Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
So what part of the Ten Commandments has nothing to do with what Jesus Christ expects of us?
The 'Law' condemns the sinner; but manifests itself within the lives of those who truly belong to Christ.
You have no authority over me so therefore there is no authority to usurp. You are not Christ and you are not my husband.
You are right in saying I am not your husband; but you are not my appointed teacher. So don't act like you are.
If you wish to teach me something about God, then at least learn how to rightly divide the Scriptures first.
And by the way, it is a Biblical truth that no woman is to have authority over a man. Paul was speaking within the context of men in general, not just a husband.
And since you believe every single word written in the Bible was dictated by God, you should have no problem accepting this.
To those who might find these words offensive, there is a history behind them. Eila and I have had discussions over other matters, and each time she has sought to usurp authority over me as a teacher would with a student. I don't mind receiving instruction from a woman; but if a woman is going to speak authoritatively to me, she better at least speak the truth. I don't see that happening here. There is some truth to what Eila is saying, but there is also error.
Eila said:If I am not speaking truth then you would need to show me from the Bible where I have expressed my beliefs wrongly.
And yes I believe the Bible is inspired in the original languages and woman in 1 Timothy can also be translated as wife according to Strongs Dictionary:
a woman
New Testament Greek Definition:
1135 gune {goo-nay'}
probably from the base of 1096; TDNT - 1:776,134; n f
AV - women 129, wife 92; 221
1) a woman of any age, whether a virgin, or married, or a widow
2) a wife
2a) of a betrothed woman
and the man as husband:
over the man
New Testament Greek Definition:
435 aner {an'-ayr}
a primary word cf 444; TDNT - 1:360,59; n m
AV - man 156, husband 50, sir 6, fellow 1, not tr 2; 215
1) with reference to sex
1a) of a male
1b) of a husband
1c) of a betrothed or future husband
2) with reference to age, and to distinguish an adult man from a boy
3) any male
4) used generically of a group of both men and women
I have tried to, but you refuse to listen.
In fact, my dealings with you have proven that you are not open to correction. Even others that I know have had this problem with you too. So it's not just me.
This is precisely my point! You are imposing meaning on the text that the context does not fully support. Yes, Paul was speaking of it as being wrong for a woman to usurp authority over her husband, but he was also referring to women and men in general.
The context supports both scenarios.
Of course, you won't see this unless you are open to correction.
Eila said:Saying that women in general cannot teach men goes against other portions of Scripture.
On the contrary. God's word does not direct new covenant Christians to go back to the old covenant.Free,
I am not even going to waste my time responding to your post in detail, because anyone can clearly see what the Holy Word of God has to say about commandment keeping, and you are obviously denying what God's word has to say about it.
Then don't argue. Discuss. Show me that you keep what you say you keep. Otherwise, stop making claims that aren't true.Why should anyone bother arguing with you over this?
Do you or do you not break the 10 commandments you claim can be kept? How is this 'reading into' what you said?Furthermore, you don't even take what people say at face value. Instead, you read meaning into what they say, and thus bear false witness against them (this is obvious in your response to me).
Your own words arrive at this conclusion. You claim to not be saved by works/law-keeping, then claim that you can be lost by works/law-breaking. You claim the 10 commandments can be kept, but when I ask you if you break them you say it's 'futile to discuss such things with me'. You're statements are at contradiction with each other.I can tell you that I don't believe we are made righteous by human works until I am blue in the face. But you will still insist that I am saying we are made righteous by works simply because I believe God has the power to deliver us from sin.
How you arrive at this conclusion makes absolutely no sense at all, and that is why it is futile to discuss such things with you.
Why? What does that have to do with anything?If you weren't a former SDA pastor I would be more patient with you.
I was taught in the SDA school system, and I agree, I should have been taught better. They don't teach it right, which is how false doctrines are formed in the first place.But you ought to know better than to speak of the Ten Commandments and the Old Covenant as though they are one and the same (meaning you should have been taught how to properly exegete scripture).
I used to believe that John was referring to the 10 commandments too (it's how SDA's teach it). But you will not be able to show this because it's simply not in the text. If it were we wouldn't be having this discussion. You must make many assumptions to arrive at this conclusion, the first of which is that Jesus did not do what he said he would, fulfill the law. You also assume that John is speaking of the 10 while ignoring the fact that he identifies the commands he's referring to in the very same book.Moreover, you ought to know better than to deny the fact that the NT makes it very clear that God's people are still required to keep His commandments. There is plenty of evidence in the NT for this. You just simply choose to ignore it.
May I suggest that you go to the General Topics Forum and read a thread titled; "When ask The Ten Commandments still binding?" As usual, when the subject of the Ten Commanments is broached, the Law, the Covenants, and the Sabbath are quickly added. In that thread I believe that what I have already posted there addresses those points and refutes the highlighted portions of your post. If you see it differently, please feel free to make your point/points when I have finished my curent dialogue."I was taught in the SDA school system, and I agree, I should have been taught better. They don't teach it right, which is how false doctrines are formed in the first place.
Eila has already clearly shown that the covenant made with Israel (not gentiles) was the 10 commandments, which were kept in the ark of the 'COVENANT'. The Bible tells us this in many places. I know why you wish to deny this, also because I was taught it in the SDA school system."
I will check it out. I spent a lot of time studying this very topic, so I'm not optimistic about seeing any 'progressive truth' or 'present truth' on the topic. There is no doubt that Scripture identifies (at least) the 10 commandments to be the covenant God made with Israel at Mt. Sinai. It was stored in ark of the 'covenant', and certainly nothing else in the ark of the covenant could have been the covenant (manna--no, Aaron's rod--no...). The Bible goes on to show that breaking one of the 10 commandments was breaking the covenant, so there isn't much wiggle room to try and say the covenant God made with Israel was something else. Even the 'book of the law' stored on or 'beside' the ark of the covenant contained a copy of the 10 commandments.Hi Freeindeed2,
In your last post you said:
May I suggest that you go to the General Topics Forum and read a thread titled; "When ask The Ten Commandments still binding?" As usual, when the subject of the Ten Commanments is broached, the Law, the Covenants, and the Sabbath are quickly added. In that thread I believe that what I have already posted there addresses those points and refutes the highlighted portions of your post. If you see it differently, please feel free to make your point/points when I have finished my curent dialogue.
As an aside, what difference does it make where you got your education? However, perhaps you are right when you say, "I should have been taught better."
Respectfully, your brother in Christ,
Doc
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?