Community > Posts By > BigD9832

 
BigD9832's photo
Sat 10/06/18 05:28 AM
There is nothing in the Bible that says sex outside of marriage is a sin. As long as you are not married and fooling around with someone other than your spouse.

BigD9832's photo
Fri 10/05/18 05:34 PM
From GalaxyStarz
prove it!


You can prove it to yourself. All you have to do is read the Bible.


Up2youandme...

The Book of Enoch is not Scriptural.


BigD9832's photo
Fri 10/05/18 09:46 AM
From GalaxyStarz
The OT "laws" were not sufficient, people couldn't stop sinning, sexually or otherwise.

That's why Jesus was sent - to take the burden for mankind's sins. BUT he has to be chosen. Monogamy in marriage, one man, one woman, is the teaching of Jesus/God/Holy Spirit.

If you're not affiliated with any any faith, sexual immorality is also a sin.


This is NOT a Scriptural set of statements.

From Febin
s it is


Again, not Scriptural.


BigD9832's photo
Tue 10/02/18 06:44 PM
I lived in Indianapolis for about 8 years. Now I am in Hammond.

So many have deactivated their accounts since this started.

BigD9832's photo
Thu 09/27/18 11:22 AM

Quote from johnsonwitty01:
1 Corinthians 7:2
“But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.”


CLV 1Cor. 7:2 Yet, because of prostitutions, let each man have a wife for himself and each woman have her own husband.

This poster neglected to reveal the name of the English version he took this verse from, leaving us to guess. There is no explanation as to why he used this version. If I were to guess I would have to say it is from the English Standard Version.

Notice the word "should" is not used. I believe this takes much of the morality out of the equation.

In this verse, the apostle Paul describes any activity outside of marriage as “sexual immorality.” That means when we read of “sexual immorality,” it includes sex before marriage as one of many examples of sin.


Unfortunately the sin of "any activity outside of marriage" is not described in the Scriptures. Perhaps it was formed in the mind of this poster.

CLV 1Cor 6:12 All is allowed me, but not all is expedient. All is allowed me, but I will not be put under its authority by anything.

So many Christians seem to forget this verse. We are not limited by Him as to our actions. We are ALLOWED to express our own desires. As this is the case, it is no longer the business of the church as to what we do.


BigD9832's photo
Thu 09/27/18 09:27 AM

Quote from johnsonwitty01:
1 Corinthians 7:2
“But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.”


CLV 1Cor. 7:2 Yet, because of prostitutions, let each man have a wife for himself and each woman have her own husband.

This poster neglected to reveal the name of the English version he took this verse from, leaving us to guess. There is no explanation as to why he used this version. If I were to guess I would have to say it is from the English Standard Version.

Notice the word "should" is not used. I believe this takes the morality out of the equation.

In this verse, the apostle Paul describes any activity outside of marriage as “sexual immorality.” That means when we read of “sexual immorality,” it includes sex before marriage as one of many examples of sin.


Unfortunately the sin of "any activity outside of marriage" is not described in the Scriptures. Perhaps it was formed in the mind of this poster.

CLV 1Cor 6:12 All is allowed me, but not all is expedient. All is allowed me, but I will not be put under its authority by anything.

So many Christians seem to forget this verse. We are not limited by Him as to our actions. We are ALLOWED to express our own desires. As this is the case, it is no longer the business of the church as to what we do.


BigD9832's photo
Mon 09/24/18 10:41 AM
There is no "rapture" in the Scriptures.

BigD9832's photo
Wed 09/05/18 12:07 PM
Welcome.

BigD9832's photo
Mon 09/03/18 12:04 PM

It's a quote.
You need to read the article to understand it.

BigD9832's photo
Mon 09/03/18 08:12 AM
Edited by BigD9832 on Mon 09/03/18 08:14 AM

An article called "Sin Is Not What It Seems," by Rabbi Shmuel Silinsky.

The word "sin" has no connection with endless guilt and eternal damnation. But it does have a lot to do with archery.

One of the most commonly mistranslated Hebrew words is chait, which we usually see translated as "sin."

Sin is one of those words we tend to find repellant. Many of us grew up in non-Jewish societies and as a result of that influence, we think of sin as some horrible evil, connected with endless guilt, eternal damnation and a host of other associations that are equally unpalatable.

Does chait really mean that?

No.

The meaning of the word is usually defined by the context of how it is used. So for example, In the Book of Judges (20:16), slingers from the tribe of Benjamin are described as being so good with their weapon that they can "aim at a hair and not chait."


Could this mean to "aim at a hair and not sin"? It makes no sense. Obviously, the text means to aim at a hair and not "miss," i.e. not to hit off target.

Another example is in the Book of Kings I (1:21). King David is on his deathbed and his wife, Bathsheba, comes to him and says, "If Solomon does not become king after you then Solomon and I will be chataim." Solomon and Bathsheba will be sinners? It means that Solomon and Bathsheba will not reach their potential, will not make the grade, will not measure up.

A third example: The Hebrew for one of the many sacrificial offering is chatot, from the same root as the word chait. This offering -- called in English a "sin offering" -- can only be brought for something done unintentionally. In fact, if a person purposely committed a violation, he is forbidden to bring a chatot. It is truly a "mistake offering" rather than a "sin offering."

"Off target," "not reaching the mark," "mistake," and "unintentional" are all indications that the word chait does not mean "sin."



A more accurate translation of the Hebrew chait is "error" or "mistake."

People don't "sin." People make mistakes. After all, we are human. And the Jewish way is to learn from our mistakes. We apologize, clean up any mess, and move on with life.

Of course, there can be real ramifications to our mistakes.

If a glass of milk is dropped, the milk is gone and the glass is shattered. So what do we do?

We deal with the fallout and fix what we can. Our amends may include a sincere apology, removing the shards, getting the carpet cleaned and buying a new bottle of milk. But we do not become steeped in guilt over our "sin."

Note that there are other words in Hebrew which are also mistranslated as "sin," but which convey a more serious misdeed than an error. To cite two examples: avon, refers to willful, knowing transgression of God's law where one's desires get the upper hand; pesha, refers to a willful transgression done specifically to spite God.

However, the most common word translated as "sin" is chait. The "sin" of Adam and Eve was chait, a mistake.

So many of the concepts we may have in our minds may really not be Jewish at all. Taking a fresh look can give us great insights and clarity -- and tips to make our lives more meaningful.

http://www.aish.com/jl/p/ph/48964596.html


BigD9832's photo
Mon 09/03/18 08:05 AM

By the way, what is "fornification"?


BigD9832's photo
Mon 09/03/18 08:03 AM
Edited by BigD9832 on Mon 09/03/18 08:05 AM

From smileyzest
The definition of sin is to transgress God's regulations.


Here is another person who is having trouble understanding that the Bible was not written in English and that in order for a word to appear there, it must have an ancient counterpart. No ancient term, no English term.

The term "sin" is misrepresented by the ancient Hebrew word "chait." It's meaning has been misconstrued, as seen by some here.

CLV Judges 20:16 From all these people were seven hundred chosen men hampered in their right hand; every one of these could sling a stone at a hair and not miss.

The Bible, God's regulations, states that fornification, sex outside of marriage and equivalent to adultery, is sin.


Of course, this is not true, as the word "fornication" is not Scriptural. Or, to put it another way, the ancient Koine Greek term 'porneian' does not mean "fornication," but rather is closer to the definition of "prostitution."

For example...

CLV 1Cor 6:18 Flee from prostitution. The penalty of every sin, whatsoever man should be doing, is outside of the body, yet he who is committing prostitution is sinning against his own body.

The exalted honor of being members of Christ is the most powerful incentive to keep our bodies free from the gross sin which still afflicts humanity as it did in the days when this epistle was penned.
A. E. Knoch

If you believe in the Bible, sex without marriage is sin by definition. If God's Word is not your life guide and you don't believe in God then why would one care about sin or even understand what it is?


More fantasy. I have already provided the Scriptural definition of "sin." Some take delight in changing the meanings of the Biblical words and attach their own meanings and interpretation.

I happen to believe in a loving God and His Word, and to trust that He knows what is best for the humans He created.


Perhaps her own interpretations only.

Of course fornification is not in the ancient manuscripts because it is the English language. If you want to go around in circles fussing over language translation to self-justify indulgence in sin then go on and let God clarify it on judgement day.


By all means, let us not "fuss" over language translation. Just take my word for it and let's move on.

As I stated earlier, the ancient Koine Greek term 'porneian' does not mean "fornication," but rather is closer to the definition of "prostitution."

And to the Hebrews, "prostitution" has two meaning. The traditional one, and the worship of "other" gods.

Much of these moral implications are based on the Law given in the OT. Would it be hypocritical to point out certain of the Law and ignore the rest?

There are 613 Mitzvot or Commandments. Anyone here follow them all?


BigD9832's photo
Tue 08/28/18 10:01 AM
Once again, there is no "hell."

There is no ancient term for "hell." That means it was not translated, rather interpreted.

Jesus never used the word "hell." Paul never used it. John never used it. Abraham never used it. David never used it. Solomon never used it.
No one in the Bible ever used the word "hell."


Sheol - The Jews define this word as...
It connotes the place where those that had died were believed to be congregated.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13563-sheol

No punishment and no fire.
Literally translated it means "unseen."

Hades - It is the translation of the word 'sheol.' Unfortunately, it comes with baggage from the Mythology of that time. Literally translated it means "unseen."

Gehenna - The Valley of Hinnom. This is a real physical place on Earth. It is a valley or ravine on a sulfur deposit. It was used by the Romans as a garbage dump. Garbage was burned from a fire much hotter than a normal one.

It has a sorted history and was used as a "Potter's Field" of sorts. Jesus used it in some of His parables.

Tartarus - Used once in 2Peter 2:4, it is translated as "jail," and relates only to angels, not humans.


BigD9832's photo
Mon 08/27/18 08:21 AM
From Nikolas1990
Let's make a distinction here: when Jesus refers to Sheol or the grave he is talking about hell (were the rich man resided and is still residing in the story of the rich man and Lazarus.) After Jesus died on the cross he descended to into the bowels of the earth and freed the captives (those who died with faith in God) from Abraham's Boosom (paradise.) Abrahams's boosom was, at this time, on the other side of the fixed chasm which the rich man could not cross over.


There are several problems when taking the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus as literal.
see my thread...

The Rich Man and Lazarus... Literal or Figurative?

After Jesus freed the captives He was resurrected by God and for a short time he and the captives were seen walking around, after which Jesus was taken up into Heaven to prepare a place for us. After this, hell increased according to Isaiah 5:14, as with believers now being taken up into paradise by the Holy Spirit after death instead of descending into the bowels of the earth as they had prior to his death on the cross, there is now more space for the wicked in hell ans therefore hell increased.


The problem is, none of this is Scriptural.

CLV Isaiah 5:14 Therefore, the unseen widens its greedy soul And gapes with its mouth without limitation; Her effulgence and her throng descend With her tumult and gladness into it.

Nothing in this verse about 'sheol' being "hell."

the fact is, there is no ancient word in Hebrew or Greek that represents "hell" as we know it. No "eternal" punishment.

Let us be clear about another thing: hell is distinct from the lake of fire which is the second death according to the scriptures. Whereas demons are currently freely to torment people in hell as the executors of God's wrath according to the scriptures, after the great white throne judgement were the wicked will be summoned from hell to be judged at the great white throne judgement, they too, along with the wicked, will all be cast into the lake or fire, were they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

In short: hell is and always has been a holding cell for the souls of the wicked were they are held until the great white throne judgement, after which they are cast into the lake of fire which is the second death.


Again, none of this is Scriptural. There is no ancient term for "hell." Not in ancient Greek. Not in ancient Hebrew.

This term did not exist when the Bible was written.

Most of the English versions have eliminated the word "hell."

Confusing the word "hell" with the Lake of Fire will not help your case.

CLV Rev 20:14 And death and the unseen were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death--the lake of fire.

How can "hell" be cast into "hell"?


BigD9832's photo
Mon 08/27/18 08:07 AM
From Mirage4279
I see said the blind man,

and I am pointing out that the word for pre-marital sex is probably not "fornication" when the NT was written however translates to the English word from Greek Hebrew etc...


The word that was substituted for fornication is "prostitution."

porne? That means prostitute

porneia? is Prostitution (1 Cornithians 7:2)

porneuo? is committing prostitution

pornos? that is a male prostitute, which might be known as a Gigiol today (1 Corinthians 6:9)

There is no Ancient Greek term for Fornication. If your Bible uses it, then the people who wrote that version are interpreting for you. The word most often mistranslated into Fornication is Adultery. Adultery is a Scriptural term. Fornication is not.

You mention the KJV. I have listed some of the many problems that the KJV has. Some in translation, some in interpretation.

See my thread...
Real Contradictions brought to you by the KJV


BigD9832's photo
Sat 08/25/18 10:38 AM
The NT was written in Ancient Koine Greek. Not Modern Greek. There are several types of Greek.

The manuscripts used for the KJV were all written in Modern Greek, written about 1500 AD. Over 1000 years after the NT was written.

Alot can change in a language in 1000 years.

CLV 1Cor 7:2 Yet, because of prostitutions, let each man have a wife for himself and each woman have her own husband.

Strong's

G4202 porneia por-ni'-ah
from G4203;

harlotry (including adultery and incest); figuratively, idolatry.


There is no "fornication" in the Ancient text.


BigD9832's photo
Sat 08/25/18 10:28 AM
From Mirage4279
Have ever stopped and thought about it? When Sarai was named Sarah and Abram went to Abraham.


The change in their names were indications of the change in their natures. Same with Saul/Paul.

BigD9832's photo
Sat 08/25/18 10:25 AM

Jesus came here to teach us what we are. Not who we are. But there are other "Sons of God" mentioned in the Bible. Gen. 6:1-4

Jesus is not God. Nowhere in the Scriptures is Jesus called "God."

CLV Matt 3:17 And lo! a voice out of the heavens, saying, "This is My Son, the Beloved, in Whom I delight."

CLV Mark 1:11 And a voice came out of the heavens, "Thou art My Son, the Beloved; in Thee I delight."


Nowhere does God or Jesus call Him God.

This idea comes from a lack of understanding of what the Messiah is all about.

In the end, Christmas and Easter are both missing from the Scriptures.

There are several holidays mentioned in the Bible. But Christmas and Easter are not among them. These are sanctioned by men, not God.


BigD9832's photo
Fri 08/24/18 10:00 AM
:thumbsup:

BigD9832's photo
Fri 08/24/18 09:58 AM
The Birth of Jesus is not Christmas because Christ did not exist until Jesus died.


More disinformation here.

CLV Matt 1:16 now Jacob begets Joseph, the husband of Mary of whom was born Jesus, Who is termed "Christ."

Strong's

G5547 Christos khris-tos'
from G5548;

anointed, i.e. the Messiah, an epithet of Jesus.


The word "Christ" or 'Christos' means "anointed." The best parallel I can draw is the example of David. After he killed the giant, he was anointed King of Israel. He was too young to take over the job at the time. And Israel already had a king. But it meant that when he came of age he would become King of Isreal.

In God's time, Jesus will return as Messiah and become the government of the entire world.

He is "Christ," the anointed.


1 2 3 5 7 8 9 19 20