That's the funny part. Jesus frees you from the old testament dogma and ritual. Ritual, IMO, that is nothing more than Jewish culture stuck in the bible as "god's word". Jesus erases these restrictions, makes a simple message, and then Paul comes immediately around to once again place human restrictions and dogma around it.
which human restrictions and dogma? he certainly hits on sexual immorality as being something to avoid. i can't argue that. and he addresses issues that are affecting the various churches...mostly because they're asking for his guidance. he's very clear that Christ crucified and risen is THE issue...he even says that others preach that out of conceit or other reasons, but that it's ok with him, because in the end, at least Christ is preached. but Jesus doesn't just free from ritual. that's really not what it's about. it's more about acknowledging that this whole God thing is a matter of the heart. a matter of sincerity.
Outside of sexual immorality, the other big one is the role of women in the church. There are many others - all based on nothing more than the societal norms of the time. Stuck in the bible and misused accordingly... or maybe intentionally.
women in that particular church. but there were women who were leaders in churches all over the place. he addresses them in his letters and speaks about how great they are...what a blessing they are...refers to one as a "deacon." another he calls an "apostle," like himself. keep in mind, for the time this makes Paul the biggest feminist in all of that day's religion. particularly coming from a Jewish background...where he was a leader in the Temple. i think if you take snippets of what Paul said and add some element of legalism then you're truly missing his larger theme.
Yes, but not in regards to one particular group. It's strange enough to me that Jesus would use me to be a witness to Him, but I am also an example to a local church. I don't feel I am very trustworthy (or deserving). I often feel overwelmed and I feel least qualified. Being a good witness seems impossible. I have to have faith in Someone other than me. I look at myself as His servant and I try to do what I am told. I also try to keep it that simple. I love Jesus (that is how deep my theology goes). I might add that there are lots of people who let me know they don't want to here what I have to say. There are probably many reasons and I want to consider them. Even people in my church don't always want to here what I have to say.
You have to be kidding me. The worst hangout thread on earth doesnt even come close to the best D&D thread. Thats the reason Clutch created the D&D, so that we (The Hangout People) don't have to see the garbage that is spewed here. Texas should be ashamed of itself for passing this garbage. My faith in being an American and Texan has been severely shaken lately.
I CORINTHIANS 14:33b As in all the churches of the saints, 34 the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. It has been a while since I've picked up a bible, I admit. So I'm sure you can dwarf me in scriptural knowledge. Suffice to say that it's irrational to view Paul's writings as anymore than one man's opinion.
You've never wondered how the church supporting this type of legislation may impact how the gay community relates to the church? I'm sure you have - perhaps the answer was unsettling. While I'm at it, I'd like you to answer some harder questions. Chance never answered me, but I think you're a better fit for this question anyhow: Rhester, you've always struck me as well balanced and politically sensitive - even "liberal" per the definition of some here. Is marriage primarily a religious function? How do you reconcile the intended American secularism with this type of legislation? Why is this legislation acceptable with regard to the promise of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"? What are your thoughts on this post? Not trying to be confrontational - real questions.
you're right. that's there. back then, men and women used to sit on opposite sides. of course, many of the churches were house churches...and many of those were owned by women. i don't know what worship services were like then so i don't have much context to add here. but again, i'll point you to verses where women have true leadership positions in the church, and Paul not only acknowledges it but praises it. in fact, in Chapter 16 of that very letter you quoted he sends greetings from Priscilla and Aquila, and the church that meets in their home. he talks about Phoebe in another letter as a deacon. also in 1 Corinthians..in Chapter 7 he says that a man's body belongs to his wife...not just that her body belongs to him. for this time, this is revolutionary. and of course Galatians 3:28...which I'd say relates more to the bigger "theme" i mentioned earlier. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." and hey...i got you to pick up a Bible!! i'll check that off my list for the day!!!
what if we got rid of state-sanctioned marriages altogether. what if we called them ALL civil unions instead. and still allow churches to marry whomever they wish...and not marry whomever they wish. and the state could recognize the church marriage as a civil union. between the man, woman and their God...it would be called marriage. between the man, woman, whoever else and the state...it would be called a union. my marriage isn't about the document i have from the state. heck, i was married in arkansas, so i'm not sure my marriage is really official, anyway!
I am struggling with a work load, will get back later. "Rhester, you've always struck me as well balanced and politically sensitive - even "liberal" per the definition of some here." You need to know me. I am... well I don't know. I am not much. Thanks and I enjoy D&D too much... back to work.
LOL!!!! Yeah - don't get me started on I Corinthians. Super kooky stuff in there: "If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head." 1 Corinthians 11:6 (later in there, it says that a woman's long hair is her covering, so basically it's saying that women should either have long hair, or wear a hat.) Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? 1 Corinthians 11:14
One more reason to be ashamed of my Texas heritage. Bigotry sucks. If you voted for this thing, you should be ashamed of yourself.
Beejster! Can you elaborate on why one must be a bigot and ashamed of themselves for voting for this? You had a similar reaction after Kerry lost a year ago...
I'm glad you liked my post! Must have struck a nerve. It wasn't directed at you, by the way. Based on what you write here, you're pretty hopeless. It was directed at members here that I think are very intelligent but, in my opinion, were dead wrong on this issue, and will very likely face those questions from their grandkids someday. Keep D&D Civil.
Their grandkids will hear the same crap that our grandparents said to us on the race issue. Its just the way it was. Its what their parents taught them. Etc. Etc. Etc. Its just bull**** rhetoric that lets them think that it is ok and was ok for them to treat people wrong. I hope to teach my children differently.
