Posted on 10/15/2001 6:54:40 AM PDT by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
I think that you, understandably, as an outsider looking at all Protestant churches see it much differently that it actually is. I do not feel free to define God's will in a way that suits my own, as you state. If this were true, that definition would be much different than what I believe is contained in God's Word. The real problem with these "churches" you referred to is not that they interpret God's will as they choose (though they surely do), but that they but are buildings filled(?) with people that aren't even Christians, they just play "dress up" on Sunday mornings. Therefore, of course, they don't believe or follow the Bible's true teachings, but substitute a counterfeit that makes themselves the god. As you might surmise, I am not an apologist on their behalf.
This is great, you'll never know how much time I used to spend trying to get answers from "Ask A Rabbi" and now we have one of our own. Lol
- New Revised Standard with Apocrypha
Luke 11:46 And he said, "Woe also to you lawyers! For you load people with burdens hard to bear, and you yourselves do not lift a finger to ease them.
So would I be safe to say that Jesus was telling these leaders that they are the ones that turned the law of God into a grievous burden for the people, and then refused to lift a finger to redact those oral laws that would ease the burdon for the poor?
Sorry, I thought you may be heading to bed.:-(
Perhaps my comment would be more accurately stated: You believe you have come to learn God's mind - you often speak for God with no distinction, caveat or qualification made.
Such gurus gain followers, those easily led by self-confident, knowledgeable, eridite and strident, the gurus are greatly driven, motivated by accumulating followers, but they tend to fall in their own pride, by not living up to the expectations they have created for themselves.
I wish you well, honestly, but I will not be surprised to see this in your future.
FYI
Iowegian, his name was from a political site he used to be on, and he was saying I am right wing politically.
If I had come to Judaism earlier in life, I would have studied for the rabbinate. Kinda hard to do now, with a wife, two kids, and a business to run.
So would I be safe to say that Jesus was telling these leaders that they are the ones that turned the law of God into a grievous burden for the people, and then refused to lift a finger to redact those oral laws that would ease the burdon for the poor?
That is one part of what Jesus said. But Jesus also said:
[2] "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat;
[3] so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice. (Matthew 23:2-3)
It is worth noting that at the time of Jesus, Pharasaism was divided into two major movements: the School of Hillel and the School of Shammai. The Talmud contains many debates on matters of law between sages from these two schools. There is good evidence that Jesus was influenced by, and may even have studied in, the Hillel school. Many of the teachings of Hillel are found in Jesus's sermons. The school of Shammai was the more rigid and strictly observant; the Hillel school was much more understanding of the burden that the observance of the Law as interpreted could impose on people, and therefore argued more lenient interpretations. In the Talmud, and subsequently in Rabbinic Judaism, the Hillel school generally carried the day.
FYI, the process of interpreting the Law, allowing and disallowing certain activities, was referred to as "binding and loosing".
No problem, no need for the sad face! I am going to sign off shortly though, to get a few things done around the house before I turn in for the night.
How can you argue with someone who uses a different Bible?
It could be fun though, I have often wondered how anyone could read the Koran and take it seriously even on the basis of the writing style it's self.
LOL! Yes, he doesn't fit the profile for the typical TNS participant.
When he was posting here previously, he did take pains to point out that his screen name was NOT chosen as a reflection of his religious convictions, but rather for his political views.
The danger of reading Greek dictionary entries is that we can find things that support our interpretation which have absolutely nothing to do with the context. The bold text following is taken directly from the Perseus entry for .
trogo - gnaw, nibble, munch, esp. of herbivorous animals, as mules
now I don't think that we're supposed to be herbivorous animals, and if it's herbivores, does that mean we're not allowed to eat meat which would be kind of a problem with the whole body and blood thing?)
... also used of human beings in disease
is this a subtle reference to Jesus' statement that he came not for the well but for the sick?
rarely of dogs
no jokes...please
of men, eat vegetables or fruit
note that here it simply means "eat," that's the second dictionary entry in LSJ
and finally, definition 3 - later, simply eat, serving as pres. to ephagon instead of esthiô,
which simply means that John uses trogo as the present of ephagon instead of esthio, which Matthew, Mark and Luke use.
Again, trogo is a non-starter. And just for fun, in classical Greek, trogo was used for metaphorical usages (see Aristophanes). That was for free.
Hi col kurz. Yes, we are all united here in support of our nation. We can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Every few days, we get someone who pokes their head in here and tells us to shut up. I really don't understand their concern. If our discussion bothers you, then don't click on the thread. As SoothingDave wrote in the week after the September 11th attack:
"I have seen in the last week much ugly use of religion for chest thumping and blaming 'ragheads' and even blaming our decadence for the events of the last week. I would rather that we continue here, respectful of our unity in citizenship, in displaying how religion can be talked about without veering off into ugliness." (SoothingDave, 9/19/01)
Please also read the quote from John Adams at the top of this thread. Religion is the foundation of our nation and our civilization. It is eminently worth discussing.
It does not even compare to what we do for God. You don't know enough about Catholic worship.
Good for you angelo, your not the sorry slob I've been telling every body you were. :):)
BigMack
When he was on before, I thought he was totally obnoxious, and he had come on the threads to show how well read he was, but he seems to have gotten rid of the chip, but if it's still there it will show up soon, we're pretty good at that. Lol
Experience is the best teacher, I've learned as much as I can take about your worship.
No, it is the Body and Blood for real. It is in the form of bread and wine. Christ said it! mt 26:26-28; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20. God's word IS, or have you not read Genesis. And remember Is 55:11 "My word will not return... void"
God is not the author of confusion.
No, but the wise will be confused anyway. Lest you have some humility you will not understand His will
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.