# Let's Discuss



## 2ntnuf

Come on ladies and gents from the other thread. Let's talk about this. It's a curious topic for me. I'd like to hear your opinions and discuss the why's and wherefores. 

From the other thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by @TJW View Post 
I would like to speak to this, too. The answer, is yes, we were, and are, really forgiven. end quote

My response:
So, we can continue to sin in the manners of King David of the old testament?

See, I think he is a lesson and not an example. Christ is our only example.




Quote:
Originally Posted by @TJW View Post 
Our salvation from our sins begins when we realize that we were made in God's image....and that God is not made in our image. end quote.


My response: If we were made in God's image, and it is okay to ask forgiveness and not be sincere by continuing in our sins, is God also a sinner? Does He not keep His word, also?


----------



## minimalME

2ntnuf said:


> My response: If we were made in God's image, and it is okay to ask forgiveness and not be sincere by continuing in our sins, is God also a sinner? Does He not keep His word, also?


God is purely other-centered, so no, he's not sinful. 

And there's a world of difference between asking for forgiveness in all sincerity, yet faultering again, and being flippant and not sincere at all. God knows our intentions. He knows us better than we know ourselves.

Also, he does mean what he says, yet there are recorded instances in history where he was moved to alter a course of action because of the prayers of an individual or a community. This isn't an inconsistency in his character - who he is doesn't change, although he's willing to change his mind. There's a difference, and he flawlessly balances truth with grace.


----------



## sunsetmist

Don't know background for this thread. 

We sin because we are human. When I accepted that Christ died for my sins, I wanted to live a better life--obey God's commands. Because I am human, I do my best, but fail. My conscience lets me know when I am failing. Christ was sort of like a gift-certificate--he paid for me.

God does not sin. He loves me enough to have given His Son to die for me; I love Him enough to try to do my best all the while knowing that I will fail in some areas. 

BTW: Churches are hospitals for sinners and not museums for saints.


----------



## 2ntnuf

minimalME said:


> God is purely other-centered, so no, he's not sinful.


I agree, though what of us is made in God's image, then? Hope you saw the other thread to know context. I'm merely stating the obvious and looking for answers to what was meant by humans being made in God's image. Surely, he doesn't look like us. Surely, we do not have his intelligence, power, majesty or ability to love. So what of us is made in His image. I have guesses, but do not know for certain. For me, @TJW's answer was incomplete and begged the questions. I didn't mean to seem arrogant or combative. 



minimalME said:


> And there's a world of difference between asking for forgiveness in all sincerity, yet faultering again, and being flippant and not sincere at all. God knows our intentions. He knows us better than we know ourselves.


Agree, yet we ask and know in our hearts we cannot stop doing the same things over and over. Many don't even try to stop. They have given up and allow their human nature to rule their souls. Those are in my thoughts, because I am one of them with some things. Just as others. There are many things I could or am tempted to do, yet I struggle dearly and continue to sin because I know the biological human that I am needs things which are considered sinful, yet the logical part of me also knows I cannot live completely as the bible states. 



minimalME said:


> Also, he does mean what he says, yet there are recorded instances in history where he was moved to alter a course of action because of the prayers of an individual or a community. This isn't an inconsistency in his character - who he is doesn't change, although he's willing to change his mind. There's a difference, and he flawlessly balances truth with grace.


Yes, I'd forgotten those. Yet, I believe David's was a lesson, not an example of how we should live, as Christ's life was.


----------



## 2ntnuf

sunsetmist said:


> Don't know background for this thread.


Sorry about that. Read page 2 and you might see what I was getting at between me and @arbitrator, @personofinterest, and @TJW. If I've forgotten someone, I'm sorry. All are invited to this discussion. I just wanted to help others understand better by citing those members posts and mine. 

https://talkaboutmarriage.com/sex-marriage/429185-religious-impact-sexual-attitudes.html



sunsetmist said:


> We sin because we are human. When I accepted that Christ died for my sins, I wanted to live a better life--obey God's commands. Because I am human, I do my best, but fail. My conscience lets me know when I am failing. Christ was sort of like a gift-certificate--he paid for me.


I feel like, when someone says that, it means they can live as they please and never try to live as Christ wanted...because He paid for my sins. Internally, I think, "My God! I'm placing more whipping on his body, more thorns in his head and more strikes to the nails in his hands and feet. It almost nauseates me, if I think too much about it. 



sunsetmist said:


> God does not sin. He loves me enough to have given His Son to die for me; I love Him enough to try to do my best all the while knowing that I will fail in some areas.


I can agree with this. It explains a little more than the above, catch all phrase we hear so much.



sunsetmist said:


> BTW: Churches are hospitals for sinners and not museums for saints.


I believe I was always brought up to believe they were places of worship, to love, honor and praise, and thanksgiving, while educational classes outside of masses or services, were for learning the what, where, when, why, how and whom. 

If that is not what I was taught, it is how I think of it.


----------



## 2ntnuf

As to the image of God, I present:





> The Throne in Heaven
> 
> 1After these things I looked, and behold a door was opened in heaven, and the first voice which I heard, as it were, of a trumpet speaking with me, said: Come up hither, and I will shew thee the things which must be done hereafter. 2And immediately I was in the spirit: and behold there was a throne set in heaven, and upon the throne one sitting. 3And he that sat, was to the sight like the jasper and the sardine stone; and there was a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an emerald. 4And round about the throne were four and twenty seats; and upon the seats, four and twenty ancients sitting, clothed in white garments, and on their heads were crowns of gold.
> 
> 
> Worship of the Creator
> 
> 5And from the throne proceeded lightnings, and voices, and thunders; and there were seven lamps burning before the throne, which are the seven spirits of God. 6And in the sight of the throne was, as it were, a sea of glass like to crystal; and in the midst of the throne, and round about the throne, were four living creatures, full of eyes before and behind. 7And the first living creature was like a lion: and the second living creature like a calf: and the third living creature, having the face, as it were, of a man: and the fourth living creature was like an eagle flying. 8And the four living creatures had each of them six wings; and round about and within they are full of eyes. And they rested not day and night, saying: Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, who was, and who is, and who is to come. 9And when those living creatures gave glory, and honour, and benediction to him that sitteth on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever; 10The four and twenty ancients fell down before him that sitteth on the throne, and adored him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying: 11Thou art worthy, O Lord our God, to receive glory, and honour, and power: because thou hast created all things; and for thy will they were, and have been created.
> 
> Douay-Rheims Bible


https://biblehub.com/drb/revelation/4.htm


I believe services or masses are a combination of someone or a few guiding the service as these creatures about the throne and we as the congregation are like the four and twenty ancients who bow and cast of the crowns of earthly power and honor in humility, righteous fear, honor and the glory of God.


----------



## arbitrator

2ntnuf said:


> Come on ladies and gents from the other thread. Let's talk about this. It's a curious topic for me. I'd like to hear your opinions and discuss the why's and wherefores.
> 
> From the other thread:
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by @TJW View Post
> I would like to speak to this, too. The answer, is yes, we were, and are, really forgiven. end quote
> 
> My response:
> So, we can continue to sin in the manners of King David of the old testament?
> 
> See, I think he is a lesson and not an example. Christ is our only example.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by @TJW View Post
> Our salvation from our sins begins when we realize that we were made in God's image....and that God is not made in our image. end quote.
> 
> 
> My response: If we were made in God's image, and it is okay to ask forgiveness and not be sincere by continuing in our sins, is God also a sinner? Does He not keep His word, also?


*Under the precepts of the Old Testament, we were not under the conditions of the New Covenant.

That was brought about by the birth, life, and untimely death of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

I won't digress, but John 3:16 says it all inasfar as our Salvation and its beautiful story came into existence! If we earnestly accept Christ as our Lord and Saviour, and repent of our former ways of sin, then we have met the terms of the Covenant!

Even as His saved creatures, we will continue to have the propensity for sin. That is what private and public confession is all about! 

We were all made in God's image but as His creations, we were born into a world of sin. Our birth into this universe, all by itself, is in and of itself, deemed to be a sin! 

But as our esteemed Maker, God simply cannot sin!

If there are any of my TAM brothers and sisters here that do not fully know the love of Christ and the Heavenly Father, I invite you to PM me so that together we can share in the scriptural precepts of that immense love and the resultant Salvation that it brings!*


----------



## personofinterest

"I believe I was always brought up to believe they were places of worship, to love, honor and praise, and thanksgiving, while educational classes outside of masses or services, were for learning the what, where, when, why, how and whom. "

Actually, it is both. 

Yes, we can hear and accept the story of redemtion.

But that is the START, not the end. IF we are truly made new creations in Christ, we will want to become more like Him. We will want to learn. And our sin will grieve us.

It's that balance: love and mercy balanced with holiness and command for obedience.


----------



## arbitrator

sunsetmist said:


> Don't know background for this thread.
> 
> We sin because we are human. When I accepted that Christ died for my sins, I wanted to live a better life--obey God's commands. Because I am human, I do my best, but fail. My conscience lets me know when I am failing. Christ was sort of like a gift-certificate--he paid for me.
> 
> God does not sin. He loves me enough to have given His Son to die for me; I love Him enough to try to do my best all the while knowing that I will fail in some areas.
> 
> *BTW: Churches are hospitals for sinners and not museums for saints.*


*Every person who is in the church pews, be they a devoted Christian, a church member, a visitor ~ or just whoever they are, it what station of life they come from ~ are walking, talking sinners!

The only difference between Christians and sinners is that the Christians have had, and will continue to have those sins of theirs forgiven ~ sheerly through Grace!

When those Church doors in the narthex are flung open, the "hospital" is duly open for business ~ for all! There are seen and unseen injuries to the soul of so many there! 

And the Church itself? The sheer beauty of the place is to place us in awe and for a fleeting moment, see a mere piece of Heaven; the divine word is to reach our searching souls; and the melodious chords of music and the accompanying heart-penetrating lyrics are there to speak to us and to permeate our often hardened hearts!*


----------



## minimalME

2ntnuf said:


> I agree, though what of us is made in God's image, then?


Okay. This is gonna be long, but not as long as it could have been. 

So, I wanted to take a few days to think about how to respond to your questions, because they're good questions. They're important questions, and I want to do them justice.

I listen to a lot of apologetics, and one of my favorite authors/speakers is Ellis Potter. He's brilliant, and what I like most about him is that he talks about God in a way that's unique. He has books on Amazon, he has videos on youtube - if you're interested and want more from him.

So, I'm sharing topics presented in '3 Theories of Everything'.

I'm gonna keep this brief, but if you're interested, we can go deeper.

When considering any belief system, what people usually do is start with what they know. 

We look around us and we ask, 'What's reality like for us?' And it's logical to assume that whatever belief system we choose, it should be similar to the reality we experience. This is natural theology.

We also to look to history and read what's been written that gives us information and insight that we wouldn't know by experience. This is revealed theology.

So, I'm gonna try to briefly answer your question, 'How are we made in the image of God?' (Paraphrased, but accurate.)

We can use natural theology and revealed theology to compare what God is like to what we're like.

God is the standard. The absolute. The foundation. So what is God like without us? What is God like outside of time and space?

There is one God in three persons. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

So at the foundational level, apart from us, apart from our reality, there's relationship. In and among God, there is unity and diversity.

Do we experience unity and diversity? Yes, we do.

How about form and freedom?

The 3 persons of God are individuals - they aren't mechanical clones of one another. Just like you're a man, and I'm a woman, within God each individual has a form.

The Father's form is that of the Father. He commands and sends.

The Son's form is that of the Son. He obeys and goes.

The Holy Spirit's form is that of the Holy Spirit, who guides and instructs. 

Each person is also free. They make choices, with the most obvious being Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane. He struggled. His choices were hard and painful. He suffered.

Do we as human beings experience form and freedom? Yes, we do.

What about objectivity and subjectivity? 

We've already talked about the 3 persons of God being individuals. 

The Bible tells us that they each have a point of view, and they view and interact with history differently.

There is information that the Father knows, that the Son does not.

The Son died for us. 

The Holy Spirit indwells. 

So we experience subjectivity and objectivity, because God is subjective and objective.

I'm gonna stop there, but we can discuss this more, if you'd like. 

Does this answer your question about how we're in God's image? 

Each of these opposites has so much more to them, and there are more opposites and more topics like relationship, personality, identity, dynamism (which is super cool), etc.


----------



## personofinterest

> So, we can continue to sin in the manners of King David of the old testament?


I need to point out the timeline here.

David commits the big sins of adultery and murder and deceit.

He is confronted by Samuel

He repents

He is called a man after God's own heart AFTER repentance

He still suffers consequences for his sin (the baby dies, Absalom goes ape-sh**)


----------



## arbitrator

minimalME said:


> Okay. This is gonna be long, but not as long as it could have been.
> 
> So, I wanted to take a few days to think about how to respond to your questions, because they're good questions. They're important questions, and I want to do them justice.
> 
> I listen to a lot of apologetics, and one of my favorite authors/speakers is Ellis Potter. He's brilliant, and what I like most about him is that he talks about God in a way that's unique. He has books on Amazon, he has videos on youtube - if you're interested and want more from him.
> 
> So, I'm sharing topics presented in '3 Theories of Everything'.
> 
> I'm gonna keep this brief, but if you're interested, we can go deeper.
> 
> When considering any belief system, what people usually do is start with what they know.
> 
> We look around us and we ask, 'What's reality like for us?' And it's logical to assume that whatever belief system we choose, it should be similar to the reality we experience. This is natural theology.
> 
> We also to look to history and read what's been written that gives us information and insight that we wouldn't know by experience. This is revealed theology.
> 
> So, I'm gonna try to briefly answer your question, 'How are we made in the image of God?' (Paraphrased, but accurate.)
> 
> We can use natural theology and revealed theology to compare what God is like to what we're like.
> 
> God is the standard. The absolute. The foundation. So what is God like without us? What is God like outside of time and space?
> 
> There is one God in three persons. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
> 
> So at the foundational level, apart from us, apart from our reality, there's relationship. In and among God, there is unity and diversity.
> 
> Do we experience unity and diversity? Yes, we do.
> 
> How about form and freedom?
> 
> The 3 persons of God are individuals - they aren't mechanical clones of one another. Just like you're a man, and I'm a woman, within God each individual has a form.
> 
> The Father's form is that of the Father. He commands and sends.
> 
> The Son's form is that of the Son. He obeys and goes.
> 
> The Holy Spirit's form is that of Holy Spirit, who guides and instructs.
> 
> Each person is also free. They make choices, with the most obvious being Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane. He struggled. His choices were hard and painful. He suffered.
> 
> Do we as human beings experience form and freedom? Yes, we do.
> 
> What about objectivity and subjectivity?
> 
> We've already talked about the 3 persons of God being individuals.
> 
> The Bibles tells us that they each person has a point of view, and they view and interact with history differently.
> 
> There is information that the Father knows, that the Son does not.
> 
> The Son died for us.
> 
> The Holy Spirit indwells.
> 
> So we experience subjectivity and objectivity, because God is subjective and objective.
> 
> I'm gonna stop there, but we can discuss this more, if you'd like.
> 
> Does this answer your question about how we're in God's image?
> 
> Each of these opposites has so much more to them, and there are more opposites and more topics like relationship, personality, identity, dynamism (which is super cool), etc.


*Mini-me!

You hit the nail squarely on the head, and knocked it out of the park! You need to teach Christian Theology!*


----------



## minimalME

arbitrator said:


> *Mini-me!
> 
> You hit the nail squarely on the head, and knocked it out of the park! You need to teach Christian Theology!*


You're so sweet! But it's not me at all. I listen to a lot, and I read a lot, and I'm open to learning from people much smarter than me!


----------



## arbitrator

minimalME said:


> *You're so sweet! But it's not me at all. I listen to a lot, and I read a lot, and I'm open to learning from people much smarter than me!*


*Well, that rules me out!*


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

There's a great book titled "How Now Shall We Live" by Chuck Colsen, with great historical and biblical facts, science's view, which is why those who with an open mind trying to find failings in truths in bible/Christ centered religion versus darwinism etc, end up finding faith in God and Christ confirmed, and become believers. 

Also read Lee Strobel "The Case For Christ". Another one who said they'd disprove the bible. And at the end of his in depth proving/disproving process, became a Christian because that's where the facts led. 

Anyone who truly wants to objectively learn fact based biblical history and why faith exists, they'd start with these two books.

If one hasn't truly researched on their own, they're just regurgitating what they've been told, by others who haven't taken the time to research, and on and on.

Just my two cents.

RR


----------



## 2ntnuf

minimalME said:


> Okay. This is gonna be long, but not as long as it could have been.
> 
> So, I wanted to take a few days to think about how to respond to your questions, because they're good questions. They're important questions, and I want to do them justice.
> 
> I listen to a lot of apologetics, and one of my favorite authors/speakers is Ellis Potter. He's brilliant, and what I like most about him is that he talks about God in a way that's unique. He has books on Amazon, he has videos on youtube - if you're interested and want more from him.
> 
> So, I'm sharing topics presented in '3 Theories of Everything'.
> 
> I'm gonna keep this brief, but if you're interested, we can go deeper.
> 
> When considering any belief system, what people usually do is start with what they know.
> 
> We look around us and we ask, 'What's reality like for us?' And it's logical to assume that whatever belief system we choose, it should be similar to the reality we experience. This is natural theology.
> 
> We also to look to history and read what's been written that gives us information and insight that we wouldn't know by experience. This is revealed theology.
> 
> So, I'm gonna try to briefly answer your question, 'How are we made in the image of God?' (Paraphrased, but accurate.)
> 
> We can use natural theology and revealed theology to compare what God is like to what we're like.
> 
> God is the standard. The absolute. The foundation. So what is God like without us? What is God like outside of time and space?
> 
> There is one God in three persons. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
> 
> So at the foundational level, apart from us, apart from our reality, there's relationship. In and among God, there is unity and diversity.
> 
> Do we experience unity and diversity? Yes, we do.
> 
> How about form and freedom?
> 
> The 3 persons of God are individuals - they aren't mechanical clones of one another. Just like you're a man, and I'm a woman, within God each individual has a form.
> 
> The Father's form is that of the Father. He commands and sends.
> 
> The Son's form is that of the Son. He obeys and goes.
> 
> The Holy Spirit's form is that of the Holy Spirit, who guides and instructs.
> 
> Each person is also free. They make choices, with the most obvious being Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane. He struggled. His choices were hard and painful. He suffered.
> 
> Do we as human beings experience form and freedom? Yes, we do.
> 
> What about objectivity and subjectivity?
> 
> We've already talked about the 3 persons of God being individuals.
> 
> The Bibles tells us that they each have a point of view, and they view and interact with history differently.
> 
> There is information that the Father knows, that the Son does not.
> 
> The Son died for us.
> 
> The Holy Spirit indwells.
> 
> So we experience subjectivity and objectivity, because God is subjective and objective.
> 
> I'm gonna stop there, but we can discuss this more, if you'd like.
> 
> Does this answer your question about how we're in God's image?
> 
> Each of these opposites has so much more to them, and there are more opposites and more topics like relationship, personality, identity, dynamism (which is super cool), etc.


Yes, it answers my question. Thank you very much for putting such an easy to understand synopsis of a difficult topic. 

I might discuss this more. Maybe a little later this evening. I have to get myself together and think a little. I've had trouble all day. Can't concentrate. I'm sorry.


----------



## sokillme

Salvation is grace. If you continue to sin maybe the point is you haven't accepted the grace because your actions show you see no value it in it and don't want it.


----------



## red oak

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> There's a great book titled "How Now Shall We Live" by Chuck Colsen, with great historical and biblical facts, science's view, which is why those who with an open mind trying to find failings in truths in bible/Christ centered religion versus darwinism etc, end up finding faith in God and Christ confirmed, and become believers.
> 
> Also read Lee Strobel "The Case For Christ". Another one who said they'd disprove the bible. And at the end of his in depth proving/disproving process, became a Christian because that's where the facts led.
> 
> Anyone who truly wants to objectively learn fact based biblical history and why faith exists, they'd start with these two books.
> 
> If one hasn't truly researched on their own, they're just regurgitating what they've been told, by others who haven't taken the time to research, and on and on.
> 
> Just my two cents.
> 
> RR


Why do you think so many have gone the opposite direction you mentioned?


----------



## red oak

2ntnuf said:


> There is nothing wrong with loving another person. Sometimes, it doesn't work out. I think it was Paul who said it is best for the teachers to remain like him, though I am not sure what that means. I figure he meant single, but I don't know if that meant celibate. I don't know where it says that folks have to remain celibate if not married.
> 
> However, church tradition seems to believe that. I have more issues with folks knowing they are doing wrong and knowing full well they won't change. They use the church as a status symbol of sorts. They cause issues when the church does not bring them into teachings, but simply accept their donations and look the other way.
> 
> I have plenty of issues with the church. Them teaching me about sex is not one of them. I knew what they wanted. I knew what they wanted. I did what I thought was best. I don't know where it is in the Bible.


May a formerly religious person engage in this discussion without getting beat over the head?

It's a topic I enjoy discussing as long as it can stay peaceful and polite.


----------



## 2ntnuf

red oak said:


> May a formerly religious person engage in this discussion without getting beat over the head?
> 
> It's a topic I enjoy discussing as long as it can stay peaceful and polite.


Sure. I'd forgotten about this thread. Love to read more opinions.


----------



## 2ntnuf

sokillme said:


> Salvation is grace. If you continue to sin maybe the point is you haven't excepted the grace because your actions show you see no value it in it and don't want it.


Being completely honest, I haven't had sex since June 3, 2011. I haven't gone out on a date. I haven't asked anyone out. A few women came on to me. I turned them down. One asked if I wanted her phone number. I told her I wasn't that kind of man. 

I simply am not ready to date. I enjoy talking with women. I enjoy being friends with them. I am not looking for anything.

However, there are times when I can feel very lonely and really miss having a woman who loves me, near. I think you understand what I mean.


----------



## red oak

I was once very devout. Still am, although last church we went to would disagree. Not devout as most consider it.
First off I know how religion can demoralize a person.
I went from falling on my knees begging and crying to the almighty for forgiveness, and to take away the desire for sex, every time I masturbated, and even first several times I had sex.
I really started taking to heart, "prove everything," and seek your own salvation with fear, and trembling", by my first marriage I had fewer issues. Still felt bad afterwards sometimes. Long journey to where am now.

Besides the victorian ethic, if one studies for what scripture states how can one say originals sin was sex, when the creator himself told Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply? You don't have children unless you have sex. As he is perfect why would he condone such sin?

As it has so much effect on views of sex, unless we know what actually constituted marriage at time it was written, how can we know if we are in sin? A couple from scripture, Issac and Rebekah: Boaz and Ruth.

If sex is so bad why was Judah, blessed instead of condemned?


----------



## minimalME

red oak said:


> Besides the victorian ethic, if one studies for what scripture states how can one say originals sin was sex, when the creator himself told Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply? You don't have children unless you have sex. As he is perfect why would he condone such sin?


I'm having trouble understanding what you've written?

Are you saying that the Bible states that sex is the original sin? If so, would you mind providing the text?


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

red oak said:


> Why do you think so many have gone the opposite direction you mentioned?


Opposite of what?


----------



## red oak

minimalME said:


> I'm having trouble understanding what you've written?
> 
> Are you saying that the Bible states that sex is the original sin? If so, would you mind providing the text?


No, the bible doesn't say sex was the original sin. The intonation, if not outright stated in any church I was ever in, was, sex is sinful. Most consider statements of new testament, on lists of flesh to mean sexual. Some even state

They say, jesus was born without sin as he was born of a virgin. What does it intone, when they state as a result he wasn't born through sin.


----------



## red oak

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> Opposite of what?



I was referring to those who were once devout Christians ,but through study completely walked away from doctrines and changed their beliefs. 

Although would be jacking this thread to dicuss it here. I digress.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

red oak said:


> I was referring to those who were once devout Christians ,but through study completely walked away from doctrines and changed their beliefs.
> 
> Although would be jacking this thread to dicuss it here. I digress.


It's way more common a person walked away from their beliefs because of a personal tragedy in their lives they couldn't reconcile or from peer pressure, than studying science that oppose Darwin's Theory of Evolution as fact then walking away based on their learning. 

Most folks are surprised most of the well known scientists were and are Believers.


----------



## 2ntnuf

red oak said:


> I was once very devout. Still am, although last church we went to would disagree. Not devout as most consider it.
> First off I know how religion can demoralize a person.
> I went from falling on my knees begging and crying to the almighty for forgiveness, and to take away the desire for sex, every time I masturbated, and even first several times I had sex.
> I really started taking to heart, "prove everything," and seek your own salvation with fear, and trembling", by my first marriage I had fewer issues. Still felt bad afterwards sometimes. Long journey to where am now.
> 
> Besides the victorian ethic, if one studies for what scripture states how can one say originals sin was sex, when the creator himself told Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply? You don't have children unless you have sex. As he is perfect why would he condone such sin?
> 
> As it has so much effect on views of sex, unless we know what actually constituted marriage at time it was written, how can we know if we are in sin? A couple from scripture, Issac and Rebekah: Boaz and Ruth.
> 
> If sex is so bad why was Judah, blessed instead of condemned?


Judah, because God looked at their hearts. 

I believe original sin was disobedience to God. 



> "Have you not read," says Jesus, "that He who made them at the beginning 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh?'" (Matthew 19:4-5; quoting from Genesis 1:27, 2:24).https://www.focusonthefamily.com/fa...-bible-on-pre-marital-sex-and-sexual-morality


Ceremony in church or by the state unnecessary. I think that's what it says.


----------



## irish925

There is a difference between forgiveness and repentance...just thought I would throw that out there...


----------



## Diana7

red oak said:


> I was once very devout. Still am, although last church we went to would disagree. Not devout as most consider it.
> First off I know how religion can demoralize a person.
> I went from falling on my knees begging and crying to the almighty for forgiveness, and to take away the desire for sex, every time I masturbated, and even first several times I had sex.
> I really started taking to heart, "prove everything," and seek your own salvation with fear, and trembling", by my first marriage I had fewer issues. Still felt bad afterwards sometimes. Long journey to where am now.
> 
> Besides the victorian ethic, if one studies for what scripture states how can one say originals sin was sex, when the creator himself told Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply? You don't have children unless you have sex. As he is perfect why would he condone such sin?
> 
> As it has so much effect on views of sex, unless we know what actually constituted marriage at time it was written, how can we know if we are in sin? A couple from scripture, Issac and Rebekah: Boaz and Ruth.
> 
> If sex is so bad why was Judah, blessed instead of condemned?


Who said sex is bad?? Certainly not God. Read song of songs. However God says that sex is only for marriage between a man and a woman. Outside of that its wrong.


----------



## 269370

2ntnuf said:


> Come on ladies and gents from the other thread. Let's talk about this. It's a curious topic for me. I'd like to hear your opinions and discuss the why's and wherefores.
> 
> From the other thread:
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by @TJW View Post
> I would like to speak to this, too. The answer, is yes, we were, and are, really forgiven. end quote
> 
> My response:
> So, we can continue to sin in the manners of King David of the old testament?
> 
> See, I think he is a lesson and not an example. Christ is our only example.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by @TJW View Post
> Our salvation from our sins begins when we realize that we were made in God's image....and that God is not made in our image. end quote.
> 
> 
> My response: If we were made in God's image, and it is okay to ask forgiveness and not be sincere by continuing in our sins, is God also a sinner? Does He not keep His word, also?



What I want to know is: if men are made in God’s image, then who are women supposed to look like? 

It’s all very confusing isn’t it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 2ntnuf

irish925 said:


> There is a difference between forgiveness and repentance...just thought I would throw that out there...


Lost me. Sorry.


----------



## 269370

red oak said:


> They say, jesus was born without sin as he was born of a virgin.



Yes they say that, but has anyone actually verified to check if she was a virgin? She could have been trickle-truthing.

I don’t understand this original sin thing: I haven’t personally done anything wrong, I should be exempt from it. Not fair to take on the blame of others 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 2ntnuf

inmyprime said:


> What I want to know is: if men are made in God’s image, then who are women supposed to look like?
> 
> It’s all very confusing isn’t it.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


From the rib of man.


----------



## 269370

2ntnuf said:


> From the rib of man.




Feminists would disagree. I’m pretty sure I was made from a woman’s breast (my skin is quite soft). That’s why The Amazon women had one breast missing: it’s not to shoot better but because of sad ****s like me.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 2ntnuf

inmyprime said:


> Feminists would disagree. I’m pretty sure I was made from a woman’s breast (my skin is quite soft). That’s why The Amazon women had one breast missing: it’s not to shoot better but because of sad ****s like me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Lot's of folks would disagree. I disagree, but who knows what was meant? Not sure if scholars can figure it out. In the context of the bible, woman, Eve, was made from Adam's rib. Now, if you read, you may notice God saying there were... humans?... here before Adam. So, who really was Adam? I don't know what to believe there. I accept it as something I do not understand.


Genesis, Chapter 1

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
27 
So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”


Genesis, Chapter 2

7 Then the Lord God formed a man[c] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.


But for Adam[f] no suitable helper was found. 21 So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs[g] and then closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib[h] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.


See what I mean?


----------



## red oak

Diana7 said:


> Who said sex is bad?? Certainly not God. Read song of songs. However God says that sex is only for marriage between a man and a woman. Outside of that its wrong.


LOL! I was about to mention if Song of Songs were to be written in modern english it would be considered porn!


----------



## MaiChi

We sin because we enjoy sinning, the same way as someone enjoys smoking knowing it is not good for them and lying to themselves about being in charge of the cig when in fact the cig is in cgarge of the smoker. Same thing with Sin of any kind. The sin is given authority over the sinner over a period of time. After that the sin holds him/her captive. 

Sex is not sin, but can become sin if invited to.


----------



## red oak

It is implied jesus was born from "immaculate" conception so he would be free of sin. 

How does such imply other than sex is sinful?

Except for adultery, where does it actually say sex outside marriage is wrong?

It is assumed sexual immorality is pre-marital sex, but how do we know unless we have studied what it meant to them?

If we are steeped in religion will this not effect our attitude to sex?


----------



## 2ntnuf

MaiChi said:


> We sin because we enjoy sinning, the same way as someone enjoys smoking knowing it is not good for them and lying to themselves about being in charge of the cig when in fact the cig is in cgarge of the smoker. Same thing with Sin of any kind. The sin is given authority over the sinner over a period of time. After that the sin holds him/her captive.
> 
> *Sex is not sin, but can become sin if invited to.*


Agree, but the bold font is what I am asking you to clarify.


----------



## red oak

2ntnuf said:


> Lot's of folks would disagree. I disagree, but who knows what was meant? Not sure if scholars can figure it out. In the context of the bible, woman, Eve, was made from Adam's rib. Now, if you read, you may notice God saying there were... humans?... here before Adam. So, who really was Adam? I don't know what to believe there. I accept it as something I do not understand.


May I suggest looking in a lexicon, or good, older concordance? It doesn't mean rib.

Used to have a good program that would give me location of every-time a word was used. I would use it to define a words from actual usage, also had all root derivatives. It was great.

If memory serves correctly, the word they translated as rib was only used once in the entire bible. The word itself was translated as angular organ.

Edit: Relooked, also transalated as angular organ.


----------



## 2ntnuf

red oak said:


> It is implied jesus was born from "immaculate" conception so he would be free of sin.
> 
> How does such imply other than sex is sinful?
> 
> Except for adultery, where does it actually say sex outside marriage is wrong?
> 
> It is assumed sexual immorality is pre-marital sex, but how do we know unless we have studied what it meant to them?
> 
> If we are steeped in religion will this not effect our attitude to sex?


Well, not just that the conception was immaculate, but that Mary was a virgin, likely around 14 years old or so. Quite young for today, but not so young when their life span was likely 45 years on average. 

I think, it implies that no one can doubt that it was immaculate, when you combine the two things.

I don't think that is a statement about sex, just about Jesus being from David's line. I think it is also proof that his father is not of the earth.

I do not know where it says sex is wrong, except in some of Paul's letters, which is a bit of assumption, in my opinion. I thought there was something in James, but I have yet not confirmed.

If a man and woman have not had a ceremony of sorts in the church or by the state, it is still considered to be adultery by some interpretations of the word. This may well be true. 

My guess is, immorality is sex with a woman who is living with a man, or vice versa. I also think it is when a betrothed is seduced and has sex with someone else. I am not sure of all the nuances. 

I am surely, not a religious scholar or apologist. 

If we are steeped in religion, yes. If we are steeped in Christ, no.


----------



## 2ntnuf

red oak said:


> May I suggest looking in a lexicon, or good, older concordance? It doesn't mean rib.
> 
> Used to have a good program that would give me location of every-time a word was used. I would use it to define a words from actual usage, also had all root derivatives. It was great.
> 
> If memory serves correctly, the word they translated as rib was only used once in the entire bible. The word itself was translated as *pudenda*.


Reads like a word that should be censored. :laugh:


----------



## red oak

2ntnuf said:


> Reads like a word that should be censored. :laugh:


I looked again. Says angular organ. The new version is crap. not very user friendly and no where near the tools it used to have. And derivatives are used a few times regarding construction mostly.


----------



## red oak

@2ntnuf One place word they translated as rib isn't used in construction context. The "against his reproductive organs," interlinear is "to angular organs of him."
Jb 18:12
His virility shall be turned to famishing, And calamity stands ready| ›against his reproductive organs.

Just wanted to make sure I was being accurate.

KJV also has translated as chamber a few times by strongs count.


----------



## aine

2ntnuf said:


> Come on ladies and gents from the other thread. Let's talk about this. It's a curious topic for me. I'd like to hear your opinions and discuss the why's and wherefores.
> 
> From the other thread:
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by @TJW View Post
> I would like to speak to this, too. The answer, is yes, we were, and are, really forgiven. end quote
> 
> My response:
> So, we can continue to sin in the manners of King David of the old testament?
> 
> See, I think he is a lesson and not an example. Christ is our only example.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read Romans 6:1, it is quite evident, that haven been forgiven we are so grateful for HIs grace that we don't want to sin anymore in order not to disappoint or take that gift of salvation for granted.
> 
> But no, it is not a licence to continue sinning. Paul is very explicit about this. However, being weak and human, we will no doubt sin but must continually renew ourselves by asking for forgiveness, from a genuine heart of humility and remorse, not as a get out of jail card!


----------



## aine

Isaiah 55:8-9 New International Version (NIV)
8 “For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways,”
declares the Lord.
9 “As the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts

Why do we try with our 'little minds' and human thinking to put the creator in a box, a gender, etc. It is unfathomable. Isaiah above, says exactly that. So while it is good to discuss etc, it really is like a groups of ants having a discussion on the ways of men.


----------



## Diana7

inmyprime said:


> Yes they say that, but has anyone actually verified to check if she was a virgin? She could have been trickle-truthing.
> 
> I don’t understand this original sin thing: I haven’t personally done anything wrong, I should be exempt from it. Not fair to take on the blame of others
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes God knew she was a virgin otherwise He wouldn't have chosen her to carry His Son.


----------



## Diana7

inmyprime said:


> What I want to know is: if men are made in God’s image, then who are women supposed to look like?
> 
> It’s all very confusing isn’t it.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sometimes man in the bible means mankind rather than a male. Men and women both have some qualities of God.


----------



## red oak

Diana7 said:


> Yes God knew she was a virgin otherwise He wouldn't have chosen her


Which is actually odd.


----------



## red oak

aine said:


> Isaiah 55:8-9 New International Version (NIV)
> 8 “For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
> neither are your ways my ways,”
> declares the Lord.
> 9 “As the heavens are higher than the earth,
> so are my ways higher than your ways
> and my thoughts than your thoughts
> 
> Why do we try with our 'little minds' and human thinking to put the creator in a box, a gender, etc. It is unfathomable. Isaiah above, says exactly that. So while it is good to discuss etc, it really is like a groups of ants having a discussion on the ways of men.


Lol. Mankind isn't rational. Much of nothing could understand man's ways.
He does say come and reason with him though.
To understand the bible more, I think reading books the bible says to read, which aren't included in the tanach, should be.


----------



## Diana7

red oak said:


> Which is actually odd.


Why?


----------



## red oak

Diana7 said:


> Why?


Understand His commandments to know. Study of ancient mythology also.
Not going further here.


----------



## Diana7

red oak said:


> Understand His commandments to know. Study of ancient mythology also.
> Not going further here.


It was vital that she was a virgin. Not odd at all.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Diana7 said:


> It was vital that she was a virgin. Not odd at all.


Another man judging women for her sexual past! Guys need to get over it. >


----------



## PigglyWiggly

red oak said:


> Which is actually odd.


My understanding is that in the original Hebrew the word translated as virgin in Isaiah is "almah" and "almah" does not mean "virgin" but "nubile young woman", which is a different concept altogether. 

There are some smart cookies at https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/ You might enjoy some of the conversations.


----------



## Diana7

happyhusband0005 said:


> Another man judging women for her sexual past! Guys need to get over it. >


Well in her case it was rather important :surprise:


----------



## Diana7

PigglyWiggly said:


> My understanding is that in the original Hebrew the word translated as virgin in Isaiah is "almah" and "almah" does not mean "virgin" but "nubile young woman", which is a different concept altogether.
> 
> There are some smart cookies at https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/ You might enjoy some of the conversations.


In those times they got betrothed and married young. She, as a girl of the Jewish faith, wouldn't have had sex before marriage. The Bible says that she and Joseph didn't have sex till after Jesus was born.


----------



## PigglyWiggly

Diana7 said:


> In those times they got betrothed and married young. She, as a girl of the Jewish faith, wouldn't have had sex before marriage. The Bible says that she and Joseph didn't have sex till after Jesus was born.


I understand that's your understanding. Thanks.


----------



## 269370

red oak said:


> Edit: Relooked, also transalated as angular organ.



Don’t know. My wife doesn’t look very angular... She has quite nice shapes. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## red oak

inmyprime said:


> Don’t know. My wife doesn’t look very angular... She has quite nice shapes.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Lol. Kjv also translates as chamber from time to time. >


----------



## red oak

PigglyWiggly said:


> My understanding is that in the original Hebrew the word translated as virgin in Isaiah is "almah" and "almah" does not mean "virgin" but "nubile young woman", which is a different concept altogether.
> 
> There are some smart cookies at https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/ You might enjoy some of the conversations.


There is also what her being betrothed entails.


----------



## 269370

Diana7 said:


> In those times they got betrothed and married young. She, as a girl of the Jewish faith, wouldn't have had sex before marriage. The Bible says that she and Joseph didn't have sex till after Jesus was born.



Maybe it’s because Joseph didn’t put a VAR in her car?
As if it never happened before that someone kept quiet about their past... @JustTheWife? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## uhtred

When discussing Christianity I think you have to separate the words of Jesus, from those who followed him, and from later teachings and decisions of the church. Depending on your beliefs, not all of those are necessarily infallible. 

The old testament also presents quite a quagmire. It contains such utterly horrifying things. It can be interpreted everywhere from being just "stories" to the actions of a horrible evil God from whom we are only protected by Jesus.

On the idea of God being forgiven, doesn't that seem close to the story of the flood and rainbow? God doesn't exactly apologize, but promises never to do it again. 

Its very difficult to get a handle on the Christian god. He is vast enough to create the universe - an undertaking that we now know is unimaginably larger than what the early Christians assumed, but takes a particular interest in this on planet out of a billion trillion similar ones. Or is his creation of the universe, only the creation of that which people 6000 years ago understood. Is he *our* god here - one of trillions???

I can't make it all fit together.


----------



## 269370

uhtred said:


> When discussing Christianity I think you have to separate the words of Jesus, from those who followed him, and from later teachings and decisions of the church. Depending on your beliefs, not all of those are necessarily infallible.
> 
> 
> 
> The old testament also presents quite a quagmire. It contains such utterly horrifying things. It can be interpreted everywhere from being just "stories" to the actions of a horrible evil God from whom we are only protected by Jesus.
> 
> 
> 
> On the idea of God being forgiven, doesn't that seem close to the story of the flood and rainbow? God doesn't exactly apologize, but promises never to do it again.
> 
> 
> 
> Its very difficult to get a handle on the Christian god. He is vast enough to create the universe - an undertaking that we now know is unimaginably larger than what the early Christians assumed, but takes a particular interest in this on planet out of a billion trillion similar ones. Or is his creation of the universe, only the creation of that which people 6000 years ago understood. Is he *our* god here - one of trillions???
> 
> 
> 
> I can't make it all fit together.




Actually, if you view ‘god’ as the ‘nature of life’, then it does make sense.
There’s a lot of symbolism in both testaments that’s quite interesting.

We also don’t know exactly what the nature of the universe is either: the whole thing could be all a projection, some simulation or experiment from a advanced civilisation or entity long gone. In which case it makes no difference whether there are other planets with life or not as it’s all a projection. The thing is, nobody really knows. And those who claim to know....still don’t really know deep down.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

