Why do i not attend church?

[Rhema]

If you rely on the word of Cambridge rather than the word of God, suit yourself.

If one can't understand the basic definitions of words, then what hope does one have to understand any translation?

Look, go pick a fight on absurd things with someone else.

 

[Rhema]

This is why TalkJesus has 12,496 members, but only two dozen active members.
The threads degenerate into a slanging match between these small number of members.

So... what to do when someone hits the golf ball into absurdity?

Like, here I was having an interesting conversation about when the church left its Jewish roots, and then ... sploosh.

Maybe this is the same reason lentz can't find a church.... the presumption of malice.

But you have a point, Wags.

Rhema

 

[Jonathan_Gale]

If one can't understand the basic definitions of words, then what hope does one have to understand any translation?

Look, go pick a fight on absurd things with someone else.

Oh no, sir, I understand perfectly what segregation means. But these examples of "segregation" according to the very definition you provided is the polar opposite of what Paul taught in Gal. 3:28, so again, if you prefer that kind of segregation, then suit yourself, just don't bring it to God's church.

The system of racial segregation that used to exist in South Africa was called apartheid.
The community fought to end segregation in schools and housing.
the segregation of employment by gender

 

[Garee]

Race ?? What the heck are you smoking?

Any segregation of Paul would be by religion, although I am aware of the Jewish claim to BE a second race. But hardly anyone outside of academia knows about this, so it's a topic I don't discuss.

But Paul quite clearly advocates for segregation...

(1 Corinthians 5:11 KJV) But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
Whether you like the definition or not, that IS segregation.... uh, by definition "the policy of keeping one group of people apart from another and treating them differently,"

You speak of the apostle Paul as if he was not given the inspired words from above recorded in the Bible . and he was still unconverted as Saul murdering Christians calling the Bible a heresy.

Acts 24:14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

Our Holy Father revealed the false fathers as false apostles and rather than worshipping a legion of fathers .

Born again Paul worshipped the God of all fathers . . that obey y hte comandmnents and get under sola scriptura. all things writtten in the law and prophets .

Paul under the power of God fought against segregation .

God as Christ is not a Jewish man .

2 Corinthians 5:16 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.

When the veil used to represent the foreskin of circummsion was rent during the first century reformation there was no Jewish King of kings, Lord of lords sitting in the Holy of Holies .

Satan according to the parable (Revelation 20) could no longer deceive all the nations of the world that God is a flesh and blood man .He fell into the bottomless pit and will be released to again deceive the nations for a short period at the end of the age (the last day under the Sun )

Revelation 20: 3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years (a metaphor to represent a unknown not revealed) should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

 

[KingJ]

Well that's not how I read @lentz post, but I'll let him clarify if need be.

Rhema

According to Matt 5:32, divorce leads to adultery. Making divorce a sin on par with it.

 

[Rhema]

Oh no, sir, I understand perfectly what segregation means. But these examples of "segregation" according to the very definition you provided is the polar opposite of what Paul taught in Gal. 3:28, so again, if you prefer that kind of segregation, then suit yourself, just don't bring it to God's church.

Please stop being purposefully obtuse.

 

[Rhema]

According to Matt 5:32, divorce leads to adultery. Making divorce a sin on par with it.

I would suggest you re-read @lentz initial post again.

 

[KingJ]

I would suggest you re-read @lentz initial post again.

I left General Baptist because they would turn away ministers if they divorced sometime in their life.

I agree with the baptist church, reasons given in my posts.

Please don't be blurry, what is it you want me to note?

 

[Jonathan_Gale]

Please stop being purposefully obtuse.

You're the one who provided that definition and you suggested that Paul promoted it in the church, I just pointed out how absurd it is.

 

[Rhema]

I agree with the baptist church, reasons given in my posts.

Please don't be blurry, what is it you want me to note?

@lentz is quite welcome to correct me on this, but I read his post as, "they would turn away people from becoming ministers if they had divorced sometime in their life."

In essence, it would seem no repentance would ever be good enough for them.

Now since I am not a member of the "General Baptist" snyod(?), though, I wouldn't pretend to give them advice on their governance.

Kindly,
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

You're the one who provided that definition and you suggested that Paul promoted it in the church, I just pointed out how absurd it is.

Stop it. Just stop it. Any third party adjudication would not go your way.

 

[KingJ]

@lentz is quite welcome to correct me on this, but I read his post as, "they would turn away people from becoming ministers if they had divorced sometime in their life."

In essence, it would seem no repentance would ever be good enough for them.

Now since I am not a member of the "General Baptist" snyod(?), though, I wouldn't pretend to give them advice on their governance.

Kindly,
Rhema

If a pastor divorces their spouse, they force themselves and their spouse into adultery Matt 5:32. Adultery is a sin that warranted capital punishment in the OT, God's thoughts of the sin is that it deserved a gruesome and graphic stoning to death.

That in the NT we don't do this to as Catholics would term them, 'mortal sinners' is a separate matter to God's thoughts of the sin, as God does not change Num 23:19. We know that Christians who commit mortal sins tread a very fine line with God from simply considering Annanias and Sapphira.

Now, if the pastor is the one who got divorced, then 1 Cor 7:15 would apply ''if they leave you, let them go''. In this case the pastor is not the one guilty of a mortal sin.

Of course we can repent of mortal sins. Even those in the OT could. Psalm 51:17 existed for all OT. But this did not free them from a stoning to death and nor should free us from being allowed to preach in church.

You need to understand that Christians and Jews are judged to a higher standard. Unbelievers, different case completely, as Paul explains in 1 Cor 5:9-10.

Please stop hiding by referring to @lentz. You clearly have a disagreement with my view, state it plainly.

 

[Jonathan_Gale]

Stop it. Just stop it. Any third party adjudication would not go your way.

Alright. have it your way sir. Godspeed.

 

[Garee]

@lentz is quite welcome to correct me on this, but I read his post as, "they would turn away people from becoming ministers if they had divorced sometime in their life."

In essence, it would seem no repentance would ever be good enough for them.

Now since I am not a member of the "General Baptist" snyod(?), though, I wouldn't pretend to give them advice on their governance.

Kindly,
Rhema

The law is the husband of one wife.

@lentz is quite welcome to correct me on this, but I read his post as, "they would turn away people from becoming ministers if they had divorced sometime in their life."

In essence, it would seem no repentance would ever be good enough for them.

Now since I am not a member of the "General Baptist" snyod(?), though, I wouldn't pretend to give them advice on their governance.

Kindly,
Rhema

It's the ministry of a family a sect when two of three gather together under the authority of the living word . . A sign to the world. . . the husband of one wife the church

All sin other than blasphemy of the unseen Holy Spirit is forgivable .

Christ does not use examples of the world . It was not Adam, Eve and Barbra and Betty lou .

 

[Rhema]

If a pastor divorces their spouse,

That wasn't ever the issue, KJ. Like I said, I'm pretty sure @lentz was speaking about men being denied ordination as a pastor because at one point in their life they had been divorced.

If @lentz meant something else, then when he's able to come back online, I'm sure he'll let me know if I was wrong. Our denomination has no pastors, so divorce is not really a critical issue with us, although we don't take adultery lightly. But what male here has (or can) look at a "hot chick" and not say... "wow! "?? You?

That in the NT we don't do this to as Catholics would term them, 'mortal sinners' is a separate matter

If you're a Catholic, why are you trying to tell General Baptists what to do? I'm pretty sure that they reject the entire concept of "mortal sinners."

as God does not change Num 23:19.

Well God might not change, but Jesus changed everything. If nothing else, though, I'm glad to see that you agree that Moses added things into the law that God had not intended. Not many people understand that.

simply considering Annanias and Sapphira.

Now I'm not sure what composes your list of mortal sins (and rather have no interest in knowing), but I'm sure we agree that LYING to God is not a good idea. So if vows of marriage were taken before God, and the vows have broken down and the marriage is dead, why continue to lie to God?

But this did not free them from a stoning to death

Then what good is repentance? You're pretty much asking me accept a tableau where one truly repents of sin, even to where God Himself forgives them, but they still wind up in hell. (That seems problematic.)

... and nor should free us from being allowed to preach in church.

I think you may need to rephrase that. I'm having a bit of trouble understanding your grammar, so something may have been lost in translation.

You need to understand that Christians and Jews are judged to a higher standard.

No. God is no respecter of persons. All are judged to the same standard. And if I may add, you need to understand that you need to stop Mansplaining. It is unbecoming.

Please stop hiding by referring to @lentz.

Oh fur the luv of cactus. You need to go argue with someone else. All I did was suggest that you may have misunderstood @lentz.

Rhema

PS: Wait, if you're Catholic, your "pastors" don't have spouses. And why can't you get your own house in order? When do Catholics defrock priests who engage in sexual sin? That's a real problem in America.

 

[KingJ]

That wasn't ever the issue, KJ. Like I said, I'm pretty sure @lentz was speaking about men being denied ordination as a pastor because at one point in their life they had been divorced.

He never specified. Why do you assume?

If @lentz meant something else, then when he's able to come back online, I'm sure he'll let me know if I was wrong. Our denomination has no pastors, so divorce is not really a critical issue with us, although we don't take adultery lightly. But what male here has (or can) look at a "hot chick" and not say... "wow! "?? You?

Silly question. Jesus qualifies the statement He made in Matt 5:28 four verses on in Matt 5:32. To preach Matt 5:28 in isolation is heresy and idiocy. What the devil did to Jesus in the wilderness.

If you're a Catholic, why are you trying to tell General Baptists what to do? I'm pretty sure that they reject the entire concept of "mortal sinners."

I am not Catholic. Well clearly they don't if they disallow divorced pastors to preach from the pulpit.

Well God might not change, but Jesus changed everything. If nothing else, though, I'm glad to see that you agree that Moses added things into the law that God had not intended. Not many people understand that.

Jesus is God the Son. What did Jesus change?

Now I'm not sure what composes your list of mortal sins (and rather have no interest in knowing), but I'm sure we agree that LYING to God is not a good idea. So if vows of marriage were taken before God, and the vows have broken down and the marriage is dead, why continue to lie to God?

If you have no interest in knowing what constitutes mortal sins then you are removing a few OT chapters from your bible. You need to read Rev 22:19.

Ananias and Sapphira sank to a depth of intent of evil in their lie. There are degrees of types of sin. Sure, we agree on marriage vows being a serious matter. Nice to see you agree on degrees of sin, AKA mortal and venial.

Then what good is repentance? You're pretty much asking me accept a tableau where one truly repents of sin, even to where God Himself forgives them, but they still wind up in hell. (That seems problematic.)

You are reading into what I wrote. I never said they went to fiery hell after a stoning if they repented. All repented sinners in the OT went to Abraham's bosom, a place in Hades, but per Jesus's story of the rich man and Lazarus, not the fiery part.

The point we learn from this is that God wanted to make an example of the Jews. He wanted His thoughts on the sin of adultery to be clearly understood by all 'His' people. IE Jews and Christians need to pay full attention to God's opinion of the specific sin. The unsaved lessor so 1 Cor 5:10-11.

I think you may need to rephrase that. I'm having a bit of trouble understanding your grammar, so something may have been lost in translation.

For a Christian or a Jew to commit a mortal sin shows something within them is broken. Fake. Untrustworthy. Consider David and how his career as a king and servant of God came to an end after his mortal sins.

We can repent and still make right with God for sure, but if I were a betting man, I would bet on said individual not being a Christian en route to heaven. As Jesus says, we are known by our fruits.

No. God is no respecter of persons. All are judged to the same standard. And if I may add, you need to understand that you need to stop Mansplaining. It is unbecoming.

Yes, God is impartial Acts 10:34. The fact that He expects more of Jews and Christians is a separate matter. You need to read 1 Cor 5.

Mansplaning, lmao. I did not even know you were a girl.

I have debated and discussed online for ten years now, been corrected and rebuked harshly by many. Suck it up. You made me truly ROFLMAO.

Oh fur the luv of cactus. You need to go argue with someone else. All I did was suggest that you may have misunderstood @lentz.

You finally typed a reply to an unsupported one liner opinion you previously provided.

This is a discussion forum. If you want to merely come here and type one liners, go to Twitter.

Rhema

PS: Wait, if you're Catholic, your "pastors" don't have spouses. And why can't you get your own house in order? When do Catholics defrock priests who engage in sexual sin? That's a real problem in America.

You assume too much. I never said I was a Catholic.

I will however gladly discuss / defend priests and the sexual sins that have tainted them. If you want a proper discussion on this, please create a new thread and make your argument in the OP. Let's not derail this thread.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Why do i not attend church?​

Because you're PROUD of your foolishness.

 

[Rhema]

That in the NT we don't do this to as Catholics...

I am not Catholic. Well clearly they don't if they disallow divorced pastors to preach from the pulpit.

KJ, we don't know each other, but at this point I have no reason to believe that English is not a second language for you.

Rather than continuing to speak at cross purposes because of linguistic difficulties, I choose to exit the conversation. You can assume whatever you'd like.

Kindly,
Rhema

Mansplaning, lmao. I did not even know you were a girl.

Well you can keep laughing your a off, because I am not a girl, and men Mansplain things to other men all the time. It's the style of presentation, not the gender that is important.

 

[Rhema]

Jesus is God the Son. What did Jesus change?

From your profile, it would seem that you've been around for quite a number of years, and so should then know that the topic of the Trinity is prohibited as an issue for debate.

But I feel it necessary to point out that the phrase 'God the Son' cannot be found in scripture. That phrase is not there. The phrase "Son of God" certainly is, and I believe Jesus to be the "Son of God."

And again, because of forum rules, I'm stepping away from this topic as well.

Rhema

 

[KingJ]

That in the NT we don't do this to as Catholics...

I am not Catholic. Well clearly they don't if they disallow divorced pastors to preach from the pulpit.

KJ, we don't know each other, but at this point I have no reason to believe that English is not a second language for you.

You fabricated my line to insult me, that is not very nice.

My full line was ''That in the NT we don't do this to as Catholics would term them, 'mortal sinners''.

No, this does not suggest I am a Catholic.

Rather than continuing to speak at cross purposes because of linguistic difficulties, I choose to exit the conversation. You can assume whatever you'd like.

I hope you put more effort into future discussions.

Kindly,
Rhema

Well you can keep laughing your a off, because I am not a girl, and men Mansplain things to other men all the time. It's the style of presentation, not the gender that is important.

Definition of MANSPLAIN - is to explain something to a woman in a condescending way that assumes she has no knowledge about the topic.