Biblical Christianity 101, a study of the book of Romans

[Drich]

I just did 9 years in prison, was exonerated 9 months ago, and got out six months ago. You seem to have forgotten.

I did not forget, i was making a little joke, and trying to close a door that would prevent you from trying to use 'sex in male prison' as some sort of out to my senerio. looks like I triggered some PTpD/The prison version of PTSD

I was offered sex many times, by guys I actually liked. Never once did I have a desire to actually have sex with them, and politely declined

. yes that's very nice, and as you could see, (if you had not been target lock by the word 'prison') is my scenario does not include a sexual offer from a member of a sex you did not ever develop an attraction toward.

That is why i went on to the bit about Cialis. I thought you could maybe relate to that better

Why? Because despite my "sin nature" and my rejection of everything your Gawd stands for, according to Paul and Pals, I have not developed sexually to be attracted to men.
I similarly didn't get impulses to cheat on my Beloved, despite having been hit on by one of the super-cute nurses at one of the prisons... a chance for my first time to have sex in seven years (at that point)! But I didn't. Not because I didn't want to, or because I'd potentially get in trouble and get her fired (though the latter would have played a factor, had I been single, and I did caution her about that), but because I am in love with my fiancee and I gave her my word.

Holy crap I think despite yourself you understand what I am/Paul is trying to illustrate here! We are all sin. So what. What makes sin Evil is the desire of sin, to want sin more than God. You did not break your vow because you are not evil despite your situation! an Evil man would have made an excuse and did what he wanted to do. This is the difference between sin and evil.

The list of justifications and the slow progression of justified sin i described in my last post is the 'turning over to sin' described in romans 1. You not having God, yet doing what is right/the right God puts into everyone places you in the same redemptive 'sinner' catagory the whole of Christianity is in. the evil of Romans one would have done whatever they wanted to do and justified it with some spin on morality to make it right with them.

This is exactly why your weird little cult is so dangerous. You teach that something which is clearly people's innate nature is irrelevant; all that matters is whether or not we want to follow your cult's teachings.

That's the thing, the exact oppsite is true. In Chapter 7 Paul says even for Him it is impossible to follow all the rules/law. that only through Christ can we obtain the righteousness needed to be with God.

I reject categorically your claim that I am evil because I reject your stupid, stupid system of arbitrary morality and substitute my own. I commit very few of the sins on the Christian list, just based on who I am and how I was raised... but I combat your type of asshole everywhere I can, on behalf of those who are also good people while also having another man for their mate. They are not evil.

Again, didn't say you were evil nor any gay person as automatically being evil. what makes a man evil is a strong love for his sin than for the truth of God. this is true of any sin. Not just sexual sin.

You are evil, and all who are like you. You are anathema to the human race. You want my intellectual assessment of your entire philosophy?

Reach way, waaaaayyy up into your rectum, where you get the rest of this cult mantra bullshit you're spewing at us, then keep going, and if you can get the whole arm in there, you'll find it juuuust past the last pebble of shit. If you don't find it there, keep reaching. You'll only keep your hand outside of your ass if you don't want to know The Truth™.

It's funny how the rules of the 'rant' do not apply to you when you feel youve been wronged, in one friggen instance (And wrongly assumed I might add) but me on the other hand I'm supposed to smile after 30 pages of hate and answer every single charge with temprance and kindness no matter how many times I'm asked or told the same thing.

Put down your frosted side for a moment and think about this... Would I have waisted a weeks worth of time here going back and fourth with you just to call you evil? If you could get past how smart you were long enough to put the idea down that I am not going to teach you anything here, maybe you could grasp what it is I have been talking about for the last few days is something completely different that what you think is going on. You have tried and failed for a few days to ascribe what I'm trying to communicate to some failed doctrine you already think you know. This is been proven everytime you try and do a summary. you still can't seem to seperate sin/evil and apply it correctly. this last rant proves it.

So where do we go from here? do you want me to start over with chapter one or do you want to take yoour ball and go home? or maybe can we try again before your last post?

[jenny1972]

jesus:
Among the sheep and goats who both call Jesus Lord, the group who serves Jesus by feeding the brethren in need, clothing them, and giving them water, goes to heaven. The other group who calls Jesus Lord but who fails to provide such charity are, as a consequence, sent to "eternal fire." (Parable of the Sheep and the Goats. Matt. 25:32 et seq.). A faith that ignores the poor brethren is "dead" and "cannot save." (James 2:14-17.) "Every tree therefore that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire." (Matt. 7:19.)

paul:
Anyone who "shall call" on the name of the Lord shall be saved. (Romans 10:13.) This is permanent, and no condition subsequent can be put on this that you must be charitable or have fruit thereafter. Otherwise, it is salvation by works. (Romans 4:4, 14; Eph. 2:8-9.) Hence, it cannot be true that if the goats, in fact, ever once called on the name of the Lord that they should be sent to hell. James' statement that paraphrases the principle of Matthew 25:32 et seq. contradicts Paul, and we are not to believe even an angel from heaven if he should contradict Paul. (Gal. 1:8.)

*  as you can see jesus said salvation is through works and repenting to God , but paul claimed that salvation was through faith in jesus  *

jesus:
Salvation is based on God forgiving your sin. If you do not forgive others after you receive forgiveness, God will revoke your forgiveness and send you to hell to be tormented. (Matt. 18:28-35; cf. Matt. 6:12.)

paul:
Salvation is not contingent on your forgiving others. Salvation only has one condition: a one-time faith. (Romans 4:4.) If you ever once had faith (Romans 10:9), you are no longer able to be condemned. (Romans 8:1.)

Salvation could not possibly depend on any works of repentance. Salvation is by faith alone. (Eph.2:8-9; Rom. 4:4.)

---

jesus:
To have eternal life, follow the Ten Commandments, deny yourself (i.e., repent and do works worthy of repentance) and then follow Jesus. If you give up fathers, mothers, and brothers for Jesus, deny yourself, take up your cross, and "follow Me," you "shall have eternal life." (Matthew 19:27-29; Matthew 10:37-39; John 12:25-26.)

In Luke 18:18-22 Jesus says: a ruler asked him, "Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" "Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good—except God alone. You know the commandments: 'Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother.'""All these I have kept since I was a boy," he said.When Jesus heard this, he said to him, "You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." (through works)

paul:
To have eternal life, say with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe He is resurrected. (Rom. 10:9.) Do not add any work. "Now to him that worketh, the reward is not reckoned as of grace, but as of debt."(Rom. 4:4.) If salvation depends on keeping the Law, then salvation by faith is made void. "[I]f they that are of the law are heirs, faith is made void..." (Rom.4:14.) In Romans 3:20, Paul says: “For no one is put right in God’s sight by doing what the Law requires; what the Law does is to make man know he sinned.” (through faith)

[Edwardo Piet]

What makes a man evil is a strong love for his sin than for the truth of God. this is true of any sin.

So considering that masturbation is a sin and I have a strong love for masturbation and I don't have any love for the "truth" of "God" at all because I don't believe in that bullshit, does that make me evil?

And what about my strong love for blasphemy for that matter? Or another completely harmless sin? + I guarantee that I have no love for the "truth" of "God" whatsoever. Does this make me evil according to you?

[jenny1972]

well according to jesus your going to hell according to paul heaven if you say i believe in jesus just 1 time do it evie for insurance just in case its true lol then sin as much as you want and you are going to heaven according to paul .

actually paul could be considered an antichrist since he goes against what jesus preached i would say hes an antichrist that is what the term means right drich ?  

[Edwardo Piet]

I see you winking Jenny, I see you winking at me.

(With an emoticon but still).

[jenny1972]

so drich what do you think about the idea that paul was an undercover antichrist ?
think about it what would the devil like to do but get in with Gods inner circle ? they were just humans right they werent gods so why wouldnt that be probable isnt satan a liar and deceiver so then who was decieved jesus or paul because they are obviously at odds with how salvation worked . its seems like jesus had no clue about the whole believing in him and u get salvation , maybe because it hadnt been invented yet

[TheRocketSurgeon]

Fuck you for saying you "triggered PTSD" by mentioning prison. Just like you, I included examples of both genders because, despite longterm deprivation of sexual pleasure, I went all those years without because my sense of honor is still solid despite thinking your entire notion of "sin against God" is fucking ridiculous.

Your god forbids a lot of things... so I sin all the time. Willfully, gladly, and without hesitation. Just not many of the types of sin typically listed by believers as examples, because those aren't who I am. But the ones that are, I'm totally unrepentant about. If I ever met a man I found remotely attractive, and I was single, I'd have sex with him in an instant. Why not? My only rule is "don't harm people intentionally". Not keeping my word would harm someone I care about. That's it! All the rest of that shit you're talking goes up your ass with the rest of your arm that you've been using to scoop your rhetoric out of there.

What an astounding level of douchebag you are. It is incomprehensible to me that you could be such a douchebag. I don't say that lightly; I try hard not to put labels on people, and I see a lot of my mission here as trying to build bridges between our community and others. So when I react like this, I try to make sure I've been given adequate cause.

If you could see yourself the way all the rest of us see you, if you would even allow for a moment the shield of your own personal arrogance slip for just an instant, it would crush you utterly. You'd have a gun barrel down your throat in two days, after realizing just what a scumbag you really are. Luckily for you, I doubt your shell of arrogance can be penetrated.

But a douchebag, you remain. This is my last communication to you.

[jenny1972]

i like how he just ignores my questions and gets offline i thought this was supposed to be a study of romans and he was going to reconcile all pauls contradictions in the bible with impressive apologetic hoop jumping ... well i guess get back to me drich . one way to make them match is to combine them   oh wait the church already did , not pure jesus and not pure paul they dont match so just compromise and combine so both are true right ? nevermind jesus didnt say anything about having faith for salvation or paul anything about works (actually paul said its all faith not at all repentance and following the old law new covenent bla bla bla totally against what jesus said about salvation)

[GrandizerII]

The unrighteousness is in their unbelief.

God's existence is made clear through what can be seen (his creation) so it's not a special revelation to only a subset of unbelievers, dear Drich. It's a revelation available to all through perception. This is the point you keep ignoring. So even the Athenians in Acts 17 were supposed to have been aware of God (according to Romans 1). If you disagree, then you disagree with Romans 1:20, ok?

They suppress the truth through not following God and going for other gods instead. Again, this is made clear in Romans 1. And this is exactly what the Athenians in Acts 17 did.

Your problem is that you WANT there not to be a contradiction between Acts 17 and Romans 1, so you come up with some sneaky maneuvers to get the passages to reconcile but by doing so you pretty much have to disregard the context of Romans 1. That is not honest, Drich. Quite the contrary.

Who does Paul in Romans 1 say "They" are?

The Honest Answer is "They" does not refer to ALL Men. "They" only refers to Evil Men. How do we know this? Because in Chapter 2 "Sinful" believers are warned Not to Judge the Evil Men the "they" of Chapter 1.

This means that the men in chapter 1 Knew "They" should have acted righteously but did not. so THEY have no excuse. How ever the men of chapter 2 like the men of Acts 17 while still sinful are doing their best to act in accordance to the laws written on their hearts (The same laws the men of chapter 1 have ignored and have no excuse for ignoring,) because of the men in chapter 2 and acts 17 prove that it is possible to know God's will without having the law according to Paul in Romans 2

Before you respond I need you to sum up my position, i want to make sure you understand what and why I keep saying the same thing over and over. If you can't or won't do this then you forfeit the right to move forward. I not saying you have to be right i just want you to tell me what it is I am trying to tell you. I need to know if you are even reading anything. people who circle around to defeated points either are lost in the conversation, or simply run out of things to argue but need the last word so they start over.

I need to know where you are at here.

For Allah's sake, it's simple logic.

Just because it says "they" does not preclude others than "they" in Romans 1:20.

Are you familiar with Modus Ponens logic? Doubt it, but this is very basic logic, which goes as follows:

1. If A then B
2. A
3. Therefore, B (from 1 & 2)

In other words:

1. If God's existence is made clear through creation to a person who does not worship God, then that person is aware of God's existence and is deliberately rejecting God.
2. God's existence is made clear through creation to every Athenian spoken to by Paul in Acts 17,  and each of them did not worship God before Paul came to them.
3. Therefore, every one of those Athenians was aware of God's existence and was deliberately rejecting God.

That's logic.

The problem is that in Acts 17, Paul blames their unbelief on their ignorance, which contradicts the logic implied in Romans 1:20. But just because there is a contradiction does not mean you should force a reconciliation between them. As I said earlier, that would not be honest thing to do.

Reread Romans 1:21-22:
For even though they knew God, they did not [n]honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and [o]crawling creatures.

The Athenians did not honor God but worshiped idols instead, remember? So they were also committing an evil there.

[GrandizerII]

I just did 9 years in prison, was exonerated 9 months ago, and got out six months ago. You seem to have forgotten.

I did not forget, i was making a little joke, and trying to close a door that would prevent you from trying to use 'sex in male prison' as some sort of out to my senerio. looks like I triggered some PTpD/The prison version of PTSD

Fucking asshole. Really? That's how callous you talk about these issues?