Behold
Well-Known Member
The reason you get heretics out of your church is because if you don't, they continue to cause strife and issues.
Titus 3:10 proves you have no idea what you talking about. @Webers_Home .
Christ's Instructions
- Thread starter Webers_Home
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The reason you get heretics out of your church is because if you don't, they continue to cause strife and issues.
Titus 3:10 proves you have no idea what you talking about. @Webers_Home .
~
142) 2Cor 2:10-11 . . If you forgive anyone, I also forgive him. And what I
have forgiven-- if there was anything to forgive --I have forgiven in the sight
of Christ for your sake, in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are
not unaware of his schemes.
One of the opposition's tactics is to create disunity in a church. Sure enough
when that happens-- as when one portion of the congregation believes in
judging and ostracizing while the other doesn't --people start taking sides
and the church will end up divided into cliques and factions. According to the
lord and master of New Testament Christianity, a house divided against itself
cannot stand.
Paul mentioned that his extension of forgiveness was "in the sight of Christ".
There exists some controversy as to the exact meaning but I think it's just
saying that Paul's forgiveness of that man was done in accordance with
Christ's approval; to the end that the Corinthians all go along with it, i.e.
stand together as one in their compliance with the apostle Paul's decisions.
_
142) 2Cor 2:10-11 . . If you forgive anyone, I also forgive him. And what I
have forgiven-- if there was anything to forgive --I have forgiven in the sight
of Christ for your sake, in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are
not unaware of his schemes.
One of the opposition's tactics is to create disunity in a church. Sure enough
when that happens-- as when one portion of the congregation believes in
judging and ostracizing while the other doesn't --people start taking sides
and the church will end up divided into cliques and factions. According to the
lord and master of New Testament Christianity, a house divided against itself
cannot stand.
Paul mentioned that his extension of forgiveness was "in the sight of Christ".
There exists some controversy as to the exact meaning but I think it's just
saying that Paul's forgiveness of that man was done in accordance with
Christ's approval; to the end that the Corinthians all go along with it, i.e.
stand together as one in their compliance with the apostle Paul's decisions.
_
~
143) 2Cor 5:20-21 . . We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God
were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be
reconciled to God.
There's two different aspects to reconciliation. One is a criminal justice kind
of reconciliation (Rom 5:6-11, Rom 6:3-11, 1John 2:2) and the other is a
fellowship kind of reconciliation. (Gen 4:1-7, Gen 5:22-24, Gen 6:9, Gen
17:1, 1John 1:3-7)
For example, a man and his wife may not be speaking to each other; and
sleeping in separate beds; but they're still married: they're just not getting
along; in other words, they're out of fellowship with one another. It's God's
wishes that His own walk with Him in fellowship while they're waiting for
their departure; and the Corinthians weren't doing very well at it.
In order to restore diplomatic relations between themselves and their Father
above, that congregation had to knuckle down and deal with sin in their
midst in accordance with their master's wishes rather than their own.
Compare Josh 7:2-26 where Moses' people couldn't win anymore battles
until they first dealt with a sin in their midst.
It's ironic that a fully functioning Christian church like the one at Corinth was
in need of reconciliation with God. How many Christian churches are just like
that today? They pride themselves in being Spirit-filled congregations, yet
their congregational attitude is completely out of touch with Christ. Yes,
Christian congregations are oftentimes out of touch and need to come to
their senses and reconnect or else they risk becoming like the church at
Laodicea where the central figure of Christianity is depicted outside the
building banging on the door trying to get someone's attention to let him in.
(Rev 3:14-22)
_
143) 2Cor 5:20-21 . . We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God
were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be
reconciled to God.
There's two different aspects to reconciliation. One is a criminal justice kind
of reconciliation (Rom 5:6-11, Rom 6:3-11, 1John 2:2) and the other is a
fellowship kind of reconciliation. (Gen 4:1-7, Gen 5:22-24, Gen 6:9, Gen
17:1, 1John 1:3-7)
For example, a man and his wife may not be speaking to each other; and
sleeping in separate beds; but they're still married: they're just not getting
along; in other words, they're out of fellowship with one another. It's God's
wishes that His own walk with Him in fellowship while they're waiting for
their departure; and the Corinthians weren't doing very well at it.
In order to restore diplomatic relations between themselves and their Father
above, that congregation had to knuckle down and deal with sin in their
midst in accordance with their master's wishes rather than their own.
Compare Josh 7:2-26 where Moses' people couldn't win anymore battles
until they first dealt with a sin in their midst.
It's ironic that a fully functioning Christian church like the one at Corinth was
in need of reconciliation with God. How many Christian churches are just like
that today? They pride themselves in being Spirit-filled congregations, yet
their congregational attitude is completely out of touch with Christ. Yes,
Christian congregations are oftentimes out of touch and need to come to
their senses and reconnect or else they risk becoming like the church at
Laodicea where the central figure of Christianity is depicted outside the
building banging on the door trying to get someone's attention to let him in.
(Rev 3:14-22)
_
.
144) 2Cor 6:1-2 . . As God's fellow workers we urge you not to receive
God's grace in vain; for He says: In the time of my favor I heard you, and in
the day of salvation I helped you. I tell you, now is the time of God's favor,
now is the day of salvation.
Salvation is a project similar to tearing down a house and building it back
better. Well; the Corinthians had undergone the demolition phase in concert
with Christ's crucifixion and resurrection; but they were stuck in the rubble,
so to speak.
Well; Paul said, in so many words; that they shouldn't wait till the afterlife to
begin building back better, rather, God wanted them to begin now, in this
life.
"For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to
do-- living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and
detestable idolatry." (1Pet 4:3 cf. Rom 6:1-14)
_
144) 2Cor 6:1-2 . . As God's fellow workers we urge you not to receive
God's grace in vain; for He says: In the time of my favor I heard you, and in
the day of salvation I helped you. I tell you, now is the time of God's favor,
now is the day of salvation.
Salvation is a project similar to tearing down a house and building it back
better. Well; the Corinthians had undergone the demolition phase in concert
with Christ's crucifixion and resurrection; but they were stuck in the rubble,
so to speak.
Well; Paul said, in so many words; that they shouldn't wait till the afterlife to
begin building back better, rather, God wanted them to begin now, in this
life.
"For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to
do-- living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and
detestable idolatry." (1Pet 4:3 cf. Rom 6:1-14)
_
Behold
Well-Known Member
Paul teaches that because we are already forgiven, we are to forgive. (not to be forgiven).
.
145) 2Cor 6:14-18 . . Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers:
for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what
communion hath light with darkness? and what concord hath Christ with
Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? and what
agreement hath the temple of God with idols?
. . . For ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said: I will dwell in
them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my
people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate-- saith
The Lord --and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will
be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters --saith The
Lord Almighty.
That commandment clearly forbids intermarriage between Christians and
non-Christians. Failure to comply is not only grossly disobedient, but it's
unwise and can have tragic results; for example:
● Gen 6:1-2 . .When men began to increase in number on the earth and
daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of
men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.
If we posit that the "sons of God" were believers and the "daughters of men"
were not; then it would appear that back in Noah's day, believing men threw
caution to the wind and built themselves harems of unbelieving women.
What happened to those believing men when it came time for the Flood?
Well, for one thing; they had lost their piety.
● Gen 7:1 . .The Lord then said to Noah: Go into the ark, you and your whole
family, because I have found you righteous in this generation.
None of the other sons of God in that day were righteous; hence they
weren't invited aboard the ark. All of those men-- whose women were
chosen based solely upon sensual allure sans any spiritual prudence
whatsoever --perished in the Flood right along with everybody else.
Another incident is located at Nehemiah 13:23-31; which led to the break-up
of homes. Were Nehemiah to do so in our day, the politicized media would
crucify him for child abuse. But Nehemiah wasn't the one at fault. His people
had entered into impious marriages; consequently their families became
collateral damage when the Flood came.
_
145) 2Cor 6:14-18 . . Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers:
for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what
communion hath light with darkness? and what concord hath Christ with
Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? and what
agreement hath the temple of God with idols?
. . . For ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said: I will dwell in
them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my
people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate-- saith
The Lord --and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will
be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters --saith The
Lord Almighty.
That commandment clearly forbids intermarriage between Christians and
non-Christians. Failure to comply is not only grossly disobedient, but it's
unwise and can have tragic results; for example:
● Gen 6:1-2 . .When men began to increase in number on the earth and
daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of
men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.
If we posit that the "sons of God" were believers and the "daughters of men"
were not; then it would appear that back in Noah's day, believing men threw
caution to the wind and built themselves harems of unbelieving women.
What happened to those believing men when it came time for the Flood?
Well, for one thing; they had lost their piety.
● Gen 7:1 . .The Lord then said to Noah: Go into the ark, you and your whole
family, because I have found you righteous in this generation.
None of the other sons of God in that day were righteous; hence they
weren't invited aboard the ark. All of those men-- whose women were
chosen based solely upon sensual allure sans any spiritual prudence
whatsoever --perished in the Flood right along with everybody else.
Another incident is located at Nehemiah 13:23-31; which led to the break-up
of homes. Were Nehemiah to do so in our day, the politicized media would
crucify him for child abuse. But Nehemiah wasn't the one at fault. His people
had entered into impious marriages; consequently their families became
collateral damage when the Flood came.
_
.
146) 2Cor 7:1 . . Since we have these promises, dear friends, let us cleanse
ourselves from everything that contaminates body and spirit, perfecting
holiness out of deference to God's will.
Webster's defines "deference" as affected and/or ingratiating regard for
another's wishes. Deference is the opposite of resistance, rebellion, defiance,
indifference, stubbornness and/or doing things your own way.
Contaminations of one's body would include things like drug addiction,
alcoholism, adultery, promiscuity, gluttony, eating blood, etc.
Contaminations of the spirit likely refers to things that influence one's
thinking and/or have an effect upon the personality; for example: Critical
Race Theory, the political philosophies of Carl Marx, Mao Zedong, and
Vladimir Lenin, Planned Parenthood, Liberalism, LGBTQ sex education,
transgender propaganda, Anti-Semitism, etc.
* The promises are those listed at 2Cor 6:14-18.
_
146) 2Cor 7:1 . . Since we have these promises, dear friends, let us cleanse
ourselves from everything that contaminates body and spirit, perfecting
holiness out of deference to God's will.
Webster's defines "deference" as affected and/or ingratiating regard for
another's wishes. Deference is the opposite of resistance, rebellion, defiance,
indifference, stubbornness and/or doing things your own way.
Contaminations of one's body would include things like drug addiction,
alcoholism, adultery, promiscuity, gluttony, eating blood, etc.
Contaminations of the spirit likely refers to things that influence one's
thinking and/or have an effect upon the personality; for example: Critical
Race Theory, the political philosophies of Carl Marx, Mao Zedong, and
Vladimir Lenin, Planned Parenthood, Liberalism, LGBTQ sex education,
transgender propaganda, Anti-Semitism, etc.
* The promises are those listed at 2Cor 6:14-18.
_
.
147) 2Cor 8:11-15 . . If the willingness is there, the gift is acceptable
according to what one has, not according to what he does not have. Our
desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but
that there might be equality.
. . . At the present time your plenty will supply what they need, so that in
turn their plenty will supply what you need. Then there will be equality, as it
is written: He who gathered much did not have too much, and he who
gathered little did not have too little.
* The equality we're looking at here has nothing to do with banning private
property and/or mandatory distribution of wealth; viz: this is about generosity
rather than politics, so please don't attempt to defend and/or promote
Socialism with this passage.
It's inevitable that some churches would be disadvantaged compared to
others. For example: here in the USA's big cities, churches have no lack of
resources to take care of themselves; while small town churches are barely
scraping by. The charitable thing for the big-city church to do is take a small
town church under its wing, like any normal person would a needy relative.
NOTE: "if the willingness is there" tells me that church officers should not
pressure and/or shame their people into sharing their abundance, viz:
should not attempt to break down their resistance; like talking people into
buying cars and vacuum cleaners, so to speak.
The directive is an excellent passage for debunking the so-called Faith
Promise; which is a popular scheme for seducing congregations into pledging
money they don't have while expecting God's providence will somehow
provide it. That is not the Lord's way. By means of Paul, the Lord says to
help out with what you already have, not what you hope to have later; I
mean: it is not His wish to copy ENRON's mark-to-market accounting
practices and/or futures trading with pork bellies and soy beans.
_
147) 2Cor 8:11-15 . . If the willingness is there, the gift is acceptable
according to what one has, not according to what he does not have. Our
desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but
that there might be equality.
. . . At the present time your plenty will supply what they need, so that in
turn their plenty will supply what you need. Then there will be equality, as it
is written: He who gathered much did not have too much, and he who
gathered little did not have too little.
* The equality we're looking at here has nothing to do with banning private
property and/or mandatory distribution of wealth; viz: this is about generosity
rather than politics, so please don't attempt to defend and/or promote
Socialism with this passage.
It's inevitable that some churches would be disadvantaged compared to
others. For example: here in the USA's big cities, churches have no lack of
resources to take care of themselves; while small town churches are barely
scraping by. The charitable thing for the big-city church to do is take a small
town church under its wing, like any normal person would a needy relative.
NOTE: "if the willingness is there" tells me that church officers should not
pressure and/or shame their people into sharing their abundance, viz:
should not attempt to break down their resistance; like talking people into
buying cars and vacuum cleaners, so to speak.
The directive is an excellent passage for debunking the so-called Faith
Promise; which is a popular scheme for seducing congregations into pledging
money they don't have while expecting God's providence will somehow
provide it. That is not the Lord's way. By means of Paul, the Lord says to
help out with what you already have, not what you hope to have later; I
mean: it is not His wish to copy ENRON's mark-to-market accounting
practices and/or futures trading with pork bellies and soy beans.
_
Last edited:
.
148) 2Cor 9:7 . . Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to
give, not reluctantly or under compulsion for God loves a cheerful giver.
Towards what end is the giving spoken of in the New Testament? To finance
ambitious building programs? Well; Christians back then met in homes. Did
their contributions go towards obtaining more homes to meet in? No.
Within the context of the New Testament; giving in the early church was
charitable. It met needs rather than expenses; and those needs were
typically congregational rather than universal; viz: their charity went
towards those amongst themselves and/or other congregations that were
hungry, sick, injured, homeless, alone, helpless, missionaries, full-time
church officers, orphans, widows, abandoned, and/or oppressed, etc.
_
148) 2Cor 9:7 . . Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to
give, not reluctantly or under compulsion for God loves a cheerful giver.
Towards what end is the giving spoken of in the New Testament? To finance
ambitious building programs? Well; Christians back then met in homes. Did
their contributions go towards obtaining more homes to meet in? No.
Within the context of the New Testament; giving in the early church was
charitable. It met needs rather than expenses; and those needs were
typically congregational rather than universal; viz: their charity went
towards those amongst themselves and/or other congregations that were
hungry, sick, injured, homeless, alone, helpless, missionaries, full-time
church officers, orphans, widows, abandoned, and/or oppressed, etc.
_
.
149) 2Cor 10:7 . . If anyone is confident that he belongs to Christ, he should
reconsider that we belong to Christ just as much as he.
It's amazing that any Christian's ego would be so inflated as to think
themselves holier than an apostle, However, there are some people out
there infected with a pretty bad case of conceit who are up to it.
_
149) 2Cor 10:7 . . If anyone is confident that he belongs to Christ, he should
reconsider that we belong to Christ just as much as he.
It's amazing that any Christian's ego would be so inflated as to think
themselves holier than an apostle, However, there are some people out
there infected with a pretty bad case of conceit who are up to it.
_
.
150) 2Cor 13:5 . . Examine yourselves, whether you're in the faith; test
your own selves. Don't you know of your own selves, how that Jesus Christ
is in you, unless you're all reprobates?
The only proof-positive way for individuals to know for sure whether Christ is
in them is by getting it from the horse's mouth.
● Rom 8:15 . .The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God's
children.
The Greek word translated "testifies" means to corroborate; defined by
Webster's as: to support or help prove (a statement, theory, etc.) by
providing information or evidence.
This kind of support usually isn't public: it's private. In other words: it's one
on one, spirit to spirit, heart to heart. Needless to say then, this kind of
corroboration is supernatural rather than academic which is why Paul said to
test "your own selves" rather than others because no one but you and God
together can do this for you.
Smokey the Bear says: Only you can prevent forest fires, whereas scripture
says: Only you can know whether Christ is in you.
_
150) 2Cor 13:5 . . Examine yourselves, whether you're in the faith; test
your own selves. Don't you know of your own selves, how that Jesus Christ
is in you, unless you're all reprobates?
The only proof-positive way for individuals to know for sure whether Christ is
in them is by getting it from the horse's mouth.
● Rom 8:15 . .The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God's
children.
The Greek word translated "testifies" means to corroborate; defined by
Webster's as: to support or help prove (a statement, theory, etc.) by
providing information or evidence.
This kind of support usually isn't public: it's private. In other words: it's one
on one, spirit to spirit, heart to heart. Needless to say then, this kind of
corroboration is supernatural rather than academic which is why Paul said to
test "your own selves" rather than others because no one but you and God
together can do this for you.
Smokey the Bear says: Only you can prevent forest fires, whereas scripture
says: Only you can know whether Christ is in you.
_
.
151) Gal 1:8 . . Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other
gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be
accursed.
The Greek word for "accursed" in that passage basically has to do with
banishment, shunning and/or disassociation.
An application of this, within the epistle to Galatians, is 5:4 where it says:
"You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ;
you have fallen away from grace."
Whenever Paul spoke of "law" he was usually referring to the five books of
Moses per Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. So, in a
nutshell; the anathema clearly applies to people who insist that it's
necessary to comply with the Ten Commandments to get to Heaven, e.g.
Acts 15:5.
_
151) Gal 1:8 . . Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other
gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be
accursed.
The Greek word for "accursed" in that passage basically has to do with
banishment, shunning and/or disassociation.
An application of this, within the epistle to Galatians, is 5:4 where it says:
"You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ;
you have fallen away from grace."
Whenever Paul spoke of "law" he was usually referring to the five books of
Moses per Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. So, in a
nutshell; the anathema clearly applies to people who insist that it's
necessary to comply with the Ten Commandments to get to Heaven, e.g.
Acts 15:5.
_
.
152) Gal 5:1 . . Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath
made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
The yoke of bondage about which Paul wrote pertains to the covenant that
Moses' people agreed upon with God per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and
Deuteronomy; which is described by Acts 15:10 as "neither our fathers, nor
are we, able to bear"
A very serious problem with that covenant is that it allows neither pardon
nor atonement for willful disobedience.
● Num 15:30-31 . . Anyone who sins defiantly, whether native-born or alien,
blasphemes The Lord, and that person must be cut off from his people.
Because he has despised The Lord's word and broken His commands, that
person must surely be cut off; his guilt remains on him.
FAQ: David knew that an affair with married Bathsheba would be adultery.
How then was God able to let him off with a mere rap on the knuckles, so to
speak, seeing as how that covenant was David's religion? (2Sam 2:13)
REPLY: David was a man of faith and also a prophet. He was spared a full
cup of the wrath of God by means of Jesus' crucifixion. (Rom 3:21-26 & 1Pet
1:10-11)
FAQ: Jesus was crucified ex post facto. How then was it legal to apply his
cross to David retroactively before it even took place?
REPLY: Jesus was designated, and scheduled, to give his life for the sins of
the world very early-on: prior to anything created. (1Pet 1:18-20 & Rev
13:8) For example: the language and grammar of Isa 53:4-10 is mostly past
tense indicating it was already a done deal even before Jesus was born.
_
152) Gal 5:1 . . Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath
made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
The yoke of bondage about which Paul wrote pertains to the covenant that
Moses' people agreed upon with God per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and
Deuteronomy; which is described by Acts 15:10 as "neither our fathers, nor
are we, able to bear"
A very serious problem with that covenant is that it allows neither pardon
nor atonement for willful disobedience.
● Num 15:30-31 . . Anyone who sins defiantly, whether native-born or alien,
blasphemes The Lord, and that person must be cut off from his people.
Because he has despised The Lord's word and broken His commands, that
person must surely be cut off; his guilt remains on him.
FAQ: David knew that an affair with married Bathsheba would be adultery.
How then was God able to let him off with a mere rap on the knuckles, so to
speak, seeing as how that covenant was David's religion? (2Sam 2:13)
REPLY: David was a man of faith and also a prophet. He was spared a full
cup of the wrath of God by means of Jesus' crucifixion. (Rom 3:21-26 & 1Pet
1:10-11)
FAQ: Jesus was crucified ex post facto. How then was it legal to apply his
cross to David retroactively before it even took place?
REPLY: Jesus was designated, and scheduled, to give his life for the sins of
the world very early-on: prior to anything created. (1Pet 1:18-20 & Rev
13:8) For example: the language and grammar of Isa 53:4-10 is mostly past
tense indicating it was already a done deal even before Jesus was born.
_
.
153) Gal 5:2-3 . . Listen! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be
circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. Again I declare to every
man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole
law.
The Greek word for "man" in the above passage is anthropos (anth' ro-pos)
a common word in the New Testament for humans of either gender. The
specific word for males is arrhen (ar'-hrane) and/or arsen (ar' sane).
Modern females undergo conversion to Judaism by means of a ritual bathing
called Mikveh; which, for them, is equivalent to male circumcision. The exact
process by which females in the Old Testament underwent conversion-- e.g.
Ruth --is unknown, but for certain, covenanted circumcision is specifically a
requirement for Jewish men. (Gen 17:9-14)
I think it safe to assume that the circumcision Paul warned against was a
nondescript label that included not only the male kind but also by whatever
means that females in his day underwent conversion to Judaism.
Seeing as how the covenant that Moses' people agreed upon per Exodus,
Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy doesn't specify a God-given
procedure for female conversion to Judaism, then I'd guess that just about
any method would be sufficient so long as the ritual is conducted by
someone authorized to do so.
The primary "value" of Christ that's lost by conversion to Judaism is access
to God via Jesus' high priesthood. Judaism's high priesthood gets no closer
to heaven's ear than the inner sanctum in the back of the Temple down here
on the ground; and even that's only once a year on Yom Kippur; whereas
Christ's high priesthood is seated in heaven at God's right hand 24/7/365;
which of course is far and away superior to Judaism's access to God.
_
153) Gal 5:2-3 . . Listen! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be
circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. Again I declare to every
man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole
law.
The Greek word for "man" in the above passage is anthropos (anth' ro-pos)
a common word in the New Testament for humans of either gender. The
specific word for males is arrhen (ar'-hrane) and/or arsen (ar' sane).
Modern females undergo conversion to Judaism by means of a ritual bathing
called Mikveh; which, for them, is equivalent to male circumcision. The exact
process by which females in the Old Testament underwent conversion-- e.g.
Ruth --is unknown, but for certain, covenanted circumcision is specifically a
requirement for Jewish men. (Gen 17:9-14)
I think it safe to assume that the circumcision Paul warned against was a
nondescript label that included not only the male kind but also by whatever
means that females in his day underwent conversion to Judaism.
Seeing as how the covenant that Moses' people agreed upon per Exodus,
Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy doesn't specify a God-given
procedure for female conversion to Judaism, then I'd guess that just about
any method would be sufficient so long as the ritual is conducted by
someone authorized to do so.
The primary "value" of Christ that's lost by conversion to Judaism is access
to God via Jesus' high priesthood. Judaism's high priesthood gets no closer
to heaven's ear than the inner sanctum in the back of the Temple down here
on the ground; and even that's only once a year on Yom Kippur; whereas
Christ's high priesthood is seated in heaven at God's right hand 24/7/365;
which of course is far and away superior to Judaism's access to God.
_
.
154) Gal 5:13a . . You, my brethren, were called to be free. But do not use
your liberty to indulge the base nature;
Christ's followers are sometimes accused of practicing a religion that gives
people a license to steal, so to speak. Well; that's true to a certain extent
because his followers do have immunity from any, and all, of the curses that
the Old Testament imposes on scofflaws per Lev 26:3-38, Deut 27:15-26,
and Deut 28:1-69 because their association with God is via a different
covenant wherein are no curses for non compliance.
So then; for sure there's a bit of a "moral hazard" within Christianity.
However, God prefers that people dead to Old Testament law not allow
human nature be the dominant force in their lives. (e.g. Rom 6:1-13 and
Col 3:1-17)
_
154) Gal 5:13a . . You, my brethren, were called to be free. But do not use
your liberty to indulge the base nature;
Christ's followers are sometimes accused of practicing a religion that gives
people a license to steal, so to speak. Well; that's true to a certain extent
because his followers do have immunity from any, and all, of the curses that
the Old Testament imposes on scofflaws per Lev 26:3-38, Deut 27:15-26,
and Deut 28:1-69 because their association with God is via a different
covenant wherein are no curses for non compliance.
So then; for sure there's a bit of a "moral hazard" within Christianity.
However, God prefers that people dead to Old Testament law not allow
human nature be the dominant force in their lives. (e.g. Rom 6:1-13 and
Col 3:1-17)
_
.
155) Gal 5:16 . . I say then: walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the
lust of the base nature.
Some years ago, in a boatyard where I was employed on Shelter Island in
San Diego, I was listening to a young Christian boast of his dedication to
Christ. So I asked him: What about the command to walk in the Spirit? How
are you doing with that one?
Well, the brash, pleased-with-himself youngster admitted he didn't even
know what that meant, let alone how to do it. (chuckle) In regards to
"dedication" Mr. Super Saint hadn't even got to first base yet. (judging by
the fact that was on a third marriage the last time we spoke, I'd have to say
he never did get the hang of it.
Anyway, there's nothing mystical about this. Walking in the Spirit is just
simply complying with Christ's instructions rather than letting your natural
impulses and/or your own thinking control your conduct all the time.
For example: "Abstain from food tainted by idols, from promiscuity, from the
meat of strangled animals, and from blood." When a Christian complies with
those instructions; they're walking in the Spirit, but when they're
indiscriminately eating whatever, drinking whatever, and sleeping around
without regard for God's feelings about it; then they're fulfilling the desires
of the base nature. It's that simple.
NOTE: The Greek word translated "lusts" can refer to bad lusts as well as
good. For example:
"And he said to them: I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you
before I suffer." (Luke 22:15)
Christ's eager desire is translated from the same Greek word as the lusts
spoken of in Gal 5:16
_
155) Gal 5:16 . . I say then: walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the
lust of the base nature.
Some years ago, in a boatyard where I was employed on Shelter Island in
San Diego, I was listening to a young Christian boast of his dedication to
Christ. So I asked him: What about the command to walk in the Spirit? How
are you doing with that one?
Well, the brash, pleased-with-himself youngster admitted he didn't even
know what that meant, let alone how to do it. (chuckle) In regards to
"dedication" Mr. Super Saint hadn't even got to first base yet. (judging by
the fact that was on a third marriage the last time we spoke, I'd have to say
he never did get the hang of it.
Anyway, there's nothing mystical about this. Walking in the Spirit is just
simply complying with Christ's instructions rather than letting your natural
impulses and/or your own thinking control your conduct all the time.
For example: "Abstain from food tainted by idols, from promiscuity, from the
meat of strangled animals, and from blood." When a Christian complies with
those instructions; they're walking in the Spirit, but when they're
indiscriminately eating whatever, drinking whatever, and sleeping around
without regard for God's feelings about it; then they're fulfilling the desires
of the base nature. It's that simple.
NOTE: The Greek word translated "lusts" can refer to bad lusts as well as
good. For example:
"And he said to them: I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you
before I suffer." (Luke 22:15)
Christ's eager desire is translated from the same Greek word as the lusts
spoken of in Gal 5:16
_
.
156) Gal 5:25-26 . . Since we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
Let us not be conceited, provoking one another, envying one another.
The sentient consciousness we have as our normal selves is dried up, i.e. it's
decrepit and infertile. (John 6:53 & Eph 2:1) whereas regeneration gives
folks something viable and sustainable. (John 3:3-8 & John 4:10-14)
Webster's defines "conceit" as excessive self-appreciation of one's own worth
or virtue.
To my knowledge, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with having strong core
values and/or believing in yourself, but if you should find yourself somewhat
indignant and/or resentful when others don't believe in you, or when they
think very little of your core values; then watch out because that's a
symptom of conceit, and it will hinder you from complying with The Lord's
instructions in regard to getting along with fellow believers.
The Greek word translated "provoke" basically means to challenge; viz: to
get in somebody's face in an obnoxious, assertive, militant manner.
The Greek word for "envy" basically means hostile toward a rival, or towards
someone believed to enjoy an advantage. In other words: we're talking
about a competitive spirit-- not the good-natured, friendly kind but a
malicious kind of competitive spirit that resents others doing better than
itself, or more popular than itself, or more recognized than itself, or more
admired than itself; viz: it's all about self.
Rivalry is a very destructive passion. It got Abel slain by his own brother,
and it got Christ slain by his own people. Rivalry makes otherwise sensible
people behave contrary to their own better judgment, and gets them
embroiled in oftentimes unnecessary vendettas; e.g. gender rivalry, political
rivalry, financial rivalry, and racial rivalry. Those kinds of rivalries are very
destructive influences.
_
156) Gal 5:25-26 . . Since we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
Let us not be conceited, provoking one another, envying one another.
The sentient consciousness we have as our normal selves is dried up, i.e. it's
decrepit and infertile. (John 6:53 & Eph 2:1) whereas regeneration gives
folks something viable and sustainable. (John 3:3-8 & John 4:10-14)
Webster's defines "conceit" as excessive self-appreciation of one's own worth
or virtue.
To my knowledge, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with having strong core
values and/or believing in yourself, but if you should find yourself somewhat
indignant and/or resentful when others don't believe in you, or when they
think very little of your core values; then watch out because that's a
symptom of conceit, and it will hinder you from complying with The Lord's
instructions in regard to getting along with fellow believers.
The Greek word translated "provoke" basically means to challenge; viz: to
get in somebody's face in an obnoxious, assertive, militant manner.
The Greek word for "envy" basically means hostile toward a rival, or towards
someone believed to enjoy an advantage. In other words: we're talking
about a competitive spirit-- not the good-natured, friendly kind but a
malicious kind of competitive spirit that resents others doing better than
itself, or more popular than itself, or more recognized than itself, or more
admired than itself; viz: it's all about self.
Rivalry is a very destructive passion. It got Abel slain by his own brother,
and it got Christ slain by his own people. Rivalry makes otherwise sensible
people behave contrary to their own better judgment, and gets them
embroiled in oftentimes unnecessary vendettas; e.g. gender rivalry, political
rivalry, financial rivalry, and racial rivalry. Those kinds of rivalries are very
destructive influences.
_
.
157) Gal 6:1a . . Brethren, even if someone is caught in the very act of any
trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness;
The Greek word for "trespass" is interesting. It can refer to willful conduct
unbecoming and/or unintentional conduct.
For example the same Greek word at Rom 5:18 describes Adam's decision in
the forbidden fruit incident, which we know for sure wasn't due to either
ignorance or sophistry. (1Tim 2:14)
Seeing as how the willful variety is dealt with harshly and summarily per
1Cor 5:1-13, whereas in this situation gently, then I'd say Gal 6:1 is
referring to unintentional misconduct; which doesn't merit a public flogging;
but rather a quiet talk; and the more private the better in order to avoid
embarrassing the unintentional offender.
* Restoration does not apply to visitors; only to members on a church's
roles; i.e. the congregation. The visitors' business is none of our business so
don't go sticking your nose in it.
The Greek word for "restore" basically means to repair or adjust, viz:
restoration applies to maladjusted Christians, i.e. the ones whose
misconduct is habitual, and quite possibly detrimental to a church's overall
health.
A spirit of gentleness precludes the use of bullying, intimidation, rage.
yelling, demeaning comments, lecturing, scolding, biting sarcasm, ugly
remarks, carping criticism, brow beating, and such. Those kinds of behaviors
aren't gentle, no, they're cruel and abusive. They're also unwarranted when
the accused has committed an unintentional trespass.
NOTE: The instructions given in Gal 6:1 pertain only to spiritual Christians.
The garden variety, rank and file pew warmers-- viz: marginal Christians -
need not concern themselves with it.
In churches where people are conceited, assertive, confrontational,
embroiled in petty rivalries, debating, quarrelling, and maybe even jostling
for notoriety; the spiritual ones are obviously going to be as scarce as
California Condors
"each one looking to yourself, lest you too be tempted". (Gal 6:1b)
The Greek word for "tempted" is somewhat ambiguous. It primarily means
to test; but can also mean endeavor, scrutinize, entice, and/or discipline.
I think what the restorers are being cautioned against is going about a right
thing in a wrong way so that they themselves wind up taken to task for
conduct unbecoming. In some people's minds, the end justifies the means so
long as it benefits the so-called greater good. But that's Machiavellian
thinking rather than Christian thinking.
In other words: the restorers need to tread lightly because if they go after
an alleged offender like a lynch mob; then they themselves should expect to
be seen by others as a toxic menace and a threat to congregational peace,
trust, and cohesion.
_
157) Gal 6:1a . . Brethren, even if someone is caught in the very act of any
trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness;
The Greek word for "trespass" is interesting. It can refer to willful conduct
unbecoming and/or unintentional conduct.
For example the same Greek word at Rom 5:18 describes Adam's decision in
the forbidden fruit incident, which we know for sure wasn't due to either
ignorance or sophistry. (1Tim 2:14)
Seeing as how the willful variety is dealt with harshly and summarily per
1Cor 5:1-13, whereas in this situation gently, then I'd say Gal 6:1 is
referring to unintentional misconduct; which doesn't merit a public flogging;
but rather a quiet talk; and the more private the better in order to avoid
embarrassing the unintentional offender.
* Restoration does not apply to visitors; only to members on a church's
roles; i.e. the congregation. The visitors' business is none of our business so
don't go sticking your nose in it.
The Greek word for "restore" basically means to repair or adjust, viz:
restoration applies to maladjusted Christians, i.e. the ones whose
misconduct is habitual, and quite possibly detrimental to a church's overall
health.
A spirit of gentleness precludes the use of bullying, intimidation, rage.
yelling, demeaning comments, lecturing, scolding, biting sarcasm, ugly
remarks, carping criticism, brow beating, and such. Those kinds of behaviors
aren't gentle, no, they're cruel and abusive. They're also unwarranted when
the accused has committed an unintentional trespass.
NOTE: The instructions given in Gal 6:1 pertain only to spiritual Christians.
The garden variety, rank and file pew warmers-- viz: marginal Christians -
need not concern themselves with it.
In churches where people are conceited, assertive, confrontational,
embroiled in petty rivalries, debating, quarrelling, and maybe even jostling
for notoriety; the spiritual ones are obviously going to be as scarce as
California Condors
"each one looking to yourself, lest you too be tempted". (Gal 6:1b)
The Greek word for "tempted" is somewhat ambiguous. It primarily means
to test; but can also mean endeavor, scrutinize, entice, and/or discipline.
I think what the restorers are being cautioned against is going about a right
thing in a wrong way so that they themselves wind up taken to task for
conduct unbecoming. In some people's minds, the end justifies the means so
long as it benefits the so-called greater good. But that's Machiavellian
thinking rather than Christian thinking.
In other words: the restorers need to tread lightly because if they go after
an alleged offender like a lynch mob; then they themselves should expect to
be seen by others as a toxic menace and a threat to congregational peace,
trust, and cohesion.
_
.
158) Gal 6:2 . . Bear one another's burdens, and thus fulfill the law of
Christ.
It's human nature to shun people with problems as if they were lepers so
they don't drag us into a world of inconvenience and/or negativity. But that
is not what I call fulfilling the law of Christ; which reads like this:
● John 13:34-35 . . A new command I give you: Love one another. As I
have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that
you are my disciples, if you love one another.
The love that is defined by "As I have loved you" is a kind of love willing to
suffer inconvenience, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and disgrace for
the sake of another. Christ's love isn't a fault-finding attitude; it's a
supportive virtue: it doesn't only feel your pain, it gets involved in your pain.
Church can be the loneliest place on earth when nobody cares enough about
you to get involved in your pain; but instead would just as soon not know
about it. Sadly, there is about as much love for one another in modern
churches as there is amongst an audience of strangers at the movies. I
sincerely believe that a lot of that indifference has to do with modern
churches just simply being too big, too busy, and too complex; where
individuals are as invisible as a drop of pigment in a bucket of paint.
* I'm persuaded, from years of personal experience, that a mega church's
real strength isn't in its pastor, nor its associate pastors, nor its deacons, nor
its Sunday school teachers, nor its board, rather; it's in their inconspicuous
folk sitting out there in the pews quietly empowered by God for special
purposes, e.g. comfort and personal one-on-one spiritual counseling.
_
158) Gal 6:2 . . Bear one another's burdens, and thus fulfill the law of
Christ.
It's human nature to shun people with problems as if they were lepers so
they don't drag us into a world of inconvenience and/or negativity. But that
is not what I call fulfilling the law of Christ; which reads like this:
● John 13:34-35 . . A new command I give you: Love one another. As I
have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that
you are my disciples, if you love one another.
The love that is defined by "As I have loved you" is a kind of love willing to
suffer inconvenience, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and disgrace for
the sake of another. Christ's love isn't a fault-finding attitude; it's a
supportive virtue: it doesn't only feel your pain, it gets involved in your pain.
Church can be the loneliest place on earth when nobody cares enough about
you to get involved in your pain; but instead would just as soon not know
about it. Sadly, there is about as much love for one another in modern
churches as there is amongst an audience of strangers at the movies. I
sincerely believe that a lot of that indifference has to do with modern
churches just simply being too big, too busy, and too complex; where
individuals are as invisible as a drop of pigment in a bucket of paint.
* I'm persuaded, from years of personal experience, that a mega church's
real strength isn't in its pastor, nor its associate pastors, nor its deacons, nor
its Sunday school teachers, nor its board, rather; it's in their inconspicuous
folk sitting out there in the pews quietly empowered by God for special
purposes, e.g. comfort and personal one-on-one spiritual counseling.
_
.
159) Gal 6:6 . . And let the one who is taught the word, share all good
things with him who teaches.
I suspect that this is a bit different than 1Cor 9:11-14 and 1Tim 5:17-18
where it's required that full-time church officers be compensated for their
work.
The Greek of the verse above is vague, but seems to focus upon ordinary
laymen-- likely both men and women --who voluntarily teach Sunday school
classes and/or speak to Wednesday night prayer meetings. These non
professional leaders appreciate feed-back, i.e. reports from their students
and listeners how the information they've received improves their lives; and
quite possibly corrects their thinking.
_
159) Gal 6:6 . . And let the one who is taught the word, share all good
things with him who teaches.
I suspect that this is a bit different than 1Cor 9:11-14 and 1Tim 5:17-18
where it's required that full-time church officers be compensated for their
work.
The Greek of the verse above is vague, but seems to focus upon ordinary
laymen-- likely both men and women --who voluntarily teach Sunday school
classes and/or speak to Wednesday night prayer meetings. These non
professional leaders appreciate feed-back, i.e. reports from their students
and listeners how the information they've received improves their lives; and
quite possibly corrects their thinking.
_
