What Does It Mean To Be Carnally Minded?

[Antlerman]

I do not see it as ridiculous at all. It represents the fact that laws are used to set a standard because not all have standards in their own heart. The Bible says the same that the Law is not for a righteous man, but for whoremongers, murderers etc. When a person is able to hear and listen to the inner voice of God, they no longer need to written law. But, we all have experienced times when we were not in a hearing place and just living our lives selfishly with no regard for others. This is when having a book like the Bible can bring us back to what is right and good.

I said the word nonsense. You heard the word "ridiculous". In using irresponsible behavior as an analogy to standards of morality in someone's heart in not a good analogy. If you re-read what I've said above you'll see this difference explained more clearly. I'm sorry if my choice of the word nonsense put you on the defense. You should try to use examples that are not quite so extreme and irrelevant to what we're talking about. That example reminds me of the argument that people will say when they hear I don't believe in God, "Well, what's going to keep you from just going out and killing someone?" That's a nonsense argument too. It's using exteme emotional examples that have no relevance.

 

Again, please reread what I said above about enforced laws. I spoke at lenght to this already in the post you seemed to skipped over after hearing me respond with a dismissive tone to your analogy of drunk drivers.

 

I totally disagree over the adultary thing unless you think what you want to do for yourself is more important than the committments you make in life. Keeping your word even when it is not what you want is what makes us of value to the world and ourselves.

Again, reread what I said about the complexity of these situation. I did address wanton selfishness in there, but then explained how what you are saying above is a huge oversimplification of things. Even in your response here above this, it shows it all as just a 'simple choice'. It's not. And it's this 'putting people into a box along with God" approach to real life that I feel fails miserably to help people. It may make society feel good to have people superficially following the rules in order to please society, but when it comes to personal matters of emotions and human relations, it get extremely complex.

 

Again, you're trying to say that I feel commitment is unimportant. Re-read my post.

 

Keeping your word? What about making mistakes? So what if someone made a mistake in the choice to marry, they should then continue to live unhappily with that other person? Who do you think is served by that? The spouse the person is forced to stay with? It's an insincere marriage. The marriage is a lie. You cant force someone to love! To me both the husband and wife at that point are being hurt - every single day for the rest of their lives living together. It becomes either a living hell or living half-alive. Wouldn't you think it would be better for the spouse to have been supported by friends to work through their grief and move on with their life, and then actually find someone who genuinely loves them?? Where every day they get up and their spouse makes them feel important to them, feel loved, respected, appreciated, valuable, and special? Where their lives are now happy after having come out on the other side of loss?

 

I'm not minimizing the importance of committment in marriage. Not at all. But according to your approach, obeying the LAW of God is more important than living sincerely. It's that which makes me convinced it isn't the law of God at all, but the law of men. And by men in this case I actually mean the gender male.

 

In my scenario, which has more heart, and which doesn't? Which reflects the support of God in the human experience, and which doesn’t? Is God Love, or Rules? To me, rules created by love are the rules of God. The scenario of being forced to live in an insincere marriage is not rules created by love at all - but selfishness itself. (You should do some study on the history of marriage to see that it's really more about protecting property rights).

 

Again, let’s not bring up axe murderers as counter examples. We’re talking about the majority of people who don’t need jail cells.

[sojourner]

The law is given to point out whats wrong not encourage what is not imo

hence it is unable to change a persons heart, only condemn never give life

 

Antlerman

 

the way you would deal with marraiges and adultery and such is the way the church my husband is currently on staff at deals with it. However, it has taken years for changes to come as the pastor was raised with a very strict to the letter of the law background if you will. He has come to see though that as Gene Edwards says in 'A Tale of Three Kings', 'policies are for lazy Kings' in that leaders that just want pat answers and not to be involoved with their congregations will just stand on a rule for everyone. But a leader whose heart is tender, who loves the people will listen to them, seek wisdom for each case and point them to healing and love.

 

just my two cents

 

sojourner

[Grandpa Harley]

With due respect... Every church claims to handle things that way, but the reality is nearly always radically different. The only reason I give the claim any credence is that the normal distribution curve has an extreme far end...

 

My experience, from my seat outside Gethsemane is akin to this...

 

"Oh, by the way, did y’all know that Scott and I had a baby together? Yeah? Did y’know that he’s 16 years older than me? How about the fact that he’d start yelling at me and telling me how he didn’t want to be with me, WHILE I was pregnant? Did you know that the baby died? Did you know that he dumped me two weeks later?

 

Oh, wait wait, I’ve got one. DID YOU KNOW, that I got kicked out of that church that so many of y’all go to… you know, the big white one shaped like a box in the middle of the field, it’s called Eagle, by the way, back when I was pregnant? Did you know that they told Scott to stay? Oh, I’m sorry, I guess I wasn’t so much “kicked out†as I was “asked to leave by the leadershipâ€. And apparently it wasn’t “because I was pregnantâ€, it was because College Park was supposed to have had more resources to help me “make my decision.†But Scott was told to STAY. Why? Well, they felt like we shouldn’t be together. See, their thought on the matter was that I should put my son up for adoption, and never speak to Scott again. Now, don’t get me wrong, I think never speaking to Scott again part was a great idea. In fact, it was SUCH a good idea, that I’ve recently decided to make it my own. But they felt that I should leave, because College Park would have more resources to help me, and would be more able to convince me to put Weslee up for adoption.

 

His name, by the way, was Weslee. Yeah, he had a name. And I was incredibly excited to be having him.

 

Oh, and College Park DIDN’T try to convince me to put him up for adoption. Just a plug for old CP.

 

Anyway, I’m sure that all of that had NOTHING to do with the fact that if people saw Scott, by himself, they wouldn’t have any idea that he had impregnated a 23 year old woman. But if they saw a single, pregnant 23 year old walking around with him? They’d probably wonder.

 

And I’m SURE that’s not why Scott went ahead and stayed.

 

Did you know, by the way, that the worship pastor there yelled in my face about how my son’s father didn’t love me and that he wasn’t going to marry me, that I was just trying to make excuses for myself and justify my bad behavior, when I came to him and asked him if the leadership could please speak to me directly instead of giving me commands through my friends? And did you know, that he did this when I was four months pregnant? Did you know that he, then, turned around and told my friends that I had actually yelled at HIM, and that he had “spoken a little angrily†to me, but that I’d PROVOKED him? Yes, apparently, it’s just too much to ask the leadership of a church to speak to you directly. It’s far too bold. Especially if you are a 23 year old single pregnant woman.

 

Did you know that my friends believed him?

 

What a shock that I lost the baby a month and a half later.

 

What a compound shock that his father didn’t stick around. I mean, that’s amazing. Scott’s such a nice guy, isn’t he?

 

I don’t go there anymore, and no, I don’t speak to him. In fact, now? I’m dating a wonderful man who is incredibly kind to me. And I’m on birth control. I guess we all learn something from the shit that happens in our lives, don’t we? I go to a church that, while it has its quirks, I like and feel welcomed in. And those friends, who believed that worship pastor? They stopped speaking to me about a year ago. I don’t know for SURE why, but as I understand it, it’s most likely because they didn’t approve of my church and they didn’t think that I should date my current boyfriend.

 

They have never, by the way, met him.

 

So, anyway, dear friends and former co-workers, if you’d like something to talk about, you are MORE THAN WELCOME to talk about all of that. I can give you some more, too, if you give me a little time.

 

Hey, I don’t mind if people gossip about me behind my back. Hell, I’m even a little flattered! I just don’t want y’all to have misinformation.

 

=)"

 

Welcome to the world I inhabit... in the places where the Passover moon hangs fat over the olive groves and another soul waits for the Romans, alone, in pain, and not looking for judgment, since anything handed out by others is NOTHING compared to what you hand down to yourself... That's just one of my friends... their tale is both totally unique and a hauntingly familiar refrain... positively common... but the dark is no place for 'the faithful'... and harlots are always best cast out...

 

Think you see why I find your tale hard to take without a pinch of salt, and why proselytizers are, to me, little better than venomous reptiles...

[Kratos]

GH,

 

I am not sure specifically what part of I Tim. 2 you are refering to, but the whole chapter speaks about how God has ordered His Kingdom. In order for any group of individuals to function there must be order. Take the military for an example. If every individual soldier does whatever they think is right, the army would easily be defeated to the destruction of all. This does not mean that the seargent is a better person than the private. It does not mean that the captain is always right and the seargent always wrong. It just means that one is over the other for the sake of order.

 

Kratos

[Kratos]

AM,

 

Now we are getting down to some major differences in how we see life. Adam is a type of a man who shooses his own life over what is expected of him by God. He chose the tree of his own knowledge of what is right and good over the tree of life where God sets the standard. The temptation that he listened to is real. You can be your own God by being your own arbiter of what is right.

 

Jesus came as the second Adam to teach the opposite reaction to what God calls good. Jesus came not to do what He thought was right, but to die to his will and live to God's will.

 

According to the Bible, choosing your own life is the path to spiritual death and dying to your own will for God's is the path to spiritual life.

 

I have been married twice and have two children one from each of my two marriages. I married my first wife at 19 and went off to college. Not long after my daughter was born in our 6th yer of marriage, I met someone who I felt I loved and told my wife that I no longer loved her and wanted a divorce. So, we got one and I have worked ever since to help my now 27 year old daughter to deal with my selfishness.

 

I became a Christian not long after the end of my first marriage and a few years later met my current wife and got married. Again, after about 5 years my son was born. Again, a few years later, I met someone else and seriously considered going the same way. However, this time, I knew that I had to die to what I wanted so others could live. This time, I knew that love was a choice and God would not command a husband to love their wife if it was not in my power to do so. Therefore, I ruled over my soul by my spirit and commanded myself to obey God and love my wife.

 

That was over 10 years ago and we are still married and in love and our son is now 15 and very well adjusted. The enemy still tells people that they should be their own God and do what feels right. He tells them that they will either fall in or out of love, but it is not in our power to choose. It is a lie. We can by our spirit rule over our soul and bring our mind and will and emotions into submission to God's will. As sons of God we have been given that power as partakers of the new creation second Adam anointing.

 

This is real life. This is not a sermon on papaer or out of a book.

 

Kratos

[mwc]

I do not see it as ridiculous at all. It represents the fact that laws are used to set a standard because not all have standards in their own heart. The Bible says the same that the Law is not for a righteous man, but for whoremongers, murderers etc. When a person is able to hear and listen to the inner voice of God, they no longer need to written law. But, we all have experienced times when we were not in a hearing place and just living our lives selfishly with no regard for others. This is when having a book like the Bible can bring us back to what is right and good.

Unfortunately, what you're saying really isn't biblical but you're trying ever so hard to make it so...

 

Jeremiah 31

 

33 But this is the agreement which I will make with the people of Israel after those days, says the Lord; I will put my law in their inner parts, writing it in their hearts; and I will be their God, and they will be my people. 34 And no longer will they be teaching every man his neighbour and every man his brother, saying, Get knowledge of the Lord: for they will all have knowledge of me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord: for they will have my forgiveness for their evil-doing, and their sin will go from my memory for ever.

The new covenant will be in everyone's "hearts." You keep trying to say something similar to this. So far so good I guess but it's the next part where you are amiss. "...saying, Get knowledge of the Lord: for they will all have knowledge of me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord..." And yet here you are telling us (and it seems others) to "get knowledge" and then you procede to say how to go about it. This violates the new covenant.

 

You're also saying that the "righteous man" is all set but the "whoremongers, murderers etc." are not but re-read my quote verses and see that "from the least of them to the greatest of them" have knowledge not just the righteous as you're erroneously telling us (in violation of the new covenant).

 

Also note that the new covenant is not voluntary and it is not optional. There is not "free will" aspect to it. The law is written into everyone's hearts and the knowledge is there. At which point no one has to be made aware of it and no one has to be taught of "god" or his rules. There is not some outside spirit or force that inhabits us but simply a knowledge of "god," like an instinct, that exists in all people. Since we are having this discussion this knowledge obviously is not universal since you are trying to explain to us (your neighbors/brothers) your knowledge of "the lord" and this same discussion goes on each and every day around the world. If the new covenant was truly within all of us we wouldn't need to do any of this but, in doing it, we'd realize we were violating the new covenant and stop.

 

But of course this agreement is only for Israel and not the Gentiles. So perhaps there is a new new covenant for them that requires a haphazard form of communication? That seems a bit odd considering this rather elegant solution that is presented in Jeremiah.

 

Oh well, I'm sure you'll have a very interesting explanation as to why Jeremiah, and I, are mistaken and Paul and yourself are correct (I imagine it will involve invisible "god" breath cohabitating within my body by invitation only to reveal to me bits and pieces of a larger puzzle instead of "god" simply placing knowledge into my brain as the plain reading of the text states...but I could be wrong)

 

mwc

[Kratos]

A covenant or contract must be agreed to by both parties or it is void. The written law is still fulfilling its purpose to bring the lost to Christ as their schoolmaster. Once you come to Christ, the law is removed and the New Covenant comes into effect with the law written in your heart. It does not work if the Holy Spirit has not come to dwell within you and if your spirit is still dead in trespasses and sins.

[mwc]

A covenant or contract must be agreed to by both parties or it is void. The written law is still fulfilling its purpose to bring the lost to Christ as their schoolmaster. Once you come to Christ, the law is removed and the New Covenant comes into effect with the law written in your heart. It does not work if the Holy Spirit has not come to dwell within you and if your spirit is still dead in trespasses and sins.

First I will admit to being wrong on the reason you offered. I took a shot.

 

Second, since covenants must be agreed to then I'm not bound by anything and I'm not a sinner. I can't break any laws I haven't agreed to be bound by since you state the agreement is mutual or it is void. So anyone who doesn't put themselves under either if these covenants are free and clear. It's only those who agree to be bound, and remain bound, that can have issues.

 

For example, if the government tells me that I may only drive 55mph on a stretch of road or I will get a ticket. However, this restriction only applies if both the government and I both agree to the terms otherwise the whole things is null and void. So I can choose to drive 55mph or I can simply do as I wish. I choose to do as I wish and drive 55mph, 75mph or 100mph. Since I never agreed to their law I should get no tickets no matter what speed I drive. I look at the road conditions and use my judgment to set the best speed. If I should choose poorly I pay the price.

 

In the same vein you're telling me that if you agree to the law you must drive 55mph and you will do so because there are signs all over the place telling you the speed limit. Once you accept the new deal the signs will be removed from the road but you will still drive 55mph because now a little transmitter placed into your ear will simply repeat the speed limit to you over and over again. It doesn't matter what the conditions of the road are or anything else. One size fits all and you must drive that speed.

 

mwc

[Grandpa Harley]

GH,

 

I am not sure specifically what part of I Tim. 2 you are refering to, but the whole chapter speaks about how God has ordered His Kingdom. In order for any group of individuals to function there must be order. Take the military for an example. If every individual soldier does whatever they think is right, the army would easily be defeated to the destruction of all. This does not mean that the seargent is a better person than the private. It does not mean that the captain is always right and the seargent always wrong. It just means that one is over the other for the sake of order.

 

Kratos

 

You work hard ad being disingenuous, or you really are very dumb...

 

Does nothing in 1 Tim 2 strike you as, perhaps, a little 'off'? Maybe not applicable to the modern world? Hmmm, just maybe? Hmmmm? Just a touch? Hmmmm.... I'm here regularly, so I can wait for you to drag your zealot arse into the 21st Century...

[Kratos]

I am neither dumb or disingenuous. Am I to assume you refer to the relationship between men and women? There are a ton of things that are mentioned in the Bible that are not popular to modern society. What is the point. Is it that God has not stayed current with the times or that man no longer recognizes the way that God sees things as valid?

[Kratos]

MWC,

 

When you apply for and accept a driver's license, you agree to obey the rules of the road and accept the consequences of not doing so.

 

As far as the law of God, all I can do is answer by what is revealed in scripture which you are well versed in. Romans 1 says that He has revealed Himself to everyone who is made so they are without excuse. I do not believe in the Catholic doctrine of "original sin". The Bible does not teach that we all die because of Adam's sin as it is often taught. Adam sinned and died spiritually and became a partaker of a sin nature. As with other traits like hair color etc. we inherit from our parents their traits. This has nothing to do with agreeing or not agreeing with God's law. Paul said that he was alive once, but when the law came it slew him. The reason we must be born again is because we were alive spiritually once and need to be re-born spiritually and not just born spiritually. I believe that children are born with a relationship with God. He reveals His law of right and wrong to all of us when we are old enough to understand and when the sin nature that we have responds with disobedience, we die spiritually like our first parents did. Not for their sin, but for our own like they did.

 

So, you knew what was right and wrong when you chose wrong and reaped your won consequence. You knew what you were doing and did it anyway. You understood the deal and chose to bear the consequences for choosing your own will over His. But, the good news is that you can still choose to follow the second Adam and choose life over death.

 

Kratos

[dr_funkenstein]

Kratos:

 

As far as the law of Zeus, all I can do is answer by what is revealed in scripture which you are well versed in. Romans 1 says that Zeus has revealed Himself to everyone who is made so they are without excuse... I believe that children are born with a relationship with Zeus. Zeus reveals His law of right and wrong to all of us when we are old enough to understand... So, you knew what was right and wrong when you chose wrong and reaped your won consequence. You knew what you were doing and did it anyway. You understood the deal and chose to bear the consequences for choosing your own will over Zeus's. But, the good news is that you can still choose to follow Heracles and choose life over death.

 

Do you see the folly yet?

[Mythra]

He won't get it, Funk. Nor will he get this:

 

You believe that the Bible is the literal (or inspired) word of God and that Jesus is the Son of God-and you believe these propositions because you think they are true, not merely because they make you feel good. You may wonder how it is possible for a person like myself to find these sorts of assertions ridiculous. While it is famously difficult for atheists and believers to communicate about these matters, I am confident that I can give you a very clear sense of what it feels like to be an atheist.Consider: every devout Muslim has the same reasons for being a Muslim that you now have for being a Christian. And yet, you know exactly what it is like not to find these reasons compelling. On virtually every page, the Qur'an declares that it is the perfect word of the Creator of the universe. Muslims believe this as fully as you believe the Bible's account of itself. There is a vast literature describing the life of Muhammad that, from the Muslim point of view, proves his unique status as the Prophet of God. While Muhammad did not claim to be divine, he claimed to offer the most perfect revelation of God's will. He also assured his followers that Jesus was not divine (Qur'an 5:71-75; 19:30-38) and that anyone who believed otherwise would spend eternity in hell. Muslims are convinced that Muhammad's pronouncements on these subjects, as on all others, are infallible.

Why don't you find these claims convincing? Why don't you lose any sleep over whether or not you should convert to Islam? Please take a moment to reflect on this. You know exactly what it is like to be an atheist with respect to Islam. Isn't it obvious that Muslims are not being honest in their evaluation of the evidence? Isn't it obvious that anyone who thinks that the Qur'an is the perfect word of the Creator of the universe has not read the book very critically? Isn't it obvious that Muslims have developed a mode of discourse that seeks to preserve dogma, generation after generation, rather than question it? Yes, these things are obvious. Understand that the way you view Islam is precisely the way every Muslim views Christianity. And it is the way I view all religions. Sam Harris, Reply to a Christian

[Mythra]

The reason we must be born again is because we were alive spiritually once and need to be re-born spiritually and not just born spiritually.

 

Interesting choice of passages. John chapter 3. Jesus' little talk with Nicodemus. The discussion that works in the Greek language, because of the double entendre of "born from above" "born a second time". And hence, Nicodemus' confusion and Jesus' necessity to explain.

 

Unfortunately, the phrase doesn't work in Aramaic. And there isn't a NT scholar in the world who believes that Jesus would have had a discussion with a ruler of the Pharisees and conversed in Greek.

 

The passage is inauthentic. This little talk between Jesus and Nicodemus could not have happened as recorded. It is an attempt at a clever literary construct by whoever wrote the gospel of John - most likely in the early part of the second century CE.

 

Don't get me wrong, Kratos. You're welcome to assert anything you want. It just won't work here at Ex-C.

 

Perhaps if you prayed and fasted, Jesus would help you come up with better examples.

 

Or you might think about sacrificing a goat.

[Kratos]

Please do not be condescending with me. I am just sharing what I believe as you are sharing what you believe. I do not think that you are too stupid to understand what I believe, I just understand that you disagree. Neither am I too stupid to understand what you believe. I have no comprehension problems getting what it is like to not believe what other's believe. I am not trying to convince anyone nor convert anyone. I am just answering questions posted to me. If you believe that Zeus said those things then I believe that you believe that. I do not think that the fact that you believe that means that you do not "get" what I am saying. I think you are wrong as you think I am wrong. No problem here. Are you such zealots that the only reason you can conceive of another disagreeing is thinking that they do not understand what you are saying?

[dr_funkenstein]

If you believe that Zeus said those things then I believe that you believe that.

Mythra - you were right. He didn't get it.

 

Kratos: you missed the point I was making in a spectacularly idiotic way. By replacing the word God with Zeus and "The New Adam" with Heracles I was trying to get you to realize a really important point.

 

How would you feel if someone came up to you and said those things, but about Zeus? I'm sure outwardly you would be respectful and say that they have the right to believe what they believe but that you don't believe in Zeus thankyou very much. But internally, you would be thinking "is this guy serious? Who the hell believes in Zeus anymore?"

 

You are an atheist, Kratos!

 

You are an atheist with respect to Zeus!

 

When someone preaches to you about Zeus, it sounds ridiculous.

 

But all I've done is replace the word God with Zeus...

[Mythra]

I don't believe this. Did you really follow this post:

 

So, you knew what was right and wrong when you chose wrong and reaped your won consequence. You knew what you were doing and did it anyway. You understood the deal and chose to bear the consequences for choosing your own will over His. But, the good news is that you can still choose to follow the second Adam and choose life over death.

 

with this:

 

I am not trying to convince anyone nor convert anyone

 

 

wowie.

[Ouroboros]

But all I've done is replace the word God with Zeus...

"For Zeus so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son Hercules, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

[Kratos]

Dr. Funk,

 

I knew what you were doing, but showed that it is your business is all. I would feel no different if someone said they believed in Zeus or Allah or Bhudda or were an atheist. I would believe that it is their business and not what I believe. I do not think anyone is foolish or laughable for their beliefs. I just believe differently.

 

Mythra,

 

I was answering the question posed to me about whether a person can be held responsible for disobeying a law they never agreed to follow. You can tell the traffic cop that you did not know what the speed limit was, but he knows that you did and just chose to do what you wanted instead. I believe that the key to understanding is to answer honestly regardless of whether you think your answer will be received. This is not trying to convert others.

 

Kratos

[dr_funkenstein]

Dr. Funk,

 

I knew what you were doing, but showed that it is your business is all. I would feel no different if someone said they believed in Zeus or Allah or Bhudda or were an atheist. I would believe that it is their business and not what I believe. I do not think anyone is foolish or laughable for their beliefs. I just believe differently.

 

It's not to say that you would think them foolish or laughable - the mere fact that you do not believe in Zeus makes you an atheist with respect to Zeus and his divine son Heracles.

 

So if someone proclaimed to you that you needed to be saved from the depths of Hades by believing in the free gift offered by Zeus through the sacrifice made by, and example set by, his son Heracles, on what basis would you reject that message?

 

Furthermore, what if they said to you: "think of what you've got to lose if I'm right! Hades is a terrible place, and so you should make a safe bet and just worship Zeus. That way, even if I'm wrong, you've lost nothing!"

 

Zeus loves you! Zeus made you! Zeus wants to have a relationship with you! Read the stories of the life of Heracles and do your best to follow his example!

 

How would you answer such a person?

[dr_funkenstein]

This is not trying to convert others.

 

"I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the father but by me."

 

Didn't Christ say that?

 

"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you."

 

Didn't Christ say that?

 

"whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son."

 

Didn't Christ say that?

 

So if everyone who has not believed in Jesus stands condemned already, and Jesus himself has commanded his followers to go and make disciples of everyone in the world, and there is no other way to escape this condemnation but through Jesus... then why the hell aren't you trying to convert us?

 

Or are you...

[mwc]

When you apply for and accept a driver's license, you agree to obey the rules of the road and accept the consequences of not doing so.

I was hoping you'd say that.

 

As far as the law of God, all I can do is answer by what is revealed in scripture which you are well versed in. Romans 1 says that He has revealed Himself to everyone who is made so they are without excuse.

Compare to the driver license concept above. Purely opt-in. Did I opt-in to life? By being born and taking a look around according to Romans 1 this makes me liable under the law. You said that the covenant had to be fully agreed upon by both parties in order to be binding but Romans makes it clear that I am bound to some conditions whether I like it or not simply by being here.

 

I do not believe in the Catholic doctrine of "original sin". The Bible does not teach that we all die because of Adam's sin as it is often taught. Adam sinned and died spiritually and became a partaker of a sin nature. As with other traits like hair color etc. we inherit from our parents their traits. This has nothing to do with agreeing or not agreeing with God's law.

You don't agree with "original sin" in that it damns you to a literal hell but you agree with a variation of the concept. What "Adam" did casts a long shadow and we're all affected whether we actually were there to actively participate or not. We've become "tainted" like it or not.

 

Paul said that he was alive once, but when the law came it slew him.

And King David (among others) said the Law was a blessing that brought him closer to "god." So? Why should I choose to believe Paul, who corrupted the words of those in the OT, as opposed to those in the OT themselves? Why should I choose to believe Paul when the "god" of the OT also said the Law was for that very same purpose? Why should I believe Paul when he disagrees even with the jesus of the NT? Why should I believe Paul at all? Because he allows the Law to be altered/removed at the whim of men who don't wish to be under it?

 

The reason we must be born again is because we were alive spiritually once and need to be re-born spiritually and not just born spiritually. I believe that children are born with a relationship with God. He reveals His law of right and wrong to all of us when we are old enough to understand and when the sin nature that we have responds with disobedience, we die spiritually like our first parents did. Not for their sin, but for our own like they did.

So children have a spiritual relationship with "god?" That means that they are under the new deal. They must have then agreed to the terms prior to birth as the deal is only binding if both parties agree to it since "god" will not force the agreement on people who do not want it (according to what you've said). Where is the evidence that this has occurred? The NT states that xians should raise their children up so that they will continue in the proper ways. This would not be the case for someone under the new deal that had the Law written into their hearts. In fact, the children could be our (the old folks) teachers but children possess no knowledge of any "god" and would fall right into the atheist category. Also, anyone who watches children know they are not aware of right and wrong but must be taught which also shows they aren't part of the new deal you speak of.

 

As far as an age of understand goes that age is any age. If the Law is in our hearts it would be a part of our nature as you claim "sin" is right now. It would come as easy as breathing (see? I used a "spirit" word...a pun). No need to wait for any age. That's an excuse to justify why the whole thing simply isn't working like it's supposed to.

 

So, you knew what was right and wrong when you chose wrong and reaped your won consequence. You knew what you were doing and did it anyway. You understood the deal and chose to bear the consequences for choosing your own will over His. But, the good news is that you can still choose to follow the second Adam and choose life over death.

What you're claiming is that when I was a little child way back when that I actually had a "spirit" connection to "god." This is the same connection I am trying to restore to this day. Then I made a bad baby choice and lost the connection. But this connection is supposed to help me make perfect choices from what I understand so how did I choose poorly? How did my baby brain know I was making such a horrific error? So by making my own decisions (horror of horrors) I lost this wonderful connection that didn't seem to do anything for me anyway. But now I can gain that connection back again but I can still lose it if I decide to make my own choices. If I do get this connection back I can get magic messages that are flashes of light that tell me bits and pieces of messages that I might be able to decode using my own mind which I can double-check using a book that already has the messages already printed out in them. If my decoded message agrees with what's already in the book then I got the correct message and I am good to go. Now I have "life" but since there is no real "down side" (aka hell) other than I might, maybe, perhaps have to wallow in my own crapulence while I am alive for this short-ish life and, whether I have life or not, there's no guaranty that my life will be better crap-wise than anyone else's it really makes no difference if I get this connection to "god" or not now does it?

 

mwc

[Grandpa Harley]

IF you believe 1 Tim 2:11 et seq is 'the will of god' then I'd not care to be married to you, and if one of your sons approached one of my God-daughters I'm afraid I'd have to introduce him to my old friend Mr Webley... Thank you for establishing your credentials as a poisonous snake...

 

For those who's bible is rusty

 

11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15But women[a] will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

 

you, sir, are creature of evil... get thee hence... I had given you the benefit of the doubt about being dumb...

[Grandpa Harley]

Please do not be condescending with me. I am just sharing what I believe as you are sharing what you believe. I do not think that you are too stupid to understand what I believe, I just understand that you disagree. Neither am I too stupid to understand what you believe. I have no comprehension problems getting what it is like to not believe what other's believe. I am not trying to convince anyone nor convert anyone. I am just answering questions posted to me. If you believe that Zeus said those things then I believe that you believe that. I do not think that the fact that you believe that means that you do not "get" what I am saying. I think you are wrong as you think I am wrong. No problem here. Are you such zealots that the only reason you can conceive of another disagreeing is thinking that they do not understand what you are saying?

 

Telling you the fact that the Jesus-Nicodemos conversation couldn't be in Aramaic was being far from condescending... If presupposed a level of intelligence I find hard to credit...

[Mythra]

Telling you the fact that the Jesus-Nicodemos conversation couldn't be in Aramaic was being far from condescending... If presupposed a level of intelligence I find hard to credit...

 

I'm sure he skimmed over the greek/aramaic discussion (dismissing it as nothing more than atheist propaganda) and landed on the "sacrificing of the goat" comment.

 

Unfortunately, that part too, was grounded in scripture. Yahweh has gone on record as having an affinity for such things.

 

Sure glad it's not me trying to justify this poor excuse for a god.