Godly Wrath

[WarEagle]

Romans 1:27 (King James Version)

And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

Wow, that sounds even less like the diction you used.

I'm sorry but the only place where the diction you used is found, is in Leviticus.

I'm sorry, but the passage in Romans 1 very clearly states that they left behind the natural affection for women and turned their lusts toward one another.

I understand that you don't like that, but it only makes you look foolish to say that the passage doesn't say that.

If you would like to quote and exegete the passage and explain why that isn't what it means, please feel free.

However, until that time, everyone here who knows God's word understands exactly what Romans 1 is referring to.

Not with the diction "as a man lies with a...". You may have been thinking Romans, but you were poorly quoting Leviticus.

Again, I was quoting Romans. I understand that you're embarrassed about not knowing that the book of Romans is in the NT, not the OT, but acting like a child and insisting that I've said something I did not say doesn't help to prove your point.

The bottom line is that Romans 1 shows that the Bible does condemn homosexuality outside of the Old Testament.

That's open to interpretation.

No, it isn't open to interpretation. The Bible says what it says.

You can try to justify your sin any way you like, but the bottom line is that it is still condemned in scripture.

If you loved God you would try to keep the 4th commandment instead of willfully disregarding it.

I do keep it. I just keep it the way the Bible instructs me to keep it and not the way you think I should keep it.

Can you prove that, or are you just blowing smoke?

It's up to you to demonstrate that they're correct, not up to me to shoot them down.

No, I said that the diction you used was from Leviticus, not Romans, and I was correct. I would have thought someone who studied the scriptures as much as you claim to would understand the importance of diction.

And I would have thought that you'd be able to read Romans 1.

No, the diction you used does not appear in Romans, in any translation.

I've already shown that the KJV does, in fact, say in Romans 1 that God condemns homosexuality.

It simply doesn't. Like I said, you may have been thinking Romans, but you were quoting Leviticus.

No. I specifically quoted Romans to you. Not Leviticus. Romans. Romans appears in the New Testament, not the Old Testament.

Now, in the spirit of the scriptural command not to argue with fools, goodbye.

 

[igotbegot]

It says men sleeping with men as with women.

First of all, you never said you were quoting Romans, just the N.T.

Obviously you know the difference between quoting and paraphrasing. So obviously you know of a N.T translation that has those quotable words in it. Please, don't keep it a secret.

I understand that you don't like that, but it only makes you look foolish to say that the passage doesn't say that.

I get it. You don't understand what a quote is, or how it is different than paraphrasing, so you have no idea what I'm talking about.

The bottom line is that Romans 1 shows that the Bible does condemn homosexuality outside of the Old Testament.

You may be correct. However, the story doesn't end there. I won't say any more until I can back it up.

It's up to you to demonstrate that they're correct, not up to me to shoot them down.

But you did shoot them down, and you weren't even specific in your criticism.

It's as if you have no idea what they say and are jumping to some baseless conclusion.

The article I referenced is simply a description of the history of the formation of the new testament. It's not an interpretation of the contents.

 

[tapero]

Among the other laws proscribed by God in the OT, are things like not eating pork or shellfish, or not having "relations" with a woman during or soon after her period. Many christians, among WarEagle, I believe, make a distinction between these laws as being "ceremonial" and therefore no longer necessary to follow since Jesus arrived 2,000 years ago. But other laws, such as those in the 10 Commandments, or not having "relations" between same sex couples, are "moral" laws - and are still in effect.

The difficulty is finding anywhere in the bible where such distinctions are objectively made.

WarEagle seems to rely on a "it was repeated in the NT" methodology for why some OT laws survived Jesus, but not others. But that is dubious in its own right, and raises many more questions in itself.

Hi!

ah, thanks for explaining, now I understand the terms and what is meant by them.

I myself would stick with sin to be called sin and would not call them moral laws (as moral laws may also be something other than sin, tho not sure, can't think offhand of an example.)

Sin is sin regardless of if in nt or ot. Something which is sin will always be sin.

Also, as pertains to sexual immorality which when I use that term also includes homosexuality sex, we know right from Genesis that all such is wrong.

God says all wrong doing is sin.

Here is the portion from Genesis which speaks of Adam and Eve.

For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.
25 The man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.

But even without such we know all sexual immorality is sin.

and we know such from the ot or nt.

As to 10 commandments, the sin in there is sin, don't murder, etc.

Though 10 commandments and leviticus laws were given to Hebrews and we are not under law or 10 commandments, but all the sin contained in either are still sin.

There are some believers in Christ, called Messianics which keep as many of the levitical laws (in leviticus) as they can. May be others who do as well.

So the OT law and 10 Commandments we are not under (except those who desire to be, such as Messianics.)

But the sin is sin no matter where it's listed in the bible, either in the levitical law, 10 commandments or anywhere else in the bible as sin never stops being sin.

And as believers in Christ, once we come to Christ we are forgiven all sin, past, present and future. (of course some Christians believe different on that, tho I've no doubt on this matter for myself or for any who are believers in Christ, as scripture is clear to me on that.)

So, but as Christians we do sin. We are commanded not to, and yet we still do. As we are free will creations (given free will by God) and so we can obey or disobey commands in the nt as well as sins any place in the bible.

We are more blessed to obey and when we do sin, we are consious of doing so most times. Of course no one obeys perfectly as we all fail and we all sin.

There are times when we become less conscious of sin, and that occurs when we do a sin, we know is wrong, and after continually doing it, we no longer feel bad or convicted for such (as have done so much and so long), we harden our hearts to it, or justify it in our minds, etc.

Just speaking on the topic there as Christians as pertains to sin.

Not always the case (i mean the above para) as one can come to Christ and be an alcoholic and still be an alcoholic after coming to Christ, still drinking (in an alcoholic manner) and some know is sin and desire to stop or not but find or feel they can not.

So, in this case the person hasn't hardened their hearts, they feel bad everytime they drink or whenever they think about it.

So some sin we do as Christians we either justify it (if it is something we continue in) justify it in our mind, that it's actually not sin, or is okay,

or we know we need to not do something but feel can not stop or will not etc.

this would be about any sin.

and not just as to homosexuality sex.

Please clarify more as I see you mean more on this topic, and I just wasn't sure on exactly what you were asking and so when you clarify will help.

Thanks,
tapero

 

[WarEagle]

War Eagle, where in Scripture do you find the criteria by which you guish between the various classes of Law?

The key to understanding this issue is knowing that the Old Testament law was given to the nation of Israel, not to Christians. Some of the laws were to make the Israelites know how to obey and please God (the Ten Commandments for example), some of them were to show them how to worship God (the sacrificial system), some of them were to simply make the Israelites different from other nations (the food and clothing rules).

None of the Old Testament law applies to us today. When Jesus died on the cross, He put an end to the Old Testament law (Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:23-25; Ephesians 2:15).

In place of the Old Testament law, we are under the law of Christ (Galatians 6:2) which is to, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment.

And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments" (Matthew 22:37-40).

If we do these two things, we will be fulfilling all that Christ wants for us to do, "This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome" (1 John 5:3). Technically, the Ten Commandments are not even applicable to Christians. However, 9 of the Ten Commandments are repeated in the New Testament (all except the command to observe the Sabbath day).

Obviously, if we love God we won't be worshipping other gods or worshipping idols. If we love our neighbors, we won't be murdering them, lying to them, committing adultery against them, or coveting what belongs to them. So, we are not under any of the requirements of the Old Testament law. We are to love God and love our neighbors. If we do those two things faithfully, everything else will fall into place.

How do you reconcile applying the so-called "moral commandments" with Paul's reiterated statement that we are free from the Law?

Take a look at Romans 8:1-9. Paul isn’t saying that we aren’t responsible to follow God’s moral commandments but that Christ fulfilled the law on our behalf because we could not keep it.

Paul elaborates on this in Galatians 2:11-21.