Romans 13, in full content.

[BULLDOG]

In that case, Mueller's investigation would be ordained of God. Why is Trump trying to stop God's will?

Because he's not a Godly man and doesn't respect God's authority and has authority of his own. I mean, why are you trying to hold Trump accountable to authority he doesn't recognize?

Trump is an atheist and believes in only his own authority.

So why are non believers saying he should be held accountable to God? I mean, aren't they advocating for a theocracy?

He is the one quoting scripture to justify his disgusting behavior. He should be judged by the same bible he is using.

Lots of people pay lip service to God. Dare I say all of us do at one time or another.

Yes, but someone who makes a point to misuse bible verses to justify their hateful behavior should be called on it

 

[hadit]

Conservatives claim it means government can do anything they want

In that case, Mueller's investigation would be ordained of God. Why is Trump trying to stop God's will?

Because he's not a Godly man and doesn't respect God's authority and has authority of his own. I mean, why are you trying to hold Trump accountable to authority he doesn't recognize?

Trump is an atheist and believes in only his own authority.

So why are non believers saying he should be held accountable to God? I mean, aren't they advocating for a theocracy?

He is the one quoting scripture to justify his disgusting behavior. He should be judged by the same bible he is using.

Every American politician quotes from the Bible. Are you going to hold them all accountable to it, or just Trump because reasons?

 

[ding]

Because he's not a Godly man and doesn't respect God's authority and has authority of his own. I mean, why are you trying to hold Trump accountable to authority he doesn't recognize?

Trump is an atheist and believes in only his own authority.

So why are non believers saying he should be held accountable to God? I mean, aren't they advocating for a theocracy?

He is the one quoting scripture to justify his disgusting behavior. He should be judged by the same bible he is using.

Lots of people pay lip service to God. Dare I say all of us do at one time or another.

Yes, but someone who makes a point to misuse bible verses to justify their hateful behavior should be called on it

There's an awful lot of that going on around here. I don't think there's enough time in the day to respond to it all.

 

[irosie91]

Picaro can attack me with his diploma mill education and will always be wrong about me.

And he does not comprehend scripture or have a real witness of our Lord and Savior.

Jake, as much a 'Christian' as he is a 'Republican' n stuff'. Still can't find us any verses Constantine rewrote along with the originals so we can all marvel at them.

I don't remember anyone suggesting that CONSTANTINE, HIMSELF. authored anything in the NT-------you are VERY
defensive, pic.

Well, nobody expects you to remember your own posts; you're just making up rubbish as you go along, same as Jake, so naturally you wouldn't remember what they hell you say about anything.

I remember-------I described CONSTANTINE as an "editor"-----
I never suggested that he WROTE THE BOOK. HOWEVER---
I will modify--------as to the compilation of the NT-----its contents
were INFLUENCED BY CONSTANTINE and THE POSITION
OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE. Try reading the book------It is OBVIOUS

So go ahead and list all those alleged 'changes', along with the originals. And of course you claimed he rewrote it.

We'll wait.

your demand is idiotic------the CONTENTS of the NT----included that which CONSTANTINE allowed------I did not say he WROTE
new stuff. The stuff written was written by serfs of the ROMAN EMPIRE. I am not even sure that Constantine, himself, was
literate. You got some of his writings, in his handwriting, signed and notarized? I have no doubt that the Pharisee Jesus was literate-----you got some of HIS stuff-----signed and notarized?
I do have a sense that Constantine's mother----Helen, was literate------but I have no samples of her writings.

 

[irosie91]

Many evangelicals are evangelical, Pharisaical in the sense that the put the Holy Bible up as an idol instead of concentrating on their relationship with Jesus.

Lean on the Lord is what those like Picaro need, and to live His Gospel intentionally instead of sounding goofy.

The term "PHARISAICAL" as DEFINED by the very ignorant sons and daughters of the first second and third REICHs------was invented by the same kind of people who use the terms --IN ARABIC KAFFIR AND NAJIS AND KHALB for jews and
Christians. For the record----KAFFIR is a person who conceals
and distorts truth, Najis is filth and Khalb is dog. Historically---
Pharisee means literate, scholarly and liberal in interpretation ---
like HILLEL

 

[hadit]

Paul wrote it to the Romans, describing his particular brand of Christianity. Some of his statements were the exact opposite of what Jesus had taught. Paul even called it his gospel instead of the gospel of Jesus and/or the 12 disciples.

That's correct as far as who wrote the Book of Romans and what the Book of Romans is (Paul's letters to the Romans).
I can assume you know who he was actually writing the letters to and why.

It's true the context of the letters and Paul's desires can shed some light on how the content of a verse pulled from the letters ...
May not accurately represent the entire picture.

.​

A direct contradiction with Jesus's teachings has nothing to do with context. The teachings are the same, or they aren't. I'm not talking about a different placement of a comma. I;m talking about directly opposite statements.

Have you an example?

Paul says:
Rom.13
[9] The commandments, "You shall not commit adultery, You shall not kill, You shall not steal, You shall not covet," and any other commandment, are summed up in this sentence, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

Jesus says:
Matt.22
[37] And he said to him, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.
[38] This is the great and first commandment.
[39] And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
[40] On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets.

Paul is summarizing the commandments having to do with our interpersonal relationships into one statement. He's not contradicting Jesus. Why would he in the first place? He referred Jesus.

 

[irosie91]

in fact---Paul is paraphrasing Jesus who paraphrased Hillel

 

[JakeStarkey]

The term "PHARISAICAL" as DEFINED by the very ignorant sons and daughters of the first second and third REICHs------was invented by the same kind of people who use the terms --IN ARABIC KAFFIR AND NAJIS AND KHALB for jews and
Christians. For the record----KAFFIR is a person who conceals
and distorts truth, Najis is filth and Khalb is dog. Historically---
Pharisee means literate, scholarly and liberal in interpretation ---
like HILLEL

You are literate and scholarly, irosie, unlike Picaro and ding.

The reason Pharisaical is a dirty term is not just because of the reichs' misinterpretations of it, but because the Pharisees, who knew better, corrupted their group because of their persecution of Jesus and his followers.

Christians today who persecute others over religious issues are often Pharisaical in their behavior.

Yes, they corrupt the term.

 

[irosie91]

The term "PHARISAICAL" as DEFINED by the very ignorant sons and daughters of the first second and third REICHs------was invented by the same kind of people who use the terms --IN ARABIC KAFFIR AND NAJIS AND KHALB for jews and
Christians. For the record----KAFFIR is a person who conceals
and distorts truth, Najis is filth and Khalb is dog. Historically---
Pharisee means literate, scholarly and liberal in interpretation ---
like HILLEL

You are literate and scholarly, irosie, unlike Picaro and ding.

The reason Pharisaical is a dirty term is not just because of the reichs' misinterpretations of it, but because the Pharisees, who knew better, corrupted their group because of their persecution of Jesus and his followers.

Christians today who persecute others over religious issues are often Pharisaical in their behavior.

Yes, they corrupt the term.

nope----read the book again and learn something about
the LIFE AND TIMES of jesus. ----the Pharisees did not
persecute Jesus------the ROMANS hated the Pharisees.
This I know----not because of some "jewish propaganda"
that I read------or because of some "Hebrew school" learning
or "synagogue learning" to which I was subjected. FACT is
that I had no JEWISH EDUCATION WHATSOEVER. It is because over time I learned about those times------on my own.
It became absolutely clear to me that JESUS WAS A PHARISEE and the people responsible for the making of Christianity needed
to make it ROMAN. Rome ruled the world at that time and
the ROMANS, some jews wanted to MELD INTO THE WORLD
and not spend eternity fighting its ALL POWERFUL government---
the only way to go was to ACCEPT ROMAN RULE. The Pharisees NEVER ACCEPTED SUBSERVIENCE TO ROME or
to the new ROMAN RELIGION---to wit---CHRISTIANITY. ----when young having made this "discovery"----I actually thought
I WAS UNIQUE-------I knew something no one else seemed to
know-------then LATER I came across the opinions of
REAL SCHOLARS-------sorry Charlie---Jesus was a Pharisee
in word and deed---------the anti-Pharisee crap is an AFTER
(ie after crucifixion) thought. The romans did not crucify people as a FAVOR TO JEWS-----they crucified their own enemies-----
MOSTLY PHARISEES. The "anti-Pharisee" crap is 100% ROMAN. A famous PHARISEE who caved into rome (ostensibly) was JOSEPHUS FLAVIUS. Lots of Christians
tried DESPERATELY to "get him to convert to Christianity
POSTHUMOUSLY" You have SWALLOWED A VERY BIG
LIE

 

[JakeStarkey]

irosie, you can yell all you want. Yes, Jesus would have been a Pharisee, and most of them turned on Him: not all, but most.

The NT contradicts you.

 

[irosie91]

irosie, you can yell all you want. Yes, Jesus would have been a Pharisee, and most of them turned on Him: not all, but most.

The NT contradicts you.

name the "most" who "turned" on him----ie the ONES who got him crucified ----not ALL of them-----just, let's say 10----or even just five.
While you are at it-----try to find another example of JEW CRUCIFIED AS A FAVOR TO PHARISEES

 

[JakeStarkey]

OK, you admit 'some' Pharisees were part of the hit committee on Jesus, then.

Good. Why then is Pharisaical today a bad term to describe hypocrites to the faith?

You know I am not quarreling with you, only trying to understand your point of view.

 

[irosie91]

Many evangelicals are evangelical, Pharisaical in the sense that the put the Holy Bible up as an idol instead of concentrating on their relationship with Jesus.

Lean on the Lord is what those like Picaro need, and to live His Gospel intentionally instead of sounding goofy.

The term "PHARISAICAL" as DEFINED by the very ignorant sons and daughters of the first second and third REICHs------was invented by the same kind of people who use the terms --IN ARABIC KAFFIR AND NAJIS AND KHALB for jews and
Christians. For the record----KAFFIR is a person who conceals
and distorts truth, Najis is filth and Khalb is dog. Historically---
Pharisee means literate, scholarly and liberal in interpretation ---
like HILLEL

Picaro------funny, idiotic and stupid

 

[Picaro]

in fact---Paul is paraphrasing Jesus who paraphrased Hillel

Actually Jesus' entire ministry was built around Moses and the Torah. It's understandable how the ignorant wouldn't know that.

Now please do cite all the stuff Constantine rewrote in the NT, but somehow left the OT entirely alone n stuff? We're all waiting for these fascinating historical revelations of yours.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Many evangelicals are evangelical, Pharisaical in the sense that the put the Holy Bible up as an idol instead of concentrating on their relationship with Jesus.

Lean on the Lord is what those like Picaro need, and to live His Gospel intentionally instead of sounding goofy.

The term "PHARISAICAL" as DEFINED by the very ignorant sons and daughters of the first second and third REICHs------was invented by the same kind of people who use the terms --IN ARABIC KAFFIR AND NAJIS AND KHALB for jews and
Christians. For the record----KAFFIR is a person who conceals
and distorts truth, Najis is filth and Khalb is dog. Historically---
Pharisee means literate, scholarly and liberal in interpretation ---
like HILLEL

Picaro------funny, idiotic and stupid

"Funny" in the head: he is a very disturbed individual emotionally.

 

[irosie91]

OK, you admit 'some' Pharisees were part of the hit committee on Jesus, then.

Good. Why then is Pharisaical today a bad term to describe hypocrites to the faith?

You know I am not quarreling with you, only trying to understand your point of view.

try again AT NO POINT did I "admit" that 'some Pharisees"
were part of the "HIT" committee-------I simply asked you to name
a few

 

[JakeStarkey]

OK, you admit 'some' Pharisees were part of the hit committee on Jesus, then.

Good. Why then is Pharisaical today a bad term to describe hypocrites to the faith?

You know I am not quarreling with you, only trying to understand your point of view.

try again AT NO POINT did I "admit" that 'some Pharisees"
were part of the "HIT" committee-------I simply asked you to name
a few

You know "some" did just that.

 

[irosie91]

in fact---Paul is paraphrasing Jesus who paraphrased Hillel

Actually Jesus' entire ministry was built around Moses and the Torah. It's understandably how the ignorant wouldn't know that.

Now please do cite all the stuff Constantine rewrote in the NT, but somehow left the OT entirely alone n stuff? We're all waiting for these fascinating historical revelations of yours.

for the record----fellows in cyberspace------Pic is playing his usual shit-------AT NO POINT did I say that Constantine REWROTE
anything-------I CORRECTLY STATED THAT HE SPONSORED and therefore influenced the compilation of the NT----he was THE
KING

 

[irosie91]

OK, you admit 'some' Pharisees were part of the hit committee on Jesus, then.

Good. Why then is Pharisaical today a bad term to describe hypocrites to the faith?

You know I am not quarreling with you, only trying to understand your point of view.

try again AT NO POINT did I "admit" that 'some Pharisees"
were part of the "HIT" committee-------I simply asked you to name
a few[ QUOTE]

You know "some" did just that.

ok ----you cannot name ten-----name three

 

[Picaro]

Many libs and cons are Christian, and quite a few cons would use government to enforce their religious practice in the public square.

Many, such as Picaro and ding, claim a relationship with Him that is not evident in their writings here.

I have never made any such claim, Jake. My interest is entirely historical and cultural. Yours is merely trolling. Almost all the attacks on Christianity come form sexual deviants, pedophiles, sociopaths, and mindless self-indulgent lunatics, not genuine agnostics or 'rationalists'. It is also a lot of fun reading mentally ill degenerates rewriting it, and failing to even grasp the basics, like yourself. Christians are simply a far better influence on law, society, and and life in general than you emotionally sick whiney little blood-thirsty pagan neurotics. It's that simple.