Pete Buttigieg Twists Christianity: ‘Salvation’ Depends on Being ‘Useful.’

[initforme]

Too bad our politicians aren't capable of believing in the teachings of Christ.

 

[Dragonlady]

There are a number of verses in the Bible which, on their face, establish that justification is by faith alone and works are irrelevant . This are also a number of verses which say that we are judged by our works and that faith without works is dead. Some Christians believe in the former and others in the latter. That's just the way it is.

lol
“Works” Have absolutely nothing to do with salvation… If they did there would be no reason for the crucifixion of Christ.


1. Eph. 2:8-9 - "For BY GRACE are ye SAVED THROUGH FAITH; and that NOT OF
YOURSELVES: it is the GIFT of God: NOT OF WORKS, lest any man should boast."
2. Rom. 4:6-7 - God imputes "Righteousness without works." (See #9, #4, #45, #7, #12, #53)
3. Rom. 10:3 - It's a grave mistake for anyone to try to, "Establish their own righteousness."
4. Rom. 5:17 - Heaven deserving righteousness is a "GIFT," not something you earn.
5. Rom. 5:18 - Justification to God is a "FREE GIFT," not something you work toward.
6. Phil. 3:9 - Paul, as ‘good’ as he was, still wouldn't trust his "Own righteousness" to save him.
7. Rom. 3:22 - God's righteousness is credited to "ALL THEM THAT BELIEVE," not all that work.
8. Rom. 8:3-4 - The flesh is too "Weak" to save itself. We need a Saviour. We need Christ. (See #86)
9. Rom. 4:3 - Abraham's faith, not works, "Was counted unto him for righteousness."
10. Rom. 4:4-5 - Works are "Not reckoned of grace, but of debt." Faith is counted as righteousness.
11. Gal. 3:10 - To earn Heaven you'd have to "Continueth," perfectly, in the whole law. (See #81, #86)
12. Titus 3:5 - "NOT BY WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS which we have done, but according to
his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost."
13. John 5:24 - In Christ we've "PASSED from death unto life." We don't have to "wait" to find out.
14. Rom. 9:31-32 - Israel, "Sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law." (#33, #54)
15. Acts 4:12 - No other name but Christ can save us-- not the name of works, nor our own name.
16. John 1:12-13 - Only God's power, through His Son, makes us a child of God. We are not born into
God's family by "Blood" (heritage, family ‘pedigree’), "Nor will of the flesh" (good works), "Nor will
of man." (minister, or man made religion), "But of God." (See #12, #53, #21, #17, #22, #46, #15)
17. Isa. 45:22 - No one else can save a soul from Hell but God; "There is none else."
18. Acts 13:39 - "And by him [Christ] all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye
COULD NOT BE JUSTIFIED by the law of Moses." (See #33, #54, #53, #5, #42, #64, #82, #87, #80)
19. Rom. 8:7 - We can't follow God's law even if we wanted to. So how can we save ourselves? (#86, #8)
20. Matthew 7:21-23 - Christ describes a future scene in which some who are trusting in their "Many
wonderful works," will, sadly, be told by Christ: "I never knew you: depart from me, Ye that work
iniquity." Their good works will not save them. We all have to trust Christ, and Him ALONE. (#46, #12)
21. John 10:1 - We must enter through Christ, "THE DOOR," not by "Some other way.." (See #46)
22. John 8:24 - A person can work all they want, but it won't save them. Jesus said the bottom line is
that, "If ye believe not that I am he [the only way], ye shall die in your sins." (See #53 and #69)
23. Rom. 4:2 - If Abraham could have saved himself, he'd have something to brag about. (See #25, #1)
24. Acts 10:1-43 - Cornelius' good works would put anyone today to shame, yet he still had to get saved
by trusting solely in Christ to save him. (See #6, #12, #1, #88)
25. Rom. 3:27-28 - "Where is boasting then?...Of WORKS? nay." (See #1 and #23)
26. 1 John 5:13 - If your salvation depends on a lifetime of good works, then why does the Bible teach
that you could "KNOW" for sure, before you die, that you are going to Heaven? The answer is because
salvation doesn't depend on you, but on Christ, who ALREADY paid the price for your sins. (See #87)
27. Heb. 1:3 - "He had BY HIMSELF purged our sins." He doesn't need help from us! (See #15)
28. Heb. 2:3 - If we have to work at earning it, why does the Bible call it "So great salvation"?
29. Heb. 2:9-10 - Christ is "The CAPTAIN of their salvation." He tasted "Death for every man."
30. Heb. 2:14-15 - Christ is the one who will "DELIVER" us from death, not ourselves! (See #53)
31. Heb. 2:17 - Christ makes "RECONCILIATION for the sins." We can't reconcile ourselves.
32. Heb. 5:9 - Christ is "The AUTHOR of eternal salvation," not us! It's not in our hands.



33. Gal. 2:16 - "Knowing that a man IS NOT JUSTIFIED BY THE WORKS of the law, but by the
faith of Jesus Christ, ....that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and NOT by the WORKS
of the law: FOR BY THE WORKS OF THE LAW SHALL NO FLESH BE JUSTIFIED."
34. Heb. 9:28 - "Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many." God won't accept good works.
35. Heb. 10:10-12 - Christ's body was offered "Once for all." So stop insulting God with your works.
36. Heb. 10:14 - "For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them." STOP WORKING at it!
37. Heb. 10:17-18 - "There is no more offering for sin." So stop offering your good works.
38. 2 Cor. 1:9 - "We should not trust in ourselves, but in God," who has ALREADY paid the price.
39. 2 Cor. 1:10 - Christ "Delivered us from so great a death." He had to; we can't deliver ourselves.
40. Eph. 1:12-13 - You are saved by trusting in Christ, and, "After that believed, ye were SEALED."
41. Jer. 17:5 - "Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm."
42. Job 25:4 - "How then can man be justified with God? or how can he be clean that is born of a
woman?" (For God's answer, see #86, #63, #54, #33, #82, #80, #73, #5 and Isaiah 1:18)
43. Isa. 12:2 - "Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust." Don't trust good works, trust the Saviour.
44. Luke 18:9-14 - Jesus gives a parable teaching that self righteousness WILL NOT save a person.
45. Ezek. 33:13 - "If he trust to his own righteousness..." He better be perfectly sinless or else!
46. John 14:6 - Jesus said, "I am THE WAY...no man cometh unto the Father, BUT BY ME."
47. 1 Tim. 2:5-6 - There's ONLY "One mediator between God and men," Jesus Christ, not ourselves.
48. Col. 2:14 - Christ took our sin debt, "Nailing it to his cross." It's ALREADY paid for! (See #34-37)
49. John 19:30 - While on the cross, Christ said, "It is finished." It's paid. We don't have to work for it.
50. Matt. 11:28-30 - Christ offers "REST" to all those working at trying to earn their way to Heaven.
51. Isa. 53:4-6 - Christ was, "WOUNDED FOR OUR transgressions." Why? So WE don't have to be.
52. Heb. 4:9-10 - The person who accepts Christ as Saviour, "Hath CEASED from his own works."
53. Gal. 2:21 - If you could earn Heaven, why did Christ die? "Then Christ is dead in vain." (See #86, #8)
54. Rom. 3:20 - "Therefore by the deeds of the law there SHALL NO FLESH BE JUSTIFIED in his
sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin." (See #33, #14, #82, #80, #87, #42, #73)
55. Gal. 5:1-4 - "Christ hath made us free." He had to; we can't free ourselves, no matter how "good."
56. 2 Tim. 1:10 - "Our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death," with no help from us.
57. 1 John 4:14 - Christ was sent, "To be the Saviour of the world"; we couldn't save ourselves.
58. 1 Tim. 4:10 - "The Saviour of ALL men." Why try to save yourself? You already have a Saviour.
59. Acts 16:30-31 - When the Philippian jailer asked, "What must I do to be saved?" Paul didn't say,
keep the Ten Commandments, but rather, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved."
60. Luke 7:49-50 - Christ told the woman: "Thy faith hath saved thee," not thy works! (See #1)
61. Eph. 1:7 - "Redemption through HIS BLOOD, the forgiveness of sins," not through our works.
62. 1 Pet. 1:3-5 - "According to his abundant MERCY," not according to our good deeds. (See #12)
63. Rev. 1:5 - Christ, "Washed us from our sins in his own blood"; can't wash ourselves with works.
64. Titus 3:7 - We are "Justified by his grace," not by our good deeds, baptism, or church membership.
65. Titus 2:11 - "The grace of God that BRINGETH SALVATION hath appeared to ALL MEN."
66. Eph. 4:32 - We are forgiven, "For Christ's sake," not because of our good behavior. (See #88)
67. Eph. 2:4-5 - "(By grace ye are saved)," not by works. The two don't mix according to Rom. 11:6.
68. Acts 26:18 - "Through this man [Christ]...forgiveness of sins," not through our efforts!
69. Heb. 7:25 - Only Christ is "Able to save." Only He can "Make INTERCESSION for them."



70. Rom. 3:10 - "There is none righteous, no, not one." So how can anyone save themselves?
71. Rom. 3:12 - "There is none that doeth good, no, not one." So how can anyone save themselves?
72. Eccl. 7:20 - "There is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good." Can anyone save themselves?
73. Rom. 4:25 - Christ has already died for our sins. He, "Was delivered for our offences and raised
again FOR OUR JUSTIFICATION." So what role does a person play in their own salvation?
74. Rom. 5:10 - "We are reconciled to God by the death of his Son," not by the fruits of our works.
75. John 6:28-29 - "Then said they unto him, WHAT SHALL WE DO, that we might work the works
of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, THIS IS THE WORK OF GOD, THAT YE BELIEVE
ON HIM whom he hath sent." (See #59, #22, #10, #53)
76. 1 Pet. 3:18 - "Suffered for us...that HE might bring us to God." Do we have to help Him save us?
Didn't He suffer enough to pay the price? Heb. 7:25 says He did. He saves to "The uttermost."
77. Matt. 5:20 - Your self-righteousness would have to surpass that of the Pharisees-- Impossible! (#70)
78. 1 John 2:2 - Christ, "Is the propitiation [payment]...for the sins of the whole world." If He can
pay for the sins of the whole world, why would He need our help in saving us-- mere individuals?
79. Rom. 8:8 - "They that are in the flesh cannot please God." So what chance does anyone have?
80. Rom. 3:23-25 - Through Christ's death we are "Justified freely" (made right with God). His death
provides: "Redemption" (we are bought back to God), "Propitiation" (a settlement of our sin debt),
"Remission [forgiveness] of sins." It's all by God's "Grace" not our works. (See #1, #35, #36, #78)
81. James 2:10-11 - "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in ONE POINT, he is
guilty of all." We can't possibly save ourselves; God demands sinless perfection. We need a Saviour.
82. Romans 5:8-9 - We are "Justified by his blood," not our good works. That's why "When we were
sinners, Christ died for us." Therefore, "We shall be saved from wrath through him."
83. Matt. 18:11 - Jesus came "To save that which was lost [us]." Why? Because we can't save ourselves.
Otherwise, why send Christ to die for our sins if we could pay for them ourselves? (See #53, #8, #86, #76)
84. Acts 15:10-11 - "Through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved," not through
works. Grace is not works; works is not grace, as explained in Rom. 11:6 (see #90, #1, #53)
85. 2 Cor. 5:21 - "Christ was made sin for us...that we might be made the righteousness of God in
him." Why trust our own "righteousness" if God offers to impute us His righteousness? (Rom. 4:22-24)
86. Matt. 19:25-26 - "When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, WHO THEN
CAN BE SAVED? But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, WITH MEN THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE;
but with God all things are possible." (See #8, #41, #42, #81, #11, #45, #70, #19)
87. Rom. 5:1 - "Therefore being JUSTIFIED BY FAITH, we have PEACE WITH GOD through our
Lord Jesus Christ." There can be no real peace when a person spends their life wondering if they have done
enough good works. Peace is knowing it's been paid for ALREADY. (See #52, #50, #26, #53)
88. 2 Tim. 1:9 - "Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, NOT ACCORDING TO OUR
WORKS, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the
world began." God had a "payment plan" ready before any of us were even alive to work!
89. Rom. 10:9-13 - "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus [i.e. Repent], and shalt
believe in thine heart [i.e. Trust] that God hath raised him from the dead, THOU SHALT BE SAVED
...For whosoever shall CALL upon the name of the Lord SHALL BE SAVED." (See #15)
90. Rom. 11:6 - "And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace."
91. Gal. 1:4, 92. Rom. 1:16, 93. Gal. 3:21, 94. Heb. 9:22, 95. 1 Tim. 2:6, 96. Acts 10:43,
97. Isa. 43:11, 98. Gal. 3:24, 99. Heb. 9:12-14, 100. 1 Tim. 1:15, 101. Heb. 6:1





IF you were to die today, are you 100% SURE
you would go to Heaven? The Bible says
YOU CAN BE SURE (1 John 5:13).
BUT FIRST, you must realize that what keeps you
from going to Heaven are your sins, because:
"...your iniquities [sins] have separated
between you and your God," Isaiah 59:2.
In fact, in God's eyes YOU ARE A SINNER: "For
all have sinned, and come short
of the glory of God;" Romans 3:23.

SECONDLY, you must realize that there is
NOTHING you can do to save yourself and earn
Heaven: "For by grace are ye saved through
faith; and that not of yourselves: it is
the gift of God: Not of works, lest any
man should boast." Eph. 2:8-9 Baptism, good
deeds, church membership, self-righteousness are
all examples of good works that cannot save you,
because: "Not by works of
righteousness which we have done, but
according to his mercy he [Christ] saved
us," Titus 3:5.

THE ONLY WAY you can get saved is through
Jesus Christ. He said: "I am the way, the
truth, and the life: no man cometh unto
the Father, but by me." (John 14:6) THAT'S
WHY: "...while we were yet sinners, Christ
died for us." (Rom. 5:8-9)

THEREFORE: You must REPENT (change your
mind); admit that you are a Hell deserving sinner
and can't save yourself. And call upon Christ, and
Him alone, to save you. "if thou shalt confess
with thy mouth the Lord Jesus [REPENT], and
shalt believe in thine heart [TRUST] that God
hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be
saved." Romans 10:9

The man hanging on the cross next to Jesus became a believer and was never baptized nor did anything for his new faith. Yet minutes later went to paradise with Jesus.

This is gonna be an all time classic. Here we go .............


---------------- Link?

I discount any of Paul's letters to anyone. Paul was not an Apostle, he never met Jesus, and Paul's words are not the words of Jesus.

"Faith without deeds is dead" were Jesus' words, not Paul's.

Bible Gateway passage: James 2:14-26 - New King James Version

Why would anyone care what you "discount"? A thing that is true in now way requires anyone to believe it.

By what right can you tell me what to believe and what to discount? Who gets to decide which beliefs are valid and which aren't?

Right wing Christias ignore Jesus' commandment to "love one another as I have loved you", and demand the right to selectively shun and shame some but not all of the people they consider to be "sinners" and they want me to respect their right to cherry pick what to believe and who to shun

 

[pknopp]

It's always the rhetorical fascist control freaks who want to take something entirely personal like one's religion or one's sexuality, and try to force their own views on them. And they don't seem shy about self-identifying.

Of course I don't have any problem about self-identifying as a Christian.

First it is rather ridiculous to try and compare this to Fascism. No one here is trying to force Christianity on anyone.

The only thing we are doing is saying you can't make up what a Christian is. You are free to be, or not be a Christian, at your own choice, and I have no problem with it.

However, being a Christian means something. It does not just mean anything you randomly feel like it should mean. Just like the color blue, is not red. Red is red. Blue is blue.

If you posted a picture that was red, and said "look at my blue picture"

View attachment 291538

We would contest that. That is not blue. It is red. You complaining that we are fascist for saying someone who does not follow the teachings of Christ, is not a Christian, is like you saying we're fascist for saying that red square is red, not blue.

Again.... if I joined the Vegan society, and posted pictures of myself eating steak at Longhorn Steakhouse today, they would kick me out out of the Vegan society.

If they did that, would you be here attacking them for being fascist? No. Likely not.

Similarly, Pete is a false prophet. He is not a Christian, though he claims to be. He lives a life that is completely against Christian teaching, though he claims to be Christian. He twists 2,000 years of Biblical doctrine, and then spouts off about what he thinks a Christian should do.

He is evil. He wrong. He is not a Christian.

And so you can whine and cry about "fascist" until the end of your life, I don't care. I'm right. I know I'm right. And I'll keep saying what is clearly true.

The Bible teaches about divorce. A large number of Christians live counter to that teaching.

Live counter to that?

We just covered this... there is a huge difference between choosing to live continually in sin, and sinning and repenting. I assume you understand that.

So when you say "they live counter to that"... how?

The question isn't do people sin. All people sin.

The question is, do they repent or not?

Additionally, Divorce is a tricky type of sin, because there are people who would never divorce, but had a spouse that would not accept it.

We had this in my parents church. The woman simply refused to compromise on anything. In fact, we tried to give counseling, while the husband was begging to keep the marriage, as he really loved this woman. Nevertheless, she refused to talk to the church leadership, and we told her that until she repented, that she was not welcome at the church anymore.

He kept showing up there (she brought him to our church, but before was not a regular attendee), he did so to see if there was any way to repair the marriage, even after she divorced him.

So he is divorced.

But can you say he was living contrary to Biblical teaching? No. He never wanted a divorce. He fought as best he knew how to prevent it, and even to make it right after being divorced.

Further, can you say the church lived counter to Christianity? No. The church worked to prevent the divorce. They operated as best they could, to help repair the marriage. And when the woman refuse to submit to the authority of the church, they kicked her out as a non-believer, exactly as the Bible describes.

Lastly, let's talk about the woman herself. Our church no longer considers her a Christian. (this was some years ago now) So there are two possibilities. Either she is unrepentant, and thus is not a Christian.... or she is repentant and is.

We don't know where her heart is on this today. If she repents, then G-d is kind and just, to forgive sins of the repentant heart.

So she is either not a Christian, and living contrary to the Bible. Or she is living according to the Bible and is a Christian.

Thus, I disagree with your assessment that Christians live contrary to the Bible.

Now there are people who claims to be Christian, but are not.

Again, I just quoted you the passage.....

Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?'

Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' -Jesus​

What is the whole point of that passage? That people are going to say "I'm a Christian!" and yet do not live or follow the teachings of Christ.

When you see someone who lives crazy, and says "I'm a Christian"... what you are seeing is not that Christians don't follow the teachings of Christ... it's simply that you are seeing some who is not a Christian, but pretends to be.

An example I heard years ago... Sitting in a pew does not make you a Christian, anymore than sitting in your garage makes you a Mercedes.

I'll give you a simple example...... The Bible says that Christians are too pray for the peace of Israel, and that G-d will curse those who curse the Jews, and bless those that bless the Jews.

So every time you see someone who claims to be a Christian, and see them saying hateful things about Jews..... they are not Christians.

According to the Bible they are committing adultery if they remarry.

Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.”

Luke 16:18

It doesn't stop being adultery because you say "sorry".

Right, and I agree with that. It says you committed adultery. Yes. You did. But does that mean that you must divorce again, which is another sin? Does sinning twice, somehow cancel each other out?

And what if the other person has already remarried? Then what?

The Bible even says, that because of sexual sin, each person should have their own husband and wife.

But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.
1 Cor 7:2
​

Telling someone to stay single because of a divorce years ago, means that now they would be tempted into immorality. And we've seen this by the way, even in the church. Where a pastor says he'll just stay single, and then years later you find he's screwing someone from the church. Why? Because he tried to stay single, and was tempted into immorality.

So I am not of the opinion, that if you sin, and you end up marrying some girl who was divorced, that this means you are now required to sin yet again, by divorcing again. That just makes no sense to me.

Now ideally you should not marry a woman who divorced her husband without cause. I agree with that. On that point, your post is accurate and true.

But I do not believe in the catch 22 version of Christian, where you are damned to hell if you don't, and damned to hell if you do.

Doesn't mean you can go marry women who divorced without cause. But it also doesn't mean that those who have committed sin, are now doomed to hell no matter if they repent or not. I reject that ideology.

So that would be you are OK with them living in an adulterous relationship.

 

[Dragonlady]

There is no "for cause" for divorce in the Bible.

 

[Andylusion]

Here's a suggestion: that Christians of one belief leave Christians of another belief alone? I would say the same thing to Muslims who are Sunni and those who are Shi'ite. Just go your separate ways for religious purposes and then get together and party? What is the point of anyone carrying on historical intra-faith and inter-faith religious squabbles? What is anyone trying to prove? What is the point? I've always said, die and find out.

I don't see Christians of one belief, storming the church of those of another.

However, Christianity is not a ideological buffet where you can pick and choose what you believe. Sorry.

Now there are minor differences of opinion, rather than doctrine. For example my parents Church taught you should never go to a movie theater.

There is nothing in the Bible about movie theaters either way.... so that is a difference of opinion, not doctrine.

Thus I would never criticize my parents church, because while my opinion is that movies like Toy Story are not somehow inherently bad.... it isn't a violation of Christian teaching to also say, don't go to movies.

So I would leave that alone, as you said.

However, when it comes to fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith, handed down for thousands of years..... like Jesus was G-d, and Jesus came back from the dead... and fundamental morality like marriage is between a man and a woman, and don't murder or lie.....

These things are not negotiable. And I'm not going to apologize to you or anyone else, for calling out someone who is a false prophet and needs to be called out as a fake Christian.

And moreover Lysistrata.... not only am I going to do this with or without your aproval, but we Christians are actually ordered to do this by scripture itself.

Romans 16:17

“Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you have learned; and avoid them.”

So let me be clear.... not only are we going to continue to call out Pete for his false made up phony 'christianity', but we are directly called to do exactly that.

And we will.
And you won't stop us.
And we don't care what you think.

That's not a dig at you... it is simply us practicing our faith, and we are not ashamed of it, nor embarrassed by it, and we understand you are pissed off and offended..... but we don't care. This isn't your business, but rather the business of Christianity defending the Christian faith. Your opinion does not matter to us on this.

You want to talk about the minimum wage, I'll listen. But this is our faith, and our Bible, that has been passed down to us for thousands of years. What you think is of little consequence.

Do you demand those committing adultery to stop? To leave their adulterous relationships?

If you are talking about actually sleeping with someone who is married to another, then yes of course.

However if they are not married to anyone, and they get married to someone new, then no, of course not. The two situations are not comparable. They are not the same.

And this should be obvious to anyone who is thinking about it.

Tim and Nancy divorce. Nancy married Bob. Tim marries Tina.

Now you could make the case that there were 3 sins involved here.

However, the solution is to repent, never do it again, and ask for forgiveness.

The solution is not to double the sins. Tim divorces Tina. Sin. Nancy divorces Bob. Sin. Nancy and Tim remarry.... but now they are leaving their spouses, which means they are committing adultery all over again. Nancy marries Tim, who was Tina's husband. Tim marries Nancy who was Bob's wife. Sin.

So you have taken the original sins, and multiplied them? That's not Biblical.

Now compare that to, Nancy is Bob's wife, and is sleeping with Tim. That's just simple Adultery. Tim never sleeps with her again. And Nancy goes back to Bob. No sins are committed in rectifying that evil.

The two situations are not comparable.

 

[pknopp]

Here's a suggestion: that Christians of one belief leave Christians of another belief alone? I would say the same thing to Muslims who are Sunni and those who are Shi'ite. Just go your separate ways for religious purposes and then get together and party? What is the point of anyone carrying on historical intra-faith and inter-faith religious squabbles? What is anyone trying to prove? What is the point? I've always said, die and find out.

I don't see Christians of one belief, storming the church of those of another.

However, Christianity is not a ideological buffet where you can pick and choose what you believe. Sorry.

Now there are minor differences of opinion, rather than doctrine. For example my parents Church taught you should never go to a movie theater.

There is nothing in the Bible about movie theaters either way.... so that is a difference of opinion, not doctrine.

Thus I would never criticize my parents church, because while my opinion is that movies like Toy Story are not somehow inherently bad.... it isn't a violation of Christian teaching to also say, don't go to movies.

So I would leave that alone, as you said.

However, when it comes to fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith, handed down for thousands of years..... like Jesus was G-d, and Jesus came back from the dead... and fundamental morality like marriage is between a man and a woman, and don't murder or lie.....

These things are not negotiable. And I'm not going to apologize to you or anyone else, for calling out someone who is a false prophet and needs to be called out as a fake Christian.

And moreover Lysistrata.... not only am I going to do this with or without your aproval, but we Christians are actually ordered to do this by scripture itself.

Romans 16:17

“Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you have learned; and avoid them.”

So let me be clear.... not only are we going to continue to call out Pete for his false made up phony 'christianity', but we are directly called to do exactly that.

And we will.
And you won't stop us.
And we don't care what you think.

That's not a dig at you... it is simply us practicing our faith, and we are not ashamed of it, nor embarrassed by it, and we understand you are pissed off and offended..... but we don't care. This isn't your business, but rather the business of Christianity defending the Christian faith. Your opinion does not matter to us on this.

You want to talk about the minimum wage, I'll listen. But this is our faith, and our Bible, that has been passed down to us for thousands of years. What you think is of little consequence.

Do you demand those committing adultery to stop? To leave their adulterous relationships?

If you are talking about actually sleeping with someone who is married to another, then yes of course.

However if they are not married to anyone, and they get married to someone new, then no, of course not. The two situations are not comparable. They are not the same.

And this should be obvious to anyone who is thinking about it.

Tim and Nancy divorce. Nancy married Bob. Tim marries Tina.

Now you could make the case that there were 3 sins involved here.

However, the solution is to repent, never do it again, and ask for forgiveness.

The solution is not to double the sins. Tim divorces Tina. Sin. Nancy divorces Bob. Sin. Nancy and Tim remarry.... but now they are leaving their spouses, which means they are committing adultery all over again. Nancy marries Tim, who was Tina's husband. Tim marries Nancy who was Bob's wife. Sin.

So you have taken the original sins, and multiplied them? That's not Biblical.

Now compare that to, Nancy is Bob's wife, and is sleeping with Tim. That's just simple Adultery. Tim never sleeps with her again. And Nancy goes back to Bob. No sins are committed in rectifying that evil.

The two situations are not comparable.

The Bible states that if you marry a woman that had been previously married you are committing adultery. You understand what I am saying.

 

[Andylusion]

Of course I don't have any problem about self-identifying as a Christian.

First it is rather ridiculous to try and compare this to Fascism. No one here is trying to force Christianity on anyone.

The only thing we are doing is saying you can't make up what a Christian is. You are free to be, or not be a Christian, at your own choice, and I have no problem with it.

However, being a Christian means something. It does not just mean anything you randomly feel like it should mean. Just like the color blue, is not red. Red is red. Blue is blue.

If you posted a picture that was red, and said "look at my blue picture"

View attachment 291538

We would contest that. That is not blue. It is red. You complaining that we are fascist for saying someone who does not follow the teachings of Christ, is not a Christian, is like you saying we're fascist for saying that red square is red, not blue.

Again.... if I joined the Vegan society, and posted pictures of myself eating steak at Longhorn Steakhouse today, they would kick me out out of the Vegan society.

If they did that, would you be here attacking them for being fascist? No. Likely not.

Similarly, Pete is a false prophet. He is not a Christian, though he claims to be. He lives a life that is completely against Christian teaching, though he claims to be Christian. He twists 2,000 years of Biblical doctrine, and then spouts off about what he thinks a Christian should do.

He is evil. He wrong. He is not a Christian.

And so you can whine and cry about "fascist" until the end of your life, I don't care. I'm right. I know I'm right. And I'll keep saying what is clearly true.

The Bible teaches about divorce. A large number of Christians live counter to that teaching.

Live counter to that?

We just covered this... there is a huge difference between choosing to live continually in sin, and sinning and repenting. I assume you understand that.

So when you say "they live counter to that"... how?

The question isn't do people sin. All people sin.

The question is, do they repent or not?

Additionally, Divorce is a tricky type of sin, because there are people who would never divorce, but had a spouse that would not accept it.

We had this in my parents church. The woman simply refused to compromise on anything. In fact, we tried to give counseling, while the husband was begging to keep the marriage, as he really loved this woman. Nevertheless, she refused to talk to the church leadership, and we told her that until she repented, that she was not welcome at the church anymore.

He kept showing up there (she brought him to our church, but before was not a regular attendee), he did so to see if there was any way to repair the marriage, even after she divorced him.

So he is divorced.

But can you say he was living contrary to Biblical teaching? No. He never wanted a divorce. He fought as best he knew how to prevent it, and even to make it right after being divorced.

Further, can you say the church lived counter to Christianity? No. The church worked to prevent the divorce. They operated as best they could, to help repair the marriage. And when the woman refuse to submit to the authority of the church, they kicked her out as a non-believer, exactly as the Bible describes.

Lastly, let's talk about the woman herself. Our church no longer considers her a Christian. (this was some years ago now) So there are two possibilities. Either she is unrepentant, and thus is not a Christian.... or she is repentant and is.

We don't know where her heart is on this today. If she repents, then G-d is kind and just, to forgive sins of the repentant heart.

So she is either not a Christian, and living contrary to the Bible. Or she is living according to the Bible and is a Christian.

Thus, I disagree with your assessment that Christians live contrary to the Bible.

Now there are people who claims to be Christian, but are not.

Again, I just quoted you the passage.....

Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?'

Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' -Jesus​

What is the whole point of that passage? That people are going to say "I'm a Christian!" and yet do not live or follow the teachings of Christ.

When you see someone who lives crazy, and says "I'm a Christian"... what you are seeing is not that Christians don't follow the teachings of Christ... it's simply that you are seeing some who is not a Christian, but pretends to be.

An example I heard years ago... Sitting in a pew does not make you a Christian, anymore than sitting in your garage makes you a Mercedes.

I'll give you a simple example...... The Bible says that Christians are too pray for the peace of Israel, and that G-d will curse those who curse the Jews, and bless those that bless the Jews.

So every time you see someone who claims to be a Christian, and see them saying hateful things about Jews..... they are not Christians.

According to the Bible they are committing adultery if they remarry.

Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.”

Luke 16:18

It doesn't stop being adultery because you say "sorry".

Right, and I agree with that. It says you committed adultery. Yes. You did. But does that mean that you must divorce again, which is another sin? Does sinning twice, somehow cancel each other out?

And what if the other person has already remarried? Then what?

The Bible even says, that because of sexual sin, each person should have their own husband and wife.

But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.
1 Cor 7:2
​

Telling someone to stay single because of a divorce years ago, means that now they would be tempted into immorality. And we've seen this by the way, even in the church. Where a pastor says he'll just stay single, and then years later you find he's screwing someone from the church. Why? Because he tried to stay single, and was tempted into immorality.

So I am not of the opinion, that if you sin, and you end up marrying some girl who was divorced, that this means you are now required to sin yet again, by divorcing again. That just makes no sense to me.

Now ideally you should not marry a woman who divorced her husband without cause. I agree with that. On that point, your post is accurate and true.

But I do not believe in the catch 22 version of Christian, where you are damned to hell if you don't, and damned to hell if you do.

Doesn't mean you can go marry women who divorced without cause. But it also doesn't mean that those who have committed sin, are now doomed to hell no matter if they repent or not. I reject that ideology.

So that would be you are OK with them living in an adulterous relationship.

Of course not. But you are defining an adulterous relationship differently than me.

Say I get divorced because my wife decided to leave. I should remain single, and attempt to fix the relationship. But at some point, say my ex-wife remarries, then I am free to marry, because it is impossible to fix that relationship now.

Now ideally, I should remain with the woman I marry until death. However, if I marry someone, and she is only married to me.... then regardless of whatever evil may have happened to that point.... from that point on, I do not believe that it is an adulterous relationship.

There are numerous examples of this throughout the Bible. The most famous being David and Bathsheba. Obviously that was adultery. And most certainly David paid a heavy and painful price for his sin. But G-d did not tell David to divorce Bathsheba, and even blessed their marriage, and in fact the next King of Israel came from this marriage.

Does that mean what David did was fine? No. But were they in continuous adultery? No.

 

[Andylusion]

Here's a suggestion: that Christians of one belief leave Christians of another belief alone? I would say the same thing to Muslims who are Sunni and those who are Shi'ite. Just go your separate ways for religious purposes and then get together and party? What is the point of anyone carrying on historical intra-faith and inter-faith religious squabbles? What is anyone trying to prove? What is the point? I've always said, die and find out.

I don't see Christians of one belief, storming the church of those of another.

However, Christianity is not a ideological buffet where you can pick and choose what you believe. Sorry.

Now there are minor differences of opinion, rather than doctrine. For example my parents Church taught you should never go to a movie theater.

There is nothing in the Bible about movie theaters either way.... so that is a difference of opinion, not doctrine.

Thus I would never criticize my parents church, because while my opinion is that movies like Toy Story are not somehow inherently bad.... it isn't a violation of Christian teaching to also say, don't go to movies.

So I would leave that alone, as you said.

However, when it comes to fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith, handed down for thousands of years..... like Jesus was G-d, and Jesus came back from the dead... and fundamental morality like marriage is between a man and a woman, and don't murder or lie.....

These things are not negotiable. And I'm not going to apologize to you or anyone else, for calling out someone who is a false prophet and needs to be called out as a fake Christian.

And moreover Lysistrata.... not only am I going to do this with or without your aproval, but we Christians are actually ordered to do this by scripture itself.

Romans 16:17

“Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you have learned; and avoid them.”

So let me be clear.... not only are we going to continue to call out Pete for his false made up phony 'christianity', but we are directly called to do exactly that.

And we will.
And you won't stop us.
And we don't care what you think.

That's not a dig at you... it is simply us practicing our faith, and we are not ashamed of it, nor embarrassed by it, and we understand you are pissed off and offended..... but we don't care. This isn't your business, but rather the business of Christianity defending the Christian faith. Your opinion does not matter to us on this.

You want to talk about the minimum wage, I'll listen. But this is our faith, and our Bible, that has been passed down to us for thousands of years. What you think is of little consequence.

Do you demand those committing adultery to stop? To leave their adulterous relationships?

If you are talking about actually sleeping with someone who is married to another, then yes of course.

However if they are not married to anyone, and they get married to someone new, then no, of course not. The two situations are not comparable. They are not the same.

And this should be obvious to anyone who is thinking about it.

Tim and Nancy divorce. Nancy married Bob. Tim marries Tina.

Now you could make the case that there were 3 sins involved here.

However, the solution is to repent, never do it again, and ask for forgiveness.

The solution is not to double the sins. Tim divorces Tina. Sin. Nancy divorces Bob. Sin. Nancy and Tim remarry.... but now they are leaving their spouses, which means they are committing adultery all over again. Nancy marries Tim, who was Tina's husband. Tim marries Nancy who was Bob's wife. Sin.

So you have taken the original sins, and multiplied them? That's not Biblical.

Now compare that to, Nancy is Bob's wife, and is sleeping with Tim. That's just simple Adultery. Tim never sleeps with her again. And Nancy goes back to Bob. No sins are committed in rectifying that evil.

The two situations are not comparable.

The Bible states that if you marry a woman that had been previously married you are committing adultery. You understand what I am saying.

Yes perfectly. But you apparently are not understanding what I am saying.

I think the problem you have, is the same I used to have.... which is that the Bible really is a book about forgiveness.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Pete the fudgepacker is sinning every moment he breathes since he is an abomination of the human condition. If he truly believes in the so called word of god he would do well to shut the fuck up about how others conduct their lives.

 

[pknopp]

The Bible teaches about divorce. A large number of Christians live counter to that teaching.

Live counter to that?

We just covered this... there is a huge difference between choosing to live continually in sin, and sinning and repenting. I assume you understand that.

So when you say "they live counter to that"... how?

The question isn't do people sin. All people sin.

The question is, do they repent or not?

Additionally, Divorce is a tricky type of sin, because there are people who would never divorce, but had a spouse that would not accept it.

We had this in my parents church. The woman simply refused to compromise on anything. In fact, we tried to give counseling, while the husband was begging to keep the marriage, as he really loved this woman. Nevertheless, she refused to talk to the church leadership, and we told her that until she repented, that she was not welcome at the church anymore.

He kept showing up there (she brought him to our church, but before was not a regular attendee), he did so to see if there was any way to repair the marriage, even after she divorced him.

So he is divorced.

But can you say he was living contrary to Biblical teaching? No. He never wanted a divorce. He fought as best he knew how to prevent it, and even to make it right after being divorced.

Further, can you say the church lived counter to Christianity? No. The church worked to prevent the divorce. They operated as best they could, to help repair the marriage. And when the woman refuse to submit to the authority of the church, they kicked her out as a non-believer, exactly as the Bible describes.

Lastly, let's talk about the woman herself. Our church no longer considers her a Christian. (this was some years ago now) So there are two possibilities. Either she is unrepentant, and thus is not a Christian.... or she is repentant and is.

We don't know where her heart is on this today. If she repents, then G-d is kind and just, to forgive sins of the repentant heart.

So she is either not a Christian, and living contrary to the Bible. Or she is living according to the Bible and is a Christian.

Thus, I disagree with your assessment that Christians live contrary to the Bible.

Now there are people who claims to be Christian, but are not.

Again, I just quoted you the passage.....

Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?'

Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' -Jesus​

What is the whole point of that passage? That people are going to say "I'm a Christian!" and yet do not live or follow the teachings of Christ.

When you see someone who lives crazy, and says "I'm a Christian"... what you are seeing is not that Christians don't follow the teachings of Christ... it's simply that you are seeing some who is not a Christian, but pretends to be.

An example I heard years ago... Sitting in a pew does not make you a Christian, anymore than sitting in your garage makes you a Mercedes.

I'll give you a simple example...... The Bible says that Christians are too pray for the peace of Israel, and that G-d will curse those who curse the Jews, and bless those that bless the Jews.

So every time you see someone who claims to be a Christian, and see them saying hateful things about Jews..... they are not Christians.

According to the Bible they are committing adultery if they remarry.

Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.”

Luke 16:18

It doesn't stop being adultery because you say "sorry".

Right, and I agree with that. It says you committed adultery. Yes. You did. But does that mean that you must divorce again, which is another sin? Does sinning twice, somehow cancel each other out?

And what if the other person has already remarried? Then what?

The Bible even says, that because of sexual sin, each person should have their own husband and wife.

But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.
1 Cor 7:2
​

Telling someone to stay single because of a divorce years ago, means that now they would be tempted into immorality. And we've seen this by the way, even in the church. Where a pastor says he'll just stay single, and then years later you find he's screwing someone from the church. Why? Because he tried to stay single, and was tempted into immorality.

So I am not of the opinion, that if you sin, and you end up marrying some girl who was divorced, that this means you are now required to sin yet again, by divorcing again. That just makes no sense to me.

Now ideally you should not marry a woman who divorced her husband without cause. I agree with that. On that point, your post is accurate and true.

But I do not believe in the catch 22 version of Christian, where you are damned to hell if you don't, and damned to hell if you do.

Doesn't mean you can go marry women who divorced without cause. But it also doesn't mean that those who have committed sin, are now doomed to hell no matter if they repent or not. I reject that ideology.

So that would be you are OK with them living in an adulterous relationship.

Of course not. But you are defining an adulterous relationship differently than me.

I am defining it as the Bible defines it and also pointing out your hypocrisy.

 

[pknopp]

Here's a suggestion: that Christians of one belief leave Christians of another belief alone? I would say the same thing to Muslims who are Sunni and those who are Shi'ite. Just go your separate ways for religious purposes and then get together and party? What is the point of anyone carrying on historical intra-faith and inter-faith religious squabbles? What is anyone trying to prove? What is the point? I've always said, die and find out.

I don't see Christians of one belief, storming the church of those of another.

However, Christianity is not a ideological buffet where you can pick and choose what you believe. Sorry.

Now there are minor differences of opinion, rather than doctrine. For example my parents Church taught you should never go to a movie theater.

There is nothing in the Bible about movie theaters either way.... so that is a difference of opinion, not doctrine.

Thus I would never criticize my parents church, because while my opinion is that movies like Toy Story are not somehow inherently bad.... it isn't a violation of Christian teaching to also say, don't go to movies.

So I would leave that alone, as you said.

However, when it comes to fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith, handed down for thousands of years..... like Jesus was G-d, and Jesus came back from the dead... and fundamental morality like marriage is between a man and a woman, and don't murder or lie.....

These things are not negotiable. And I'm not going to apologize to you or anyone else, for calling out someone who is a false prophet and needs to be called out as a fake Christian.

And moreover Lysistrata.... not only am I going to do this with or without your aproval, but we Christians are actually ordered to do this by scripture itself.

Romans 16:17

“Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you have learned; and avoid them.”

So let me be clear.... not only are we going to continue to call out Pete for his false made up phony 'christianity', but we are directly called to do exactly that.

And we will.
And you won't stop us.
And we don't care what you think.

That's not a dig at you... it is simply us practicing our faith, and we are not ashamed of it, nor embarrassed by it, and we understand you are pissed off and offended..... but we don't care. This isn't your business, but rather the business of Christianity defending the Christian faith. Your opinion does not matter to us on this.

You want to talk about the minimum wage, I'll listen. But this is our faith, and our Bible, that has been passed down to us for thousands of years. What you think is of little consequence.

Do you demand those committing adultery to stop? To leave their adulterous relationships?

If you are talking about actually sleeping with someone who is married to another, then yes of course.

However if they are not married to anyone, and they get married to someone new, then no, of course not. The two situations are not comparable. They are not the same.

And this should be obvious to anyone who is thinking about it.

Tim and Nancy divorce. Nancy married Bob. Tim marries Tina.

Now you could make the case that there were 3 sins involved here.

However, the solution is to repent, never do it again, and ask for forgiveness.

The solution is not to double the sins. Tim divorces Tina. Sin. Nancy divorces Bob. Sin. Nancy and Tim remarry.... but now they are leaving their spouses, which means they are committing adultery all over again. Nancy marries Tim, who was Tina's husband. Tim marries Nancy who was Bob's wife. Sin.

So you have taken the original sins, and multiplied them? That's not Biblical.

Now compare that to, Nancy is Bob's wife, and is sleeping with Tim. That's just simple Adultery. Tim never sleeps with her again. And Nancy goes back to Bob. No sins are committed in rectifying that evil.

The two situations are not comparable.

The Bible states that if you marry a woman that had been previously married you are committing adultery. You understand what I am saying.

Yes perfectly. But you apparently are not understanding what I am saying.

I think the problem you have, is the same I used to have.... which is that the Bible really is a book about forgiveness.

You have already stated that you can not ask for forgiveness and continue in the sin. You then excuse people living in an adulterous relationship according to the Bible.

 

[Andylusion]

Live counter to that?

We just covered this... there is a huge difference between choosing to live continually in sin, and sinning and repenting. I assume you understand that.

So when you say "they live counter to that"... how?

The question isn't do people sin. All people sin.

The question is, do they repent or not?

Additionally, Divorce is a tricky type of sin, because there are people who would never divorce, but had a spouse that would not accept it.

We had this in my parents church. The woman simply refused to compromise on anything. In fact, we tried to give counseling, while the husband was begging to keep the marriage, as he really loved this woman. Nevertheless, she refused to talk to the church leadership, and we told her that until she repented, that she was not welcome at the church anymore.

He kept showing up there (she brought him to our church, but before was not a regular attendee), he did so to see if there was any way to repair the marriage, even after she divorced him.

So he is divorced.

But can you say he was living contrary to Biblical teaching? No. He never wanted a divorce. He fought as best he knew how to prevent it, and even to make it right after being divorced.

Further, can you say the church lived counter to Christianity? No. The church worked to prevent the divorce. They operated as best they could, to help repair the marriage. And when the woman refuse to submit to the authority of the church, they kicked her out as a non-believer, exactly as the Bible describes.

Lastly, let's talk about the woman herself. Our church no longer considers her a Christian. (this was some years ago now) So there are two possibilities. Either she is unrepentant, and thus is not a Christian.... or she is repentant and is.

We don't know where her heart is on this today. If she repents, then G-d is kind and just, to forgive sins of the repentant heart.

So she is either not a Christian, and living contrary to the Bible. Or she is living according to the Bible and is a Christian.

Thus, I disagree with your assessment that Christians live contrary to the Bible.

Now there are people who claims to be Christian, but are not.

Again, I just quoted you the passage.....

Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?'

Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' -Jesus​

What is the whole point of that passage? That people are going to say "I'm a Christian!" and yet do not live or follow the teachings of Christ.

When you see someone who lives crazy, and says "I'm a Christian"... what you are seeing is not that Christians don't follow the teachings of Christ... it's simply that you are seeing some who is not a Christian, but pretends to be.

An example I heard years ago... Sitting in a pew does not make you a Christian, anymore than sitting in your garage makes you a Mercedes.

I'll give you a simple example...... The Bible says that Christians are too pray for the peace of Israel, and that G-d will curse those who curse the Jews, and bless those that bless the Jews.

So every time you see someone who claims to be a Christian, and see them saying hateful things about Jews..... they are not Christians.

According to the Bible they are committing adultery if they remarry.

Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.”

Luke 16:18

It doesn't stop being adultery because you say "sorry".

Right, and I agree with that. It says you committed adultery. Yes. You did. But does that mean that you must divorce again, which is another sin? Does sinning twice, somehow cancel each other out?

And what if the other person has already remarried? Then what?

The Bible even says, that because of sexual sin, each person should have their own husband and wife.

But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.
1 Cor 7:2
​

Telling someone to stay single because of a divorce years ago, means that now they would be tempted into immorality. And we've seen this by the way, even in the church. Where a pastor says he'll just stay single, and then years later you find he's screwing someone from the church. Why? Because he tried to stay single, and was tempted into immorality.

So I am not of the opinion, that if you sin, and you end up marrying some girl who was divorced, that this means you are now required to sin yet again, by divorcing again. That just makes no sense to me.

Now ideally you should not marry a woman who divorced her husband without cause. I agree with that. On that point, your post is accurate and true.

But I do not believe in the catch 22 version of Christian, where you are damned to hell if you don't, and damned to hell if you do.

Doesn't mean you can go marry women who divorced without cause. But it also doesn't mean that those who have committed sin, are now doomed to hell no matter if they repent or not. I reject that ideology.

So that would be you are OK with them living in an adulterous relationship.

Of course not. But you are defining an adulterous relationship differently than me.

I am defining it as the Bible defines it and also pointing out your hypocrisy.

You have the right to be wrong.

 

[Andylusion]

I don't see Christians of one belief, storming the church of those of another.

However, Christianity is not a ideological buffet where you can pick and choose what you believe. Sorry.

Now there are minor differences of opinion, rather than doctrine. For example my parents Church taught you should never go to a movie theater.

There is nothing in the Bible about movie theaters either way.... so that is a difference of opinion, not doctrine.

Thus I would never criticize my parents church, because while my opinion is that movies like Toy Story are not somehow inherently bad.... it isn't a violation of Christian teaching to also say, don't go to movies.

So I would leave that alone, as you said.

However, when it comes to fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith, handed down for thousands of years..... like Jesus was G-d, and Jesus came back from the dead... and fundamental morality like marriage is between a man and a woman, and don't murder or lie.....

These things are not negotiable. And I'm not going to apologize to you or anyone else, for calling out someone who is a false prophet and needs to be called out as a fake Christian.

And moreover Lysistrata.... not only am I going to do this with or without your aproval, but we Christians are actually ordered to do this by scripture itself.

Romans 16:17

“Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you have learned; and avoid them.”

So let me be clear.... not only are we going to continue to call out Pete for his false made up phony 'christianity', but we are directly called to do exactly that.

And we will.
And you won't stop us.
And we don't care what you think.

That's not a dig at you... it is simply us practicing our faith, and we are not ashamed of it, nor embarrassed by it, and we understand you are pissed off and offended..... but we don't care. This isn't your business, but rather the business of Christianity defending the Christian faith. Your opinion does not matter to us on this.

You want to talk about the minimum wage, I'll listen. But this is our faith, and our Bible, that has been passed down to us for thousands of years. What you think is of little consequence.

Do you demand those committing adultery to stop? To leave their adulterous relationships?

If you are talking about actually sleeping with someone who is married to another, then yes of course.

However if they are not married to anyone, and they get married to someone new, then no, of course not. The two situations are not comparable. They are not the same.

And this should be obvious to anyone who is thinking about it.

Tim and Nancy divorce. Nancy married Bob. Tim marries Tina.

Now you could make the case that there were 3 sins involved here.

However, the solution is to repent, never do it again, and ask for forgiveness.

The solution is not to double the sins. Tim divorces Tina. Sin. Nancy divorces Bob. Sin. Nancy and Tim remarry.... but now they are leaving their spouses, which means they are committing adultery all over again. Nancy marries Tim, who was Tina's husband. Tim marries Nancy who was Bob's wife. Sin.

So you have taken the original sins, and multiplied them? That's not Biblical.

Now compare that to, Nancy is Bob's wife, and is sleeping with Tim. That's just simple Adultery. Tim never sleeps with her again. And Nancy goes back to Bob. No sins are committed in rectifying that evil.

The two situations are not comparable.

The Bible states that if you marry a woman that had been previously married you are committing adultery. You understand what I am saying.

Yes perfectly. But you apparently are not understanding what I am saying.

I think the problem you have, is the same I used to have.... which is that the Bible really is a book about forgiveness.

You have already stated that you can not ask for forgiveness and continue in the sin. You then excuse people living in an adulterous relationship according to the Bible.

They are not. But you have the right to be wrong on this.

 

[pknopp]

According to the Bible they are committing adultery if they remarry.

Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.”

Luke 16:18

It doesn't stop being adultery because you say "sorry".

Right, and I agree with that. It says you committed adultery. Yes. You did. But does that mean that you must divorce again, which is another sin? Does sinning twice, somehow cancel each other out?

And what if the other person has already remarried? Then what?

The Bible even says, that because of sexual sin, each person should have their own husband and wife.

But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.
1 Cor 7:2
​

Telling someone to stay single because of a divorce years ago, means that now they would be tempted into immorality. And we've seen this by the way, even in the church. Where a pastor says he'll just stay single, and then years later you find he's screwing someone from the church. Why? Because he tried to stay single, and was tempted into immorality.

So I am not of the opinion, that if you sin, and you end up marrying some girl who was divorced, that this means you are now required to sin yet again, by divorcing again. That just makes no sense to me.

Now ideally you should not marry a woman who divorced her husband without cause. I agree with that. On that point, your post is accurate and true.

But I do not believe in the catch 22 version of Christian, where you are damned to hell if you don't, and damned to hell if you do.

Doesn't mean you can go marry women who divorced without cause. But it also doesn't mean that those who have committed sin, are now doomed to hell no matter if they repent or not. I reject that ideology.

So that would be you are OK with them living in an adulterous relationship.

Of course not. But you are defining an adulterous relationship differently than me.

I am defining it as the Bible defines it and also pointing out your hypocrisy.

You have the right to be wrong.

I posted the verses. The Bible is wrong?

 

[Andylusion]

Right, and I agree with that. It says you committed adultery. Yes. You did. But does that mean that you must divorce again, which is another sin? Does sinning twice, somehow cancel each other out?

And what if the other person has already remarried? Then what?

The Bible even says, that because of sexual sin, each person should have their own husband and wife.

But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.
1 Cor 7:2
​

Telling someone to stay single because of a divorce years ago, means that now they would be tempted into immorality. And we've seen this by the way, even in the church. Where a pastor says he'll just stay single, and then years later you find he's screwing someone from the church. Why? Because he tried to stay single, and was tempted into immorality.

So I am not of the opinion, that if you sin, and you end up marrying some girl who was divorced, that this means you are now required to sin yet again, by divorcing again. That just makes no sense to me.

Now ideally you should not marry a woman who divorced her husband without cause. I agree with that. On that point, your post is accurate and true.

But I do not believe in the catch 22 version of Christian, where you are damned to hell if you don't, and damned to hell if you do.

Doesn't mean you can go marry women who divorced without cause. But it also doesn't mean that those who have committed sin, are now doomed to hell no matter if they repent or not. I reject that ideology.

So that would be you are OK with them living in an adulterous relationship.

Of course not. But you are defining an adulterous relationship differently than me.

I am defining it as the Bible defines it and also pointing out your hypocrisy.

You have the right to be wrong.

I posted the verses. The Bible is wrong?

The Bible is not wrong. You are. But you have the right to be wrong.

I can go through everything all over again to explain it to you, but it is clear that you have no intention of learning more than you think you know.

So... I will just agree that you are allowed to be wrong.

 

[Lysistrata]

It's always the rhetorical fascist control freaks who want to take something entirely personal like one's religion or one's sexuality, and try to force their own views on them. And they don't seem shy about self-identifying.

Of course I don't have any problem about self-identifying as a Christian.

First it is rather ridiculous to try and compare this to Fascism. No one here is trying to force Christianity on anyone.

The only thing we are doing is saying you can't make up what a Christian is. You are free to be, or not be a Christian, at your own choice, and I have no problem with it.

However, being a Christian means something. It does not just mean anything you randomly feel like it should mean. Just like the color blue, is not red. Red is red. Blue is blue.

If you posted a picture that was red, and said "look at my blue picture"

View attachment 291538

We would contest that. That is not blue. It is red. You complaining that we are fascist for saying someone who does not follow the teachings of Christ, is not a Christian, is like you saying we're fascist for saying that red square is red, not blue.

Again.... if I joined the Vegan society, and posted pictures of myself eating steak at Longhorn Steakhouse today, they would kick me out out of the Vegan society.

If they did that, would you be here attacking them for being fascist? No. Likely not.

Similarly, Pete is a false prophet. He is not a Christian, though he claims to be. He lives a life that is completely against Christian teaching, though he claims to be Christian. He twists 2,000 years of Biblical doctrine, and then spouts off about what he thinks a Christian should do.

He is evil. He wrong. He is not a Christian.

And so you can whine and cry about "fascist" until the end of your life, I don't care. I'm right. I know I'm right. And I'll keep saying what is clearly true.

The Bible teaches about divorce. A large number of Christians live counter to that teaching.

Live counter to that?

We just covered this... there is a huge difference between choosing to live continually in sin, and sinning and repenting. I assume you understand that.

So when you say "they live counter to that"... how?

The question isn't do people sin. All people sin.

The question is, do they repent or not?

Additionally, Divorce is a tricky type of sin, because there are people who would never divorce, but had a spouse that would not accept it.

We had this in my parents church. The woman simply refused to compromise on anything. In fact, we tried to give counseling, while the husband was begging to keep the marriage, as he really loved this woman. Nevertheless, she refused to talk to the church leadership, and we told her that until she repented, that she was not welcome at the church anymore.

He kept showing up there (she brought him to our church, but before was not a regular attendee), he did so to see if there was any way to repair the marriage, even after she divorced him.

So he is divorced.

But can you say he was living contrary to Biblical teaching? No. He never wanted a divorce. He fought as best he knew how to prevent it, and even to make it right after being divorced.

Further, can you say the church lived counter to Christianity? No. The church worked to prevent the divorce. They operated as best they could, to help repair the marriage. And when the woman refuse to submit to the authority of the church, they kicked her out as a non-believer, exactly as the Bible describes.

Lastly, let's talk about the woman herself. Our church no longer considers her a Christian. (this was some years ago now) So there are two possibilities. Either she is unrepentant, and thus is not a Christian.... or she is repentant and is.

We don't know where her heart is on this today. If she repents, then G-d is kind and just, to forgive sins of the repentant heart.

So she is either not a Christian, and living contrary to the Bible. Or she is living according to the Bible and is a Christian.

Thus, I disagree with your assessment that Christians live contrary to the Bible.

Now there are people who claims to be Christian, but are not.

Again, I just quoted you the passage.....

Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?'

Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' -Jesus​

What is the whole point of that passage? That people are going to say "I'm a Christian!" and yet do not live or follow the teachings of Christ.

When you see someone who lives crazy, and says "I'm a Christian"... what you are seeing is not that Christians don't follow the teachings of Christ... it's simply that you are seeing some who is not a Christian, but pretends to be.

An example I heard years ago... Sitting in a pew does not make you a Christian, anymore than sitting in your garage makes you a Mercedes.

I'll give you a simple example...... The Bible says that Christians are too pray for the peace of Israel, and that G-d will curse those who curse the Jews, and bless those that bless the Jews.

So every time you see someone who claims to be a Christian, and see them saying hateful things about Jews..... they are not Christians.

According to the Bible they are committing adultery if they remarry.

Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.”

Luke 16:18

It doesn't stop being adultery because you say "sorry".

Right, and I agree with that. It says you committed adultery. Yes. You did. But does that mean that you must divorce again, which is another sin? Does sinning twice, somehow cancel each other out?

And what if the other person has already remarried? Then what?

The Bible even says, that because of sexual sin, each person should have their own husband and wife.

But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.
1 Cor 7:2
​

Telling someone to stay single because of a divorce years ago, means that now they would be tempted into immorality. And we've seen this by the way, even in the church. Where a pastor says he'll just stay single, and then years later you find he's screwing someone from the church. Why? Because he tried to stay single, and was tempted into immorality.

So I am not of the opinion, that if you sin, and you end up marrying some girl who was divorced, that this means you are now required to sin yet again, by divorcing again. That just makes no sense to me.

Now ideally you should not marry a woman who divorced her husband without cause. I agree with that. On that point, your post is accurate and true.

But I do not believe in the catch 22 version of Christian, where you are damned to hell if you don't, and damned to hell if you do.

Doesn't mean you can go marry women who divorced without cause. But it also doesn't mean that those who have committed sin, are now doomed to hell no matter if they repent or not. I reject that ideology.

Your input serves to explain why there are so many different variations of Christianity.
However, I am curious about your last post.

You write only of marrying a woman who divorced without cause, but say nothing about a man who divorces a wife without cause. What if he is the one who has committed adultery?What if he divorces his innocent wife in order to marry the woman with whom he committed adultery? I would think that his second marriage would be invalid at its inception, as would the second marriage of a woman who divorced her first husband without cause, so there would be no second "sin" of divorce.

Is Newt Gingrich actually married? Is trump? Did each divorce his previous wife, or wives, because they committed adultery? Either both guys' first wives were adulterous hussies, or these two guys committed adultery, divorced innocent spouses, and then entered into sham "marriages," more than once.

 

[pknopp]

So that would be you are OK with them living in an adulterous relationship.

Of course not. But you are defining an adulterous relationship differently than me.

I am defining it as the Bible defines it and also pointing out your hypocrisy.

You have the right to be wrong.

I posted the verses. The Bible is wrong?

The Bible is not wrong. You are. But you have the right to be wrong.

I can go through everything all over again to explain it to you, but it is clear that you have no intention of learning more than you think you know.

So... I will just agree that you are allowed to be wrong.

“Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery."

Luke 16:18

Everyone. It doesn't say "everyone except........." it says everyone. Either you take the Bible as the literal word or you do not.

 

[Andylusion]

Of course I don't have any problem about self-identifying as a Christian.

First it is rather ridiculous to try and compare this to Fascism. No one here is trying to force Christianity on anyone.

The only thing we are doing is saying you can't make up what a Christian is. You are free to be, or not be a Christian, at your own choice, and I have no problem with it.

However, being a Christian means something. It does not just mean anything you randomly feel like it should mean. Just like the color blue, is not red. Red is red. Blue is blue.

If you posted a picture that was red, and said "look at my blue picture"

View attachment 291538

We would contest that. That is not blue. It is red. You complaining that we are fascist for saying someone who does not follow the teachings of Christ, is not a Christian, is like you saying we're fascist for saying that red square is red, not blue.

Again.... if I joined the Vegan society, and posted pictures of myself eating steak at Longhorn Steakhouse today, they would kick me out out of the Vegan society.

If they did that, would you be here attacking them for being fascist? No. Likely not.

Similarly, Pete is a false prophet. He is not a Christian, though he claims to be. He lives a life that is completely against Christian teaching, though he claims to be Christian. He twists 2,000 years of Biblical doctrine, and then spouts off about what he thinks a Christian should do.

He is evil. He wrong. He is not a Christian.

And so you can whine and cry about "fascist" until the end of your life, I don't care. I'm right. I know I'm right. And I'll keep saying what is clearly true.

The Bible teaches about divorce. A large number of Christians live counter to that teaching.

Live counter to that?

We just covered this... there is a huge difference between choosing to live continually in sin, and sinning and repenting. I assume you understand that.

So when you say "they live counter to that"... how?

The question isn't do people sin. All people sin.

The question is, do they repent or not?

Additionally, Divorce is a tricky type of sin, because there are people who would never divorce, but had a spouse that would not accept it.

We had this in my parents church. The woman simply refused to compromise on anything. In fact, we tried to give counseling, while the husband was begging to keep the marriage, as he really loved this woman. Nevertheless, she refused to talk to the church leadership, and we told her that until she repented, that she was not welcome at the church anymore.

He kept showing up there (she brought him to our church, but before was not a regular attendee), he did so to see if there was any way to repair the marriage, even after she divorced him.

So he is divorced.

But can you say he was living contrary to Biblical teaching? No. He never wanted a divorce. He fought as best he knew how to prevent it, and even to make it right after being divorced.

Further, can you say the church lived counter to Christianity? No. The church worked to prevent the divorce. They operated as best they could, to help repair the marriage. And when the woman refuse to submit to the authority of the church, they kicked her out as a non-believer, exactly as the Bible describes.

Lastly, let's talk about the woman herself. Our church no longer considers her a Christian. (this was some years ago now) So there are two possibilities. Either she is unrepentant, and thus is not a Christian.... or she is repentant and is.

We don't know where her heart is on this today. If she repents, then G-d is kind and just, to forgive sins of the repentant heart.

So she is either not a Christian, and living contrary to the Bible. Or she is living according to the Bible and is a Christian.

Thus, I disagree with your assessment that Christians live contrary to the Bible.

Now there are people who claims to be Christian, but are not.

Again, I just quoted you the passage.....

Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?'

Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' -Jesus​

What is the whole point of that passage? That people are going to say "I'm a Christian!" and yet do not live or follow the teachings of Christ.

When you see someone who lives crazy, and says "I'm a Christian"... what you are seeing is not that Christians don't follow the teachings of Christ... it's simply that you are seeing some who is not a Christian, but pretends to be.

An example I heard years ago... Sitting in a pew does not make you a Christian, anymore than sitting in your garage makes you a Mercedes.

I'll give you a simple example...... The Bible says that Christians are too pray for the peace of Israel, and that G-d will curse those who curse the Jews, and bless those that bless the Jews.

So every time you see someone who claims to be a Christian, and see them saying hateful things about Jews..... they are not Christians.

According to the Bible they are committing adultery if they remarry.

Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.”

Luke 16:18

It doesn't stop being adultery because you say "sorry".

Right, and I agree with that. It says you committed adultery. Yes. You did. But does that mean that you must divorce again, which is another sin? Does sinning twice, somehow cancel each other out?

And what if the other person has already remarried? Then what?

The Bible even says, that because of sexual sin, each person should have their own husband and wife.

But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.
1 Cor 7:2
​

Telling someone to stay single because of a divorce years ago, means that now they would be tempted into immorality. And we've seen this by the way, even in the church. Where a pastor says he'll just stay single, and then years later you find he's screwing someone from the church. Why? Because he tried to stay single, and was tempted into immorality.

So I am not of the opinion, that if you sin, and you end up marrying some girl who was divorced, that this means you are now required to sin yet again, by divorcing again. That just makes no sense to me.

Now ideally you should not marry a woman who divorced her husband without cause. I agree with that. On that point, your post is accurate and true.

But I do not believe in the catch 22 version of Christian, where you are damned to hell if you don't, and damned to hell if you do.

Doesn't mean you can go marry women who divorced without cause. But it also doesn't mean that those who have committed sin, are now doomed to hell no matter if they repent or not. I reject that ideology.

Your input serves to explain why there are so many different variations of Christianity.
However, I am curious about your last post.

You write only of marrying a woman who divorced without cause, but say nothing about a man who divorces a wife without cause. What if he is the one who has committed adultery?What if he divorces his innocent wife in order to marry the woman with whom he committed adultery? I would think that his second marriage would be invalid at its inception, as would the second marriage of a woman who divorced her first husband without cause, so there would be no second "sin" of divorce.

Is Newt Gingrich actually married? Is trump? Did each divorce his previous wife, or wives, because they committed adultery? Either both guys' first wives were adulterous hussies, or these two guys committed adultery, divorced innocent spouses, and then entered into sham "marriages," more than once.

So I tend to put myself into the example, and obviously I am not going to marry a man. However, I see nothing in scripture that somehow the rules are different between genders.

You are getting deeper into the weeds of this particular topic, and I'll openly admit to you that I am not a Ph.D in theology.

However, here is my best understanding:

The only time there is no sin of divorce, is when you divorce with cause. The man is sleeping around with other women, and has no intention of stopping. That is divorce with cause, and I believe the woman can walk away utterly blameless.

Another example, would be if you married under false pretense. So if the guy says he has never been married before, and the woman finds out he was married before, and divorced.... I believe that the woman can have the marriage annulled, and I believe the woman can walk away utterly blame before G-d.

However, if there is no cause... if the man loves his wife... and the man has no relations with any other woman (barring polygamy obviously), and he has remained faithful and true to his wife....

Then I do not believe that it is Biblical to divorce. Regardless of whatever mistakes and sins were committed prior to the marriage.... at the point of marriage did the person make a vow

"With this ring I thee wed, and all my worldly goods I thee endow. In sickness and in health, in poverty or in wealth, 'til death do us part."

If you made a vow, you should keep it. If you divorce, without cause, then there is sin. The solution to a first sin of divorce, is not a second sin of divorce.

Is Newt Gingrich actually married? Is trump? Did each divorce his previous wife, or wives, because they committed adultery? Either both guys' first wives were adulterous hussies, or these two guys committed adultery, divorced innocent spouses, and then entered into sham "marriages," more than once.

Well first, Newt Gingrich is not Jesus Christ. Donald Trump is not Jesus Christ. There is only one pure model for what a Christian is, and how they should live. That's Jesus Christ.

Second, I was never convinced that Donald Trump was even a Christian. I have no idea about Newt at all.

As far as, are they married? It seems to me that they are both married.

Whether their marriage is a sham or not, is impossible for me to say. I have no idea what their marriages are like, and I don't trust the opinion driven media to give me an answer in either direction.

I have no idea for example, how Melania feels about Donald. I'll confess to you openly, that I honestly do not understand the feelings of love at all. The love women feel for the men in their lives, defies all logic and reason in my opinion. Since I have never really been in love, perhaps that is why I don't get it.

But it is possible I suppose that Melania really loves Donald, and is really hurt by his past choices. I don't know.

After all, everyone knows Trump is bad with women. This was well established decades ago.

The difference between Trump and Pete, is that Trump isn't saying "I'm a Christian, and the Bible says what I'm doing is fine".

If Trump did say something as ridiculous, then I would be just as much a critic of that. Nor is Trump making up stuff like, salvation depends on being useful. Which I would also be critical of.

In fact, you could say that Trump even knows what he did was wrong, or he would not have tried to pay off the porn star. That's still leagues better than Pete saying it is not wrong, and he's proud of it.

 

[pknopp]

The Bible teaches about divorce. A large number of Christians live counter to that teaching.

Live counter to that?

We just covered this... there is a huge difference between choosing to live continually in sin, and sinning and repenting. I assume you understand that.

So when you say "they live counter to that"... how?

The question isn't do people sin. All people sin.

The question is, do they repent or not?

Additionally, Divorce is a tricky type of sin, because there are people who would never divorce, but had a spouse that would not accept it.

We had this in my parents church. The woman simply refused to compromise on anything. In fact, we tried to give counseling, while the husband was begging to keep the marriage, as he really loved this woman. Nevertheless, she refused to talk to the church leadership, and we told her that until she repented, that she was not welcome at the church anymore.

He kept showing up there (she brought him to our church, but before was not a regular attendee), he did so to see if there was any way to repair the marriage, even after she divorced him.

So he is divorced.

But can you say he was living contrary to Biblical teaching? No. He never wanted a divorce. He fought as best he knew how to prevent it, and even to make it right after being divorced.

Further, can you say the church lived counter to Christianity? No. The church worked to prevent the divorce. They operated as best they could, to help repair the marriage. And when the woman refuse to submit to the authority of the church, they kicked her out as a non-believer, exactly as the Bible describes.

Lastly, let's talk about the woman herself. Our church no longer considers her a Christian. (this was some years ago now) So there are two possibilities. Either she is unrepentant, and thus is not a Christian.... or she is repentant and is.

We don't know where her heart is on this today. If she repents, then G-d is kind and just, to forgive sins of the repentant heart.

So she is either not a Christian, and living contrary to the Bible. Or she is living according to the Bible and is a Christian.

Thus, I disagree with your assessment that Christians live contrary to the Bible.

Now there are people who claims to be Christian, but are not.

Again, I just quoted you the passage.....

Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?'

Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' -Jesus​

What is the whole point of that passage? That people are going to say "I'm a Christian!" and yet do not live or follow the teachings of Christ.

When you see someone who lives crazy, and says "I'm a Christian"... what you are seeing is not that Christians don't follow the teachings of Christ... it's simply that you are seeing some who is not a Christian, but pretends to be.

An example I heard years ago... Sitting in a pew does not make you a Christian, anymore than sitting in your garage makes you a Mercedes.

I'll give you a simple example...... The Bible says that Christians are too pray for the peace of Israel, and that G-d will curse those who curse the Jews, and bless those that bless the Jews.

So every time you see someone who claims to be a Christian, and see them saying hateful things about Jews..... they are not Christians.

According to the Bible they are committing adultery if they remarry.

Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.”

Luke 16:18

It doesn't stop being adultery because you say "sorry".

Right, and I agree with that. It says you committed adultery. Yes. You did. But does that mean that you must divorce again, which is another sin? Does sinning twice, somehow cancel each other out?

And what if the other person has already remarried? Then what?

The Bible even says, that because of sexual sin, each person should have their own husband and wife.

But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.
1 Cor 7:2
​

Telling someone to stay single because of a divorce years ago, means that now they would be tempted into immorality. And we've seen this by the way, even in the church. Where a pastor says he'll just stay single, and then years later you find he's screwing someone from the church. Why? Because he tried to stay single, and was tempted into immorality.

So I am not of the opinion, that if you sin, and you end up marrying some girl who was divorced, that this means you are now required to sin yet again, by divorcing again. That just makes no sense to me.

Now ideally you should not marry a woman who divorced her husband without cause. I agree with that. On that point, your post is accurate and true.

But I do not believe in the catch 22 version of Christian, where you are damned to hell if you don't, and damned to hell if you do.

Doesn't mean you can go marry women who divorced without cause. But it also doesn't mean that those who have committed sin, are now doomed to hell no matter if they repent or not. I reject that ideology.

Your input serves to explain why there are so many different variations of Christianity.
However, I am curious about your last post.

You write only of marrying a woman who divorced without cause, but say nothing about a man who divorces a wife without cause. What if he is the one who has committed adultery?What if he divorces his innocent wife in order to marry the woman with whom he committed adultery? I would think that his second marriage would be invalid at its inception, as would the second marriage of a woman who divorced her first husband without cause, so there would be no second "sin" of divorce.

Is Newt Gingrich actually married? Is trump? Did each divorce his previous wife, or wives, because they committed adultery? Either both guys' first wives were adulterous hussies, or these two guys committed adultery, divorced innocent spouses, and then entered into sham "marriages," more than once.

So I tend to put myself into the example, and obviously I am not going to marry a man. However, I see nothing in scripture that somehow the rules are different between genders.

You are getting deeper into the weeds of this particular topic, and I'll openly admit to you that I am not a Ph.D in theology.

However, here is my best understanding:

The only time there is no sin of divorce, is when you divorce with cause. The man is sleeping around with other women, and has no intention of stopping. That is divorce with cause, and I believe the woman can walk away utterly blameless.

Another example, would be if you married under false pretense. So if the guy says he has never been married before, and the woman finds out he was married before, and divorced.... I believe that the woman can have the marriage annulled, and I believe the woman can walk away utterly blame before G-d.

However, if there is no cause... if the man loves his wife... and the man has no relations with any other woman (barring polygamy obviously), and he has remained faithful and true to his wife....

Then I do not believe that it is Biblical to divorce. Regardless of whatever mistakes and sins were committed prior to the marriage.... at the point of marriage did the person make a vow

"With this ring I thee wed, and all my worldly goods I thee endow. In sickness and in health, in poverty or in wealth, 'til death do us part."

If you made a vow, you should keep it. If you divorce, without cause, then there is sin. The solution to a first sin of divorce, is not a second sin of divorce.

The Bible does state when it is allowable to divorce. Even then though if you remarry or marry someone who has divorced you are committing adultery.

Is Newt Gingrich actually married? Is trump? Did each divorce his previous wife, or wives, because they committed adultery? Either both guys' first wives were adulterous hussies, or these two guys committed adultery, divorced innocent spouses, and then entered into sham "marriages," more than once.

Well first, Newt Gingrich is not Jesus Christ. Donald Trump is not Jesus Christ. There is only one pure model for what a Christian is, and how they should live. That's Jesus Christ.

But yet that is exactly what you expect out of Pete.

Second, I was never convinced that Donald Trump was even a Christian. I have no idea about Newt at all.

As far as, are they married? It seems to me that they are both married.

Whether their marriage is a sham or not, is impossible for me to say. I have no idea what their marriages are like, and I don't trust the opinion driven media to give me an answer in either direction.

Lastly, everyone knows Trump is bad with women. This was well established decades ago.

The difference between Trump and Pete, is that Trump isn't saying "I'm a Christian, and the Bible says what I'm doing is fine".

If Trump did say something as ridiculous, then I would be just as much a critic of that. Nor is Trump making up stuff like, salvation depends on being useful. Which I would also be critical of.

Again, Pete is speaking about himself. You can not in any way comment on what Pete says God has placed on him. He places different things on different people.

In fact, you could say that Trump even knows what he did was wrong, or he would not have tried to pay off the porn star. That's still leagues better than Pete saying it is not wrong, and he's proud of it.

Noted, committing adultery and then paying off a porn star is not as bad as Pete being in a loving committed relationship.

 

[Andylusion]

Live counter to that?

We just covered this... there is a huge difference between choosing to live continually in sin, and sinning and repenting. I assume you understand that.

So when you say "they live counter to that"... how?

The question isn't do people sin. All people sin.

The question is, do they repent or not?

Additionally, Divorce is a tricky type of sin, because there are people who would never divorce, but had a spouse that would not accept it.

We had this in my parents church. The woman simply refused to compromise on anything. In fact, we tried to give counseling, while the husband was begging to keep the marriage, as he really loved this woman. Nevertheless, she refused to talk to the church leadership, and we told her that until she repented, that she was not welcome at the church anymore.

He kept showing up there (she brought him to our church, but before was not a regular attendee), he did so to see if there was any way to repair the marriage, even after she divorced him.

So he is divorced.

But can you say he was living contrary to Biblical teaching? No. He never wanted a divorce. He fought as best he knew how to prevent it, and even to make it right after being divorced.

Further, can you say the church lived counter to Christianity? No. The church worked to prevent the divorce. They operated as best they could, to help repair the marriage. And when the woman refuse to submit to the authority of the church, they kicked her out as a non-believer, exactly as the Bible describes.

Lastly, let's talk about the woman herself. Our church no longer considers her a Christian. (this was some years ago now) So there are two possibilities. Either she is unrepentant, and thus is not a Christian.... or she is repentant and is.

We don't know where her heart is on this today. If she repents, then G-d is kind and just, to forgive sins of the repentant heart.

So she is either not a Christian, and living contrary to the Bible. Or she is living according to the Bible and is a Christian.

Thus, I disagree with your assessment that Christians live contrary to the Bible.

Now there are people who claims to be Christian, but are not.

Again, I just quoted you the passage.....

Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?'

Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' -Jesus​

What is the whole point of that passage? That people are going to say "I'm a Christian!" and yet do not live or follow the teachings of Christ.

When you see someone who lives crazy, and says "I'm a Christian"... what you are seeing is not that Christians don't follow the teachings of Christ... it's simply that you are seeing some who is not a Christian, but pretends to be.

An example I heard years ago... Sitting in a pew does not make you a Christian, anymore than sitting in your garage makes you a Mercedes.

I'll give you a simple example...... The Bible says that Christians are too pray for the peace of Israel, and that G-d will curse those who curse the Jews, and bless those that bless the Jews.

So every time you see someone who claims to be a Christian, and see them saying hateful things about Jews..... they are not Christians.

According to the Bible they are committing adultery if they remarry.

Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.”

Luke 16:18

It doesn't stop being adultery because you say "sorry".

Right, and I agree with that. It says you committed adultery. Yes. You did. But does that mean that you must divorce again, which is another sin? Does sinning twice, somehow cancel each other out?

And what if the other person has already remarried? Then what?

The Bible even says, that because of sexual sin, each person should have their own husband and wife.

But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.
1 Cor 7:2
​

Telling someone to stay single because of a divorce years ago, means that now they would be tempted into immorality. And we've seen this by the way, even in the church. Where a pastor says he'll just stay single, and then years later you find he's screwing someone from the church. Why? Because he tried to stay single, and was tempted into immorality.

So I am not of the opinion, that if you sin, and you end up marrying some girl who was divorced, that this means you are now required to sin yet again, by divorcing again. That just makes no sense to me.

Now ideally you should not marry a woman who divorced her husband without cause. I agree with that. On that point, your post is accurate and true.

But I do not believe in the catch 22 version of Christian, where you are damned to hell if you don't, and damned to hell if you do.

Doesn't mean you can go marry women who divorced without cause. But it also doesn't mean that those who have committed sin, are now doomed to hell no matter if they repent or not. I reject that ideology.

Your input serves to explain why there are so many different variations of Christianity.
However, I am curious about your last post.

You write only of marrying a woman who divorced without cause, but say nothing about a man who divorces a wife without cause. What if he is the one who has committed adultery?What if he divorces his innocent wife in order to marry the woman with whom he committed adultery? I would think that his second marriage would be invalid at its inception, as would the second marriage of a woman who divorced her first husband without cause, so there would be no second "sin" of divorce.

Is Newt Gingrich actually married? Is trump? Did each divorce his previous wife, or wives, because they committed adultery? Either both guys' first wives were adulterous hussies, or these two guys committed adultery, divorced innocent spouses, and then entered into sham "marriages," more than once.

So I tend to put myself into the example, and obviously I am not going to marry a man. However, I see nothing in scripture that somehow the rules are different between genders.

You are getting deeper into the weeds of this particular topic, and I'll openly admit to you that I am not a Ph.D in theology.

However, here is my best understanding:

The only time there is no sin of divorce, is when you divorce with cause. The man is sleeping around with other women, and has no intention of stopping. That is divorce with cause, and I believe the woman can walk away utterly blameless.

Another example, would be if you married under false pretense. So if the guy says he has never been married before, and the woman finds out he was married before, and divorced.... I believe that the woman can have the marriage annulled, and I believe the woman can walk away utterly blame before G-d.

However, if there is no cause... if the man loves his wife... and the man has no relations with any other woman (barring polygamy obviously), and he has remained faithful and true to his wife....

Then I do not believe that it is Biblical to divorce. Regardless of whatever mistakes and sins were committed prior to the marriage.... at the point of marriage did the person make a vow

"With this ring I thee wed, and all my worldly goods I thee endow. In sickness and in health, in poverty or in wealth, 'til death do us part."

If you made a vow, you should keep it. If you divorce, without cause, then there is sin. The solution to a first sin of divorce, is not a second sin of divorce.

The Bible does state when it is allowable to divorce. Even then though if you remarry or marry someone who has divorced you are committing adultery.

Is Newt Gingrich actually married? Is trump? Did each divorce his previous wife, or wives, because they committed adultery? Either both guys' first wives were adulterous hussies, or these two guys committed adultery, divorced innocent spouses, and then entered into sham "marriages," more than once.

Well first, Newt Gingrich is not Jesus Christ. Donald Trump is not Jesus Christ. There is only one pure model for what a Christian is, and how they should live. That's Jesus Christ.

But yet that is exactly what you expect out of Pete.

Second, I was never convinced that Donald Trump was even a Christian. I have no idea about Newt at all.

As far as, are they married? It seems to me that they are both married.

Whether their marriage is a sham or not, is impossible for me to say. I have no idea what their marriages are like, and I don't trust the opinion driven media to give me an answer in either direction.

Lastly, everyone knows Trump is bad with women. This was well established decades ago.

The difference between Trump and Pete, is that Trump isn't saying "I'm a Christian, and the Bible says what I'm doing is fine".

If Trump did say something as ridiculous, then I would be just as much a critic of that. Nor is Trump making up stuff like, salvation depends on being useful. Which I would also be critical of.

Again, Pete is speaking about himself. You can not in any way comment on what Pete says God has placed on him. He places different things on different people.

In fact, you could say that Trump even knows what he did was wrong, or he would not have tried to pay off the porn star. That's still leagues better than Pete saying it is not wrong, and he's proud of it.

Noted, committing adultery and then paying off a porn star is not as bad as Pete being in a loving committed relationship.

But yet that is exactly what you expect out of Pete.
Again, Pete is speaking about himself. You can not in any way comment on what Pete says God has placed on him. He places different things on different people.

No that is not exactly what I expect out of Pete.

There is a huge difference between a man who does what is evil, are not Christian.... verses a man who does what is evil, and tells everyone that G-d says it's fine.

Huge massive difference. I don't see Newt or Donald saying "Yeah I did this, and Jesus Christ is fine with it". Do you have any quotes like that? I will criticize either or both for that.

I have heard Trump for example post that people in power do this all the time. I thought he was an idiot when he said that, and still do.

But Trump did not say "yeah I screwed Stormy, and Jesus said that's ok". If he had said that, then I would clearly have a huge issue with that, just as much as Pete saying he's a gay Christian, and salvation is by deeds.

Let me give you another example from the other side:

If you go back and look at all my posts about Barnie Frank, the nearly all of them are about bad policies, and maybe a few referring to a prostitution ring he operated out of his Washington apartment.

However I never really cared that he was gay. I didn't care he had a male lover. In fact, I think this post right here, could be the first time I ever mentioned it. Why? Because I don't expect people who do not believe in the Christian faith, to follow the Christian faith.

Barnie Never claimed to be Christian, so I wouldn't expect him to follow a code of conduct he doesn't believe in.

Pete claims to be Christian, and he's very open about it, which is why he even said something like "salvation" is through being "useful". Salvation is not exclusively a Christian term, but pretty close.

When Pete claims to be Christian, but directly contradicts fundamentals of Christian faith, it is our duty to mark them and oppose them.

Noted, committing adultery and then paying off a porn star is not as bad as Pete being in a loving committed relationship.

If you do not claim that Christianity condones adultery and paying off a porn star, but you do claim that being in a loving committed homosexual relationship is acceptable to Christianity...... then the answer absolutely yes.

It is way worse to claim something is not sin in the Christian faith, than to do something that is sinful, and NOT claim Christianity accepts it. Way worse... by a wide margin.

One person is merely doing something that is wrong.

The other person is directly undermining the Christian faith. That is a million times worse. Yes, absolutely. You are entirely correct.