ARCHIVE: Will You Be Celebrating Christmas?

[wholearmor]

Lord willing.

 

[koban]

No, just as I accomplish more by telling my son, "Tabitha will not scream again because you pulled her hair." If I were just to say, "Don't pull your sister's hair," it doesn't convey as much information, nor is it as emphatic, unequivocal or as strictly stated as "Tabitha will not scream again because you pulled her hair."

.

Man - anybody who can make this statement with a straight face doesn't deserve to be listened to.


What a loon! :freak:

 

[koban]

I agree. I wonder why JustAChristian would even make such a statement as ...

Though it is not inherently wrong to observe the day of Christmas as a national holiday, to exchange gifts, to have lighted trees and ornaments, to enjoy the childhood fantasies that come with the season, ...

Nothing is inherently wrong. But Christmas most certainly is.

More looney tunes from the master. :hammer:

 

[koban]

This is going to be fun. I think while I'm reading the rest of this thread, I'll pull out all of Hilston's looney tunes. Maybe save them up so as not to make this thread too long.

 

[koban]

It's what Paul says, Crow. Religious holidays are an open denial of Christ's headship. Prove otherwise.

Where's your proof to the contrary, Crow? Would you say the same thing about Moses stoning a man for violating the Sabbath?

I cited the verse for a specific reason: To find out what Sozo believes about the verse. You, however, obviously don't understand the intent or context of the verse. It doesn't apply today. Neither do 1Co 8 and the end of 1Co 10. These verses pertained to the co-existence of elect Jews, Gentiles and members of the Body of Christ in the same congregation. There are no longer elect Jews or Gentiles of the Kingdom dispensation alive, so these passages no longer obtain.

Again, you miss the point of the passage. Paul is affirming the various dispensational laws for each of God's elect. It is right and proper for the Jew to observe food restrictions because that is what Moses commanded. It is right and proper for the member of the Body of Christ to eat pork and meat sacrificed to idols. But when these dispensational prescriptions come in conflict, as we see in Rome, then Paul says the weaker brother (the Jew) is to be respected and honored, and no offense is to be made toward him.

For you newcomers, please have a look at the previous posts before posting. I'm sure you don't want to re-hash old obliterated arguments.

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=641133&postcount=300




I hope somebody called him on this one further in.

I guess that the ten commandments were only written to the ancient Israelites and they don't apply today.

I guess Paul's letters to the Galatians, Collosians, etc were written specifically to those churches, moreover to those ancient churches and therefore don't apply today.

I guess the whole darn book must not apply today, since it was written to an earlier people. :freak:



(BTW - this is the post where he tries to defend his statement that celebrating Christmas is worse than abortion.)

 

[koban]

I know you are, but what am I. :freak:

Notice how desperate you've become. You have no scriptural arguments to offer. Instead, you resort to cheap shock-value tactics. It's a sure sign of desperation, novice.

Have you repented of violating your interpretation of these verses yet?

Ro 14:21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

1Co 8:13 Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.

If not, why not?

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=641224&postcount=315



Hilston - if you are a stumbling weakling in your faith, why should novice pay any heed to your interpretation of scripture?

 

[koban]

Shall I start pasting?

You've already done that by refusing to consider the biblical arguments against you.

See what I mean? That argument has been refuted several times over, and no one has been able to counter the refutation.

And since this "sums up the entire argument" for you, you obviously believe Romans 14 applies to this situation. So, you should obey your own interpretation and not celebrate Christmas for those who are offended or stumble because of it.

Ro 14:21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

You're a hypocrite, novice.

Once again, you demonstrate how egregiously inept you are by uncritically dismissing the exegesis provided that shows you what judging in this verse refers to.

So did Paul novice. Paul publicly rebuked Peter for celebrating religious ceremonies, just as you are being rebuked here. If you think there's a difference, please prove it.

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=641390&postcount=338


So are you Hilston, so are you. It's obvious that you are causing novice to stumble, or at least it's obvious that you believe he's stumbling.

Hypocrite!

 

[koban]

In a reply to Hilston:

I'll comment as soon as you tell us how long you've had homosexual tendencies.

And Hilston never responds! :think: :shocked:


(Maybe he had to take off his shoes and socks and is still counting. :chuckle: )

 

[koban]

I am running short on time, with the holidays coming up and some family is in town, not to mention my wife is about to have a baby! So let me respond to this one point.....
The rules are... there are no rules!

Those in the Body are sealed until the day of redemption.

And that's it!

No rules... not a single one!

In the dispensation of uncircumcision all you need to do is turn your life over to Christ. With a pure heart accept that His work on the cross is payment for your sin... your past sin... your present sin and your future sin. And if you do this Christ will not forsake you....ever!

:BRAVO:


Thank you Knight, for making this long slog worthwhile.

 

[koban]

So the word "dispensation" is meaningless? All of Christ's commands through Paul are empty? Christ's ordinances through Paul are pointless?

Of course. Does that mean we don't have to care about Christ's commands, ordinances or laws? Please explain how being sealed equates to lawlessness?

Here's one:

Php 3:16 Nevertheless, whereto we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us mind the same thing. 17 Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample.

How can you tell who walks according to this rule? How do you mark those who follow Paul's example if you don't see their obedience to the rules?

Paul continues: 18 (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: 19 Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.)

How do you know who the enemies of the stavros are unless you see them disobeying the rules? Your thesis is self-refuting, Knight. Your claims are contrary to the very language Paul uses throughout his epistles. I've given you example after example. I've taken time to look these up, to focus on specific questions, to provide some analyses to help demonstrate the point. But all I get from you is generalized statement that is patently contradicted by your own posts and the piles of scripture that have been provided.

Whoever said otherwise? Do you think I want to live righteously in order to have my sins forgiven? Do you think my desire to live according to the rules is to have my sins paid for? Do you forget that I'm a proponent of particular redemption? I don't abstain from Christmas because any of those reasons. I abstain because Paul commands us to eschew religious holidays, ritual, ceremony and symbolism. That by doing so, I will abound more and more as I walk according to Paul's rule of how to please God.

1Th 4:1 Furthermore then we beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please God, so ye would abound more and more.

The grace of God teaches us to live righteously and godly, not for salvation, not to work off our own sin, not to earn the payment of our sin, but to obey Him and to please Him.

Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, 12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;

:dizzy: :kookoo:

Clearly, Hilston has been using David2's bong, or Letsargue's glue bottle



[Blazing Saddles voice] Won't somebody help that poor man?[/Blazing Saddles voice]



So Hilston, if you break Paul's commandment, then what?

Start murdering unborn babies? Might as well! :kookoo:

 

[koban]

Paul uses the 3rd person imperitive to give direction to a 2nd party. He tells the 3rd party not to do something.

There are 2 ways for the 2nd party to carry out the command given to the 3rd party (that is meant for them). Either they can ignore what the 3rd party was commanded to do (thus, not letting them accomplish what they are commanded not to do). Or, the 2nd party can avoid doing something that would illicit a response from the 3rd party that included what they were commanded not to do.

An example of the latter: "Your sister will no longer scream because her hair was pulled".

I think as far as arbitrary laws are concerned, using the 3rd person imperative is a poor way to establish them.

Crow - :chuckle:

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=644591&postcount=462



"Your sister will no longer scream because her hair was pulled".

I kicked this one around with my boys the other day. They both agreed that it was much less clear than "Don't pull your sister's hair"

Some of the responses we came up with were:

"Thanks Dad, that was getting real annoying!"

"Thanks Dad, can I have my roll of duct tape back?"

"Thanks Dad, can you get her to stop screaming when I kick her butt?"

 

[stunrut]

Yes. Unfortunately we will be celebrating at work this year. One of the hazards of Emergency Medical Service.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

:BRAVO:


Thank you Knight, for making this long slog worthwhile.

'Tis my curse.

 

[Agape4Robin]

:dizzy: :kookoo:

Clearly, Hilston has been using David2's bong, or Letsargue's glue bottle



[Blazing Saddles voice] Won't somebody help that poor man?[/Blazing Saddles voice]



So Hilston, if you break Paul's commandment, then what?

Start murdering unborn babies? Might as well! :kookoo:

:darwinsm:

 

[One Eyed Jack]

I'll be celebrating Christmas. However, I will not be putting a tree in my apartment -- they belong outside.

 

[stunrut]

We will have an artificial tree. Otherwise where would I put all my ornaments?

 

[One Eyed Jack]

Artifical trees are fine. I'm just too lazy to put one together.

 

[koban]

You could spray paint the refrigerator green :think:

 

[stunrut]

And use magnetic ornaments!

 

[koban]

or kids crayon drawings!