 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Nobby
Board - Admin
Joined: 16 Sep 2002
Posts: 5141
Location: Missouri
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:32 am Post subject: |
 |
|
This thread belongs here, not in the Christian Fellowship Forum.
_________________
Much Love Nobby
CVP Smilies
dictionary Bible |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
StElsewhere
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 8:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
8 posts in response to 1...well that must be some new record...I guess I must have touched a nerve to cause the eruption of such constipated clap-trap...but then come to think about it...you participate in a particular activity that is a particular "Cause" that would cause such an "Effect" when it comes to constipation...silly me!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6065
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Prove that rainbows are a "blessing" (objectively, using scripture, not just because you like them or something) and then perhaps you'll have a point.
And if you really want to go down this route, I know of several pagan symbols which got adopted by Christians that you should condemn just as equally.
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StElsewhere
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 4:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| FFT wrote: | Prove that rainbows are a "blessing" (objectively, using scripture, not just because you like them or something) and then perhaps you'll have a point.
And if you really want to go down this route, I know of several pagan symbols which got adopted by Christians that you should condemn just as equally. |
| FFT wrote: | Prove that rainbows are a "blessing" (objectively, using scripture, not just because you like them or something) and then perhaps you'll have a point.
And if you really want to go down this route, I know of several pagan symbols which got adopted by Christians that you should condemn just as equally. |
You are exactly right ...and each and everyone of them are to God ...like all things pagan....abominations... and as far the rainbow goes...it is are far more than "blessings" They represent the very throne of Almighty God:
Rev 4:2 And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and [one] sat on the throne.
Rev 4:3 And he that sat was to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone: and [there was] a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an emerald.
and then Rev.goes on to say:
Rev 10:1 And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a rainbow [was] upon his head, and his face [was] as it were the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire:
Rev 10:2 And he had in his hand a little book open: and he set his right foot upon the sea, and [his] left [foot] on the earth,
As I correctly stated...The Rainbow belongs to the Only True and Living God...and for it to be co-opted and twisted into representing the very thing the All Righteous God hates the most...is SATANIC!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6065
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rev 4:3 describes a "rainbow made of emerald." So not the full rainbow we know today.
And your other scriptural example does absolutely nothing to show that rainbows are objectively a "blessing."
So you still have no point. Bolding your entire post was classy, though.
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StElsewhere
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 1:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| FFT wrote: | Rev 4:3 describes a "rainbow made of emerald." So not the full rainbow we know today.
And your other scriptural example does absolutely nothing to show that rainbows are objectively a "blessing."
[b]So you still have no point. Bolding your entire post was classy, though. |
So God's giving it as a promise to man that He would never again destroy earth by water...wasn't a blessing? ('')Cool
I guess to impress you God would have to dance a gig on a table top? [/b] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6886
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A blessing? Not really.
A sign of a promise of God definitely. But worthy of no other 'worship' or special consideration other than what it was given for.
Ultimately your whole rant about the alleged 'abomination' has no grounding in scripture, no grounding in the love of Christ, and is simply a purely abominable demonstration of the sin of self-righteousness.
_________________
JP's Mind - my blog
Psa 118:8 It is better to trust and take refuge in the Lord than to put confidence in man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atoz
Emperor of the Solar System
Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Posts: 4189
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | | ...Ultimately your whole rant about the alleged 'abomination' has no grounding in scripture, no grounding in the love of Christ, and is simply a purely abominable demonstration of the sin of self-righteousness. |
Hi RevJP,
And isn't the sin of selfrighteousness really the sin of Hate for myself as wrong,
which leads to my Hate of others who are wrong,
and leads to me being & feeling SO right when others are wrong,
and makes me still guilty of self-righteousness even if I repent of the sin of self-right-eousness,
since all I wd have done is to have again just made my self righteous?
Since God loves us as right and as wrong,
isn't it the first sin to hate myself or others as wrong?
Mathew 5:43-48.
So since the sin of self-righteousness is the sin of hate of self as wrong,
isn't the sin of self-righteousness better called or named as it is:
as self-wrongeousness
or selfhateousness
or selfhatewrongeousness?
in Righteousness of God's Love for my self as wrong and as right so I can love all others as myself no matter if they are right or wrong,
atoz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StElsewhere
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 2:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | A blessing? Not really.
A sign of a promise of God definitely. But worthy of no other 'worship' or special consideration other than what it was given for.
Ultimately your whole rant about the alleged 'abomination' has no grounding in scripture, no grounding in the love of Christ, and is simply a purely abominable demonstration of the sin of self-righteousness. |
You act as if I wrote the WOG...Let me put that nasty little rumor to rest...I Didn't!..you previously listed various reasons other why Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed ... But it was 1 "SIN" which cried out before God...Read:
Genesis 18:20-21 says, “And the LORD said, ‘Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous; I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.’”
Notice it does not say their [b]"SINS" ... So that particular "SIN" had to be very grievous...did it not?
[/b]
Gen 19:4 ¶ But before they lay down, the men of the city, [even] the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:
It was men who came to Lot's house to "KNOW" the angels ... (they weren't seeking to know his wife's latest recipes!)
Gen 19:5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where [are] the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them
When offered 2 "Virgin Women"...they wanted nothing of it...
Gen 19:8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as [is] good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.
They didn't do women!
Your argument...I have heard before...that it was a "hospitality" issue...Those men did not have tea and cookies on their minds...
Gen 19:9 And they said, Stand back. And they said [again], This one [fellow] came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, [even] Lot, and came near to break the door.
Then the angels intervene:
Gen 19:10 But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door.
Then these guys got real serious!
Gen 19:11 And they smote the men that [were] at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door.
And even after being stuck blinded...they still wore themselves out trying to find the door where the men were...
Your argument holds no bases in fact! That is a particular "Sin"...which to God is abominable above all others. Back then He destroyed 5 cities because of it...and all subsequent cities where homosexuality was rampant...Pompeii, Herculeum, and the list goes on and on...and He will continue to do the same ...and many great cities in America are going to be lie wise destroyed...God... He changeth not!
BTW: I am in no way being self righteous...about anything...you are more than free to live your life as you choose and according to how you believe...this is still America...at least for now...But likewise... so am I...I have supported my claim with scripture...can you do the same?... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6065
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 8:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| StElsewhere wrote: | | Notice it does not say their "SINS" ... So that particular "SIN" had to be very grievous...did it not? |
Doesn't in any way mean that they had but one sin going on. Genesis 4:7, Genesis 20:9, Genesis 31:36, Genesis 50:17. "Sin" is often used as a collective singular.
| StElsewhere wrote: | | Back then He destroyed 5 cities because of it...and all subsequent cities where homosexuality was rampant...Pompeii, Herculeum, and the list goes on and on...and He will continue to do the same ...and many great cities in America are going to be lie wise destroyed...God... He changeth not! |
I'm sorry, this is just too cute. Do you have any scriptural justification to reflect that God destroyed Pompeii or Herculeum?
| StElsewhere wrote: | | BTW: I am in no way being self righteous...about anything...you are more than free to live your life as you choose and according to how you believe...this is still America...at least for now...But likewise... so am I...I have supported my claim with scripture...can you do the same?... |
To yourself, perhaps.
One should recall that the reason Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed was because of the outcry to God about their sins. So by complaining you seem to be attempting the same sort of thing, which sounds awfully self-righteous.
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StElsewhere
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Doesn't in any way mean that they had but one sin going on. Genesis 4:7, Genesis 20:9, Genesis 31:36, Genesis 50:17. "Sin" is often used as a collective singular.
Look your argument is with the WOG and the way it is written...then don't beef with me about it...I showed you clearly what is written...if you don't want to accept it ...what can I do?
I'm sorry, this is just too cute. Do you have any scriptural justification to reflect that God destroyed Pompeii or Herculeum?
No biblical reference...but ...They were wiped off the map! ...in a very similar way... all at once!! Imperical ...NO ....But awful convincing...and you do know about all the little nasty things that were going on in those cities...don't you?
To yourself, perhaps.
One should recall that the reason Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed was because of the outcry to God about their sins. So by complaining you seem to be attempting the same sort of thing, which sounds awfully self-righteous.
So this is all you offer response to my requesting scripture in support o your point of view? Well it says to me loud and clear that you have none....Cool...No Big Woop...and here again you clearly misstate the WOG...It says "SIN" ...you insist on re-writing it by deliberately using "SINS" ...I thought I put that nasty little rumor to rest...about me writing the WOG...Darn...you haven't grasped that yet! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StElsewhere
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 2:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| atoz wrote: | | StElsewhere wrote: |
............oh! BTW: Your choice to twist the WOG around to say that God is a Fool...shows your blatant disrespect for the Righteousness of the WOG...but I expected no less!javascript:emoticon('')Cool...
|
atoz: I am talking to your Hate-side since that is who is speaking:
Running scared, aren't you, since it was *YOU* who used your own definition of fools to hate & disrespect fools like me....and then used God's own words as your back-up without realising *WHO* else you were calling a fool and Who Else you were hating & disrespectingas a Fool!
But is ok: To your Love-side: God knows that you did not know better.
Plus, meanwhile, my shoulders of Love are Love-strong enough with God's Love for fools to love Him as one as myself since I have no conditions on God for my Love, and so I can easily to bear that light burden!smile
To your Hate-side:
Betcha will never ever use that scripture about a fool being one who uses a multitude of words ever again except in Love of God as one and of everyone else and especially of you as the first fool!
What do we say in England?
Where ignorance is bliss, tis folly to be wise and tis wise to be a fool?
The real fool is the one who hates fools whether he talks a lot, talks a little or keeps silent!
 for you.
FYI:
Homework Assignment for your Love-side to become:
1 Corinthians 3:18
18Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world,
let him become a fool that he may be wise.
in the Wisdom of Love that makes fools wise and makes the wise wise-wise,
atoz |
They only problem with the "LOVE" you keep crying about is a carnal lust.. that is nothing but unadulterated enmity before the face of the True and Living God...it is amazing how to quote the WOG is to be accused of "Hate Speech" as if it was I the one who wrote it...The problem is you have a problem with the WOG jiving with your chosen lifestyle..so seeing that it doesn't give sanctuary...cover and respect to that lifestyle...you war against it ... and all who stand up for it... Now ...who really has the problem? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6886
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 8:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| elsewhere wrote: | | Look your argument is with the WOG and the way it is written...then don't beef with me about it...I showed you clearly what is written...if you don't want to accept it ...what can I do? |
I can say in all honesty that my beef is not with the Word of God, or how it was written, but is in fact with how you choose to interpret it and the anti-scriptural teachings you espouse through your self-righteousness.
I very rarely agree with FFT, but linguistically he is entirely correct here:
| Quote: | | Doesn't in any way mean that they had but one sin going on. Genesis 4:7, Genesis 20:9, Genesis 31:36, Genesis 50:17. "Sin" is often used as a collective singular. |
and scripturally here:
| Quote: | | One should recall that the reason Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed was because of the outcry to God about their sins. |
| elsewhere wrote: | | Your argument...I have heard before...that it was a "hospitality" issue...Those men did not have tea and cookies on their minds... |
Please do me the favor of explaining 'my argument' to me. For all I can see here, I have not made an argument regarding that which you have accused me.
| Quote: |
That is a particular "Sin"...which to God is abominable above all others. |
Do you have any scripture to support that this one particular sin is abominable 'above all others'?
I didn't think so...
| Quote: | | I have supported my claim with scripture... |
Most false teachings are supported with scripture. The problem is, as it is with you, that support is tenuous, based on misinterpretation, selection of one piece of scripture over another, ignoring the whole of scripture and its context, and based purely on self-righteous indignation. God has provided a definition of sin, and it is that which He finds abominable, not one particular act over another. S&G were rife with iniquity of all kind, homosexual activity being just one of many 'sins'. For you to select that one sin, then to twist scripture in an attempt to support your unscriptural interpretation is itself an abomination to God.
| Quote: | | No biblical reference...but ...They were wiped off the map! ...in a very similar way... all at once!! Imperical ...NO ....But awful convincing...and you do know about all the little nasty things that were going on in those cities...don't you? |
Didn't you say:
| Quote: | | Back then He destroyed 5 cities because of it...and all subsequent cities where homosexuality was rampant...Pompeii, Herculeum, and the list goes on and on |
So you are telling us that you speak for God apart from His Holy Inspired Word? You claim He did something that His Word does not state He did. You are a special messenger then? Given the authority to speak for Him in contravention to the Word He has given mankind?
I began to think you simply did not understand the Word of God and that you spoke from self-righteous indignation, but you are giving me reason to think that you wish to supplant Him and place yourself in authority in place of Him and His Word. I think Revelation uses the term 'false prophet'.
_________________
JP's Mind - my blog
Psa 118:8 It is better to trust and take refuge in the Lord than to put confidence in man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StElsewhere
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | | elsewhere wrote: | | Look your argument is with the WOG and the way it is written...then don't beef with me about it...I showed you clearly what is written...if you don't want to accept it ...what can I do? |
I can say in all honesty that my beef is not with the Word of God, or how it was written, but is in fact with how you choose to interpret it and the anti-scriptural teachings you espouse through your self-righteousness.
I very rarely agree with FFT, but linguistically he is entirely correct here:
| Quote: | | Doesn't in any way mean that they had but one sin going on. Genesis 4:7, Genesis 20:9, Genesis 31:36, Genesis 50:17. "Sin" is often used as a collective singular. |
and scripturally here:
| Quote: | | One should recall that the reason Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed was because of the outcry to God about their sins. |
| elsewhere wrote: | | Your argument...I have heard before...that it was a "hospitality" issue...Those men did not have tea and cookies on their minds... |
Please do me the favor of explaining 'my argument' to me. For all I can see here, I have not made an argument regarding that which you have accused me.
| Quote: |
That is a particular "Sin"...which to God is abominable above all others. |
Do you have any scripture to support that this one particular sin is abominable 'above all others'?
I didn't think so...
| Quote: | | I have supported my claim with scripture... |
Most false teachings are supported with scripture. The problem is, as it is with you, that support is tenuous, based on misinterpretation, selection of one piece of scripture over another, ignoring the whole of scripture and its context, and based purely on self-righteous indignation. God has provided a definition of sin, and it is that which He finds abominable, not one particular act over another. S&G were rife with iniquity of all kind, homosexual activity being just one of many 'sins'. For you to select that one sin, then to twist scripture in an attempt to support your unscriptural interpretation is itself an abomination to God.
| Quote: | | No biblical reference...but ...They were wiped off the map! ...in a very similar way... all at once!! Imperical ...NO ....But awful convincing...and you do know about all the little nasty things that were going on in those cities...don't you? |
Didn't you say:
| Quote: | | Back then He destroyed 5 cities because of it...and all subsequent cities where homosexuality was rampant...Pompeii, Herculeum, and the list goes on and on |
So you are telling us that you speak for God apart from His Holy Inspired Word? You claim He did something that His Word does not state He did. You are a special messenger then? Given the authority to speak for Him in contravention to the Word He has given mankind?
I began to think you simply did not understand the Word of God and that you spoke from self-righteous indignation, but you are giving me reason to think that you wish to supplant Him and place yourself in authority in place of Him and His Word. I think Revelation uses the term 'false prophet'. |
You accuse me of using scripture to support a false understanding ...yet you a Rev. offer NONE in refute. If your opinions are based on your life experiences...well fine...everyone is entitled to their opinion... But when in a Christian Discussion forum...you keep making statements ...in which you rant at my understanding of the WOG... but offer nothing written in that same WOG that supports your claims...yet you scourge mine...WOW! May I ask? What denomination are you a Rev. in service to?...or is it just a moniker ...Just curious! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6065
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 8:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| StElsewhere wrote: | | You accuse me of using scripture to support a false understanding ...yet you a Rev. offer NONE in refute. |
Please, please, please keep asking this/pointing this out. It proves that you aren't paying attention and that your position is weak and I really enjoy that.
| StElsewhere wrote: | | May I ask? What denomination are you a Rev. in service to?...or is it just a moniker ...Just curious! |
Uh oh.
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
