Jesus or Paul?
- Thread starter resurrection33
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Yeah, but I don't believe this poster was trying to bend or rip scripture by sharing something he was struggling with that seems contradictory to him.
And I just can't make it work in my mind that rebellious teenagers disqualify a godly man from work the Spirit has called him to. This just turns into...Ammo for ambitious and ungodly men to demand he step down if his daughter runs away or his son gets arrested for pot, etc. I can understand Paul trying to help them with some guidelines but I think it's a problem if you follow Paul's guidelines as law rather than the new way of the Spirit guiding rather than law. You begin to edge toward yoking and away from the Spirit ruling and guiding. And you inch toward making men bear the sins of the child, which God told them to stop doing and they had the gall to say: what the Lord is doing is wrong but He said, no, you are doing what is wrong. If He commanded them to stop saying the phrase about the parents eating sour grapes and the children's teeth being set on edge, and that from now on each man was only to be held to account for his own sins, then I guess that to say the parents teeth are set on edge because the child ate sour grapes is also not good.
I see some things that appear to be contradictions too, as this poster does. But they don't really cause the problems I see unless you try to make them into laws to yoke men and women under law all over again. It's at that point that I think the Spirit must be grieved because men choose that heavy yoke again and begin to impose it on others.
And I just can't make it work in my mind that rebellious teenagers disqualify a godly man from work the Spirit has called him to. This just turns into...Ammo for ambitious and ungodly men to demand he step down if his daughter runs away or his son gets arrested for pot, etc. I can understand Paul trying to help them with some guidelines but I think it's a problem if you follow Paul's guidelines as law rather than the new way of the Spirit guiding rather than law. You begin to edge toward yoking and away from the Spirit ruling and guiding. And you inch toward making men bear the sins of the child, which God told them to stop doing and they had the gall to say: what the Lord is doing is wrong but He said, no, you are doing what is wrong. If He commanded them to stop saying the phrase about the parents eating sour grapes and the children's teeth being set on edge, and that from now on each man was only to be held to account for his own sins, then I guess that to say the parents teeth are set on edge because the child ate sour grapes is also not good.
I see some things that appear to be contradictions too, as this poster does. But they don't really cause the problems I see unless you try to make them into laws to yoke men and women under law all over again. It's at that point that I think the Spirit must be grieved because men choose that heavy yoke again and begin to impose it on others.
I don't know...a lot of people have wondered how "I give my opinion here" or I THINK I have the mind of God on this" are called the word of God. And he's not the only one who's struggled with a woman must be silent and not ask questions. So he's got a lot of company because a lot have struggled with it. Or struggled with Jude quoting Enoch being scripture but Enoch not being scripture. Or with: never answer a fool then later, always answer a fool. It shouldn't turn into displays of flesh and name calling and cries of ignorant, etc.
Sorry, that was answer to lotcus.
Sorry, that was answer to lotcus.