(November 7, 2015 at 11:15 am)Drich Wrote: How can you speak of dishonesty when your still cutting up verses and misrepresenting them?

(November 7, 2015 at 7:43 pm)jenny1972 Wrote: its simply due to the fact that i have absolutely no respect for those verses but even if i did have respect for the verses that paul was responsible for  why do you think im talking about dishonesty ?

and we finally get to the truth. You admit to quoting the passages dishonestly, because you do not respect them.

So in your intellectual mind, you think it is ok to dishonestly handle what people have said and done, just because you on some level can find offense?/It is ok to be intellectually dishonest if you do not respect an ideology... What about something you do respect? is it ok to be intellectually dishonest about something you do respect and are trying to protect?/do you also lie about things that support your position when you know they are wrong?

Let me ask you this.. When is it mandated that you only tell the truth? when do you check emotion at the door (what you want to be true) and let the simple truth speak for itself?

Quote: i think your honestly representing christian views toward homosexuality you represent the hypocritical christian who discriminates against gays even though jesus never spoke against homosexuality even though it was a widespread practice during his time and even though he spoke against many different social problems he never spoke against that .

Again, being Homosexual has absolutely nothing to do with the identification of their sin. They are in sexual sin because they have sex (what Kind is irrelevant) outside the confines of a sanctified marriage, and Jesus did infact speak on/Against that. Their sin is sexual in nature, just like all other sexual sin. Meaning it is not unforgivable IF one repents of it, one will never repent if one can somehow make sin 'moral.'

That said..
The fact that you would intentionally misquote Paul and try and properly quote any other part of the bible makes you the only Hypocrite in our conversation.

---

(November 7, 2015 at 11:53 am)Drich Wrote: Ah! I get it, you do not understand the word 'perfect'. You are using it as a verb when the context I provided tells you to use it as an adjective.

Quote:ok so by "perfect" your actually meaning flawed and corrupt by 10-30% due to inevitable translation errors and thats the best that christianity can do is to be satisfied with the errors .

No not at all. I mean perfect by it's first official literal definition. Meaning it is absolutely as Good as it can be... That is what the primary meaning of the word perfect means. Not what you have twisted together in an attempt to bend the truth and change the definition of a word to support your own version of reality. Your delusion does not fly well in the light of truth does it?

The word perfect can mean what you think it means, but also know it's primary use describes something being as good as it can possible be. Which again points to a closed mind if your still insisting that the word 'perfect' only can be used how you "feel" like it should be used.

Quote: well some people are not interested in corrupted bibles and are not even convinced that the bible that was written in greek is honest and legitimate

This is your primary problem. You 'feel' you way to truth, with little to no regaurd for what is actually true... How can you live like this? It would make me crazy not knowing anything for sure.. But I guess you have over come that by going with what 'feels' right and changing/ignoring actual truth when confronted by it, to match what you think truth should be. This is literally an example of what a close mind does. You have closed your mind off to EVERYTHING you don't like/Doesn't already fit your reality.

A simple google search would give you the truth here.
https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=n...written+in

Yet, your circling your 'logic' back (despite the truth I've given you) to the beginning and simply restating what you believe or "feel" to be true.

Wake up, the universe does not revolve around what you 'feel' to be true. Either you accept what truth is, or the world will leave you behind along with all those who thought the earth was flat or the sun revolved around the earth... The too 'felt' like they had a lock on truth because from their perspective they 'felt' it was true.

Quote:because of pauls spin and for a variety of other reasons , to even accept the legitimacy of the very first greek bible why should anyone believe what is in that and why should we believe these people who say they witnessed and wrote down what this man called "jesus" said and taught ?
why should we believe that he was part God what evidence do you have that any part of it is the truth ?

Because again the teaching did not happen in a vacuum. Their were signs and wonders to accompany the teachers words to show that they were from God. That was just to get people's attention. Once the adopted the religion for themselves they themselves had direct access to God. What better 'proof' of God is there than access to God?

That's the thing with biblical Christianity. It makes claims like no other religion, and it makes good on those claims when one simply follows the direction provided. Even today. That is why it is still around.

Quote: it wasnt written by an unbiased observer everything was written by followers of jesus decades after he died to the best of their memory each with their own spin ,

That should tell you something. Luke was sent as an unbiased observer, and what He saw converted Him. Then like now it is impossible to be unbiased once you know all of it. Love it or Hate it. even the middle ground takes a side.

Quote:paul being the most contradictory

you have YET to show 1 accurate/Non delusioned example of Paul being contrary to Jesus.

Quote:but why would any of it have any value even in the greek language ?

It has nothing to do with Koine Greek itself. It has to do with context and intention of what the original writer was trying to communicate. Again As I have shown you over and over even in our exchanges. My use of a word does not always mean your understanding of a word is the same as what I intended.

we have a "PERFECT" example do we not? I used the word "Perfect" perfectly/in accordance with one of it's true English definations. You only understand the word to be identified by one of it's definations and ignore the others. Now if you were truly interested in the truth (not how you 'feel') you could take my original context/use of the word and look it up to see if my use of the word was correct or does it mean something else and does that alternate meaning change how you should perceive what I wrote.

We only turn to the greek because that is what the NT was written in.

Again this is all about seeking Truth. If you have no interest in truth or you have closed you mind to it, then as you said, you would not see a need for any of this. Because you could/have make up whatever and that for you/people like you becomes just as good as truth/'truthiness'

Quote:there are a lot of cults just because people believe something doesnt make it true .

Belief in of itself does not make it true, that is correct.. Look at the cult of Atheism, just because the primary creed says their is no God does not mean God does not exist. Like with anything else content/Why people believe can define truth.

Quote:paul wrote romans great why would anyone have any interest in something that a con man wrote /[quote]
That's the thing.. You have failed over and over to prove Paul lied about anything. The only lies here were the ones you admitted to in the beginning of your post. We all know you are more than willing to bend the truth if you don't like someone or somebody. It's clear you do not like Paul.

[quote]
,you see its not confusion about romans its just a complete lack of interest in it due to the fact its not respected as the truth

so 48 pages of active topical dialog in the first 2 chapters is lack of intrest? Is this more 'truthiness'?

Quote: - jim jones wrote a bunch of stuff too should we go into an in depth study about his writings and have a serious discussion about them?

Ask Irrational, or Rocket man if you like, or go back and read the dialog for yourself. I have absolutely no issue taking on ALL comers or their ''expert's" best works. Why? It's certainly not because I am smarter. I simply have truth and context on my side. If the truth is the primary goal, I will come out on top.

Quote:IF jesus is God and paul is accurately writing the truth everyone is interested in knowing the truth - but first show that it is the truth and that its worth studying at all .

Again, This study is not for you persay. This study is to show what Bible Based Christians believe. Why? Because as I point out in the OP you can't say you properly hate someone/Something unless you truly know who and what they are. Otherwise know your hate is not of them, it is of bigotry and fear of who and what they represent.. "Change, and Judgement." So most of you (wrongly) think anyway.

(November 8, 2015 at 11:35 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: "You guys don't know biblical Christianity and sound like hateful bigots!"
"Why's that?"
"Because you don't agree with my interpretation of the bible and don't treat it with the respect I demand!"

This whole thread presumes we should care about the bible.  I fail to see why.

Here's an Idea..
READ THE OP SPORT

(November 9, 2015 at 10:33 am)Drich Wrote: So in your intellectual mind, you think it is ok to dishonestly handle what people have said and done, just because you on some level can find offense?/It is ok to be intellectually dishonest if you do not respect an ideology... What about something you do respect? is it ok to be intellectually dishonest about something you do respect and are trying to protect?/do you also lie about things that support your position when you know they are wrong?

Let me ask you this.. When is it mandated that you only tell the truth? when do you check emotion at the door (what you want to be true) and let the simple truth speak for itself?

For if the truth of God hath more abounded through her lie unto his glory; why yet is she also judged as a sinner?

(October 26, 2015 at 4:00 pm)Hmmm? Wrote: (Romans 3:7, Gal 2:9, Acts 15:7)

(November 9, 2015 at 10:33 am)Drich Wrote:

(November 7, 2015 at 11:15 am)Drich Wrote: How can you speak of dishonesty when your still cutting up verses and misrepresenting them?

" and we finally get to the truth. You admit to quoting the passages dishonestly, because you do not respect them. So in your intellectual mind, you think it is ok to dishonestly handle what people have said and done, just because you on some level can find offense?/It is ok to be intellectually dishonest if you do not respect an ideology... What about something you do respect? is it ok to be intellectually dishonest about something you do respect and are trying to protect?/do you also lie about things that support your position when you know they are wrong? "  

no i never did quote anything dishonestly or lie about any quotes or fabricate or invent anything so why would i admit to doing that ? I said i have no respect for the quotes but im not going to be dishonest about bible verses whether i agree with them or not . yes i agree truth speaks for itself and the truth is that the bible contradicts itself in many many places thats why christians have to learn the best ways to convince people that the bible doesnt really say what it says (apologetics)

Quote:  Again, being Homosexual has absolutely nothing to do with the identification of their sin. They are in sexual sin because they have sex (what Kind is irrelevant) outside the confines of a sanctified marriage, and Jesus did infact speak on/Against that. Their sin is sexual in nature, just like all other sexual sin. Meaning it is not unforgivable IF one repents of it, one will never repent if one can somehow make sin 'moral.'

you have yet to show even in the bible that it is a sin any worse than eating shellfish , which noone considers a sin , because of the "new covenant" . although homosexuality was widespread Jesus never spoke against it although he spoke against many things . so still waiting for you to show that it is even a sin that is worse than eating shellfish , or worse than any other sin . and what business of it is yours to judge anyone else even if you do think its a sin . your not God and its not your job to judge anyone your only job according to jesus is to love God and love one another and that is keeping the law . or are you going to pull out your apologetics to explain why it is ok to judge other people and discriminate and invalidate everything jesus said about that issue . im sure you can explain how everything jesus said should be discounted and invalidated

---

" it is absolutely as Good as it can be... That is what the primary meaning of the word perfect means. Not what you have twisted together in an attempt to bend the truth and change the definition of a word to support your own version of reality. Your delusion does not fly well in the light of truth does it? "

thats what i said , its " perfect " but at the same time very flawed and the only way to eliminate the flaws is to learn greek and read it in greek and avoid the inevitable translation errors . dont translate ! you mean christians are too lazy to learn greek language if it means understanding the uncorrupted Word of God 100% accurate instead of 10-30% flawed due to translation errors and "language incompatability"

Quote:This is your primary problem. You 'feel' you way to truth, with little to no regaurd for what is actually true... How can you live like this? It would make me crazy not knowing anything for sure.. But I guess you have over come that by going with what 'feels' right and changing/ignoring actual truth when confronted by it, to match what you think truth should be. This is literally an example of what a close mind does. You have closed your mind off to EVERYTHING you don't like/Doesn't already fit your reality.

you mean like how the vast majority of christians have no interest in learning the " truth " of Gods word enough to learn the greek language and read the uncorrupted word of God for themselves as originally written ?

" Again, This study is not for you persay. This study is to show what Bible Based Christians believe. Why? Because as I point out in the OP you can't say you properly hate someone/Something unless you truly know who and what they are. Otherwise know your hate is not of them, it is of bigotry and fear of who and what they represent.. "Change, and Judgement." So most of you (wrongly) think anyway. "

the vast majority of atheists used to be "bible based christians" , everyone wants to know the truth so if you can show that this is the truth it will be accepted and believed and very much respected its not due to fear of judgement or bigotry as you believe its because people are not convinced it is even real . what evidence do you have that this or any other chapter in the bible is worthy of respect and serious study . if it is worthy every human wants to know that truth if  it is truth . so what makes you think the bible is true what has convinced you exactly ?

The Bible condemns homosexuality, and states that homosexuals will go to hell. So fuck that stupid book.

(November 9, 2015 at 11:45 am)jenny1972 Wrote: no i never did quote anything dishonestly or lie about any quotes or fabricate or invent anything so why would i admit to doing that ?

That's not true. Every time you quoted 1/2 a verse and gave a full verse denotation you lied about it's meaning.
You admitted in doing wrong because their are at least 5 posts/examples of you doing this directly.

Quote: I said i have no respect for the quotes but im not going to be dishonest about bible verses whether i agree with them or not .

That's not true. I've pointed out several instances where you intentionally 'cherry picked' verses by quoting only 1/2 because the second 1/2 would have contradicted your reading of it.

Quote:yes i agree truth speaks for itself and the truth is that the bible contradicts

Every single point of supposed contradiction you left has been over come by a simple full contextual reading of the passage.
You have yet to provide a single contradiction.

Quote: itself in many many places thats why christians have to learn the best ways to convince people that the bible doesnt really say what it says (apologetics)

Again, All I've done is take a full reading of what you have cut up and are now in full denial about again.

Quote:you have yet to show even in the bible that it is a sin any worse than eating shellfish , which noone considers a sin , because of the "new covenant"

Because you have not asked.
Eating shellfish is still a sin. But like all sin it has been atoned for. Now Ask why eating shellfish is handled differently than sexual sin.
(Let's pretend you honestly want to know and did ask)

The Law was divided up into three sections in the OT. Cermonial law, Communial (of which dietary laws were included) and Moral law.
Moral law demanded a blood sacrifice and a turning of sin/repentance. Dietary concerns simply made one unclean for a few days. a cleaning cermony and quarrentine was all that was required to be absolved of those sins.

Jesus' sacrifice Paid all that was owed.(completing the law) Meaning Jesus' work on the cross paid for the quarrentine time and the cleansiing cermony which means that no longer had to be done. In essence all food was made clean UNLESS you could not reconcile this truth with yourself, then it became a moral law violation.

With a Moral law violation Jesus paided the blood sacrifice part but the repentance is still due/something only you can do. So that means All Moral sin still require the sinner to turn from their sin

Quote:. although homosexuality was widespread Jesus never spoke against it although he spoke against many things .

I've answered this already. are you not reading what i write or do I need to break this down to a 3rd grade level?
What i said in my last post to you:

Quote:Again, being Homosexual has absolutely nothing to do with the identification of their sin. They are in sexual sin because they have sex (what Kind is irrelevant) outside the confines of a sanctified marriage, and Jesus did infact speak on/Against that. Their sin is sexual in nature, just like all other sexual sin. Meaning it is not unforgivable IF one repents of it, one will never repent if one can somehow make sin 'moral.'

Which BTW is a rehash of the first time I wrote this to you. the post before.

Which means I guess you do not understand.. If this is the case truly I am sorry. i do not mean to speak over your head.

In essence what I am saying, is Homosexuals are no different than anyone else who has sex outside of a sanctified marriage.

Meaning they like everyone else are guilty of have sex outside of marriage. Now if you want to pretend that the bible never says Homosexuality is a sin, then fine lets both pretend it does not say homosexuality is a sin specifically. Now the question then become does the bible say all sex then becomes sanctified/legal? No absolutely not! It says many many times (Even Jesus in Mat 5 supports this) That sex is only permitted in the confines of a sanctified marriage. that means all who practice any type of sex (even the thought of it according to Christ) is guilty of sexual sin. This INCLUDES the Homosexual.

Just because you want to pretend the bible is silent, does not mean the bible grants you permission. Because again ALL SEX OUTSIDE OF A SANCTIFIED MARRIAGE Is Still A SIN!!! Jesus Very Specifically said those people (People steeped in sexual sin) would NOT enter Heaven. This means two things, Homosexuals have always had the 'equality' they've been clammering for, in they are doomed to the same hell as all Heterosexual sexual sinners are, and at the same time have the same oppertuities to repentance as the rest of us do as well.

They just can not embrace their sin, because according to What Paul says in Romans 1, the embracing of sin over God becomes an act of Evil. We All Must repent of our sin. That is the difference between the evil people of Romans 1 and the People who have committed the EXACT Same Acts in Romans 2 but are only identified as 'sinners.' As a sinner one can find forgiveness as an Evil person, their hearts will not seek or accept it.

Quote:so still waiting for you to show that it is even a sin that is worse than eating shellfish

Done, next.

Quote: , or worse than any other sin .

Which if you would HONESTLY Read what I write (Rather than assume you know my position) you would see I have ALWAYS SAID THIS!!! That is why this study in Romans is important. It will show you (Those who will follow it) that you truly don't understand the basics of Biblical Christianity. That it is a compleletly different religion than what you think.

[quote]
and what business of it is yours to judge anyone else even if you do think its a sin .{/quote]
I want to call you a bad name right now, because it is very obvious that you do not read my posts. You read past them looking for key words to argue.
Honestly you need to Read romans 2 all of it tell me what it says and tell me what my position is on Homosexuality, then answer this question on your own, otherwise I will have to shake the dust from my feet with you.

This is beyond a failure to comperhend, You are wasting my time. You are not reading what I write.

Do what I ask and I will pick up where I left off. otherwise know I will not waist any more of my time with you.

(November 9, 2015 at 1:32 pm)Drich Wrote: I want to call you a bad name right now, because it is very obvious that you do not read my posts. You read past them

This is beyond a failure to comperhend.... You are not reading what I write.

Do what I ask and I will pick up where I left off. otherwise know I will not waist any more of my time with you.

(November 9, 2015 at 12:56 pm)Divinity Wrote: The Bible condemns homosexuality, and states that homosexuals will go to hell.  So fuck that stupid book.

Actually no it does not. Again that's why stupid people.. (Sorry Freudian slip) People who blindly reguard the bible as stupid should take the time to see what it actually says before they hate it because others hate it.

The bible condemns Evil. Romans one identifies Evil as sinners who love their sin more than they love God, so God turns them over to their sin. Meaning God allows them to see their sin as being " moral."

 Then in romans 2 Paul points out that the people in the church do Commit the exact same sins as the evil people of romans 1.. This means Evil is not defined by what you do, (Your works/acts themselves have or hold no moral value in relation to sin and evil) but your feelings for your sin over your love for God is what is Evil. In essence Paul says their are Homosexuals in the group of sinners (romans 2) who are in line for forgivness of their sins and therefore in line to goto Heaven.

So again no. Not all homosexuals goto Hell. The Evil amongst all of us will go to hell, our indivisual sin are not what send us there. it is our attitude toward them (The fact that we prize sin over God) that sends us to Hell. Whatever that sin maybe.

The bible has little intrest in changing people's religious beliefs, or way of life Except in so far as it directly conflicts or leads to what the bible/Paul identifies as "Evil." (romans 1) Then it is stern and unyeilding. Thier is mercy, but only in the form of patience, Not latitude. God even seem to let us cling to whatever 'christian' notions that will foster this change, but do not mistake His patience for acceptance. Because when it comes to change, change you must, or you will never find a home with God, but have destroyed yourself in your own self righteousness.

[quote pid='1109399' dateline='1447090346']
" Again, All I've done is take a full reading of what you have cut up and are now in full denial about again. "

all the verses i put in my comments i copy and pasted directly from the following website [/url][url=http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/recommendedreading/175-pauls-contradictions-of-jesus.html]http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/recommendedreading/175-pauls-contradictions-of-jesus.html
as you can see i did not add or subtract anything from the bible verses that were on the website you can see for yourself they are exactly as listed there what is in my comments. I trust this website far more than i trust any corrupted translation of verses that have questionable legitimacy to begin with

" The Law was divided up into three sections in the OT. Cermonial law, Communial (of which dietary laws were included) and Moral law. Moral law demanded a blood sacrifice and a turning of sin/repentance. Dietary concerns simply made one unclean for a few days. a cleaning cermony and quarrentine was all that was required to be absolved of those sins. "

how do you know any of that is true? just because a book says something is true doesnt make it true there are many different religions that have things written down in a book that doesnt mean that every religion is true . why do you think your religion is true why should anyone believe that its true ?
 
" Jesus' sacrifice Paid all that was owed.(completing the law) Meaning Jesus' work on the cross paid for the quarrentine time and the cleansiing cermony which means that no longer had to be done. In essence all food was made clean UNLESS you could not reconcile this truth with yourself, then it became a moral law violation.

With a Moral law violation Jesus paided the blood sacrifice part but the repentance is still due/something only you can do. So that means All Moral sin still require the sinner to turn from their sin "

how do you know any of that is even true and that jesus did that ?

" Again, being Homosexual has absolutely nothing to do with the identification of their sin. They are in sexual sin because they have sex (what Kind is irrelevant) outside the confines of a sanctified marriage, and Jesus did infact speak on/Against that. Their sin is sexual in nature, just like all other sexual sin. Meaning it is not unforgivable IF one repents of it, one will never repent if one can somehow make sin 'moral.' "

so sex within marriage is ok right? so again homosexual sex within sanctified marriage is fine , the fact that christian ministers perform marriage ceremonies for gay couples proves that not all christians agree with your interpretation of what does and does not constitute a " sanctified marriage ",so what proof do you have that your interpretation is right and everyone else is wrong ?
 
" Just because you want to pretend the bible is silent, does not mean the bible grants you permission. Because again ALL SEX OUTSIDE OF A SANCTIFIED MARRIAGE Is Still A SIN!!! Jesus Very Specifically said those people (People steeped in sexual sin) would NOT enter Heaven. This means two things, Homosexuals have always had the 'equality' they've been clammering for, in they are doomed to the same hell as all Heterosexual sexual sinners are, and at the same time have the same oppertuities to repentance as the rest of us do as well. "

why should anyone have respect for anything that is contained in this bible ? we dont know if its even true or not first determine that something is true and then if something is shown to be true and legitimate then there is value in studying it , what makes christianity more true than any other religion . what proof do you have that christianity is true ?  only after its established that something is true  can there be serious discussion about its details . but if its all a lie why would anyone be interested in studying a lie ?  noone is going to believe its true just because you say it is you dont believe greek mythology is true just because many people used to believe in it right or just because the myths were written in books
[/quote]