Bible verses that Christians ignore

The funniest scripture is Revelations 16:15: “Look, I will come as unexpectedly as a thief! Blessed are all who are watching for me, who keep their clothing ready so they will not have to walk around naked and ashamed.”
Lmao, If you aren’t fully dressed when the rapture happens everyone’s gonna see your goods O_O.

 

No you are an acknowledged hypocrite who uses the fruits of the spirit like a club - and has rationalized it.

Once again,the spirit is not a lack of accountability.

The spirit works just fine in me, which is why I have little appetite for behavior that is clearly little more than Bible abuse.

 

You have missed a shift in the discussion.. the correlation between Spirit Filled Sects and Demonic possession.

Who has criticized the Fruits of your spirit?

 

So this is how kindness and gentleness is demonstrated by you? Peace, love and joy? An impeccable witness.

This thread isn't about me.

It is about scripture that Christians ignore. I think this is a great place to start. You are helping to make my case.

 

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. ​

~ Guess Who

 

Pretty much contradicts the Sermon on the Mount and the Beatitudes.

"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do."

This was about cheating poor people in the Temple.

 

But it was the sword of love.
He talked about loving your enemies and it would be like pouring coals on their heads.
The Fruits are the sword, in disguise.
When people are treated as the Fruits proscribe, they will react violently toward you, as they will not be able to ellicit the angry response they seek. The Fruits do not cause peace, they reveal the hearts of men.

 

To be sure. Unfortunately, love is the enemy of children of the devil who, in order to turn the good nature of their intended victims against them, substitute for the love of Christ a sticky-sweet simulacrum which serves as a medium for infecting those victims with the affinity for evil which motivates the victimizers.

Indeed, and the devil is plenty clever enough to pass himself off to the uninitiate as calm, reasonable and compassionate, even as he advocates pure insanity, so as to elicit anger from the Winston Smiths of the world who refuse, at least for a time, to affirm that 2+2=5.

No doubt you find that a comforting thought, as secure as you are in your blissful ignorance of the ineffable truth which underlies it.

 

People who are devoid of spiritual understanding can certainly be expected to think so.

Actually it was about everybody to takes offense to it.

 

THe Bible is pretty clear about what to do with serial complainers and whiners. Love is not allowing someone who is vain and obstinate to abuse people and call it the Bible.

The Bible is very clear on what to do when conronted with such people - caste them out.

Once again, to your whiney rationalizing, Love and Joy means never being held to task. That is death.

Love, as any parent know, means that when someone is being a jack hole, you tell them.

Now, lets compare. I have disagreed with BOTH Margot and Q, and have done so in a civil and constructive manner. Anyone who stands up to YOU is ignoring the one part of the Bible that you pay attention to - and interprete the way YOU think it should be.

You are doing nothing but being a bully to people and attempting, poorly, to use their faith against them. Love and peace does not mean you tolerate abuse. Period.

Feel free to disagree, but when all you can say is (ever), "You are violating the fruits of the spirit ... er, because I say so!" Well BB, as numerous posters have attempted to tell you, you are neither God nor Jesus and your judgements are rude and absolutely hypocritical.

The constant badgering is nothing more than the usual behavior of teh atheist, "I am better than you because YOU violate and ignore your own standards!" Its arrogance.

For the upteeth time, Love is not the tolerance of abuse, nor is it a lack of accountability. You can love someone and still call a spade a spade. Or did you miss that commandment about honesty?

 

Because Paul was talking to the Church over 2000 years ago and this is very clear to me. This is why I posted the part where Paul said "judge for yourselves." If I were to take that as a command to me, it wouldn't be a problem because I don't care if women or men cover their hair,have long hair or shave their heads as it pertains to prayer or worship.

The commands are very simple in Christianity even though you may disagree, Everything falls under the ten commandments and Jesus' two commands, as well as his moral teachings such as turn the other cheek, love your enemies, judge not, etc... These set the bar at perfection if your heart permits.

None of these thing are why I used the word "petty."
What I was specifically talking about was the omission between "no exception" as opposed to "except marital unfaithfulness."

But I will answer these things as I see it.

1. No, I think it is very important. I mean, Divorce was getting out of hand and Jesus drew a line, let's go with "no exceptions." (the extreme) In this sense, guilt was effectively put back into the equation as opposed to a law given men a free pass.

2. He did clarify,it was divorce in general that he wasn't in favor of.

3. Pick one ? lol Seriously though, this is a general command to limit the idea that divorce is perfectly acceptable and of no damage to society. ( including children )

That verse doesn't say anything about "the man can go get another mate." After Jesus condemns divorce, it puts blame on the man for "causing her to commit adultery."

No, just give me one example.

Falsely believed ? Doubtful. But no, I suppose it was good advise at anytime.

Well I think it is safe to assume that Christian's aren't supposed to kill non-believers so that isn't an option.lol

First of all, 1st Corinthians is assuming that they are already married, the second Corinthians is not.

You ask "So why are believers married to non-believers?" I'm pretty sure that there are far more professing Christians in the world at 2.1 billion...

Which doesn't change what I said..

Look at the context that the Pharisees brought to Jesus

"When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out from his house,..."

This was the Law that Jesus was answering to..

I'll concede the point that some Christians ignore the "no exceptions" marriage rule but I don't disagree with the context of which he made it.

Jesus didn't make laws of the basis that men should beat their wives,etc..etc...etc... He laid down the ideology..

 

No, my statement was "No the Bible doesn't command us stoning our kids.." Us meaning Christians.

....and what is your point about Mark 7:5-10 ? This is no exception.

Ugh, you are ignorant on Mark 7,which isn't an insult. As far as Matthew 10:37, although you disagree with this,that doesn't make it incorrect or bad, in fact it is a good thing for a Christian but as an atheist I wouldn't expect you to agree with it.

 

I assumed that much.

So ? This is more the reason why the Gospel is important. You don't agree that broad is the road that leads to destruction ?

Heck, turn on your tv set ..

 

Unfortunately from my experience is that most Christians (and I use that word loosely) do not study the Bible. There's a big difference between reading the Bible and studying it. Most rarely read the Bible let alone study it. Except for a few scriptures here and there many don't know much of the Bible at all. Their belief basically comes from what the pastor tells them in Church, from the pulpit. For me, if there was no Bible I would never put one foot in the Church. The Bible is an exciting book when one understands it. The Bible is about human beings, God reason for making us and our relationship with Him. But much of what is preached in Church bores me. Those scriptures that you post can easily be answered but I will let others address them.

 

A few questions.
Is calling another person a "jackhole" kind or gentle? Loving or good? Where should I put it?
If this is the "upteeth" time, when does "downteeth" time start?
This thread is about scripture Christians ignore. I haven't "badgered" anyone on this thread. I posted my suggestion of a verse that fits the bill. By your response I'm apparently right.
I have told you before I'm not an atheist. To continue to call me one I think would be worthy of reporting. What do you think? I've never done it before.
As for what the Bible says to do if your message is rejected; brush the dust off your sandals and leave. Feel free to do so if you like, or act civilly.

I do get a kick out of how angry you get when having to confront the Fruits of the Spirit. Your reaction is now completely predictable, and it never rises to the high standards set by Paul in Galatians.

 

His reaction is in accordance with Paul. As Paul hated those who sought to bring the believers under a law. And that is what you do with the 'fruits of the Spirit'. You attempt to make a law of it to bring the Christians into some sort of guilt for not measuring up.

Paul wasn't setting any 'high standards'. The fruits of the Spirit are not high standards. They are the fruits of the Spirit. They are standards for someone like you. But then, you cant reach them as they are of the Spirit only. They are however found in the believer. And only in the Christian.

Quantrill

 

So are you saying Neutral is not a Christian, or that calling someone a "jackhole" is kind?
I'm very confused now.
Are you saying Neutral doesn't measure up?
Very convoluted post.

You guys get so ticked off whenever the Fruits are discussed.

 

I will discuss the fruits of the spirit with you.. then lets see who gets 'ticked off' of 'kicked off' the thread first.

 

Is the truth harsh to you BB? If you are acting like a total idiot and someone tells you that your are acting like an idiot, especially after the gentle method has repeatedly failed - you have no right to demand kindness in the face of repeated tomfoolery.

How about you put it in the pile of - someone who respects humans enough to tell them the truth. My friends, people who care about me, will tell me when I am out of line.

Is enabling a sign of love to you?

BB, EVERY debate you are in ends in the fruit of teh spirit attack. Rationalize it however you wish.

You keep saying you are not an atheist and then dodging your spiritual classification while acting like an atheist. And whenever anyone points out what YOUR BEHAVUIOR indicates, you whine about being called an atheist.

Well, did it occur to you that many people think you are an atheist because you act like one? Do you wonder how people can arrive at that conclusion when you repeatedy, and apparently ONLY, berate Christians with fruit of the spirit attacks with selective Bible quotes - just like atheists?

I get a kick out of your rationalizing projections. Its amazing, someone says, "You are out of line and acting like a total hypocrite," and what you hear is anger and uncontrollableness?

Is just another demand for enabling.

 

...Anyway, getting back to the OP: everything in Leviticus not specifically rated to the hatred of homosexuals.

Anyone else ever read Leviticus? Would be very interesting to meet an anti-gay-rights Christian who practices just about anything else from that chapter.

 

Leviticus is principally about priestly rituals and rules... written by priests .... during or after the Babylonian Exile of the sixth century BC.

 

This is a thread about verses Christians ignore. You repeatedly prove the point.
As for my projection, you choose to edit the name calling you have used and quote your white washed version. If you think that is an honest evaluation of your behavior, then noone can reach you.
God be with you.

 

So you are finding pride in goading people to anger?
Amen.

 

I would have to disagree with your characterization of Leviticus being "principally" about priestly rules. It is at least as much a codification of rules for the people as well. Much of it discusses rules of sacrifice and the handling of those sacrifices by the priestly class, but it is telling the people what sacrifices they must bring for various offerings as well.

 

Rules concerning valuations:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+27&version=NASB

Yes.. they were a source of revenue. The Levites had no land.