Do you throw out parts of the bible?

[KayCee]

Only the parts where St. Paul, in effect, states that women should be silent, tend to housekeeping chores, and leave it to the men to take care of the big stuff. Hey, you libbers out there, gimme a chapter and verse for this.

[charisenexcelcis]

Originally Posted by KayCee

Only the parts where St. Paul, in effect, states that women should be silent, tend to housekeeping chores, and leave it to the men to take care of the big stuff. Hey, you libbers out there, gimme a chapter and verse for this.

If you look at those verses you will find that each one of them was about how the authority of the church could not undermine the marriage relationship. The verses do not demand the hyper-conservative view espoused by some. In the New Testament there were women teachers, prophetesses, and probably even apostles.

[Nuhen]

Originally Posted by charisenexcelcis

If you look at those verses you will find that each one of them was about how the authority of the church could not undermine the marriage relationship. The verses do not demand the hyper-conservative view espoused by some. In the New Testament there were women teachers, prophetesses, and probably even apostles.

That's not what Paul says in Timothy, actually.

[greatkraw]

Originally Posted by Nuhen

I know! 'Cause, you know, G-d doesn't care if you have a beard or eat pork or have a tattoo. But you better not have long hair, men, and you women better not have short hair and you should only be wearing dresses!

'Cause, you know, G-d cares about THOSE trivial issues, but not beards and the like.

I have been thinking about this

in the Millenium I think I will throw a BBQ for Jesus with pork sausages

[charisenexcelcis]

Originally Posted by Nuhen

That's not what Paul says in Timothy, actually.

You have no interpretive skills.

[superdave5221]

Originally Posted by MahogonySnail

Most bible scholars believe Paul and James were at odds as Nuhan has been saying.

Paul and James were not at odds. Martin Luther originally disagreed with James because he misinterpreted his writings as saying that works were necessary for salvation. He felt that this would be at odds with Paul's theme of salvation by faith. James never said this. What he said is that a person with saving faith will manifest that faith in good works. Luther began to understand and did accept James writing towards the end of his life.

[Stuey]

Nuhen what I don't understand is how you can say that not a tiny part of the law will be erased, yet you do not follow the law to the letter. You say that it is the meaning behind the law which counts, which if you take the old testament into account is clearly not the case, I think snail pointed out earlier all the situations where for a seemingly minor break of the law people were killed or punished!

There is a quote that says in the nt somewhere that if you follow one part of the law you are obligated to follow the Entire thing - this does not mean adapting the law to suit modern purposes because that is the 'meaning' behind it. If you want to obey the law then you need to obey the full law, not some watered down version of it like you are describing.

But you are right, we don't need to follow the law but the meaning behind it - and that meaning is manifest in Jesus! When he healed the man with the bad hand on the sabath, did he sin? No, for the sabath was made for man rather than man made for the sabath. But we don't need to follow a watered down version of the law that the rabbi's have decided upon.. we don't need to follow it at all because in christ we are free, he is the fullfilment of the law. Jesus said that the most important commandements are to love god with all your heart mind and soul, and to love your neighbour as yourself. - These two commandments sum up the entire old testament law.

Against love there is no law.

God bless

[HumbleSaint]

Ya Nahun if we are under the old law, then I should have been stoned a long time ago.

Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of isreal after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people. Hebrews 8:9-10

[MahogonySnail]

Jewish hypocrites are nothing new. See the book of Matthew.

[charisenexcelcis]

Originally Posted by Nuhen

That's not what Paul says in Timothy, actually.

Paul speaks against a woman in a teaching relationship with a man. This relationship, closer to what we would see as mentoring, would have been inappropriate and probably still so.

[wattie]

What good is it, my brothers, if a man says he has faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? <...> Faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. <...> Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did.

what is the context of this?

(Jas 2:14) What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?

(Jas 2:15) If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,

(Jas 2:16) And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?

So 'save' in the context of these verses is about deliverance.. helping someone out. In regards to the individual.. this would be like saying God will help me without doing anything about the situation you are in. So the person isn't looking after themselves to allow God to work with them.

Faith can save someone eternally without works.. that is called entrusting your salvation with Jesus. It's not a work.. but a response to God tapping on your heart. Romans chapter 10 shows this.. John 3:16.. John 5:24.. Acts 2:21 etc..

This is what James is getting at:

Jas 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

Anyway, I am going to study James some more to really get it. I know James doesn't contradict Paul when you read the context by studies I have done before.

[Mal316]

Following the Torah is about obeying God out of love. If you love God, you will keep His commandments. Keeping the commandments is not a condition of loving God, it's a result of loving Him.


Concerning stoning: The death penalty is a most serious punishment. You must be extremely careful in its application. If you're wrong, you don't get a do-over. Because the death penalty is so serious, measures are put in place to ensure that the person convicted of a capital offense is truly guilty.

No one can be put to death on the testimony of only a single witness. You must have at least two witnesses to testify. And their testimony must be the truth. Do not bear false witness against your neighbor. Have nothing to do with a false charge. Do not side with the majority to do evil. Do not put an innocent person to death; God will not acquit the guilty.

I have posted at length, elsewhere, about putting to death a disobedient son (ben zorer). I could post it here again if people are interested. To make a lot of long posts short, however, that law is concerned with continuing the covenant for future generations by making sure parents act worthy of honor and that children honor their parents. There's no evidence that stoning a ben zorer ever happened.

Stoning is not something people get to decide to do on their own for perceived violations of the Torah. Even if someone was absolutely sure that a person had committed a capital offense that is not enough to have the violator stoned. Execution without a fair trial and judgment is not doing justice. It is in fact perversion of justice.

Also, in the U.S., stoning is no longer done as a means of capital punishment. We are to follow the laws of the country where we live so long as they do not conflict with God's laws. Death by chemical injection, or gas, or electricity (is that still done?) while technically is not stoning, is still putting to death someone convicted of a capital offense.

Nobody is killed for a seemingly minor break in the law. If a break in the law requires death, then that break was a serious offense.

[resurrection33]

Originally Posted by DinoDillinger

Parts of the bible which don't seem to match up with other parts in your mind...

Do you consider them not to be Holy scripture since it doesn't make sense to you? This happens in many instances in modern day christanity and is also noted throughout history. I believe Luther wanted to throw out atleast James, maybe even Revelation.

As you might notice on these forums, there is a portion of believers here who believe that as gentiles we should keep the law of Moses. Some of these either base this off of or come to the conclusion therefore that Paul was a false prophet.

I've heard of some people who are 'red letter only' christians who don't accept anything except Jesus's word as divinely inspired. I myself have seen a website where a person not only claimed Paul was a heretic but also that the apostles who wrote the gospels erred in connecting some prophesies in the Old Testement with Jesus.

One of the main tenets of the muslim faith stands on the Old Testement and Christian New Testement being changed by man. Ofcourse they believe their prophet has the only untainted word of God.


If the Judiasers or muslims are correct then everybody is in trouble since in their view God puts the responsibility on man's shoulder's in finding His word in a book laced with the lies of satan.

You can’t throw out Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—those are the teachings of Jesus. Right?

[Nuhen]

Originally Posted by Mal316

Following the Torah is about obeying God out of love. If you love God, you will keep His commandments. Keeping the commandments is not a condition of loving God, it's a result of loving Him.


Concerning stoning: The death penalty is a most serious punishment. You must be extremely careful in its application. If you're wrong, you don't get a do-over. Because the death penalty is so serious, measures are put in place to ensure that the person convicted of a capital offense is truly guilty.

No one can be put to death on the testimony of only a single witness. You must have at least two witnesses to testify. And their testimony must be the truth. Do not bear false witness against your neighbor. Have nothing to do with a false charge. Do not side with the majority to do evil. Do not put an innocent person to death; God will not acquit the guilty.

I have posted at length, elsewhere, about putting to death a disobedient son (ben zorer). I could post it here again if people are interested. To make a lot of long posts short, however, that law is concerned with continuing the covenant for future generations by making sure parents act worthy of honor and that children honor their parents. There's no evidence that stoning a ben zorer ever happened.

Stoning is not something people get to decide to do on their own for perceived violations of the Torah. Even if someone was absolutely sure that a person had committed a capital offense that is not enough to have the violator stoned. Execution without a fair trial and judgment is not doing justice. It is in fact perversion of justice.

Also, in the U.S., stoning is no longer done as a means of capital punishment. We are to follow the laws of the country where we live so long as they do not conflict with God's laws. Death by chemical injection, or gas, or electricity (is that still done?) while technically is not stoning, is still putting to death someone convicted of a capital offense.

Nobody is killed for a seemingly minor break in the law. If a break in the law requires death, then that break was a serious offense.

Thank you, Leo.