By the way -- if you claim to be a Christian...

[Kenny]

All I can really say to that is that God -and life in general- indeed works in mysterious ways.

I personally was an atheist and certainly not seeking God when God “sought” me; giving me very little option but to welcome a new path of devotion, lived in deep faith.

I had not been a good person and I know that I will never either understand or be worthy of the u-turn that God granted me, but I am eternally grateful for having been in the frame of mind to have been able to receive God’s blessing.


Humbly,
Hermit

I think that is a wonderful expression of God's love, grace and mercy!

Just beautiful.

thank you for sharing.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Now you are being argumentative which is why I only asked for an explanation.

It appeared that you were being argumentative as well. But if it was a question, the conversation in Romans 3 was about circumcision and if was necessary for converts to Christianity to undergo the process. Paul was arguing that it was not necessary and he did so by pointing out that some Jews did not follow the law. And even though some did not follow the law God was still faithful to the Jewish people. In fact, and this was the verse that was abused, even if every Jew was not circumcised God would still have been faithful the Jews. That is the meaning of:

"3 What if some were unfaithful? Will their unfaithfulness nullify God’s faithfulness? 4 Not at all! Let God be true, and every human being a liar. As it is written:

“So that you may be proved right when you speak
and prevail when you judge.”[a]"

It sounds a bit awkward, but it seems to be saying that a Jew could pull it out to show that he was faithful. But more important was the "So what if some were unfaithful" In verse 1 it does mention that the Jews were trusted with the "word of God" but that was just a side point.

At this point it seems that he might be arguing for circumcision but he goes on to show that no one is without fault and argues that circumcision was for the Jews and not the gentiles. In other words, gentiles could become Christians. The Jews had a both a benefit from God and a duty to him.:

Bible Gateway passage: Romans 3 - New International Version

God’s Faithfulness - What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? Much in every way! First of all, the Jews have been entrusted with the very words of God. What if some were unfaithful? Will their unfaithfulness nullify God’s faithfulness? Not at all...

www.biblegateway.com

 

[F1fan]

Your "ordinary faith", is that any man can become a women or a man by wishful thinking, and a little surgery. That is not how it works except in liberal colleges, which ends at their doors.

I said no such thing. And you are misrepresenting the actual issue.

If you can’t accept facts and what trans people say before you dispute transgenderism then your argument is weak or invalid.

 

[3rdAngel]

Subduction Zone said: The point was that that verse in no way says or implies that the Bible is literally true. If it is "useful . People make the error of concentrating on only the first half of that verse and put their own interpretation on it. They ignore the last half when they try to claim it supports a literal interpretation of the Bible:

". . . profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work."

If a verse can be used for teaching, it meets the requirement, If it is useful for correction, it meets the requirement, or if it is useful in "training for righteousness" it meets that requirement. None of those have anything to do with being literally true. Jesus spoke in parables. They were not meant to be taken literally. But they all do meet those requirements (even though technically by that verse they are not the "word of God").

The above was posted to Kenny...

OK... Thanks for taking time to answer. And, technically, you have points that are right.

Careful @Kenny, my friend @Subduction Zone is making things up in his response to you that no one was even talking about or saying in our conversation because he was not left with any wiggle room in his responses to me earlier. Go and ask him where I ever said to him that the scriptures provided from Romans 14:23 or Romans 3:4 was saying everything in the bible is literal. I never once made those claims or used Romans 14:23 or Romans 3:4 to say this. Those scriptures were only provided to show early on in the thread that "whatsoever is not of faith is sin" (Romans 14:23) and that according to the scriptures only Gods Words are the standard of what is true and what is not true and we should choose to believe and obey what Gods Word says (Romans 3:4; John 17:17).

Take Care.

 

[3rdAngel]

Thank you. Do you also see that Romans 3 4 was a very bad verse to use. by my opponent? Especially since he had to quote mine it? Personally I think that quote mining the Bible is wrong no matter which side does it. In fact quote mining in general is almost always used as a form of lying. He may have been merely quoting Liars for Jesus (aka apologists) in his use of that verse. The verse was actually about circumcision and how some Jews not following the law does not negate that God is keeping his promise to the Jews. In fact the part that is often abused essentially says that even if every Jew did not follow the law that God would still keep his promises. That was not an excuse not to circumcise, but a recognition that God's connection to the Jews was deeper than just that.

Your whole argument has already been debunked here in post # 208 linked . You ran away from the discussion because you were not left with any wiggle room.

 

[3rdAngel]

Are you paying attention? That part of Romans was not about the reliability of scripture. They were debating whether circumcision was needed for Christianity. That was the larger context of that verse. Don't try to make it something that it wasn't.

Wrong.. Romans chapter 3 is not about circumcision (see Post # 208 linked). The Jews are of the circumcision because they have the oracles of God and circumcision in the old testament was a sign they they were His people. Romans 3 is contrasting gentiles and Jews and that both are all sinners and only faith in Christ brings salvation and forgiveness of sin and not the works of the law because we have all sinned both Jews and Gentiles and fall short of the glory of God. You really need to read the whole context of Romans 2 and Romans 3 and not quote mine scripture out of context which was your mistake. Post # 208 linked that you refuse to respond to, shows in detail why you are wrong and was only sent in love as a help to you. You are simply better off dear friend receiving Gods correction and being blessed. Ignoring Gods Word does not make it disappear. Unbelief according to the scriptures is sin (Romans 14:23) and will keep all who practice it out of Gods kingdom according to John 3:36.

Take Care.

 

[2ndpillar]

I said no such thing. And you are misrepresenting the actual issue.

If you can’t accept facts and what trans people say before you dispute transgenderism then your argument is weak or invalid.

Well, if you can't wish, and have "faith", in your position, then I guess you will have to remain what you were born as. I realize that your Progressive liberal colleges, and Progressive government have filled you with false "hope", but what is, is, and my suggestion would be to try and get your tuition back from your liberal college and prepare for less support when your woke elected government representatives get unelected. I am not arguing with you. I believe your brain is different, and that is because of the over processed and adulterated foods you eat, and the biased liberal education you have received. Your problems will remain with or without any religions. Your problems will probably increase if you try and push your agenda on children, just ask Kaitland Jenner. Just saying. Your position is just a sign of the times, and I would expect things to get worse. Your Progressive culture will end with further big Tech layoffs, a worsening value of the dollar because of progressive policies, higher energy costs because of progressive policies, and more wars due to progressive policies, and higher housing and food costs because of progressive policies, and your sex confusion will be the least of your problems.

 

[2ndpillar]

What does that have to do with faith? Yes, you are free to identify with whatever gender you prefer or none at all and appear in public appearing male or female whatever your genotype. And if you don't encounter too many bigots, you should expect to be treated with kindness and respect.

Respect is earned. As for genders, the last I heard there were around 116 different genders. Many of them seemed to have something to do with spirits and animals. Except for the far left, few people take the woke seriously with respect to their ideas. Budweiser losts 5 billion in one week with respect to pushing the woke agenda. I expect that will be a start of a trend. Disney layed off thousands because of their woke trend, and their stock tanked. People put up with it until it affects their children, their sports, or their beer drinking.

 

[2ndpillar]

Neither you or I are qualified to call it a disorder either. And please, you should be hiding your conspiracy theory nonsense. Or at the very least apologizing when you trot it out.

It is not in the realm of natural order. The "conspiracy theory", is that it is not a problem/disorder. The end result is it in the majority of cases ends in suicide. That to me seems that there is a problem, and it not going to get better taking drugs and cutting off body parts.

Dysphoria (from Ancient Greek δύσφορος (dúsphoros) 'grievous'; from δυσ- (dus-) 'bad, difficult', and φέρω (phérō) 'to bear') is a profound state of unease or dissatisfaction. It is the semantic opposite of euphoria. In a psychiatric context, dysphoria may accompany depression, anxiety, or agitation.

In psychiatry[edit]​

Intense states of distress and unease increase the risk of suicide, as well as being unpleasant in themselves. Relieving dysphoria is therefore a priority of psychiatric treatment. One may treat underlying causes such as depression or bipolar disorder as well as the dysphoric symptoms themselves.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) categorizes specific dysphoria in the obsessive–compulsive spectrum.

Dissatisfaction with being able-bodied can be diagnosed as body integrity dysphoria in the ICD-11.[1]

Gender dysphoria[edit]​

Main article: Gender dysphoria
Gender dysphoria is discomfort, unhappiness or distress due to the primary sex characteristics and secondary sex characteristics of one's sex assigned at birth. The current edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, DSM-5, uses the term "gender dysphoria" where it previously referred to "gender identity disorder", making it clear that they no longer consider the gender identity to be disordered, but rather the emotional state of distress which results from the gender identity.[2]

 

[2ndpillar]

Yes... I know where you stand with Paul. Are you saying that Jesus didn't offer grace?

Yeshua offered the chance to confess your sins, repent, provide fruit in line with your repentance, or be thrown into the fire (Mt 3). Yeshua's message was "kingdom of heaven" (Mt 13:13-15), and that includes that those "who commit lawlessness", the "wicked", will be gathered and thrown into the "furnace of fire" (Mt 13:39-51). What do you think he offered?

 

[2ndpillar]

No, it is that we are several things besides that which is between our legs. If you actually try to understand the following, you would get.
That you feel like a gender or not, is not located between your legs. It happens in your brain, just as which sex if one/two/none/pan you are attracted to.
That is it.

And pigs fly when you throw them out of a plane. Some people are attracted to a knot hole in a wooden fence, but I am thinking one is going to get splinters if they pursue that attraction. I think a lot of the problem is that people are now living in their parent's basement, without a job, because they graduated from a progressive college, and very few hire gender study or philosophy graduates. They are married and rely on their spouse for support, which makes the spouse their boss. A great life. What can I say.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It is not in the realm of natural order. The "conspiracy theory", is that it is not a problem/disorder. The end result is it in the majority of cases ends in suicide. That to me seems that there is a problem, and it not going to get better taking drugs and cutting off body parts.

Dysphoria (from Ancient Greek δύσφορος (dúsphoros) 'grievous'; from δυσ- (dus-) 'bad, difficult', and φέρω (phérō) 'to bear') is a profound state of unease or dissatisfaction. It is the semantic opposite of euphoria. In a psychiatric context, dysphoria may accompany depression, anxiety, or agitation.

In psychiatry[edit]​

Intense states of distress and unease increase the risk of suicide, as well as being unpleasant in themselves. Relieving dysphoria is therefore a priority of psychiatric treatment. One may treat underlying causes such as depression or bipolar disorder as well as the dysphoric symptoms themselves.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) categorizes specific dysphoria in the obsessive–compulsive spectrum.

Dissatisfaction with being able-bodied can be diagnosed as body integrity dysphoria in the ICD-11.[1]

Gender dysphoria[edit]​

Main article: Gender dysphoria
Gender dysphoria is discomfort, unhappiness or distress due to the primary sex characteristics and secondary sex characteristics of one's sex assigned at birth. The current edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, DSM-5, uses the term "gender dysphoria" where it previously referred to "gender identity disorder", making it clear that they no longer consider the gender identity to be disordered, but rather the emotional state of distress which results from the gender identity.[2]

And once again you are not qualified to come to that conclusion. Plus it was your rant against the pharmaceutical industry that demonstrated a belief in conspiracy theories.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yeshua offered the chance to confess your sins, repent, provide fruit in line with your repentance, or be thrown into the fire (Mt 3). Yeshua's message was "kingdom of heaven" (Mt 13:13-15), and that includes that those "who commit lawlessness", the "wicked", will be gathered and thrown into the "furnace of fire" (Mt 13:39-51). What do you think he offered?

And now you are claiming that Jesus was an immoral thug. Nice religion that you have there.

 

[2ndpillar]

Personally, I consider someone a Christian if they:

- follow Jesus, whatever they understand this to mean, and
- self-identify as a Christian.

That's basically it.

If knowing the Bible were a prerequisite for being a Christian, none of the Apostles would have been Christian... which I think would be a weird conclusion.

The "apostles" were known as being Jewish, who were told to "preach the kingdom of heaven" to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Mt 10:6-7). According to the false prophet Paul, Peter, who died in the 60s, preached to the "circumcised"/Jews (Gal 2:8).

 

[Subduction Zone]

The above was posted to Kenny...

Careful @Kenny, my friend @Subduction Zone is making things up in his response to you that no one was even talking about or saying in our conversation because he was not left with any wiggle room in his responses to me earlier. Go and ask him where I ever said to him that the scriptures provided from Romans 14:23 or Romans 3:4 was saying everything in the bible is literal. I never once made those claims or used Romans 14:23 or Romans 3:4 to say this. Those scriptures were only provided to show early on in the thread that "whatsoever is not of faith is sin" (Romans 14:23) and that according to the scriptures only Gods Words are the standard of what is true and what is not true and we should choose to believe and obey what Gods Word says (Romans 3:4; John 17:17).

Take Care.

No, I am not "making things up'. You used that verse in an argument about whether a Christian has to interpret the Bible literally. You can't even remember what we were debating. No wonder that you are so confused.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your whole argument has already been debunked here in post # 208 linked . You ran away from the discussion because you were not left with any wiggle room.

Oh, thank you for admitting that you are wrong again. You already know that every time you refer back to your old lost arguments that you are just admitting once again that you lost.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Wrong.. Romans chapter 3 is not about circumcision (see Post # 208 linked). The Jews are of the circumcision because they have the oracles of God and circumcision in the old testament was a sign they they were His people. Romans 3 is contrasting gentiles and Jews and that both are all sinners and only faith in Christ brings salvation and forgiveness of sin and not the works of the law because we have all sinned both Jews and Gentiles and fall short of the glory of God. You really need to read the whole context of Romans 2 and Romans 3 and not quote mine scripture out of context which was your mistake. Post # 208 linked that you refuse to respond to, shows in detail why you are wrong and was only sent in love as a help to you. You are simply better off dear friend receiving Gods correction and being blessed. Ignoring Gods Word does not make it disappear. Unbelief according to the scriptures is sin (Romans 14:23) and will keep all who practice it out of Gods kingdom according to John 3:36.

Take Care.

Thank you for admitting that you are wrong again.

If you want to discuss it properly you could try, but I have my doubts that you understand any of the Bible.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The "apostles" were known as being Jewish, who were told to "preach the kingdom of heaven" to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Mt 10:6-7). According to the false prophet Paul, Peter, who died in the 60s, preached to the "circumcised"/Jews (Gal 2:8).

They were also known as being Christian.

 

[Kenny]

1) It appeared that you were being argumentative as well. But if it was a question, the conversation in Romans 3 was about circumcision and if was necessary for converts to Christianity to undergo the process. Paul was arguing that it was not necessary and he did so by pointing out that some Jews did not follow the law. And even though some did not follow the law God was still faithful to the Jewish people. In fact, and this was the verse that was abused, even if every Jew was not circumcised God would still have been faithful the Jews. That is the meaning of:

"3 What if some were unfaithful? Will their unfaithfulness nullify God’s faithfulness? 4 Not at all! Let God be true, and every human being a liar. As it is written:

“So that you may be proved right when you speak
and prevail when you judge.”[a]"

It sounds a bit awkward, but it seems to be saying that a Jew could pull it out to show that he was faithful. But more important was the "So what if some were unfaithful" In verse 1 it does mention that the Jews were trusted with the "word of God" but that was just a side point.

At this point it seems that he might be arguing for circumcision but he goes on to show that no one is without fault and argues that circumcision was for the Jews and not the gentiles. In other words, gentiles could become Christians. The Jews had a both a benefit from God and a duty to him.:

Bible Gateway passage: Romans 3 - New International Version

God’s Faithfulness - What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? Much in every way! First of all, the Jews have been entrusted with the very words of God. What if some were unfaithful? Will their unfaithfulness nullify God’s faithfulness? Not at all...

www.biblegateway.com

OK... we both have come to the conclusion that neither of us are combative.

At first read, it seems to be spot on!

 

[Kenny]

Yeshua offered the chance to confess your sins, repent, provide fruit in line with your repentance, or be thrown into the fire (Mt 3). Yeshua's message was "kingdom of heaven" (Mt 13:13-15), and that includes that those "who commit lawlessness", the "wicked", will be gathered and thrown into the "furnace of fire" (Mt 13:39-51). What do you think he offered?

I see you didn't directly answer the question.... why?