Leaderboard

Pickle, all I'm doing on this thread is sharing things that I've heard about that our leaders are dealing with. I am interested in this topic in the fields of being fair to what the Bible says and does not say and encouraging us to follow the Bible and not read into the Bible ideas that are not there but are tradition. And how this affects how we treat the humans who are struggling with this issue. As I have said before I will let the theologians fight it out, I have enough temptations in my own life that I have to focus on without getting sidetracked by an issue that is not a part of my life. However it's hard to share what the issues of the current debate are when you don't want to look at the evidence and want to plug your ears even to the theologians who are on your side because they agree that the Bible is talking about something else in these passages. The issue is do you want to remain ignorantly bliss in your own little shell, or do you want to know what is being discussed and what our leaders are looking at in trying to make a decision? Do you want to listen to the evidence so that you can make up your mind or do you want to live with the idea that your mind is made up and you don't want to be confused by the evidence or facts. If we are taking these verses out of context should we not be aware of it? Or is it only Sunday keepers who need to learn that their cherished beliefs come from reading tradition into their texts and taking the text out of context. Why are they at risk of being lost for taking the Bible out of context and following how they traditionally interpret the verses, but we are fitted for heaven by doing these things? Why is it Satan who is deceiving them by reading their favorite ideas into their verses, but when we do the same thing it's not from Satan?

(I've dropped out of this thread, and will drop back out after a couple of comments) Pickle's insistence that 'strange flesh' (sarkos heteros) in Jude refers to homosexuality because that is what it suggests to him is contrary to the actual meaning of Scripture. Here's one source where people are digging into the meaning of the expression. The case for interpreting it as being about homosexuality is extremely weak: http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/19854/in-jude-7-what-is-strange-flesh Robert said: You may need to read more closely, because I am not actually reading anyone involved in this discussion as condoning the practice of homosexuality. The distinction between actions and orientations is often used extremely loosely, and many are making the case that those with this orientation should not be judged, rather than arguing about actions. Kevin(wrx) has said multiple times 'there is no evidence Romans 1 was written by someone else', but that's not the argument being made at all. It's accepted that Paul wrote all of it. The issue is about the style of writing and the rhetorical strategy being used by Paul. The reason I dropped out of the thread, and will again now, is that there appears to be much appetite to read assumptions and prejudices into the texts, and very little appetite to seek to determine what the texts actually meant to their writers in the language, time and culture when they were written.

There's a lot of stuff in the Bible for which there is no archeological record. That doesn't mean that those events aren't true. The reverse is also true.

I don't see any indication in Genesis that the Sodomites knew that the men were angels. Regarding this whole issue, start with Gen. 3:15, which says that God would put enmity between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent. Then consider that Gen. 4 illustrates that enmity, and that 1 John says that Cain was of the wicked one in contrast to being born of God. We therefore can have the same meaning in Genesis for "sons of God" as we have in 1 John. Genesis 4:26 ... then began men to call upon the name of the LORD. It has been said that this can be translated, "Then began men to call themselves by the name of the Lord," and thus it is saying that that is when the term "sons of God" began to be used. The verse after the very next verse after the genealogies speaks of the sons of God. Jesus was quite clear that the angels neither marry nor are given in marriage. It's a very old idea that men and angels crossed, and is found in the Book of Enoch. But biblical support is lacking.

Read More Daily Jesus Scripture: Matthew 13:10-15 Starting Question: When was a time you had to learn something the hard way? Silent Scribbles In the past two years and three months, I have gained a new and deeper understanding of the stories Jesus directed at religious leaders. When I was a pastor, I believed these stories were speaking of other people - not me. Now, after a season of deep repentance, I see how blind I was to Jesus’ view of my spiritual identity. Due to my failings, I’ve been able to see these stories from a different perspective. And, in a way, I’m glad for the experience. Because of my sin, I lost my ordination and job and was required to spend a year in spiritual exile. I was allowed no form of leadership: public speaking, Sabbath School, worship, etc. - I could attend, but not lead. This caused a total spiritual realignment. Rather than letting my giftedness go stale, I invested my leadership and spiritual energy into my family. This was a very good thing! During my year of censure, we experienced love and compassion at church week-to-week from local members and online daily from Christians globally. Our local church embraced and included my family. They were gentle with me in my wounded state. In short, they loved us. Juxtaposing this outflowing of love with the overwhelming stony silence I experienced from previous mentors and friends in ministry made the difference all the more dramatic. In January 2015 my censure ended. I spent this second year investing in Sabbath School and Worship at church. The denominational leadership maintained their silence except to require a partial continuance of my censure - five years of ‘no preaching during the divine hour.’ At the beginning of 2016, having become a still pond rather than a flowing stream, I was in need of a spiritual outlet. Still engaged in personal Bible reading and study, I was becoming like the Dead Sea - stagnant and toxic. To become fresh and flowing again, like the Sea of Galilee, I began writing the Daily Jesus Devotional. I sent out a bulk email - to friends and family asking them to read and share the posts that touched them. In response, the church family again shone brightly, sponsoring and encouraging the project. Previous workmates however, seeing my hand reaching out for help, broke their silence in a completely unexpected way. I started to understand, in full living colour, Jesus’ story about the beaten man on the side of the road. The previously silent priests and Levites began whispering as they stepped around me, "Someone else will help you, Dave. I can't be seen to be seen with you." One called because, he said, he didn’t want to put it into print. Another risked an email to say that a time when I would be worthy of positive public mention was outside the scope of his imagination. All hope is not lost - there are many good Samaritans. Alongside the Christian camp, the mixed multitude - my new workmates, employers and friends - have picked me up without even knowing it. Just because that’s what they would want done for them. In all fairness, I have received kind words from an occasional pastor or two. (You know who you are!) Thanks for your thoughtfulness. These conversations were largely based on regret that the Seventh-day Adventist Church has no strategy for reconciling with fallen pastors. Perhaps Jesus spent so much time haranguing religious leaders so they would see that policy and procedure are not needed when dealing with confessed sin. Indeed, His constant niggling kept their attention focused on Him until the moment they saw that the pathway to reconciliation is always cross-shaped. This counter-intuitive recognition comes soaked in the tears of those crumpled beneath the Cross. I've gained a deeper understanding of another of Jesus’ parables - that of the returned prodigal. I am he. I did wrong. Desperate wrong. I wasted the resources and gifts the Father gave me. And, when I came home dirty and empty handed, the Father embraced me - faster and more fervently than I was ready for! As did my family and church family. But, the older brother - returning from his work in the field - shakes his head at the Father’s foolish love for a wayward child and the wild celebration happening in the House. I remember shaking my head at such things, not so long ago. There is another story - not told by Jesus but lived by Him - about a person caught in sin by religious leaders, dragged to Jesus and thrown in front of Him for judgment. Our Lord drove those self-righteous men away and whispered to the broken one, “You’ll get no condemnation from me. Now go live, leaving sin behind!” Jesus has lived this story again and again with every one of His disciples between then and now. Perhaps, the absence of my accusers is due to silent words scribbled by Jesus in dusty places. I really don’t know. But, what I do know is that I am deeply grateful to our Lord for His love and His ever-present handwriting on my softening heart. If you are part of the body of Christ - thank you for loving us as you would want to be loved if thrown at Jesus’ feet. You know, there is no better place to be thrown! And if you are one of the religious leaders, thanks for stopping alongside the path for a quiet chat. It felt good to be noticed. I'll be in the House, if you're looking for me. Reflection Question: Story is always biased by the teller. What is told and what is left out is up to the one sharing. How do you feel about the telling of this testimony? Does it seem bitter or sweet? Arrogant or humble? Loving or angry? Does it bring anything to mind from your life? Write me an email. I'd love to hear your story. Prayer time: Before you pray together, ask: What would you like to say to Jesus today? View the full article

But Kevin, you are sounding inconsistent. If you don't want to read into the Bible ideas that aren't there, then you can't just uncritically swallow what any scholar says about the supposed background of this or that passage, because doing so may very well result in reading into a passage something that isn't there. And what the professor said about cross dressing is one example. If you wanted to find a prostitute, you went to the temple. One could therefore conclude that prostitution is fine today if the reason why God forbade something had only to do with false worship. Rather, I think what was going on was that Satan used false religious beliefs to lead people to do things that inside they felt were wrong.

"And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. 7 In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire." (Jude 1:6-7) It is possible to infer from these verses - taken together - that Jude is referring to the issue discussed in Genesis 6:4: "The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward [like after the flood in Sodom and Gomorrah?]—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown." I DO think this refers to people having sex with angels; and angels are indeed "strange flesh" compared to humans. That was the reason God sent the flood in the first place - to eliminate this hybrid race before it could destroy the pure humanity created by God. If Sodom and Gomorrah were so full of homosexuals, why would the whole city go after these angels? They could have all the gay sex they wanted already; so what was special about these guys? They were ANGELS, that's what made them special and desirable. Not saying I'm right; just saying it's feasible.

Similarly, look up my wording. The Sodomites were already slated for destruction before the two angels ever got to the gates, much less Lot's home. What angels do you think the Sodomites had already tried to rape before that last night? If you can't come up with any, then your proposed interpretation of Jude's words cannot possibly be correct. Do you have any other example of where people were destroyed by God for the crime of doing something they had no idea they were doing? Jude describes a two-fold crime: (a) giving themselves over to fornication, and (b) going after strange flesh. In my view, fornication includes all sexual perversions, and thus includes homosexual actions, among other things. If Jude is looking back at the story of Genesis, a point of agreement, what in that story would constitute fornication, if not homosexual actions?

I feel very much the same way. We can (and do!) reveal ourselves through our words and actions. A rose by any other name would smell as sweet! To me, it's important to be kind, fair, and just everyday, no matter what name I go by: Daughter, wife, mother, daughter, grand-daughter, sister, aunt, daughter-in-law, friend, parishoner, acquaintance, employer, employee, customer, client... I chose to remain semi-anonymous here because it allows me to write "aloud" thoughts that I am uncomfortable sharing with every person I know. If confronted, I wouldn't deny what I've shared here, but it's not something I want in the open all of the time.

This was 100% *not* meant to pressure you or anyone: I hope you'll stay.

The name is mine, and the photo is my inner-self.