Maundy Thursday

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
HvilleHokie
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 12:26 pm

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by HvilleHokie »

awesome guy wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote:
well?
His followers called him teacher. He taught lessons that are more important than ever. Lessons about eschewing wealth and taking care of the least of us. Lessons that we could all use in today's environment as we make decisions about immigration, taxes, welfare, warfare, and how to spend our money.
Christianity is not a system of government. Your interpretation of it as such is insulting and self-serving.
I didn’t say it was..

But I’ll ask you a question...

Should Christian principles be applied to government policy?
Was Jesus the son of God? Yes or no.
Yes. Of course.[/quote]Ok, then where's the line between miracles and what you described as fundamentalist taking the bible literally? Try and not be a troll or hate monger with this.[/quote]

Because I have a brain and when I read the Bible I can understand things in the context they are written.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by awesome guy »

HvilleHokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote:
well?
His followers called him teacher. He taught lessons that are more important than ever. Lessons about eschewing wealth and taking care of the least of us. Lessons that we could all use in today's environment as we make decisions about immigration, taxes, welfare, warfare, and how to spend our money.
Christianity is not a system of government. Your interpretation of it as such is insulting and self-serving.
I didn’t say it was..

But I’ll ask you a question...

Should Christian principles be applied to government policy?
Was Jesus the son of God? Yes or no.
Yes. Of course.
Ok, then where's the line between miracles and what you described as fundamentalist taking the bible literally? Try and not be a troll or hate monger with this.[/quote]

Because I have a brain and when I read the Bible I can understand things in the context they are written.[/quote]When Jesus died, rose, and ascended to heave; what context was that?
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
RiverguyVT
Posts: 30268
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by RiverguyVT »

VisorBoy wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:Where would I have fallen, 2000 years ago, for or against Christ? I'm not so sure. I hate to say it; but, I may have been one of the ones against Him. Palm fronds one day, and a few days later shouting for Barabbas. You?

:(
What can you (we) do in (y)our life now to change into the kind of person who might respond differently?
Well, some of this (IMHO -all this is just IMHO) is simply “human condition”. I-we tend to float with self interest, of this world, and rebel against God’s will. To have actually seen Christ in flesh would be unimaginably incredible. No words exist to describe, I think. And even seeing Jesus, the people then rejected Him for...I dunno...?peer pressure?..fear of their rulers?

I believe what makes Jesus, Christ, is Easter. Yes, it was his miracles and teachings...but..it was by rising from the dead that His significance for us truly takes shape. Maybe ? Maybe..it is more important to us now to have faith in absence of His corporal existence, than it was for people of the time to grasp His message.
So I put (the dead dog) on her doorstep!
Salute the Marines
Soon we'll have planes that fly 22000 mph
"#PedoPete" = Hunter's name for his dad.
User avatar
RiverguyVT
Posts: 30268
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by RiverguyVT »

HokieHam wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:Where would I have fallen, 2000 years ago, for or against Christ? I'm not so sure. I hate to say it; but, I may have been one of the ones against Him. Palm fronds one day, and a few days later shouting for Barabbas. You?

:(
That’s the beauty of it man. We have all fallen short.....ALL. All enemies of God. But Christ said, “Forgive them for they know not what they do”........and the veil was torn.......top to bottom. We have direct access to God through the one and only mediator, the one Who has forgiven. We are reconciled by this free gift of grace! Oh what Joy!

We’ve been going through Luke leading up to Resurrection Sunday. These verses have just stuck with me. Christ is dying and grace is already freely given......to the thief and the Centurion.....

32 Two others, who were criminals, were led away to be put to death with him.
33 And when they came to the place that is called The Skull, there they crucified him, and the criminals, one on his right and one on his left.
34 And Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." And they cast lots to divide his garments.
35 And the people stood by, watching, but the rulers scoffed at him, saying, "He saved others; let him save himself, if he is the Christ of God, his Chosen One!"
36 The soldiers also mocked him, coming up and offering him sour wine
37 and saying, "If you are the King of the Jews, save yourself!"
38 There was also an inscription over him, "This is the King of the Jews."
39 One of the criminals who were hanged railed at him, saying, "Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!"
40 But the other rebuked him, saying, "Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation?
41 And we indeed justly, for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong."
42 And he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom."
43 And he said to him, "Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise."
44 It was now about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour,
45 while the sun's light failed. And the curtain of the temple was torn in two.
46 Then Jesus, calling out with a loud voice, said, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit!" And having said this he breathed his last.
47 Now when the centurion saw what had taken place, he praised God, saying, "Certainly this man was innocent!" - Luke 23:32-47

+1
So I put (the dead dog) on her doorstep!
Salute the Marines
Soon we'll have planes that fly 22000 mph
"#PedoPete" = Hunter's name for his dad.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by awesome guy »

RiverguyVT wrote:
VisorBoy wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:Where would I have fallen, 2000 years ago, for or against Christ? I'm not so sure. I hate to say it; but, I may have been one of the ones against Him. Palm fronds one day, and a few days later shouting for Barabbas. You?

:(
What can you (we) do in (y)our life now to change into the kind of person who might respond differently?
Well, some of this (IMHO -all this is just IMHO) is simply “human condition”. I-we tend to float with self interest, of this world, and rebel against God’s will. To have actually seen Christ in flesh would be unimaginably incredible. No words exist to describe, I think. And even seeing Jesus, the people then rejected Him for...I dunno...?peer pressure?..fear of their rulers?

I believe what makes Jesus, Christ, is Easter. Yes, it was his miracles and teachings...but..it was by rising from the dead that His significance for us truly takes shape. Maybe ? Maybe..it is more important to us now to have faith in absence of His corporal existence, than it was for people of the time to grasp His message.
I doubt I would have recognized Christ without witnessing a miracle first hand. Or even on video if he were to return in modern times. I would have likely been a doubter and thought followers were like a cult. Something about him though let everyone he met recognize that he was not of the earth. And then we had the mass miracles and demonstrations of his power which proved his nature.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by USN_Hokie »

awesome guy wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote:
Because I have a brain and when I read the Bible I can understand things in the context they are written.
When Jesus died, rose, and ascended to heave; what context was that?
This should be good.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by USN_Hokie »

HvilleHokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:[
Christianity is not a system of government. Your interpretation of it as such is insulting and self-serving.
I didn’t say it was..

But I’ll ask you a question...

Should Christian principles be applied to government policy?
Sure you did. No part of Christianity speaks to (for example) national immigration policy in a secular state.

What does using government to seize wealth/resources at gunpoint have to do with Christianity? That's what all (save, possibly warfare) your examples are concerning.
So you think we live in a secular state? So Christian beliefs should have no bearing on things like abortion? Homosexual marriage?
LOL. One doesn't have to believe in Jesus to be against abortion or homosexuality, though it's certainly a shortcut. That's not to say our country wasn't founded on judeo-christian values.

You, like VisorBoy, appear to be describing a theocracy where your own personal views of Christianity (ie, Marxism) are imposed on others by the state. That has nothing to do with the Bible or the values our country was founded on.
I have advocated no such thing. The fact that you think I have shows the limits in your ability to comprehend beyond the simplest concepts.
It's quite easy, simpleton. You think your version of Christianity should be imposed on others. Read your own quotes above:
He taught lessons that are more important than ever.... Lessons that we could all use in today's environment as we make decisions about immigration, taxes, welfare, warfare, and how to spend our money.
When you say "we", it is in the context of government. Government officials acting in accordance to / on behalf of a specific religious edict is, more or less, a theocracy. Decisions about immigration, taxes, welfare, warfare, and how to spend our money are inherent government functions. [/quote]


Why would they be in the context of government? I didn’t say government. You must put the government at a higher importance than I do. I believe in small government so it’s just not as important to me as it is to you.
You would seize the fruits of my labor to support your policy on (more) immigration, (more) taxes, (more) welfare, etc..

One more time: what does seizing my property and will to use the fruits of my labor as I see fit have to do with Christianity? You think your religious beliefs should be the basis of government policy. What are you going to do when I don't want to play along? Let me guess....send people with guns to my house under the threat of violence and "crucify" me in court.

You seem to be showing your own biases here rather than arguing against anything I wrote.[/quote]

Still can't respond to the question I see. Good luck to your jackbootery disguised as virtue.
HvilleHokie
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 12:26 pm

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by HvilleHokie »

awesome guy wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote:
well?
His followers called him teacher. He taught lessons that are more important than ever. Lessons about eschewing wealth and taking care of the least of us. Lessons that we could all use in today's environment as we make decisions about immigration, taxes, welfare, warfare, and how to spend our money.
Christianity is not a system of government. Your interpretation of it as such is insulting and self-serving.
I didn’t say it was..

But I’ll ask you a question...

Should Christian principles be applied to government policy?
Was Jesus the son of God? Yes or no.
Yes. Of course.[/quote]Ok, then where's the line between miracles and what you described as fundamentalist taking the bible literally? Try and not be a troll or hate monger with this.[/quote]

Because I have a brain and when I read the Bible I can understand things in the context they are written.[/quote]When Jesus died, rose, and ascended to heave; what context was that?[/quote]

The resurrection story is one of the most important in the Bible. It tells us that we need not fear death. That death isn’t the end. There is life after death.

I hope this helps your understanding. I’d encourage you to spend a bit more time studying the Bible and maybe a bit less time posting here. The context of this story really isn’t that hard to understand.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by USN_Hokie »

HvilleHokie wrote: I hope this helps your understanding. I’d encourage you to spend a bit more time studying the Bible and maybe a bit less time posting here. The context of this story really isn’t that hard to understand.
1. You're the guy whose church voted to reinterpret the Bible as being cool with homosexuality and gay marriage, right? :lol:
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by awesome guy »

HvilleHokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote:
well?
His followers called him teacher. He taught lessons that are more important than ever. Lessons about eschewing wealth and taking care of the least of us. Lessons that we could all use in today's environment as we make decisions about immigration, taxes, welfare, warfare, and how to spend our money.
Christianity is not a system of government. Your interpretation of it as such is insulting and self-serving.
I didn’t say it was..

But I’ll ask you a question...

Should Christian principles be applied to government policy?
Was Jesus the son of God? Yes or no.
Yes. Of course.
Ok, then where's the line between miracles and what you described as fundamentalist taking the bible literally? Try and not be a troll or hate monger with this.[/quote]

Because I have a brain and when I read the Bible I can understand things in the context they are written.[/quote]When Jesus died, rose, and ascended to heave; what context was that?[/quote]

The resurrection story is one of the most important in the Bible. It tells us that we need not fear death. That death isn’t the end. There is life after death.

I hope this helps your understanding. I’d encourage you to spend a bit more time studying the Bible and maybe a bit less time posting here. The context of this story really isn’t that hard to understand.[/quote]Thanks hater. How about the ghey not being a sin. Explain that context with your brain.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by awesome guy »

USN_Hokie wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote: I hope this helps your understanding. I’d encourage you to spend a bit more time studying the Bible and maybe a bit less time posting here. The context of this story really isn’t that hard to understand.
1. You're the guy whose church voted to reinterpret the Bible as being cool with homosexuality and gay marriage, right? [emoji38]
Yep. He also besmirched creationist and literalist. It's amusing how he's playing holy roller now, especially after opening with another anti-Jesus view to be antagonistic and hostile towards his enemy.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by USN_Hokie »

awesome guy wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote: I hope this helps your understanding. I’d encourage you to spend a bit more time studying the Bible and maybe a bit less time posting here. The context of this story really isn’t that hard to understand.
1. You're the guy whose church voted to reinterpret the Bible as being cool with homosexuality and gay marriage, right? [emoji38]
Yep. He also besmirched creationist and literalist. It's amusing how he's playing holy roller now, especially after opening with another anti-Jesus view to be antagonistic and hostile towards his enemy.

Yeah, you're right - he's just being a troll.
User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26367
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by HokieHam »

HvilleHokie wrote:
HokieHam wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote:
HokieHam wrote:
Name names.......since you think there are many......
Still waiting.........
I think it’s pretty clear by the folks in this thread who seem to bristle at my statement.
Who’s bristling at His statements? It’s your implied incorrect application of what is taught by Him.
You seem triggered by jesus’ words. Perhaps you should look inward and try to understand why.
Perhaps you’re just a clown. Name names. You can’t. You came over to wrongly imply what was meant by His words and making accusations against people. Take the log out of your own eye.

I’m good with Jesus’ words. All of His words.
Last edited by HokieHam on Sun Apr 01, 2018 7:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."

ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26367
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by HokieHam »

USN_Hokie wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote: I hope this helps your understanding. I’d encourage you to spend a bit more time studying the Bible and maybe a bit less time posting here. The context of this story really isn’t that hard to understand.
1. You're the guy whose church voted to reinterpret the Bible as being cool with homosexuality and gay marriage, right? :lol:
Oh.....so we know Hville would decry these words by Jesus:

3 And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?"
4 He answered, "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female,
5 and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? - Matthew 19:3-5

Or these:

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."

ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by awesome guy »

HokieHam wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote: I hope this helps your understanding. I’d encourage you to spend a bit more time studying the Bible and maybe a bit less time posting here. The context of this story really isn’t that hard to understand.
1. You're the guy whose church voted to reinterpret the Bible as being cool with homosexuality and gay marriage, right? [emoji38]
Oh.....so we know Hville would decry these words by Jesus:

3 And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?"
4 He answered, "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female,
5 and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? - Matthew 19:3-5

Or these:

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
This is where his "brain" kicks in and tells us that down is really up.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
HvilleHokie
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 12:26 pm

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by HvilleHokie »

HokieHam wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote: I hope this helps your understanding. I’d encourage you to spend a bit more time studying the Bible and maybe a bit less time posting here. The context of this story really isn’t that hard to understand.
1. You're the guy whose church voted to reinterpret the Bible as being cool with homosexuality and gay marriage, right? :lol:
Oh.....so we know Hville would decry these words by Jesus:

3 And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?"
4 He answered, "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female,
5 and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? - Matthew 19:3-5
In this passage, jesus is decrying divorce. He uses man and woman as the example of marriage because that is the most common form of marriage. It does not condemn homosexuality. It is descriptive rather than prescriptive.

I also find it interesting that we hear this passage used to as an an argument against homosexuality but not divorce. In fact, we hear very few arguments against divorce which is the context of jesus’ message here. Why is that?

Or these:

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

This passage is from Leviticus. A book of the Old Testament that decries many things...
* eating pork
* mixing fabrics
* harvesting the edge of your field

Jesus declared much of these laws obsolete... and I, for one, am glad. I like bacon.
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
This is actually a case of a bad translation... the word used here is malakoi which many scholars believe translates to male prostitute.

The fact of the matter is the Bible (particularly the New Testament) is largely silent on homosexuality. It simply wasn’t an issue facing the Hebrews of the 1st century.

What the Bible... and jesus in particular ... is not silent about is loving thy neighbor and taking care of the sick and poor.


Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”


Hope this helps. If you guys are interested further, there are some really good books I can recommend... but of course the gospels are where I would start.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by USN_Hokie »

He uses man and woman as the example of marriage because that is the most common form of marriage. It does not condemn homosexuality.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26367
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by HokieHam »

HvilleHokie wrote:
HokieHam wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote: I hope this helps your understanding. I’d encourage you to spend a bit more time studying the Bible and maybe a bit less time posting here. The context of this story really isn’t that hard to understand.
1. You're the guy whose church voted to reinterpret the Bible as being cool with homosexuality and gay marriage, right? :lol:
Oh.....so we know Hville would decry these words by Jesus:

3 And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?"
4 He answered, "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female,
5 and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? - Matthew 19:3-5
In this passage, jesus is decrying divorce. He uses man and woman as the example of marriage because that is the most common form of marriage. It does not condemn homosexuality. It is descriptive rather than prescriptive.

I also find it interesting that we hear this passage used to as an an argument against homosexuality but not divorce. In fact, we hear very few arguments against divorce which is the context of jesus’ message here. Why is that?

Or these:

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

This passage is from Leviticus. A book of the Old Testament that decries many things...
* eating pork
* mixing fabrics
* harvesting the edge of your field

Jesus declared much of these laws obsolete... and I, for one, am glad. I like bacon.
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
This is actually a case of a bad translation... the word used here is malakoi which many scholars believe translates to male prostitute.

The fact of the matter is the Bible (particularly the New Testament) is largely silent on homosexuality. It simply wasn’t an issue facing the Hebrews of the 1st century.

What the Bible... and jesus in particular ... is not silent about is loving thy neighbor and taking care of the sick and poor.


Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”


Hope this helps. If you guys are interested further, there are some really good books I can recommend... but of course the gospels are where I would start.
Your esegesis is exactly what was expected. I’ll demolish it when I get back on my iPad.
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."

ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by awesome guy »

HvilleHokie wrote:
HokieHam wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote: I hope this helps your understanding. I’d encourage you to spend a bit more time studying the Bible and maybe a bit less time posting here. The context of this story really isn’t that hard to understand.
1. You're the guy whose church voted to reinterpret the Bible as being cool with homosexuality and gay marriage, right? [emoji38]
Oh.....so we know Hville would decry these words by Jesus:

3 And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?"
4 He answered, "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female,
5 and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? - Matthew 19:3-5
In this passage, jesus is decrying divorce. He uses man and woman as the example of marriage because that is the most common form of marriage. It does not condemn homosexuality. It is descriptive rather than prescriptive.

I also find it interesting that we hear this passage used to as an an argument against homosexuality but not divorce. In fact, we hear very few arguments against divorce which is the context of jesus’ message here. Why is that?

Or these:

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

This passage is from Leviticus. A book of the Old Testament that decries many things...
* eating pork
* mixing fabrics
* harvesting the edge of your field

Jesus declared much of these laws obsolete... and I, for one, am glad. I like bacon.
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
This is actually a case of a bad translation... the word used here is malakoi which many scholars believe translates to male prostitute.

The fact of the matter is the Bible (particularly the New Testament) is largely silent on homosexuality. It simply wasn’t an issue facing the Hebrews of the 1st century.

What the Bible... and jesus in particular ... is not silent about is loving thy neighbor and taking care of the sick and poor.


Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”


Hope this helps. If you guys are interested further, there are some really good books I can recommend... but of course the gospels are where I would start.
LOL, you're full of crap. Male and female are prescriptive. Gay marriage is a modern invention and didn't even exist there. Jesus addresses divorce in other passages. And no serious scholar takes your translation at face value. The gospels all refute your lies so you should start there.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26367
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by HokieHam »

awesome guy wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote:
HokieHam wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HvilleHokie wrote: I hope this helps your understanding. I’d encourage you to spend a bit more time studying the Bible and maybe a bit less time posting here. The context of this story really isn’t that hard to understand.
1. You're the guy whose church voted to reinterpret the Bible as being cool with homosexuality and gay marriage, right? [emoji38]
Oh.....so we know Hville would decry these words by Jesus:

3 And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?"
4 He answered, "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female,
5 and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? - Matthew 19:3-5
In this passage, jesus is decrying divorce. He uses man and woman as the example of marriage because that is the most common form of marriage. It does not condemn homosexuality. It is descriptive rather than prescriptive.

I also find it interesting that we hear this passage used to as an an argument against homosexuality but not divorce. In fact, we hear very few arguments against divorce which is the context of jesus’ message here. Why is that?

Or these:

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

This passage is from Leviticus. A book of the Old Testament that decries many things...
* eating pork
* mixing fabrics
* harvesting the edge of your field

Jesus declared much of these laws obsolete... and I, for one, am glad. I like bacon.
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
This is actually a case of a bad translation... the word used here is malakoi which many scholars believe translates to male prostitute.

The fact of the matter is the Bible (particularly the New Testament) is largely silent on homosexuality. It simply wasn’t an issue facing the Hebrews of the 1st century.

What the Bible... and jesus in particular ... is not silent about is loving thy neighbor and taking care of the sick and poor.


Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”


Hope this helps. If you guys are interested further, there are some really good books I can recommend... but of course the gospels are where I would start.
LOL, you're full of crap. Male and female are prescriptive. Gay marriage is a modern invention and didn't even exist there. Jesus addresses divorce in other passages. And no serious scholar takes your translation at face value. The gospels all refute your lies so you should start there.
Yes he is. I’m sure one of the books he would recommend is by Matthew Vines.....
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."

ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26367
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....

Re: Maundy Thursday

Post by HokieHam »

In this passage, jesus is decrying divorce. He uses man and woman as the example of marriage because that is the most common form of marriage. It does not condemn homosexuality. It is descriptive rather than prescriptive.

I also find it interesting that we hear this passage used to as an an argument against homosexuality but not divorce. In fact, we hear very few arguments against divorce which is the context of jesus’ message here. Why is that?
In the passage in Matthew, Jesus is decrying divorce, by using the created order of marriage as found in man and woman. So yes, He is saying that divorce is wrong. He is also saying what marriage is. More than once. This is not hard to see, but I guess, easy to ignore what The Master said referring to the Scriptures.

Your second paragraph bemoaning it not used as an argument against divorce is just absolutely silly. If a church holds to scripture, they will frown upon divorce. You complain about that......maybe the church is evolving.......like you wish it to to condone homosexuality. It’s wonderful, your logic here. Your Methodists, right? Or am I thinking of another poster here.
This passage is from Leviticus. A book of the Old Testament that decries many things...
* eating pork
* mixing fabrics
* harvesting the edge of your field
And? These are all part of the Biblical Holiness Code for Israel. Not eating pork, mixing fabrics and others are specifically speaking to the congregation or the sons of Israel. These apply to the Jews, or initial people of God, to set them apart as Holy. If you read Lev. 18 in context, God is also talking about everyone else...the surrounding nations. He considered what they did an abomination, making Him want to vomit.
The code can be broken down into 3 divisions:

Civil - Expired with the demise of the Jewish civil government
Justice practices (Lev. 24:17-23)
Law of property redemption (Lev. 25)
Be just with the poor, (Lev. 19:15)
Do not hate in your heart (Lev. 19:17)
Retain just scales in commerce (Lev. 19:35f)
Robbery, extortion, false witness, and restitution (Lev. 6:1-7)

Ceremonial - Expired with the fulfillment of priestly work of Christ (Matt. 3:15)
Various sacrificial offerings for sin (Lev. 1,2,3,4,5,6)
Priestly duties (Lev. 7:1-37)
Laws on animals for food (Lev. 11:1-47)
Cleaning house of leper (Lev. 14:33-57)
Law of Atonement (Lev. 16:1-28;17:1-16)
Regulations for Priests (Lev. 21,22)
Festivals (Lev. 23:1-25)

Moral - No Expiration because it is based on God's character. "You shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am holy," (Lev. 19:2)
Do not steal or lie (Lev. 19:11)
Do not oppress your neighbor (Lev. 19:13)
No idolatry (Lev. 26:1-13)
Don't sacrifice children to Molech (Lev. 20:1-5)
Don't commit adultery, incest, bestiality, homosexuality, etc. (Lev. 20:9-21)
You shall love your neighbor as yourself (Lev. 19:18)
This is actually a case of a bad translation... the word used here is malakoi which many scholars believe translates to male prostitute.

The fact of the matter is the Bible (particularly the New Testament) is largely silent on homosexuality. It simply wasn’t an issue facing the Hebrews of the 1st century.
This is not bad translation and obviously from scholars such as Vines, who is not a Biblical Scholar and a Harvard dropout, or others like Brownson who have changed views because they have homosexual children. It is a very, very narrow set of scholars....malakoi means “soft ones” in Greek writings and frequently identified the passive homoerotic partner. So limiting the term to male prostitution would be a mistake and bad hermeneutics, when taking on the whole of scripture. To say it’s silent is totally disingenuous.
What the Bible... and jesus in particular ... is not silent about is loving thy neighbor and taking care of the sick and poor.

Yes. Jesus did command both. Yet you come on here and say many would decry His words. Yet you have shown 0 proof. You just have an accusation. You have NO idea how each and every one of us who adhere to The Way help the poor and sick in our personal lives. This is a command to Christians. Individual Christians.
Yes, we are to love our neighbor as ourselves. We are to love those who live in sin and try and help them. What is the greatest way to help them. Tell them the gospel if they haven’t heard. BUT, Jesus calls us to repent. Something that is conveniently left out of the majority of pulpits today. Notice what they call themselves: God and the Gay Christian(Matthew Vines book). Gay Christians.

They identify themselves by their sin first. It’s what defines them. Not Christ.
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."

ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
Post Reply