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.
Which begs the question: which teachings are false? Which teachers are false? How does one discern a 'false' teaching from a 'true' one? It's all very well appealing to the Bible, but which interpretation of which translation of which Bible?False teachers and false teachings is what "Christians" (followers of Christ Jesus) are tying to save "homosexuals" from.
Any teaching contrary to the Biblical teaching given.Which begs the question: which teachings are false?
Have you got any examples of what you mean by differences in translations and interpretations as I dont see any with this issue.It's all very well appealing to the Bible, but which interpretation of which translation of which Bible?
It matters because Jesus came down to make the way to salvation for all from the sins such as those which are related to sexual oreintation. Besides which translation are you using for your statement?That said, does it matter? Surely Jesus came down to save everyone, regardless of sexual orientation (or any other arbitrary characteristic, for that matter)?
To Wiccan_Child,
Any teaching contrary to the Biblical teaching given.
Have you got any examples of what you mean by differences in translations and interpretations as I dont see any with this issue.
It matters because Jesus came down to make the way to salvation for all from the sins such as those which are related to sexual oreintation. Besides which translation are you using for your statement?
Well yes, but which Biblical teaching? There are a fair few, and not all of them are compatible. Some Christians see the Bible as condemning a particular thing, some as condoning it, and some as neither. This is true for sexuality, race, religion, gender, slavery, etc. Some Christians see Hell as alegorical, literal, redundant, etc. Some believe in both God's omnipotence and their own free will, some reject one or both.Any teaching contrary to the Biblical teaching given.
Some people translate Leviticus 18:22 in such a way that it clearly condemns male-male sex. Others translate it such that it only condemn male-male sex in a woman's bed (i.e., the bed reserved for her husband and herself). Others still see the entire set of laws and commandments given in Leviticus to be summarised by Jesus' "Love thy God and love thy neighbour as thyself"; any interpretation that doesn't fall under this is non-Biblical.Have you got any examples of what you mean by differences in translations and interpretations as I dont see any with this issue.
John 3:17, 1 John 3:5, Luke 4:18, 19:10, Heb. 2:17, etc.It matters because Jesus came down to make the way to salvation for all from the sins such as those which are related to sexual oreintation. Besides which translation are you using for your statement?
out of topic: are you aware that your nick name is "bright lucifer"?
Back to the topic:
C'mon, hundreds of years have passed, you really believe that what it says in the bible is 100% loyal to the original meaning, to what they said in the original languages the scriptures were written...
You can not even translate from spanish to english, or english to french, or french to spanish without loosing some of the original meanings, without something being lost in translation.... You can't passs the context of one use of the language to another without loosing something with current dialects, and you expect loyal translations of dead tongues?
you think that after all this time, and all of the translations, manipulations the bible is still what it was when it was written????
No its not out of topic, if you are making a claim please present some evidence because on your point you have made I think you are just plain wrongout of topic:
Are you aware that it isn’t Revelation 22:16.. are you aware that your nick name is "bright lucifer"?
yep, as I said have you got any examples of what you mean by differences in translations and interpretations as I dont see any with this issue.C'mon, hundreds of years have passed, you really believe that what it says in the bible is 100% loyal to the original meaning, to what they said in the original languages the scriptures were written...
As I don’t see any with this issue your point isn’t yet relevant, I will respond to it when you have given examples of what you mean from the Biblical translations.You can not even translate from spanish to english, or english to french, or french to spanish without loosing some of the original meanings, without something being lost in translation....
Any. You tell me which ones you have in mind on this topic.Well yes, but which Biblical teaching?
But what does the Bible say, read what the Bible says and see which ones are right.Some Christians see the Bible as condemning a particular thing, some as condoning it, and some as neither.
The Bible is clear about the union of man and woman and not other unions as we have seen from the passages frequently quoted. That some don’t believe what they say is also clear. You tell me whether you think the Bible is anti-gay or pro-gay with the relevant passages to support your view.Like I said, it's all very well appealing to the Bible, but the Bible is far from clear. Is it pro-gay? Anti-gay? Neither?
Some people translate Leviticus 18:22 in such a way that it clearly condemns male-male sex.Which is what it says.But it doesn’t say that so they aren’t really translating it rather they are mistranslating it.Others translate it such that it only condemn male-male sex in a woman's bed (i.e., the bed reserved for her husband and herself).
It can be translated
Thou shalt not lie (8799) with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
Or
'You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.
Now you show me which translation you are referring to, where does it say anything about a woman’s bed? .
Well Jesus did summerise the law like that but do these people who think this therefore see all the command in Leviticus 18 as appropriate or inappropriate?Others still see the entire set of laws and commandments given in Leviticus to be summarised by Jesus' "Love thy God and love thy neighbour as thyself"; any interpretation that doesn't fall under this is non-Biblical.
there are only two, either people believe what the Bible says and the condemnations or they don’t, they don’t even have any scriptures to countenance homosexual practice and unions.Within the 'gay' issue alone, there are a large number of opinions.
I asked which translation. But what is your point? I agree these passages show that Jesus takes away sin, are you saying anyone can now do what they want and it isn’t sin? Sorry you have lost me completely here.John 3:17, 1 John 3:5, Luke 4:18, 19:10, Heb. 2:17, etc.
The Bible doesn't use the word lucifer in Rev. 22:16.Are you aware that it isnt Revelation 22:16.
I would assume that the meaning is more or less the same, though. It'd be a reference to the planet Venus, if I'm not mistaken.ego Iesus misi angelum meum testificari vobis haec in ecclesiis ego sum radix et genus David stella splendida et matutina.
Wiccan_Child said:Which begs the question: which teachings are false?
brightmorningstar said:Any teaching contrary to the Biblical teaching given.
Contrary to the teaching of Christ, are you thinking about the OT law? If so which passages?Okay, here are a couple of easy ones. I put my child to death because he was insolent and disobedient. Have I behaved contrary to biblical teaching?
Contrary to the teaching of Christ, are you thinking about the OT law? If so which passages?I was SO insensed that my neighbor blatantly disregarded the Sabbath every week that I had no other alternative but than to kill him. Have I behaved contrary to biblical teaching?
you need to be a bit clearer in what you mean.Do I need to go on ...and on ...?
Well I don’t like Leviticus so much but it looks like you do.Oh, by the way, since you seem to like Leviticus so much, have you read the rest of the 'do's' and the 'don'ts' that it talks about? Why simply concentrate on the 'man lying' part?
Contrary to the teaching of Christ, are you thinking about the OT law? If so which passages?Okay, here are a couple of easy ones. I put my child to death because he was insolent and disobedient. Have I behaved contrary to biblical teaching?
Contrary to the teaching of Christ, are you thinking about the OT law? If so which passages?I was SO insensed that my neighbor blatantly disregarded the Sabbath every week that I had no other alternative but than to kill him. Have I behaved contrary to biblical teaching?
you need to be a bit clearer in what you mean.Do I need to go on ...and on ...?
Well I dont like Leviticus so much but it looks like you do.Oh, by the way, since you seem to like Leviticus so much, have you read the rest of the 'do's' and the 'don'ts' that it talks about? Why simply concentrate on the 'man lying' part?
To KCKID,
Contrary to the teaching of Christ, are you thinking about the OT law? If so which passages?
Contrary to the teaching of Christ, are you thinking about the OT law? If so which passages?
you need to be a bit clearer in what you mean.
Well I dont like Leviticus so much but it looks like you do.
I don’t mean anything, I refer you to Jesus Christ’s teaching in response to your ideas. For exampleYou mean that insolent, disobedient children don't need to be put to death any more?
He doesn’t. What made you think He did? Are you getting confused by different covenants He has made with His people? As I asked, are you referring to the OT? Yes or No? If so which passages.That's great news ...but, are we not told that God never changes?
Which scriptures please?Excuse me ...? I was merely quoting the scriptures. How much clearer do you want me to be?
The Bible doesn't use the word lucifer in Rev. 22:16.
I would assume that the meaning is more or less the same, though. It'd be a reference to the planet Venus, if I'm not mistaken.
Weirdest thing...I ran the Greek through Google's translation and it said something about Jesus being breakfast.
To Wiccan_Child,
No its not out of topic, if you are making a claim please present some evidence because on your point you have made I think you are just plain wrong
Are you aware that it isnt Revelation 22:16.
yep, as I said have you got any examples of what you mean by differences in translations and interpretations as I dont see any with this issue.
As I dont see any with this issue your point isnt yet relevant, I will respond to it when you have given examples of what you mean from the Biblical translations.
As I said I accept what you are saying but the reference I intend is to Jesus the bright morning star. This isn’t on topic but thanks anyway.huh, what do you know, there are other judeo-christian traditions for the meaning of the morningstar.... any way check Isaiah 14:12,
also: Lucifer is the latin word for "light-bringer" commonly asociated with the morning star, the planet venus. Also there was some mythology about lucifer rissing to heaven (the sky) at the moment of dawn and being cast down, asociated with the moment that venus shines at dawn... but i can't recall it well.
And you have many people telling you it isn’t just a book as such but the word of God given to humankind.You have how many people now? trying to show you that it is just a book, and there for it can and will contain errors.
You mean that insolent, disobedient children don't need to be put to death any more? That's great news ...but, are we not told that God never changes?
You mean that Sabbath abrogators don't need to be put to death any more? That's great news ...but, are we not told that God never changes?
Excuse me ...? I was merely quoting the scriptures. How much clearer do you want me to be?
YOU are the one who quoted the 'man lying' text from Leviticus in one of your posts. I don't care for Leviticus at all. It's full of strange and archaic references that have no place in modern thinking. It's certainly foreign to me. I prefer someone's calling a spade a spade in a vernacular that I understand.
To Morrigu
I accept what you are saying and in fact considered that when I chose itbut brightmorningstar alludes to Revelation 22
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."
For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.
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?