Has the Church Replaced Israel ?

[Clete]

According to the definition of Logos used in scripture, Logos=/= logic. The most common use of Logos in scripture is Word.

Which is a very nearly totally incorrect translation into English, most especially in John chapter one where it flat out should not have been translated "word". The use of "word" in that context has no meaning in the English language. The word "word" is not used in that fashion anywhere else in all of English literature except in either John chapter one or some reference to John chapter one and in every case, its actual meaning must be explained because "word" simply does not communicate the concept being communicated in that passage.

The correct translation would be "Reason" or, if you want to stick to a translation that is as much transliteration as it is translation, you could just as well use the word "Logic".

It can also be used to mean “word,” “speech,” “utterance,” or “message.”

Yes, yes, we all have access to the Blue Letter bible website and its accompanying access to Strong's concordance. The word, as used in John chapter one, means "reason".

When people have stopped listening, how does insulting them encourage them to listen to what you have to say?

Most of the time it doesn't. It is, however, the only ground left with any chance of bearing fruit. All one can do is sow the seed. Tell the truth and let the offense work its ministry. It will bear fruit in the listener or it won't. In either case, you'll have not cast your pearls before swine.

(Oh! That "swine" remark was an offensive thing to say! But wait, its in the bible and Jesus Himself said it! But Jesus was nice to everyone, right? What am I supposed to do?! I'm so confused!)

 

[Gary K]

I'm sorry, but Jesus sent a Helper (the Holy Spirit) to His disciples so that they could preach the gospel of the Kingdom of Israel. The Holy Spirit wasn't sent as a Helper to us in the Body of Christ, at least not specifically like Jesus said ini John 16:7.

Jesus lives within us, and as Clete mentioned, He is the LOGOS, logic.

So what I said is a complete list.



if they've lowered themselves to that point by then, then there's not much point in continuing to try to point out their original error, no?



Unless they've already stopped listening to what I have to say, for whatever reason...

At which point, is it wrong to call anyone a fool for intentionally walking towards the edge of a cliff?



Sometimes it is.

And telling people the truth rather than being polite is generally a better path forwards.



Clete has a better answer for this than I do.



I point back to what I said previously:



If they don't like that they're being one of those things, then that's a matter of the heart.

There's nothing inherently wrong with being offensive, because the truth is offensive to those who hate the truth, and in fact, Jesus was offensive. He is "the Rock OF OFFENCE!"

If someone is sinning, yes, even if they're Christians, one should call them out on it.

Or would you rather they continue in their sin, especially if they're a Christian?

Jesus is still a human being.

Joh_20:27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.

So how does Jesus live within us?

 

[JudgeRightly]

Jesus is still a human being.

Joh_20:27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.

So how does Jesus live within us?

Start a new thread, please.

 

[Gary K]

Start a new thread, please.

How is this off topic? I simply responded to your post.

 

[JudgeRightly]

How is this off topic? I simply responded to your post.

It has nothing to do with the topic of the thread.

 

[Gary K]

It has nothing to do with the topic of the thread.

How can that be when I was responding to an assertion of yours that Jesus lives within us?

 

[JudgeRightly]

How can that be when I was responding to an assertion of yours that Jesus lives within us?

Read what I was responding to with it.

Your question is off topic.

Start a new thread. Last time I'm going to say it.

 

[CabinetMaker]

I'm sorry, but Jesus sent a Helper (the Holy Spirit) to His disciples so that they could preach the gospel of the Kingdom of Israel. The Holy Spirit wasn't sent as a Helper to us in the Body of Christ, at least not specifically like Jesus said ini John 16:7.

Jesus lives within us, and as Clete mentioned, He is the LOGOS, logic.

So what I said is a complete list.



if they've lowered themselves to that point by then, then there's not much point in continuing to try to point out their original error, no?



Unless they've already stopped listening to what I have to say, for whatever reason...

At which point, is it wrong to call anyone a fool for intentionally walking towards the edge of a cliff?



Sometimes it is.

And telling people the truth rather than being polite is generally a better path forwards.



Clete has a better answer for this than I do.



I point back to what I said previously:



If they don't like that they're being one of those things, then that's a matter of the heart.

There's nothing inherently wrong with being offensive, because the truth is offensive to those who hate the truth, and in fact, Jesus was offensive. He is "the Rock OF OFFENCE!"

If someone is sinning, yes, even if they're Christians, one should call them out on it.

Or would you rather they continue in their sin, especially if they're a Christian?

Can you give me an example of when you, personally, have been personally insulted and it resulted in you changing your mind? Is this a common occurrence?

 

[CabinetMaker]

Which is a very nearly totally incorrect translation into English, most especially in John chapter one where it flat out should not have been translated "word". The use of "word" in that context has no meaning in the English language. The word "word" is not used in that fashion anywhere else in all of English literature except in either John chapter one or some reference to John chapter one and in every case, its actual meaning must be explained because "word" simply does not communicate the concept being communicated in that passage.

The correct translation would be "Reason" or, if you want to stick to a translation that is as much transliteration as it is translation, you could just as well use the word "Logic".



Yes, yes, we all have access to the Blue Letter bible website and its accompanying access to Strong's concordance. The word, as used in John chapter one, means "reason".


Most of the time it doesn't. It is, however, the only ground left with any chance of bearing fruit. All one can do is sow the seed. Tell the truth and let the offense work its ministry. It will bear fruit in the listener or it won't. In either case, you'll have not cast your pearls before swine.

(Oh! That "swine" remark was an offensive thing to say! But wait, its in the bible and Jesus Himself said it! But Jesus was nice to everyone, right? What am I supposed to do?! I'm so confused!)

I have had opportunity to talk with gay people and attempt to share the Gospel with them. As soon as I bring it up, the almost inevitable response is along the lines of, "You mean the God that wants me dead? No Thanks!" These people have become the swine that makes casting pearls a worthless exercise. But what made them become swine? Christians. In a "loving" attempt to share the gospel, most Christians will lead with some version of, "God wants you dead!" and go from there. I have often wondered what God will say to those people who witness like that. Is it possible that God will look at them and say, "Why did you turn my son/daughter away from me?" God did not send Jesus to teach us how to judge one another, God sent Jesus to teach us how to live a Godly life, how to love and care for one another. There are times when we do have to walk away from people because they have no interest in anything we may have to say. Does that give us the right to insult them? If that insult turns there heart away from God even more, well, I think that means we are missing the lesson that Jesus came to teach.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Can you give me an example of when you, personally, have been personally insulted and it resulted in you changing your mind? Is this a common occurrence?

I don't even remember the last time I was insulted, let alone during a conversation on an important topic.

I do know that I've changed my mind on a few topics, recently, through logic and reason, being shown evidence.

But that's because I'm open to being corrected.

Most of the people whom, at least I myself, insult, are people who have shown themselves to be immovable in their positions, no matter how much evidence I shove in their face.

Which is exactly what Clete and I have been saying.

If someone is open to correction, then there are no insults needed.

But if someone is set in their beliefs, and resistant to correction, then that makes them a fool, and thus they should be treated as such, because they don't want to be corrected.

I was going to do a cursory search for a few verses, but found this article instead:

Embrace the Blessing of Rebuke

Only in Jesus can we find our identity not in being without fault, but in being shown love by God when we’re still sinners and chock-full of faults (Romans 5:8). With such a Savior to steady our feet, we can embrace rebuke for the blessing that it is.

www.desiringgod.org

 

[JudgeRightly]

I have had opportunity to talk with gay people and attempt to share the Gospel with them. As soon as I bring it up, the almost inevitable response is along the lines of, "You mean the God that wants me dead? No Thanks!" These people have become the swine that makes casting pearls a worthless exercise. But what made them become swine? Christians. In a "loving" attempt to share the gospel, most Christians will lead with some version of, "God wants you dead!" and go from there. I have often wondered what God will say to those people who witness like that. Is it possible that God will look at them and say, "Why did you turn my son/daughter away from me?" God did not send Jesus to teach us how to judge one another, God sent Jesus to teach us how to live a Godly life, how to love and care for one another. There are times when we do have to walk away from people because they have no interest in anything we may have to say. Does that give us the right to insult them? If that insult turns there heart away from God even more, well, I think that means we are missing the lesson that Jesus came to teach.

No one is saying to be cruel to unbelievers (or believers, for that matter)

But there is love in rebuke.

God says to love our neighbors, and even to love our enemies.

Rebuking someone who is an unbeliever shows them that we do want what's best for them... which is what love is.

Love is the commitment to the good of someone.

If you are not committed to someone's good, then you do not love them.

Rebuking them is telling them that they're doing something wrong, and that they need to fix it, or else they're a fool, and stupid, self-hating, and leading others astray, which isn't very loving of them.

 

[Gary K]

No one is saying to be cruel to unbelievers (or believers, for that matter)

But there is love in rebuke.

God says to love our neighbors, and even to love our enemies.

Rebuking someone who is an unbeliever shows them that we do want what's best for them... which is what love is.

Love is the commitment to the good of someone.

If you are not committed to someone's good, then you do not love them.

Rebuking them is telling them that they're doing something wrong, and that they need to fix it, or else they're a fool, and stupid, self-hating, and leading others astray, which isn't very loving of them.

So balling someone who believes differently than you do a liar is a rebuke?

Gal 6:1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. Gal 6:2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. Gal 6:3 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.

 

[JudgeRightly]

So balling someone who believes differently than you do a liar is a rebuke?

As RD has stated multiple times to you already:

Your claim that we called you a liar BECAUSE you disagree with us is the lie you put forth, and why we call you a liar.

Disagreeing with us doesn't make you a liar. LYING makes you a liar.

And thus, we rebuke you for lying.

 

[CabinetMaker]

I don't even remember the last time I was insulted, let alone during a conversation on an important topic.

I do know that I've changed my mind on a few topics, recently, through logic and reason, being shown evidence.

But that's because I'm open to being corrected.

Most of the people whom, at least I myself, insult, are people who have shown themselves to be immovable in their positions, no matter how much evidence I shove in their face.

Which is exactly what Clete and I have been saying.

If someone is open to correction, then there are no insults needed.

But if someone is set in their beliefs, and resistant to correction, then that makes them a fool, and thus they should be treated as such, because they don't want to be corrected.

I was going to do a cursory search for a few verses, but found this article instead:

Embrace the Blessing of Rebuke

Only in Jesus can we find our identity not in being without fault, but in being shown love by God when we’re still sinners and chock-full of faults (Romans 5:8). With such a Savior to steady our feet, we can embrace rebuke for the blessing that it is.

www.desiringgod.org

If someone is not open to correction, insulting them will certainly not open them up to correction. Ad Hominem attacks are the least effective form of communication.

The other interesting thing is that I am fairly certain that what I believe and what you believe are not the same. Does that mean you are not my brother in Christ, not at all. You would probably want to "correct" me but according to my pastor, it is you that needs to be corrected. Interesting conundrum.

 

[CabinetMaker]

No one is saying to be cruel to unbelievers (or believers, for that matter)

But there is love in rebuke.

God says to love our neighbors, and even to love our enemies.

Rebuking someone who is an unbeliever shows them that we do want what's best for them... which is what love is.

Love is the commitment to the good of someone.

If you are not committed to someone's good, then you do not love them.

Rebuking them is telling them that they're doing something wrong, and that they need to fix it, or else they're a fool, and stupid, self-hating, and leading others astray, which isn't very loving of them.

No one says to be cruel to unbelievers and yet so many Christians do exactly that. It is a problem.

Yes, there are times that rebuke is necessary but, an Ad Hominem attack is not a rebuke. A rebuke addresses the issue, never the person.

I don't rebuke unbelievers, I share the reasons for the hope that is within me. I talk. I do my best to answer the hard questions they inevitably ask with courtesy and patience. Remember, it is not my job to save people, it is my job to plant a seed. Salvation is strictly between God and each of us.

 

[Clete]

I have had opportunity to talk with gay people and attempt to share the Gospel with them. As soon as I bring it up, the almost inevitable response is along the lines of, "You mean the God that wants me dead? No Thanks!"

You're a fool.

These people have become the swine that makes casting pearls a worthless exercise.

PRECISELY!!!

But what made them become swine? Christians.

Christ didn't make those people into the God hating perverts they are, their own sin and their own hatred of God did that. It is the unbiblically nice Christian who is to blame for greasing his slide into depravity and perversion. His perversion wouldn't even have ever happened at all if not for nice, friendly, useful to Satan fools like yourself who think that murderers, rapists and homos are people to be treated with dignity and respect instead of hunted down, tried, convicted and executed.

In a "loving" attempt to share the gospel, most Christians will lead with some version of, "God wants you dead!" and go from there.

I know of no Christian who has or has ever started any presentation of the gospel to anyone in that fashion. This is your own idiotic dream because you desire to be nicer than God, who absolutely does want them dead, by the way. It is foolish Christians like yourself that have the perverts of the world, and most everyone else as well, believing that they're perfectly normal people and that their behavior isn't killing people by the thousands and undermining the very fabric of civilized society itself.

I have often wondered what God will say to those people.....

"Those dirty perverts made Me sick too! Good riddance!"

.....who witness like that.

No one actually witnesses like that.

Is it possible that God will look at them and say, "Why did you turn my son/daughter away from me?"

NO! It isn't even close to being remotely possible. Have you even read the bible at all?

God did not send Jesus to teach us how to judge one another, God sent Jesus to teach us how to live a Godly life, how to love and care for one another.

Yes, by treating sexual perverts like normal human beings so that they can spread disease physically and spread immorality and hatred of God spiritually. Maybe you and your pastor teaches that, but God's Word certainly does not.

There are times when we do have to walk away from people because they have no interest in anything we may have to say. Does that give us the right to insult them?

Yes!

If that insult turns there heart away from God even more, well, I think that means we are missing the lesson that Jesus came to teach.

You think that because you're a fool who thinks God is too mean and that you need to teach Him how to really win the lost.

Try reading your bible through at least once before coming on a web forum and trying to look down your nose at me or anyone here. You're a fool who doesn't have the slightest idea what you're even talking about. Homosexuals are guilty of a capital crime. A CAPITAL CRIME, CabinetMaker! Not jay walking, not petty theft or mere assault. They are guilty of a crime on the order of murder and rape and incest and bestiality. Would you talk with a murderer as though they're just a normal person? Would you be nice and friendly with a man who rapes women and/or children? Would introduce them to your family and have them over for dinner and talk to them about Jesus over a nice hot piece of the apple pie that you had your wife bake for them?

The biblical Christian should have a three pronged approach to such criminals....

1. The Christian should advocate for the re-criminalization of all capital crimes, including murder, rape, incest, adultery, homosexuality, child molestation, and bestiality and for the swift, public and painful execution of anyone convicted of such crimes.​

​

2. The Christian should employ and encourage a strong social stigma of such behaviors whether they are criminalized or not.​

​

3. The Christian should stand ready to give an answer for the hope that is within them should these criminals, or anyone they're associated with, be found searching for such answers. (This is most likely to happen just before their execusion, by the way. So, the more the first two points are followed, the more effective point three will be.)​

​

Put in a single sentence, the principle that you fail to understand because you have next to no knowledge of the scriptures is....

The law is the great teacher, not you.

I Timothy 1:8 But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, 9 knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, 11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust.​

​

See also: Romans 1:18-32​

Clete

 

[Clete]

No one says to be cruel to unbelievers and yet so many Christians do exactly that. It is a problem.

Telling people the truth is not cruel. It may not be nice but it isn't cruel. Letting the pervert think he's not a pervert, that's cruel. That's the surest way to garrantee his eternal damnation that I can think of. Way to go!!!

Yes, there are times that rebuke is necessary but, an Ad Hominem attack is not a rebuke. A rebuke addresses the issue, never the person.

Liar. This "hate the sin, not the sinner" stupidity is a principle reason our society is in the shape it's in. It is why there are tens of thousands of innocent people murdered every single year. It is principle reason why millions of children are molested every year, creating the next generation of homosexuals.

I don't rebuke unbelievers, I share the reasons for the hope that is within me. I talk. I do my best to answer the hard questions they inevitably ask with courtesy and patience.

Terrific practice with people who aren't actively practicing a capital crime that is not only killing people by the thousands but aggressively erroding the society that has granted you the right to share your faith with anyone. A right that you, or your children, will one day lose and you'll have played your role in its loss.

Remember, it is not my job to save people, it is my job to plant a seed. Salvation is strictly between God and each of us.

You are a veritable fountain of meaningless clichés.

 

[JudgeRightly]

If someone is not open to correction, insulting them will certainly not open them up to correction.

Insulting someone who is resistant to correction will, without fail, do one of two things.

Either it will harden them in their beliefs, and cause them to be even more resistant (this is the most common result)

Or it will shock them enough to make them think, "Hey, maybe I am being a fool, and should reconsider my position." This is what we're aiming for.

Ad Hominem attacks are the least effective form of communication.

Only when you're talking to someone who hasn't closed their mind off.

When you're talking to someone who HAS closed their mind off, it becomes the most effective form, because it's the only form of communication they'll hear.

The other interesting thing is that I am fairly certain that what I believe and what you believe are not the same. Does that mean you are not my brother in Christ, not at all. You would probably want to "correct" me but according to my pastor, it is you that needs to be corrected. Interesting conundrum.

I stated previously that I am open to correction. That includes on this topic as well.

If you can convince me I'm wrong, then have at it! I dare you!

No one says to be cruel to unbelievers and yet so many Christians do exactly that. It is a problem.

Christians are cruel by being nice to unbelievers.

The phrase "killing with kindness" comes to mind. Only in this case, they're literally sending them to hell.

Yes, there are times that rebuke is necessary but, an Ad Hominem attack is not a rebuke. A rebuke addresses the issue, never the person.

Yes, it is a form of rebuke.

If the issue is the person (their unwillingness to listen), then an ad hominem is the rebuke of the issue.

I don't rebuke unbelievers, I share the reasons for the hope that is within me. I talk. I do my best to answer the hard questions they inevitably ask with courtesy and patience.

There's nothing wrong with that.

But when push comes to shove, are you gently putting flowers in their lap, or are you slapping them in the face trying to wake them up so that they don't drive off the road?

Remember, it is not my job to save people, it is my job to plant a seed. Salvation is strictly between God and each of us.

How do you expect to plant a seed without first stabbing a tool into the ground?

You won't break through anyone's hardened heart by dusting it off with your fingers!

 

[Gary K]

Insulting someone who is resistant to correction will, without fail, do one of two things.

Either it will harden them in their beliefs, and cause them to be even more resistant (this is the most common result)

Or it will shock them enough to make them think, "Hey, maybe I am being a fool, and should reconsider my position." This is what we're aiming for.



Only when you're talking to someone who hasn't closed their mind off.

When you're talking to someone who HAS closed their mind off, it becomes the most effective form, because it's the only form of communication they'll hear.



I stated previously that I am open to correction. That includes on this topic as well.

If you can convince me I'm wrong, then have at it! I dare you!



Christians are cruel by being nice to unbelievers.

The phrase "killing with kindness" comes to mind. Only in this case, they're literally sending them to hell.



Yes, it is a form of rebuke.

If the issue is the person (their unwillingness to listen), then an ad hominem is the rebuke of the issue.



There's nothing wrong with that.

But when push comes to shove, are you gently putting flowers in their lap, or are you slapping them in the face trying to wake them up so that they don't drive off the road?



How do you expect to plant a seed without first stabbing a tool into the ground?

You won't break through anyone's hardened heart by dusting it off with your fingers!

Is this the way God reaches people? Are insults the lovingkindness He uses? Don't you think intercessory prayer and the influence of the HS would work better.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Is this the way God reaches people? Are insults the lovingkindness He uses? Don't you think intercessory prayer and the influence of the HS would work better.

Sounds like you've never actually read the Bible.

Go read https://kgov.com/nice for a taste of what the Bible says about God being "nice."