Palin, Southern Baptist and hypocrisy

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
So far as I know, Jesus never said a word against homosexuality. He only had two commandments. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the second.

"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: [b]'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the La ...[text shortened]... the teachings of Paul and others.

From what I can tell, you are a part of that group.[/b]

Paul reinforces the double love command as it is known. The issue with Paul, is that people cherry pick verse's from his writings to suit their preconcieved ideas, infact Paul carries that theme through to its logical end by stating that love of God and love of nieghbor is fulfillment of levitical law.

Originally posted by duecer
Paul reinforces the double love command as it is known. The issue with Paul, is that people cherry pick verse's from his writings to suit their preconcieved ideas, infact Paul carries that theme through to its logical end by stating that love of God and love of nieghbor is fulfillment of levitical law.

So far as I know, Jeus does not state that the love of God and love of neighbor is fulfillment of levitical law.

Like I said earlier, from what I can tell, the vast majority of "Christians" have abandoned the teachings of Jesus for the teachings of Paul and others.

Also, Jesus defines a false prophet:
"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17 So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 So then, you will know them by their fruits."

Paul seems to fulfill this definition in Romans 7.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
So far as I know, Jeus does not state that the love of God and love of neighbor is fulfillment of levitical law.

Like I said earlier, from what I can tell, the vast majority of "Christians" have abandoned the teachings of Jesus for the teachings of Paul and others.

Also, Jesus defines a false prophet:
"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you you will know them by their fruits."

Paul seems to fulfill this definition in Romans 7.

romans 7 (written by Paul as I'm sure you know) is part of the 8 chapters of apologetics, one dealing with the nature of sine, so I hardly see your point.


[Matthew 5:16-18]
The Fulfillment of the Law
17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Originally posted by duecer
romans 7 (written by Paul as I'm sure you know) is part of the 8 chapters of apologetics, one dealing with the nature of sine, so I hardly see your point.


[Matthew 5:16-18]
The Fulfillment of the Law
17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until he ...[text shortened]... st stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

In Romans 7, Paul describes his experience with sin and his inability to overcome it.
"A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit."

Keep reading Matthew 5. Jesus goes on to explain how while the Law is the Law, but what the scribes and Pharisees think is the Law is wrong.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
In Romans 7, Paul describes his experience with sin and his inability to overcome it.
"A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit."

Keep reading Matthew 5. Jesus goes on to explain how while the Law is the Law, but what the scribes and Pharisees think is the Law is wrong.

I was going to include that as well, but I don't feel the need to lay out a complete apologetic argument on the interwebs. Chapter 5 also says that 1 sin from 1 man doomed all of humanity, while 1 act of love by 1 man saved all of humanity.

1Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we[a]have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we[b] rejoice in the hope of the glory of God. 3Not only so, but we[c] also rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; 4perseverance, character; and character, hope. 5And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us.
6You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. 7Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous man, though for a good man someone might possibly dare to die. 8But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

9Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God's wrath through him! 10For if, when we were God's enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! 11Not only is this so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

Death Through Adam, Life Through Christ
12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned— 13for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. 14Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.
15But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! 16Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. 17For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ.

18Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. 19For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

20The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, 21so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Originally posted by kirksey957
It's not that I reject the authority of the Bible, but rather I don't discount or reject the authority of women. Do you subscribe to all biblical teachings about women?

Sure I subscribe to all Biblical teachings about women! And everything else it says!

But that doesn't mean I subscribe to all of what some man might say the Bible says about women, or anything else.

The Bible is it's own teacher.

This could develop into an interesting discussion if folks could remain objective about it. Including myself. Unfortunately I don't see much objectivity in this debate forum. You see, I being subjective already! 😕

Originally posted by josephw
Sure I subscribe to all Biblical teachings about women! And everything else it says!

But that doesn't mean I subscribe to all of what some man might say the Bible says about women, or anything else.

The Bible is it's own teacher.

This could develop into an interesting discussion if folks could remain objective about it. Including myself. Unfortunately I don't see much objectivity in this debate forum. You see, I being subjective already! 😕

So you believe women are unclean while having their period?

Originally posted by duecer
I was going to include that as well, but I don't feel the need to lay out a complete apologetic argument on the interwebs. Chapter 5 also says that 1 sin from 1 man doomed all of humanity, while 1 act of love by 1 man saved all of humanity.

1Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we[a]have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2thr ...[text shortened]... ace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

You've lost me here.

I thought you posted Matthew 5:16-18 as a counter to my statement:
"So far as I know, Jeus does not state that the love of God and love of neighbor is fulfillment of levitical law."

This makes little sense in light of the rest of Matthew 5. It becomes clear that when Jesus is speaking of "the Law" He is not speaking of the "Old Testament" but the true law of God.

Why would you put stock in Romans 5 when it is not supported by the words of Jesus? Also Jesus defines a "false prophet" in Matthew 7:15-20. Paul fulfills this definition in Romans 7. Why would you put stock in Romans 5, when Paul shows himself to be a false prophet in Romans 7?

Originally posted by kirksey957
So you believe women are unclean while having their period?

I prefer the part:

When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him, and putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets:
12 Then thou shalt cut off her hand, thine eye shall not pity her.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
You've lost me here.

I thought you posted Matthew 5:16-18 as a counter to my statement:
"So far as I know, Jeus does not state that the love of God and love of neighbor is fulfillment of levitical law."

This makes little sense in light of the rest of Matthew 5. It becomes clear that when Jesus is speaking of "the Law" He is not speaking of the "Old ...[text shortened]... d you put stock in Romans 5, when Paul shows himself to be a false prophet in Romans 7?

you failed to prove that Paul is a false prophet, your argument does not make sense, You brought up Romans 5, and I think you misunderstand what was written there, so I posted the entire chapter as it supports my theological claim

Originally posted by josephw
Sure I subscribe to all Biblical teachings about women! ....

Wow ...youre better than Jesus Christ himself.
He clearly did not suscribe to the stoning of adulterous women as prescribed by the law of Moses.
You must be the new messiah.

Originally posted by duecer
you failed to prove that Paul is a false prophet, your argument does not make sense, You brought up Romans 5, and I think you misunderstand what was written there, so I posted the entire chapter as it supports my theological claim

I didn't bring up Romans 5. You did. Perhaps you misread the following?:
"Keep reading Matthew 5. Jesus goes on to explain how while the Law is the Law, but what the scribes and Pharisees think is the Law is wrong."

Once again, read how Jesus defines a false prophet.

Matthew 7:15-20
"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17 So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 So then, you will know them by their fruits."

Good fruit is righteousness. Bad fruit is unrighteousness, i.e., sin. Therefore a true prophet is righteous and a false prophet us unrighteous. What's more, Jesus states "a good tree cannot produce bad fruit". Therefore a true prophet cannot be unrighteous, i.e., sin

In Romans 7, Paul describes his experience with sin and his inability to stop sinning.

Therefore Paul does bear bad fruit. Therefore Paul is not a good tree. Therefore Paul is a false prophet.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
I didn't bring up Romans 5. You did. Perhaps you misread the following?:
"Keep reading [b]Matthew 5. Jesus goes on to explain how while the Law is the Law, but what the scribes and Pharisees think is the Law is wrong."

Once again, read how Jesus defines a false prophet.

Matthew 7:15-20
"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's ...[text shortened]... s bear bad fruit. Therefore Paul is not a good tree. Therefore Paul is a false prophet.[/b]

therefore everyone is a false prophet, because there are non that are rightoeus no not one, and again I think you misunderstand the purpose of chapter 7, that aside, Paul is an apostle, not a prophet.


I retract my argument about romans 5, as I misread your o.p. it is only narrowly relevant.

Originally posted by kirksey957
So you believe women are unclean while having their period?

Do you really expect me to answer that?

There's a time to be funny, and there's a time for serious debate. It's been about two years of this pointless back and forth garbage.

Quit sluffing me off! Or are you afraid of the truth?

Originally posted by duecer
therefore everyone is a false prophet, because there are non that are rightoeus no not one, and again I think you misunderstand the purpose of chapter 7, that aside, Paul is an apostle, not a prophet.


I retract my argument about romans 5, as I misread your o.p. it is only narrowly relevant.

So the following still stands:
I thought you posted Matthew 5:16-18 as a counter to my statement:
"So far as I know, Jeus does not state that the love of God and love of neighbor is fulfillment of levitical law."
This makes little sense in light of the rest of Matthew 5. It becomes clear that when Jesus is speaking of "the Law" He is not speaking of the "Old Testament" but the true law of God.

Many believe Paul to be "divinely inspired" which would make him a prophet . If you do not believe Paul a prophet, then why would you put stock in what he says that is contrary to the words of Jesus? If you do believe Paul a prophet, then what I posted about how Jesus defined false prophets still stands.