How do YOU live out these verses?

[tailfins]

http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/book.php?book=2+John&chapter=1&verse=&t=1



<tbody>
2 John Chapter 1



</tbody>
<small style="color: rgb(153, 153, 153);">Viewing the Standard King James Version. Switch to the 1611 KJV 2 John Chapter 1 (http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_2-John-Chapter-1/) </small>



7For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. (http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/2-John-1-7/)
8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. (http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/2-John-1-8/)
9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. (http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/2-John-1-9/)
10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: (http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/2-John-1-10/)
11For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds. (http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/2-John-1-11/)

[fj1200]

14 I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+14:14

[Abbey Marie]

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+14:14

I believe this specifically referred to clean/unclean meats, which was an important subject to the Jews of the time:


Romans 14:14 (http://www.biblestudytools.com/romans/14-14.html)I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus
As for the apostle's own sense and judgment about the distinction of meats, it was this,
that there is nothing unclean of itself;
that every creature, as originally made by God, is good; that what is eatable, or fit for food, may be eaten, whatever the Mosaic laws, being now abrogated, say to the contrary; and that whatever physical or natural difference there may be between the creatures of God, one being naturally fit for food, and another not; yet there is no moral distinction between them, there is nothing in any of them that can morally defile a man by eating them; nor indeed is there now any ceremonial distinction between them, and so no ceremonial pollution by them. This was not a bare conjecture, nor a mere opinion, but a point of certain knowledge, a matter of faith, and of full assurance of faith; the apostle was thoroughly persuaded of the truth of it, and had not the least doubt nor difficulty in his mind about it; he was as fully assured of it, as he was of his salvation by Christ, and of his interest in the love of God, from which he could never be separated, and therefore expresses it in language equally as strong; and this he came to the knowledge and persuasion of, "by the Lord Jesus"; by his express words, ( Matthew 15:11 (http://www.biblestudytools.com/matthew/15-11.html) Matthew 15:17 (http://www.biblestudytools.com/matthew/15-17.html) Matthew 15:18 (http://www.biblestudytools.com/matthew/15-18.html) ) ; or by a revelation from him, in which way he had the whole Gospel: he might be informed of this matter in like manner as Peter was, by a vision from heaven, ( Acts 10:10 (http://www.biblestudytools.com/acts/10-10.html) ) , or he knew this through the abrogation of the whole ceremonial law by Christ, who abolished the law of commandments contained in ordinances, and so these laws relating to the difference of meats among the rest; and he knew, that all the creatures in their original creation were good, and though cursed, for man's sake yet Christ had removed the curse, and sanctified them for the use of his people, who, under the Gospel dispensation, might make use of them at pleasure, without distinction: and the Jews themselves own, that what before was unclean, shall in the days of the Messiah be clean: so they explain ( Psalms 146:7 (http://www.biblestudytools.com/psalms/146-7.html) ) ; "the Lord looseth the prisoners", which they would render, "the Lord looseth that which was forbidden"; and give this as the sense F18 (http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/romans-14-14.html#r)
``every beast which w​as unclean in this world (the Jewish state), (awbl dytel htwa rhjm hb"h) , "God will cleanse it in the time to come" (in the times of the Messiah), when they shall be clean as at the first, to the sons of Noah.''


http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/romans-14-14.html

[Gunny]

http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/book.php?book=2+John&chapter=1&verse=&t=1



<tbody>
2 John Chapter 1


</tbody>
<small style="color: rgb(153, 153, 153);">Viewing the Standard King James Version. Switch to the 1611 KJV 2 John Chapter 1 (http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_2-John-Chapter-1/) </small>

I think part of your problem is you spend a lot of time preaching to the choir. But you go right ahead and argue the Bible with Abs. She's nicer than I am. I'll watch. We got popcorn. :laugh:

[Abbey Marie]

I think part of your problem is you spend a lot of time preaching to the choir. But you go right ahead and argue the Bible with Abs. She's nicer than I am. I'll watch. We got popcorn. :laugh:


Thanks Gunny, but I was mostly really referring to FJ's response to Tailfins.
I'm not sure what Tailfins was getting at.

But if I were to hazard a guess, I'd say they are taking opposite sides of the gay marriage issue. But who knows...

:confused: :dunno:

[tailfins]

Thanks Gunny, but I was mostly really referring to FJ's response to Tailfins.
I'm not sure what Tailfins was getting at.

But if I were to hazard a guess, I'd say they are taking opposite sides of the gay marriage issue. But who knows...

:confused: :dunno:

I was trying to see how others read those verses. Now I will say how I read them: Simply put, "religious tolerance" is a sin. You don't say "Godspeed" (or other supportive phrase) to someone who teaches anything other than Jesus Christ, lest you become an accomplice to an anti-Christ.

[fj1200]

But if I were to hazard a guess, I'd say they are taking opposite sides of the gay marriage issue.

Not every thread here is about gay marriage. It could just be a Paul vs. John cage match.


I believe this specifically referred to clean/unclean meats, which was an important subject to the Jews of the time:

Nevertheless I think you do a disservice to Paul. Romans is about differences of Christians in Rome; Jew and gentile trying to live the same belief and as such there were lines drawn over many things, granted meat among them. I think eating meat was merely an allegory for not "passing judgement" and creating "stumbling blocks" on those who may not have lined up 100% with others.


13 Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in the way of a brother or sister.

We can all live together in Christian love.

[Gunny]

Not every thread here is about gay marriage. It could just be a Paul vs. John cage match.



Nevertheless I think you do a disservice to Paul. Romans is about differences of Christians in Rome; Jew and gentile trying to live the same belief and as such there were lines drawn over many things, granted meat among them. I think eating meat was merely an allegory for not "passing judgement" and creating "stumbling blocks" on those who may not have lined up 100% with others.



We can all live together in Christian love.

Actually, the meat thing was about health. They had no way back then to preserve meat. "Kosher" is antiquated Jewish law based on what killed you. Poultry, pork and seafood that is not preserved can kill you. It can to this day. Salmonila from poultry and poultry by-products, trichinosous from undercooked or old pork, and I've had seafood poisoning. Sickest I think I've ever been. They didn't have a Sears to run to for a Kenmore.:laugh:

I've just never figured out that fish on Friday thing. I'm not Catholic. I just know that even in the Southwest we always had fish on Friday in public schools. Heh .. cheese enchiladas on Tuesdays. :)

[fj1200]

Actually, the meat thing was about health.

I didn't say otherwise. Meat in the context of the passage was allegorical IMO. 14:2 did not reference clean vs. unclean, merely strong in the faith vs. weak in the faith.


1 (http://biblehub.com/romans/14-1.htm)Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions. 2 (http://biblehub.com/romans/14-2.htm)One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only. 3 (http://biblehub.com/romans/14-3.htm)The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him.…

[crin63]

I think you pretty much nailed it. I would add though that the person still needs Jesus.



I was trying to see how others read those verses. Now I will say how I read them: Simply put, "religious tolerance" is a sin. You don't say "Godspeed" (or other supportive phrase) to someone who teaches anything other than Jesus Christ, lest you become an accomplice to an anti-Christ.