though most refuse to admit it, they pick and choose the verses and passages that support their beliefs and dismiss those that don't and often do so in a most disingenuous manner."
1 edit
Originally posted by SuzianneNot sure what to do with this. You seem to have conflated rajk999's posts and mine.
This fails in the very same way that Rajk's dogma fails.
You both need to get to church and stop thinking it's okay to claim that everyone is a sinner and therefore Jesus rejects them. Oh, yeah, everyone except you, that is.
You claim that cherry-picking scripture is bad. Then why do you both continue doing it?
And why is it okay to ...[text shortened]...
Yes, this is Rajk's DAISNAID dogma. And apparently you fully believe in that dogma yourself.
CB claimed that he doesn't pick and choose the verses and passages that support his beliefs and dismiss those that don't. As he keeps showing, he does. Shouldn't he at least be honest about it?
How is anything that I've posted "Rajk's DAISNAID dogma"? For that matter, for the most part, the thrust of what rajk999 posts is to point out where the doctrine followed by many Christians does not take into account many of the verses in the Bible. No idea how you manage to twist "this is what the Bible says" into "DAISNAID". Does that really seem rational to you?
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneThis can be cleared up very quickly if you just answer the question. Do you sin or don't you?
Not sure what to do with this. You seem to have conflated rajk999's posts and mine.
CB claimed that he doesn't pick and choose the verses and passages that support his beliefs and dismiss those that don't. As he keeps showing, he does. Shouldn't he at least be honest about it?
How is anything that I've posted "Rajk's DAISNAID dogma"? For that matte ...[text shortened]... e to twist "this is what the Bible says" into "DAISNAID". Does that really seem rational to you?
Originally posted by ThinkOfOnePretty sure you wont get a coherent answer from her ... she is a nutcase.
Not sure what to do with this. You seem to have conflated rajk999's posts and mine.
CB claimed that he doesn't pick and choose the verses and passages that support his beliefs and dismiss those that don't. As he keeps showing, he does. Shouldn't he at least be honest about it?
How is anything that I've posted "Rajk's DAISNAID dogma"? For that matte ...[text shortened]... e to twist "this is what the Bible says" into "DAISNAID". Does that really seem rational to you?