[jmosmith]

Originally Posted by bizzt

Very True... You will also notice that these Scriptures From Matt and Mark come from Deuteronomy. So does God believe in Divorce. The command for the LETTER of Divorce was only given if Adultery was committed. Jesus explained this further in Matt and Mark

Hey Tim,

And no one things it might not be possible that these writings were more heavily influenced by the agenda of MEN, wanting to continue a social tradition of dominating WOMEN?... maybe?... just a tiny little bit?... that couldn't even be a little bit "possible"?...

Times change, values change, the sources and need of those values change, which is WHY the values change,... it's as obviouse as history itself.

thanks,
J

[jmosmith]

Originally Posted by bizzt

Hey J

I know this is For LN but according to the Gospel Stealing is a Crime! According to the Law of Man Stealing is a Crime. One that is Hungry should ask for Food not steal it! Is that not true?

Yours Truly

Tim

Hey,

I'm pretty sure you understood the reference was to this passage:

Luke 6:29 - 31
29 If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.

And that you also understood that I was making a reference to how Christian Philosophy instructs its followers to TREAT OTHERS, and NOT how it instructs them to behave themselves,... "Do not steal", is a fairly consistent teaching of Christian Philosophy, but so is the pursuit of genuine compassion for others, even for the intolerable!

Wouldn't you agree?

Doesn't the instruction of "Do to others,..." pretty clearly suggest that Christians should not be standing in the way of the "Pursuit of Happyness" of other peoples? Agree with it or not? I think it does, and I also think that the recognition of marriage is a Civil matter, not a religious one (but the "sanctity" of marriage, might the be reverse, however that is not what is at issue, and that distinction is in no way jeopardized, IMHO).

Thanks,
J

[LittleNipper]

Originally Posted by jmosmith

Hey,

I'm pretty sure you understood the reference was to this passage:

Luke 6:29 - 31
29 If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.

And that you also understood that I was making a reference to how Christian Philosophy instructs its followers to TREAT OTHERS, and NOT how it instructs them to behave themselves,... "Do not steal", is a fairly consistent teaching of Christian Philosophy, but so is the pursuit of genuine compassion for others, even for the intolerable!

Wouldn't you agree?

Doesn't the instruction of "Do to others,..." pretty clearly suggest that Christians should not be standing in the way of the "Pursuit of Happyness" of other peoples? Agree with it or not? I think it does, and I also think that the recognition of marriage is a Civil matter, not a religious one (but the "sanctity" of marriage, might the be reverse, however that is not what is at issue, and that distinction is in no way jeopardized, IMHO).

Thanks,
J

You must take the Bible in it's entirety and not just a book here, a chapter there, and a verse over there. The rest of the Bible will place what you read in perspective. It might make me happy to punch you, but then the Bible also says do unto other's as you would have them do to you. However, where does this place the masochist? Well, the Bible also says that our bodies (Christians that is) are the temple of the Holy Spirit. How can you sanctify without recognition?

[LittleNipper]

Originally Posted by Gibble

Just out of curiousity, since I"m not a biblical scholar .. where does it say God hates divorce? I'm just curious?

And the way I see it. I'd rather live happily divorced, then be forced to be unhappy with a woman I no longer love, merely because the church says I can't divorce.

Malachi 2:16

"I hate divorce," says the LORD GOD of Israel, " and I hate a man's covering himself with violence as well as with his garment," says the LORD Almighty. So guard yourself in your spirit, and do not break faith.

[jmosmith]

Originally Posted by LittleNipper

You must take the Bible in it's entirety and not just a book here, a chapter there, and a verse over there. The rest of the Bible will place what you read in perspective. It might make me happy to punch you, but then the Bible also says do unto other's as you would have them do to you. However, where does this place the masochist? Well, the Bible also says that our bodies (Christians that is) are the temple of the Holy Spirit. How can you sanctify without recognition?

Even a Masochist wants others to "respect" their wishes, person, beliefs, safety,... and just because a Masochist "likes" painful physical contact, it does NOT mean they invite it or welcome it from everyone! Or that they walk down the street with a big sign on ASKING to be punched in the face!

I swear, the things that come out of your mouth sometimes? (I am about wondered out now, I'm sorry you've chosen NOT to respond with an explanation of the difference between your PREACHING and your ACTIONS,... )

And the point was that the STATE does NOT "sanctify" a marriage, it just "recognizes" one. Even now, those joined in marriage by the Justice of the Peace are encouraged by their congregations to have their vows "sanctified" IN THE CHURCH. So clearly, there is a difference, and it is recognized by the Church -- just not you.

And as usual, you are obfuscating the differences between how Christians are instructed to act THEMSELVES, and how they are instructed TO TREAT OTHERS! And you are just applying YOUR (rather unique) version of Christian Philosophy to EVERYONE, as if they follow your "brand" of Christianity,... It occurs to me, that YOU DON'T EVEN FOLLOW IT!? (Would you have "others" sterilize YOU, your wife, your children!? Would you have "others" denigrate you shamelessly and incesantly? Would you have "others" stir up hatered and fear against you, your life, your FREEDOM, your EQUALITY, and your "Pursuit of Happyness"? Just how much do you really think you would enjoy being "treated" in the way YOU have been treating others, and in the ways that you have ADVOCATED to treat others!...)

Have you no decency at all? No desire to be UNDERSTOOD?

I don't think you "hate" everyone else LittleNipper, I think I've come to the conclusion that you don't like YOURSELF very much! And that is why you are so self-destructive, and full of "piss and vinigar".

I'm truly sorry to see that you have refused to accept this opportunity; that you haven't taken it seriously. I am sorry for the inevitable conclusions you have left me to (all of us too I guess).

Despite your assertions to the contrary, you are NOT sincere, you are NOT interested in "debate", you are only interested in spewing forth dangerous ignorances and absurdities. This is my conclusion. I am very sorry.

...what was it you said a few days ago? "Give someone enough rope!"

You have my sympathies. Because the "absoluteness" the "arrogance" and the "authoritarianism" of your comments, arguments, and assertions, sound EXACTLY like the Pharasee's in the Gospel, whom INSISTED upon their PERFECT and ABSOLUTE understanding of "the Law", and there-by, the "Will of GOD", and how they used that to opress the people with fear, coruption, and threats. You sound exactly like EVERYONE that Jesus stood AGAINST.

Again, you have my sympathies.

[Gibble]

You have my sympathies. Because the "absoluteness" the "arrogance" and the "authoritarianism" of your comments, arguments, and assertions, sound EXACTLY like the Pharasee's in the Gospel, whom INSISTED upon their PERFECT and ABSOLUTE understanding of "the Law", and there-by, the "Will of GOD", and how they used that to opress the people with fear, coruption, and threats. You sound exactly like EVERYONE that Jesus stood AGAINST.

[jmosmith]

Originally Posted by LittleNipper

Malachi 2:16

"I hate divorce," says the LORD GOD of Israel, " and I hate a man's covering himself with violence as well as with his garment," says the LORD Almighty. So guard yourself in your spirit, and do not break faith.

Do you understand that it sounds like you're showing us where it says "in the Bible" that "God hates CLOTHES" too!

WA-HOO!

...y'all heard the man! Now everyone GIT NEKKID!

"trust me!" it's a show of "faith"

(btw, we already knew this down here in New Orleans!... or rather, the TOURISTS seem to know it )

[deh]

Originally Posted by jmosmith

You have my sympathies. Because the "absoluteness" the "arrogance" and the "authoritarianism" of your comments, arguments, and assertions, sound EXACTLY like the Pharasee's in the Gospel, whom INSISTED upon their PERFECT and ABSOLUTE understanding of "the Law", and there-by, the "Will of GOD", and how they used that to opress the people with fear, coruption, and threats. You sound exactly like EVERYONE that Jesus stood AGAINST.

and don't forget about the Roman Catholics.

[bizzt]

Originally Posted by LittleNipper

Malachi 2:16

"I hate divorce," says the LORD GOD of Israel, " and I hate a man's covering himself with violence as well as with his garment," says the LORD Almighty. So guard yourself in your spirit, and do not break faith.

NLT - Mal 2:16 - "For I hate divorce!" says the LORD, the God of Israel. "It is as cruel as putting on a victim's bloodstained coat," says the LORD Almighty. "So guard yourself; always remain loyal to your wife."
New Living Translation © 1996 Tyndale Charitable Trust


NKJV - Mal 2:16 - "For the Lord God of Israel says That He hates divorce, For it covers one's garment with violence," Says the Lord of hosts. "Therefore take heed to your spirit, That you do not deal treacherously."
New King James Version © 1982 Thomas Nelson


NASB - Mal 2:16 - "For I hate divorce," says the LORD, the God of Israel, "and him who covers his garment with wrong," says the LORD of hosts. "So take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously."
New American Standard Bible © 1995 Lockman Foundation


RSV - Mal 2:16 - "For I hate divorce, says the LORD the God of Israel, and covering one's garment with violence, says the LORD of hosts. So take heed to yourselves and do not be faithless."
Revised Standard Version © 1947, 1952.


Webster - Mal 2:16 - For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith, that he hateth putting away: for [one] covereth violence with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously.
Noah Webster Version 1833 Info


Young - Mal 2:16 - For [I] hate sending away, said Jehovah, God of Israel, And He [who] hath covered violence with his clothing, said Jehovah of Hosts, And ye have been watchful over your spirit, And ye do not deal treacherously.
Robert Young Literal Translation 1862, 1887, 1898 Info


Darby - Mal 2:16 - (for I hate putting away, saith Jehovah the God of Israel and he covereth with violence his garment, saith Jehovah of hosts: take heed then to your spirit, that ye deal not unfaithfully.
J.N.Darby Translation 1890 Info


ASV - Mal 2:16 - For I hate putting away, saith Jehovah, the God of Israel, and him that covereth his garment with violence, saith Jehovah of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously.
American Standard Version 1901 Info


HNV - Mal 2:16 - For I hate divorce," says the LORD, the God of Yisra'el, "and him who covers his garment with violence!' says the LORD of Hosts. "Therefore take heed to your spirit, that you don't deal treacherously.
Hebrew Names Version 2000 Info


Vulgate - Mal 2:16 - cum odio habueris dimitte dicit Dominus Deus Israhel operiet autem iniquitas vestimentum eius dicit Dominus exercituum custodite spiritum vestrum et nolite despicere
Jerome's Latin Vulgate 405 A.D. Info

[deh]

although i don't have too much of a problem with many translations such as NKJV or even NIV and to a lesser extent the American Standard I personally only rely on KJV.

[jmosmith]

Originally Posted by deh

and don't forget about the Roman Catholics.

If you say-so Deh

I'll take your word on it. (I trust ya,..)

how's it going guy? Always a pleasure to see you! Hpe you're having a good one!

thanks
J

p.s. I've never studied the "Mysteries of Rome" very much; but of course, I did study history a good bit!... so I think I hear what you're saying. I just don't have a "qualifed" opinion to offer one way or the other about the RCC in the present? But having "more to learn" is always the fun part, isn't it? I think so.

[jmosmith]

Originally Posted by bizzt

NLT - Mal 2:16 - "For I hate divorce!" ...

Oh bravo Tim!

Excellent post!

Well done sir, and thank you.

[deh]

Originally Posted by jmosmith

If you say-so Deh

I'll take your word on it. (I trust ya,..)

how's it going guy? Always a pleasure to see you! Hpe you're having a good one!

thanks
J

p.s. I've never studied the "Mysteries of Rome" very much; but of course, I did study history a good bit!... so I think I hear what you're saying. I just don't have a "qualifed" opinion to offer one way or the other about the RCC in the present? But having "more to learn" is always the fun part, isn't it? I think so.

Hi buddy.


Oh I really wasn't referring to the present church either just when i was reading your post i was thinking of the Catholic church in the 1500s.
I wonder if the Catholics cannonized Martin Luther?

I myself don't really have a qualified opinion in modern day either and as far as the members and perhaps many higher authority i would like to think we kind of are on the same team. although i am in no position to judge.
Although fundamentally i don't agree with the idol worship.

[bizzt]

Originally Posted by jmosmith

Hey Tim,

And no one things it might not be possible that these writings were more heavily influenced by the agenda of MEN, wanting to continue a social tradition of dominating WOMEN?... maybe?... just a tiny little bit?... that couldn't even be a little bit "possible"?...

Times change, values change, the sources and need of those values change, which is WHY the values change,... it's as obviouse as history itself.

thanks,
J

Well J it might be possible but it was not God's Intention for this. As you can see the Old Testament does not make reference to a lot of Women but the New Testament shows Women in Ministry. Something totally different from the Jewish way of life. Although I don't think that means Women were totally disregarded and Dominated in the Bible. (I am not saying it did not happen) In Proverbs 31 it shows Women were Heavily in the Market place and sold many goods for provision of their Family. A Woman had many faucets of life she could enter into. Today there are many Faucets of life Women are into some I don't know if they should be like Construction/Hard Labour, Firemen, etc... and the only reason why I say that is I wouldn't trust a 130-150 pound Woman pulling me out of a Burning Building. Considering also I am a fairly Large Guy!!! Just like I don't trust myself with my Kid as much as I would trust my wife. That could be a total MisHAP .

Anyways you are correct in a way that Women were dominated but we judge that by the standards we live in now right?

[bizzt]

Originally Posted by jmosmith

Hey,

I'm pretty sure you understood the reference was to this passage:

Luke 6:29 - 31
29 If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.

And that you also understood that I was making a reference to how Christian Philosophy instructs its followers to TREAT OTHERS, and NOT how it instructs them to behave themselves,... "Do not steal", is a fairly consistent teaching of Christian Philosophy, but so is the pursuit of genuine compassion for others, even for the intolerable!

Wouldn't you agree?

Doesn't the instruction of "Do to others,..." pretty clearly suggest that Christians should not be standing in the way of the "Pursuit of Happyness" of other peoples? Agree with it or not? I think it does, and I also think that the recognition of marriage is a Civil matter, not a religious one (but the "sanctity" of marriage, might the be reverse, however that is not what is at issue, and that distinction is in no way jeopardized, IMHO).

Thanks,
J

sorry should have looked back... Just jumped in but did not notice where it was leading to... I do not have a problem with the pursuit of Happiness but if it makes a person happy to Murder People then ? Marriage has always been between a Man and a Woman and has been labeled that way for Centuries on end. Two People coming together for all I care can have a civil Union! I don't care about that it is using Marriage as the term for their Union! Marriage was defined as between Man and Woman and was before except NOW Marriage is all of a sudden a huge topic where people who are Homosexual want to abolish that fact and challenge to say WHY NOT? It is not wrong to challenge but it is wrong for people in the majority to say well this is the way it is and always will be because Marriage was made for Man and Woman. Common Law partners get the same benefits has Married Partners then give the same thing to Homosexual Partners. Why does one need the Married Title to be legally together?