Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
These are some terms I have found that seem to have taken on new meanings outside of the bible. I think it necessary to understand these terms when phrasing questions and reading explanations concerning God or the bible. I can provide a study for each of these words that underline their biblical usage, if anyone is interested I'll be happy to go over them with you line by line if need be.
Sin, Anything not in the Expressed Will of God.
Expressed Will of God, God's verbal, or written command; The Law of God.
Evil, A malicious intent to sin.
Not all sin is evil, but all evil is indeed sin.
Free Will, The ability to be outside of God's expressed will. In otherwords it is the ability to sin.
Free Will as outlined by the bible is not the ability to choose our own path. That is based on a Greek philosophy, and has some how been transposed to supposed biblical doctrine.
The Moral Law, The Law pertaining to how one is to live under God. Most of the 10 commandments are considered Moral law. The Moral Law is the only Part of OT law that gets carried over to the NT.
The Civil Law, Was written to the OT Jews that governed societal life. Marriages, Families responsibility, Slaves, Hospitality, housing, the family hierarchy, etc..
The Ceremonial Law, This aspect of OT Judaism governed the practices of the temple, The temple, priests, and all of the ceremonies, Holy day observances, and regulations their in. Only the Moral Law was carried over to Christianity. Why? Because Christ did not authorize the continuation of OT Judaism under the New covenant of atonement. Meaning rather than trying to seek righteousness through adherence we are to seek atonement. The law does not disappear, matter of fact it gets way more stringent. So rather than seek to find righteousness through works we must accept the gift of atonement He has provided.
Righteousness, the Perfect Measure or Standard of God.
True Righteousness, Without Sin.
Atonement, Forgiveness through the blood sacrifice offered by Christ.
Morality, Man's attempt to create his own personal version of righteousness that allows for the sins he or his society are willing to accept. Most versions of modern morality excludes the need for any type of atonement.
Self Righteousness, Is one's own personal version of righteousness.
Legalism, A doctrine that states one must strictly adhear to the law of God to obtain righteousness. (legalism is condemned by Christ and the rest of scripture.)
Christianity, God's only effort to reach out and atone for the sins of man, thus allowing a personal relationship possible.
Biblical Christianity, is defined by the source material that governs said Christian relationship with God.
Popular Christianity, is any version of the religion based on precepts not found in the bible.
Religion, Man's effort (ceremony, adherences, traditional observances and the like) to worship God. Religious efforts in of themselves are meaningless in God's economy. Even religious efforts based in christianity.
There's some in here that I've never heard of being defined as that. I'm just wondering if they can all be Biblically backed up, or did the meanings develop as you got a better understanding of the Bible? I'm not asking for you to justify them through scripture but just wondering how you arrived to these definitions.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" ~ Aristotle
These are some terms I have found that seem to have taken on new meanings outside of the bible. I think it necessary to understand these terms when phrasing questions and reading explanations concerning God or the bible. I can provide a study for each of these words that underline their biblical usage, if anyone is interested I'll be happy to go over them with you line by line if need be.
Sin, Anything not in the Expressed Will of God.
Expressed Will of God, God's verbal, or written command; The Law of God.
Evil, A malicious intent to sin.
Not all sin is evil, but all evil is indeed sin.
Free Will, The ability to be outside of God's expressed will. In otherwords it is the ability to sin.
Free Will as outlined by the bible is not the ability to choose our own path. That is based on a Greek philosophy, and has some how been transposed to supposed biblical doctrine.
The Moral Law, The Law pertaining to how one is to live under God. Most of the 10 commandments are considered Moral law. The Moral Law is the only Part of OT law that gets carried over to the NT.
The Civil Law, Was written to the OT Jews that governed societal life. Marriages, Families responsibility, Slaves, Hospitality, housing, the family hierarchy, etc..
The Ceremonial Law, This aspect of OT Judaism governed the practices of the temple, The temple, priests, and all of the ceremonies, Holy day observances, and regulations their in. Only the Moral Law was carried over to Christianity. Why? Because Christ did not authorize the continuation of OT Judaism under the New covenant of atonement. Meaning rather than trying to seek righteousness through adherence we are to seek atonement. The law does not disappear, matter of fact it gets way more stringent. So rather than seek to find righteousness through works we must accept the gift of atonement He has provided.
Righteousness, the Perfect Measure or Standard of God.
True Righteousness, Without Sin.
Atonement, Forgiveness through the blood sacrifice offered by Christ.
Morality, Man's attempt to create his own personal version of righteousness that allows for the sins he or his society are willing to accept. Most versions of modern morality excludes the need for any type of atonement.
Self Righteousness, Is one's own personal version of righteousness.
Legalism, A doctrine that states one must strictly adhear to the law of God to obtain righteousness. (legalism is condemned by Christ and the rest of scripture.)
Christianity, God's only effort to reach out and atone for the sins of man, thus allowing a personal relationship possible.
Biblical Christianity, is defined by the source material that governs said Christian relationship with God.
Popular Christianity, is any version of the religion based on precepts not found in the bible.
Religion, Man's effort (ceremony, adherences, traditional observances and the like) to worship God. Religious efforts in of themselves are meaningless in God's economy. Even religious efforts based in christianity.
There's some in here that I've never heard of being defined as that. I'm just wondering if they can all be Biblically backed up, or did the meanings develop as you got a better understanding of the Bible? I'm not asking for you to justify them through scripture but just wondering how you arrived to these definitions.
As you know the bible is not a text book so it doesn't have an offical glossary. So what I did was take words (popular christian terms that I have noticed were being used in many different ways repersent many different understandings) and paired them with a consistent biblical repersentation of the term, or in some cases I go back to the Greek/Hebrew to define a concept or term. My thread on Agape was such an example.
If you wish to go over any of them I'd be happy to show you several verses or orginal greek/hebrew words that help compiled any of these definations.
Your thread on agape was shown to be a trainwreck. You never made a compelling argument there and failed to separate agape from philos in anything but an arbitrary, special pleading fashion. Please, stop with the etymology.
June 3, 2012 at 3:57 pm (This post was last modified: June 3, 2012 at 3:58 pm by Thor.)
How about these definitions....
Heaven and Hell: Imaginary places dreamed up by religious loonies so they could control people in ancient times. Somehow, belief in these fictitious places exists to this day.
Science flies us to the moon and stars. Religion flies us into buildings.
God allowed 200,000 people to die in an earthquake. So what makes you think he cares about YOUR problems?
(June 3, 2012 at 12:40 pm)Epimethean Wrote: Your thread on agape was shown to be a trainwreck. You never made a compelling argument there and failed to separate agape from philos in anything but an arbitrary, special pleading fashion. Please, stop with the etymology.
The only people who saw the train wreck were those desperatly trying to hold on to the idea that God is all loving. Why? you tell me, but I suspect that it might have something to do with a death bed confession.
An all loving God would be glad to take one offering a confession at any point in his life (even on his death bed.) But, a God offering a very specific type of love might not be so easily fooled into accepting someone trying to squease every ounce self serving pleasure to be found in this life, and then as if he had found some magic clause/loop hole could force God into an eternity of literal heaven... If this is not the case then what does it matter to one who says there is no God?
Uh, no. Go back and read. You had zero defense against clear textual evidence that it was a deliberate scam to distinguish agape and philos. You bit off more than you could chew and it's still lodged in your craw.
(June 3, 2012 at 5:10 pm)Epimethean Wrote: Uh, no. Go back and read. You had zero defense against clear textual evidence that it was a deliberate scam to distinguish agape and philos. You bit off more than you could chew and it's still lodged in your craw.
What is their to chew? I provided legitmate reference material defining the word in question. You provided an endless supply of conjecture and commentary from such crediable sources as wiki, and yahoo answers. I stopped that conversation with you for one reason. I am not here to force anyone out of their current line of thought. My purpose here is to provide clarity and answers for those who seek it. It is obvious that you are dug in like a tick and have decided to hold fast to your current understandings, and have closed your mind to every thing that does not agree with what you already believe. Why? See my last post on death bed confessions. You need you arguement to work so as to have an out or some sence of hope for your current plan (just incase Christians are right) Again, Who am I to force it from you? So just because i let something go, doesn't mean I have nothing else to say. (It's an honor thing) I have made a declaration of intent and chose to stand by it rather than, satisfy my pride by arguing out of your position. You have enough of the facts to make a responsible decision on whether or not to change your mind.
In the end simply tell yourself what does it matter if God does not exist anyway??? The only reason it would is if the bible is right. So I challenge you to argue your conviction here.
June 4, 2012 at 8:23 am (This post was last modified: June 4, 2012 at 8:30 am by Epimethean.)
You were given serious material to chew on, and all you could do was vomit. Try again, apologist. You have yet to win any debate here. You cannot, because all you have to go on is your pretend knowledge of "god's" mind. Much like your contrived definitions here, anything you offer up must be viewed with serious skepticism and, ultimately, discarded due to your lack of the capacity for integrity.
Here, you were right:
"You have enough of the facts to make a responsible decision on whether or not to change your mind."
I would have to add that the only fact you have added is that of supporting my understanding that theists have no leg to stand on in an argument if they are not allowed to hide in the faithbox.
(June 4, 2012 at 8:21 am)Drich Wrote: My purpose here is to provide clarity and answers for those who seek it.
You're here to provide answers about the bible for those who seek it, on a board consisting almost entirely of non-believers. Well, for starters, you must have the absolute worst sense of direction of anybody who has ever lived....
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)
