John's Gospel & Epistles

You have to be kidding right?

Like "premarital sex is marraige" is an interpretation of Scripture, right?

 

You have to be kidding right?

Like "premarital sex is marraige" is an interpretation of Scripture, right? </font>[/QUOTE]Why do you think that the Bible is so adamantly against premarital sex and adultery?

 

Lev 20:10 The man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, he who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress, shall surely be put to death.

Pro 6:32 Whoever commits adultery with a woman lacks understanding; He who does so destroys his own soul.

Col 3:5,6 Therefore put to death your members which are on the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. 6 Because of these things the wrath of God is coming upon the sons of disobedience,

Heb 13:4 Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge.

1 Th 4:3-8 For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you should abstain from sexual immorality; 4 that each of you should know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor, 5 not in passion of lust, like the Gentiles who do not know God; 6 that no one should take advantage of and defraud his brother in this matter, because the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also forewarned you and testified. 7 For God did not call us to uncleanness, but in holiness. 8 Therefore he who rejects this does not reject man, but God, who has also given us His Holy Spirit.

 

Trajic,

"How about the fact that these words and epistles and traditions were delivered by Paul himself, not some latter individual claiming the office of Paul? How's that work for ya? "

Why trajic, you have hit on something incredible. All the traditions must come from the Apostles or they would not be true. Brilliant. Oh wait, someone else came up with that idea long before you. The Catholic Church. We call all the traditions APOSTOLIC TRADITIONS.
But it is amazing how you came to the same conclusion on this that the Catholic Church did.

So you say they were recieved from the Apostle Paul. All well and good and true but.....
The point of 2 Tim 2:2 is that they were supposed to pass them on. That is what a tradition is after all.

2 Timothy 2:2
The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.


People would be kind of out of luck if they had to hear everything from an Apostle and they didn't happen to have their pocket apostle in their back pocket.

[ February 12, 2003, 01:10 PM: Message edited by: thessalonian ]

 

And yet you still cling to your own traditions.

Soul liberty is one.

Independence of churches is another.

 

Then what was up with Paul writing to all those churches?

Why didn't he just leave it up to the pastor?

When exactly would the meddleing have stopped?

Got a Bible verse that says, "from this day forward, all churches are independent."

Did Paul believe that he had some sort of authority over the local churches?

And where do we see Paul getting such authority?

 

The Catholic Church holds the market on Apostolic Succession because the Catholic Church says so. So much for noncircular reasoning, huh?

Yeah, a pocket apostle, what a good idea... oh, wait, that's the Bible!

 

Curtis,

This was your resonse to telling someone that they were not worth talking to. You took a poster, and assigned "worth" to them. And you justify this how? With a "he started it!" comment. You see, it's only circular because instead of apologizing for a completely uncalled for statement, you just point and say, "He's as bad as I am!" That may be true, but that doesn't excuse yourself from your share of the blame.

By the way, if we're all heretics and "unChristian", you certainly aren't showing us the Christian attitude that we should instead be following.

God bless,

Grant

 

So basically, everything in Paul's epistles to those churches were only "recommendations," but they didn't have to follow them as long as the local church, by majority, thought that Paul's understanding was incorrect?

If not, then Paul had authority over them to show them their error and reproach them.

God bless,

Grant

 

Curtis,

I certainly hope your Baptist brethern do not agree with your method of assigning worth to other people, which does nothing but to elevate yourself above those who you think are inferior.

Or maybe you just finally realized that your one-liner answers of "It's all lies," or "Where is that in the Bible?" or "Prove it to me" have finally been exhausted, and you realize you have no valid arguments, which is why you have contributed very little to this discussion other than tearing others down and elevating yourself.

Or am I simply not worth the time to share your doctrine with? If you are correct, why are you giving up? I would hate to see you in the mission field trying to convert people to Jesus Christ because they put up a fight.

Quitter.

God bless,

Grant

P.S. I asked a completely reasonable question RE: Paul's epistles right above your post to me. No answer for it, I guess, since you decided to instead tell me that I'm not worth an answer.

 

Curtis,

I followed your suggestion and have taken things to the administrator.

Ask Brigguy, an adament and faithful Baptist, if he thinks these discussions are garbage. I certainly don't think listening to Baptists speak about their faith is garbage. I consume the knowedge and enjoy seeing people who are in love with Jesus Christ.

If you are so drenched in this stench and garbage, I ask that you please stop moderating this board. Others, who are just as non-Catholic as you are have been more temperate in their dealings with those of differing faith backgrounds.

God bless,

Grant

 

I've never met a truly temperate moderator, on any board...