[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
Cool! Is that you in that gif?
[/quote]
LMFAO!
No.[/quote]
Damn I was gonna say nice tits now I still dont know what your tits look like
[quote]Professor X wrote: Honestly, what is the deal with you AVOIDING every significant question asked of you to focus on the most mundane. >>>[/quote]What I’ve been focusing on is actually the reason for the creation of the universe Doc. Ya know what’s funny? Push might even get that.
[quote]Professor X wrote:Please sir, can you respond as to why the Bible seems ok with Solomon running Legends out of his living room?
Was the stripper pole holy?[/quote]There was no striptease for the neighbors in the Song of Solomon or anywhere else in the bible among God’s people Doc. That’s the result of the same kind of non existent scholarship from the same man who find’s God blessed homosexuality in the bible as well. http://www.amazon.com/God-not-Homophobe-unbiased-Homosexuality/dp/1412020301/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1376574344&sr=1-3 The collection of 66 ancient books of the bible penned by 40 human authors over a period of 1500 years are the revelation of the grand saga of creation, sin, redemption and final glorification of men and women created in the image and likeness of almighty God.
All for the exaltation His kingly Son. For whom, from whom, through whom and to whom are all things. This collection of books was written thousands of years ago on the other side of the world in languages and dialects that we don’t speak. It requires STUDY. And SERIOUS study, along with an honest Spirit led attitude to learn how this all consuming eternal saga unfolds.
Marriage, family and sex ARE a major component in the earthly chapters of this saga. I say again. The 5th chapter of the apostle Paul’s letter to the saint’s at Ephesus in the early 60’s AD, gives the most comprehensive and profound exposition of what the “one flesh” marriage bond relationship between a man and his wife is and how God intends it to work. After this exposition the apostle (which means “one sent”) proclaims that though it is greatly mysterious, this whole time he has been speaking PRIMARILY of Christ the husband and his glorious church bride.
The history of this magnificent marriage IS the reason God in the beginning commanded this universe to exist from nothing. It is necessary to STUDY this history AS A WHOLE from Genesis to revelation to accurately grasp the fine points along the way. Push is not interested in any of this. I tried. He’s a sex addict that I watched pimp out his own covenant wife before a vast internet multitude of unbelievers in the name of Jesus. I tell you no lie.
I woke up early the next few mornings and begged the holy God to have mercy and save this man AND his family from his whoredom. He’s dangerous because he’s smart and because people by their very fallen nature are more than enthusiastically willing to believe literally anything that promotes evil as good. His linguistic agility along with the biblical ignorance and like minded willingness of his worldly audience produce what you see here.
As this kinda perversion moves from the absolute fringe where it actually still is, and grows in the visible church as it most certainly will, men of God will take the time to write refutations. That’s how it’s always worked in the whole of church history. Once an abhorrent heresy gains a certain level of acceptance, as they all always do, then God raises up men to address it. Not even the debauched and debased 21st century western church has fallen quite that far yet. This particular perversion is still being held to a smattering of apostates here and there.
Oh yeah, Make no mistake. What I am telling you now WAS the ascendant worldview, however inconsistently practiced by some, at the founding of this once great nation. That is not even debatable. It is the descent into a debauched sex saturated whorehouse society that is killing us. Just like the founders promised would be the case. Why would that be the case?
Because it is a degrading, blasphemous self worshiping corruption of the marriage covenant of the eternally begotten and spotlessly pure Son of the living God and His eternally predestined church bride. Sex is good (and boy is it ever) when used as that earthly illustration of the bond of the creator God with His chosen people like He intended it from the Garden of Eden.
[quote]Professor X wrote: I am asking these questions this way to see if you can stay on topic for once without the usual regurgitated rhetoric.[/quote]I haven’t been off topic yet. Your failure to recognize that is not my fault.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Nobody on this earth loves you and your family more than I do Push. Nobody.[/quote]
…and for the record…this just sounds creepy.[/quote]You only say that and he only keeps making ill founded statements about my mental well being because neither of you has the first flickering clue what love is. I care about him BECAUSE I know what that bible says about those who reproach and dishonor God with the spectacular distinction that he does. Without the blood of Christ, he is however certainly no worse than I am. God commands me to love him. I do.
I long to have him as my brother. To fight with him side by side for the truth of my beautiful Jesus instead of against him as an enemy of the gospel. You too Doc. I mean that. I can hear you already, but that’s ok. I’m told to expect that too.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
There was no striptease for the neighbors in the Song of Solomon or anywhere else in the bible among God’s people Doc. That’s the result of the same kind of non existent scholarship from the same man who find’s God blessed homosexuality in the bible as well.
[/quote]
Solomon 6:13 actually is speculated to relate to the Shulamite woman was dancing for a group of people.
The reasons include:
-The inherited context from Song of Solomon 6:13, with a call from the Daughters of Jerusalem.
-The description of the maiden as the prince’s daughter seems more appropriate from those other than the beloved.
-The description of a king in Song of Solomon 7:5 may be more appropriate in the voice of someone other than the beloved.
You write a lot…but most of it seems like avoidance.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
…
[/quote]
That was a spectacular display of hubris.
Your ability to cast aspersion about what others believe, experience or feel is truly unmatched by anything I’ve ever seen in my entire life.
I’d applaud the effort, but I actually feel bad for having read that.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
You only say that and he only keeps making ill founded statements about my mental well being because neither of you has the first flickering clue what love is.[/quote]
How do you know how either of us…or anyone else for that matter, knows about love?
This is a discussion…and I haven’t seen him “dishonor” God in this thread.
[quote] Without the blood of Christ, he is however certainly no worse than I am. God commands me to love him. I do.
I long to have him as my brother. To fight with him side by side for the truth of my beautiful Jesus instead of against him as an enemy of the gospel. You too Doc. I mean that. I can hear you already, but that’s ok. I’m told to expect that too.
[/quote]
Dude, you said no one loves his family more than you do.
That is a creepy thing to say no matter how you want to flower it up now.
You can pretend you are writing things like that out of love all you want to, but unless you know his family on a personal level, it does not come across as legit.
You can love all people in a general sense without pretending to actually care for his family more than anyone else on the planet.
Way too much hubris for someone claiming the moral superiority that you are.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
…
[/quote]
Why is your interpretation of the Word better/more correct than that of Prof.X?
[quote]pushharder wrote:
I will also once again add the caveat that one should not use what I’ve written as a license to run rough shod over the Golden Rule. DMaddox pointed out the admonition about causing one to stumble and he and I agree on that too.[/quote]
With regards to this, that was not my goal. I know that some do seem to think that questioning anything other than what they were told by their preacher is “blasphemy”.
I personally do not see asking questions or keeping an open mind with regards to some things that are historically held as written in stone as being a bad thing.
However, I can understand how important faith is itself.
My goal here wasn’t to make fun of anything that is held precious by many.
It is simply that the more I read myself, the more I see that many things seen as so bad seem to not really be seen as bad in the Bible and CONTEXT is more important than anything.
The question was why some see porn as bad.
The Bible contains a pretty graphic exchange of sex and the definition of body parts in that one Book of Solomon…and she was but one of 999 others.
She apparently did dance in front of guests (or at least many speculate she did from that text)…which questions what is wrong with the strip club.
Simple question…not so simple answers.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
If I am “dangerous” because I encourage folks to open the Word and read for themselves without having the church approved doctrinal manual right next to them then so be it, I’m dangerous.
[/quote]
Not dangerous at all. FWIW, That was a damn interesting take on a part of the bible that I’ve glossed over for lack of interest, and should probably give another look at.
Thanks.
This one got out of hand in a hurry.
We all have our set of beliefs and sometimes some people can take some scripture out of context. When I say some people that means everyone. All the way from the Pope down to the homeless guy on the side of the street, and me.
We have a Bible that is trying to teach us the Heart of God. God created us, and he loves us even though we do not love him. It is a collection of stories about how humans are sinful and need a savior to bridge the gap between us and God. That is it.
The Old Testament shows us that men are fallible. This includes human relationships, and mostly our relationship with God. Look at the 10 commandments. The first 5 are our relationship with God, and the next 5 are about our relationships with our fellow human beings. I learned a couple of years ago the only person who can change a human’s heart is the Holy Spirit. I used the thump people with the Bible all the time, but the Holy Spirit changed my heart. My Love for God and what he did to save me is beyond measure.
My prayer is that all of you guys on here will know that same Love I have found in Jesus Christ.
I know the Word of God Doc. God defines love. Not us. I had no idea either until He saved me. That tells me all I need to know. Here’s the problem Doc. I was about to suggest you read 1st Corinthians 5 for a lesson on how love expresses itself to those who are in flagrant heresy and or sin, who claim to be Christians, but I know you won’t.
Even though that’s a quick and easy lesson with minimal scholarship or knowledge of the ancient near east required. You just sit here, protest and be happy in your blindness. Don’t get me wrong. You’re still my buddy, but it tells me you’re interested in having what you want to believe reinforced and nothing else. This has gone exactly as I expected.
[quote]setto222 wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
…
[/quote]Why is your interpretation of the Word better/more correct than that of Prof.X?[/quote] Because it is the result of thousands of hours of prayer and study over the last 29 years and is well attested to by a vaaast multitude of witnesses that have gone before me in the kingdom of God. Nothing I believe is new or weird or original with me. Nothing. This stuff you’re seeing in this thread is… whatever. It’s just not Christianity. The perversion of marriage, sex and family is in this context just a symptom.
[quote]pushharder wrote:<<< I did not garner all my thoughts from the book he cited; >>>[/quote] Careful Amigo. Perusing that book IS reading your posts. Are you two telepathic twins. Every idle word and every little white lie. I know you must remember that much. All things are open and bare to Him who holds our life in His hands. I will say again. You are in my top five wish and prayer list of people I would LOVE to see redeemed so I could go into battle beside them and sing with in praise and victory over the enemies of our God. The weapons of our warfare are not carnal though. You might remember that too. Kamui is number one. I’m sorry. You’re good, but that guy is way off every chart of cerebral firepower I’ve ever heard of. With the Holy Ghost in his heart he’d be a one man special forces unit.
[quote]dmaddox wrote: My prayer is that all of you guys on here will know that same Love I have found in Jesus Christ.[/quote] And mine as well D. Always has been. And with that, I am outta this discussion. At least for a while?
I wasn’t wondering at all.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]setto222 wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
…
[/quote]Why is your interpretation of the Word better/more correct than that of Prof.X?[/quote] Because it is the result of thousands of hours of prayer and study over the last 29 years and is well attested to by a vaaast multitude of witnesses that have gone before me in the kingdom of God. Nothing I believe is new or weird or original with me. Nothing. This stuff you’re seeing in this thread is… whatever. It’s just not Christianity. The perversion of marriage, sex and family is in this context just a symptom.
[/quote]
Thanks for your answer Trib!
So you agree then that it’s an interpretation? What I’m getting at is that who are we to determine what is right and wrong in the eyes of god? Just because the vast majority of people agree with something does not make it correct.
Out of curiosity if tomorrow you were to see a vision which presented itself as God and told you everything man-kind has done in His name is wrong, would you change your ways?
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
If I am “dangerous” because I encourage folks to open the Word and read for themselves without having the church approved doctrinal manual right next to them then so be it, I’m dangerous.
[/quote]
Not dangerous at all. FWIW, That was a damn interesting take on a part of the bible that I’ve glossed over for lack of interest, and should probably give another look at.
Thanks.
[/quote]
Trying to read and understand a translated complex work written thousands of years ago in a remote far removed culture by yourself is nonsense. Tradition is context. Trying to understand without tradition means reading without context.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I know the Word of God Doc.[/quote]
The theological concept is that so does Satan.
You know I won’t?
I hope to eventually know the Bible on a level maybe even deeper than my dad did, which will take some effort.
You throw a lot of judgment for someone claiming to be closer to God than anyone else here.
You are not the judge of any one man’s walk with God, the concept of life, or their own life lessons hopefully leading to a better person.
This is a walk for the individual…yet you seem to think you know my walk, and push’s walk better than we do.
Hubris much?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
There was no striptease for the neighbors in the Song of Solomon or anywhere else in the bible among God’s people Doc. That’s the result of the same kind of non existent scholarship from the same man who find’s God blessed homosexuality in the bible as well. [/quote]
Solomon 6:13 actually is speculated to relate to the Shulamite woman was dancing for a group of people.
The reasons include:
-The inherited context from Song of Solomon 6:13, with a call from the Daughters of Jerusalem.
-The description of the maiden as the prince’s daughter seems more appropriate from those other than the beloved.
-The description of a king in Song of Solomon 7:5 may be more appropriate in the voice of someone other than the beloved.
You write a lot…but most of it seems like avoidance.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
If I am “dangerous” because I encourage folks to open the Word and read for themselves without having the church approved doctrinal manual right next to them then so be it, I’m dangerous.
[/quote]
Not dangerous at all. FWIW, That was a damn interesting take on a part of the bible that I’ve glossed over for lack of interest, and should probably give another look at.
Thanks.
[/quote]
Trying to read and understand a translated complex work written thousands of years ago in a remote far removed culture by yourself is nonsense. Tradition is context. Trying to understand without tradition means reading without context.[/quote]
Precisely. The Song of Solomon must be understood within both the context and the tradition of its day.
Trying to understand it within the context and tradition of the Middle Ages is not conducive to proper interpretation.[/quote]
Like it or not, the church tradition is the context. The church is repeatedly an important part of faith according to Jesus.
I agree with should all bring what we can to the table in discussion and investigation, but figuring it all out on your on is vast arrogance.
The Church is a necessary and good part of Christianity. You cannot disavow the church and claim to follow the new testament at all. I mean a large portion of the new testament is nothing more than internal Church memos between Church leaders establishing policy and tradition.
If you claim to know all you need without the Church, you must necessarily tear at least the epistles out of your Bible.