Meat Limits of Christian rules

[Mojo]

That's what we're talking about here, total submission to government.

Are we? I don’t think I am. Maybe others are.
I’ve not even said I disagree with the revolution. I’m just helping people to think about another position and that good Christians can disagree on a subject thoughtfully.

 

[steve]

I can't reply to this better than this:



Perhaps men were not equal to Jesus, but quite clearly Jesus made the effort to be equal to men.

He was a man, a human being as we are, but he managed to walk this earth without sin.
Any equality ended there.

 

[frederick]

Just to clarify, unlike all other human beings, in the hypostatic union Jesus Christ is both God and man. Jesus is one person with two natures, divine and human, without confusion, change, division, or separation. No human being is His equal, nor ever will be. Cheers

 

[frederick]

Just to clarify, unlike all other human beings, in the hypostatic union Jesus Christ is both God and man. Jesus is one person with two natures, divine and human, without confusion, change, division, or separation. No human being is His equal, nor ever will be. Cheers

 

[MeganC]

Just to clarify, unlike all other human beings, in the hypostatic union Jesus Christ is both God and man. Jesus is one person with two natures, divine and human, without confusion, change, division, or separation. No human being is His equal, nor ever will be. Cheers

Yet in saying this are you denying the humanity of Jesus?

Why would God bother with sending Jesus to be a man if Jesus were to be a deity? God could have done that Himself.

 

[frederick]

Yet in saying this are you denying the humanity of Jesus?

Why would God bother with sending Jesus to be a man if Jesus were to be a deity? God could have done that Himself.

Because He had to be human to die for the sins of humanity.

 

[MeganC]

Because He had to be human to die for the sins of humanity.

Right.

 

[MemeFan]

Yes, the heavy taxation was coming from the Romans and they weren’t his target audience.
He was preaching to the Jews and told them that if a soldier were to compel them to carry his gear for a mile, that they should carry it for two miles instead. How is that not a form of taxation?

If I remember correctly Roman army had discipline of steel and Roman law allowed soldier to compel non-soldiery to carry equipment one mile.

So Jesus actually advised making Roman soldiers to break Roman law. Exactly best situation to finish in soldier being punished. So if Jew get in habit of carrying two miles, Roman commander will get in habit of punishing their soldiers. And imagine PR impact of Roman army their law on subjugated people.

End result would be soldiers being scarred of compeling other to carry equipment.

Reminds me of Alinsky:

“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”

Jesus did sometime provide good political advice, in this case make occupiers cry.

 

[MemeFan]

Unless you are in the heavenly right now it is not talking about you or humans.

But we will judge angels.

To much is given, much is required. I don't get to judge Gods trust level of me. I can just do my best to steward what God places in my life. That does grow over time and as relationship with Him and obedience to Him grows.

OKi doki.

Can you still have free will and can decide current status is unsatisfactory. Man doesn't become monk because he is happy with his current status.

God created man perfect in human format creation. Sin caused that perfect image to become fallen. Heavenly bodies are promised to bring us back to creation ideal in a non physical form.

None of this Implies lack of perfection in Gods design. So no input of yours is wanted or needed to Improve anything.

No. A critique from someone who isn't on equal or better skill level is never a compliment or taken as something other insulting.

Like any artists will be blind to input of his children. Won't happen.

The Bible does not support the idea that men are equal to Christ; rather, it distinguishes between equality of status and equality of nature.

• Equality in Redemption: The Bible teaches that believers are equal before God as fellow heirs and children, but this is a relationship of adoption, not ontological equivalence. Galatians 3:28 states, "There is neither... male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus," emphasizing unity and shared access to salvation rather than identical status.
• Distinction from Christ: Theological consensus and scripture affirm that while believers are co-heirs (Romans 8:17), they remain distinct from Christ, who is the Lord and Savior. The concept of being "brothers" refers to familial relationship and shared spiritual life, not equality with the divine.
• Hierarchical Unity: Some interpretations note that equality in Christ does not erase all distinctions; just as Christ submits to God while being equal to Him, believers are equal in worth but may have different roles or submit to Christ’s authority.

In summary, the Bible supports spiritual equality and brotherhood among believers and with Christ in terms of inheritance and value, but explicitly rejects ontological equality with Christ Himself.

You have gone way too much.

Are siblings same or equal? No, siblinghood is defined by relationship with father/mother, no with any characteristic of siblings themselves.

What you described in the above example is not nagging. It is asking What is needed to do to serve better.

The examples you have been giving involve needing to understand Why and for what reason the request is being made. It is nagging because understanding what needs to be done is needed. To need to know why and what purpose it serves is not.

Why and what purpose does help with task.

 

[FeministVampireQueen]

@MemeFan

I'm honestly shocked at some of the accusations being thrown your way. "Luciferiansim?" Wtf, that is ridiculous "Feminine thinking," "aligning with feminism?" Lol...

I swear those are the go- to buzzwords for people when someone doesn't think the way they do. It's just odd and sort of funny to see a man being accused of such things.

It also really just comes across as a pathetic attempt to undermine your masculinity. I've read plenty of your posts and comments over the years, (i've actually disagreed with a decent amount of your opinions) as well, but nothing you've said has struck me as rooted in evil, feminist or even feminine.

Actually I had the opposite impression, I feel like you bring a positive perspective to an otherwise incredibly negative, soulless echo chamber.

While these other people are busy throwing around blanket terms like "submission," and focusing more on how to change women to make them less flawed, you've repeatedly expressed how to positively incorporate those things into a family dynamic.

Another thing, there's nothing inherently wrong or feminine about questioning God. It's the intent behind those questions that matters, you've made your intentions clear. Nothing about your explanations came across as rebellion. Some of the greatest men in scripture questioned and struggled to understand God at times.

That's why i'm honestly surprised that your way of thinking was compared to women in such a demeaning manner instead of to men who did the very same thing in scripture many times.

That comparison honestly just exposes a deeply rooted negative view of women, rather than exposing anything ungodly or unbiblical about your opinions.

 

[steve]

If I remember correctly Roman army had discipline of steel and Roman law allowed soldier to compel non-soldiery to carry equipment one mile.

So Jesus actually advised making Roman soldiers to break Roman law. Exactly best situation to finish in soldier being punished. So if Jew get in habit of carrying two miles, Roman commander will get in habit of punishing their soldiers. And imagine PR impact of Roman army their law on subjugated people.

End result would be soldiers being scarred of compeling other to carry equipment.

Reminds me of Alinsky:

“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”

Jesus did sometime provide good political advice, in this case make occupiers cry.

That was quite imaginative.
But it was complete baloney.

 

[HomesteadWife]

But we will judge angels.

Are you in the heavenly realm right now for that to apply to you currently?

OKi doki.

Can you still have free will and can decide current status is unsatisfactory. Man doesn't become monk because he is happy with his current status.

Current status almost always is due to mans sinful nature and decisions. It does not have to do with God being any less good.

Like any artists will be blind to input of his children. Won't happen.

What artist do you know claims that his children were biggest Critics who helped him improve his work? Also you are changing your wording. Input is not the same as critique.

You have gone way too much.

Are siblings same or equal? No, siblinghood is defined by relationship with father/mother, no with any characteristic of siblings themselves.

The only point I am making is that Jesus is also God. You do not share that divinity just because he chose to take on our humanity and become a brother. Also you ignore biblical hierarchy by claiming equality with Jesus. God > Jesus > Men >Women > Children. Jesus is superior and above men.

Why and what purpose does help with task.

Yes, but you are proving the original point I made in my first response. You do NOT have to understand WHY to obey.
If superior tells you not to touch something, (which they know is dangerous and can kill you) you obey even without knowing why because superior said so. Maybe this info would help you respect their command more but it is not needed for you to listen and not touch in the first place.

 

[HomesteadWife]

I'm honestly shocked at some of the accusations being thrown your way. "Luciferiansim?" Wtf, that is ridiculous "Feminine thinking," "aligning with feminism?" Lol...

I swear those are the go- to buzzwords for people when someone doesn't think the way they do. It's just odd and sort of funny to see a man being accused of such things.

What you choose to ignore here is that those terms were used by me, a woman. As a woman I recognize feminism and its roots when I see and hear them.

This is about rebellion against biblical order. I take those words very seriously. They are not buzzwords. Feminism is a subset of Luciferianism. Pride and rebellion against biblical order were the sins of Lucifer and it are the sins he tempted Eve into following him into. Eve was the first feminist. Biblical order is God > Christ > Men > Women > Children. Eve didn't just want to be equal to Adam, like feminist claim they want to be equal with men, she wanted to be equal to God. Luciferians and Feminists are the same, male or female. Women consider themselves to be more spiritual than men (As a general rule) which places them above men and closer to God.

It also really just comes across as a pathetic attempt to undermine your masculinity. I've read plenty of your posts and comments over the years, (i've actually disagreed with a decent amount of your opinions) as well, but nothing you've said has struck me as rooted in evil, feminist or even feminine.

Actually I had the opposite impression, I feel like you bring a positive perspective to an otherwise incredibly negative, soulless echo chamber.

I don't think having a feminist agree with and thinking positively of an opinion goes proves that the person is not a feminist.. On the contrary I would say if a feminist agreed with my opinions I would know that I was in alignment with feminism rather than God's order.

While these other people are busy throwing around blanket terms like "submission," and focusing more on how to change women to make them less flawed, you've repeatedly expressed how to positively incorporate those things into a family dynamic.

Incorporating rebellion against biblical order is why we have egalitarianism and feminism rampant in the churches today. When a woman no longer has to truly be submissive to a man, in the biblical definition, then she becomes the head of the household by default. The man is abdicating his authority to her.

Another thing, there's nothing inherently wrong or feminine about questioning God. It's the intent behind those questions that matters, you've made your intentions clear. Nothing about your explanations came across as rebellion. Some of the greatest men in scripture questioned and struggled to understand God at times.

Yet they were not considered great men of God because of this questioning. But because they chose to obey and continue to follow God even if they did not have the answers they wanted.

That's why i'm honestly surprised that your way of thinking was compared to women in such a demeaning manner instead of to men who did the very same thing in scripture many times.

That comparison honestly just exposes a deeply rooted negative view of women, rather than exposing anything ungodly or unbiblical about your opinions.

No. It is exposing a rebellion against biblical order. When a man is placing himself on equal or higher footing than Christ (who is his superior in the biblical order) that is the same as a woman saying she is equal or above a man in biblical order. A man is to Submit to Christ just as a woman submits to a man. That is the comparison being made.

No man in the bible is praised for constantly questioning God and His reasons for things. Men are praised for following God's will especially when they did not understand why (eg. Abraham being willing to sacrifice Isaac).

 

[FeministVampireQueen]

Oh, I'm well aware of who it came from, and the fact that it came from a woman makes it even worse. You've repeatedly attempted to undermine someone's masculinity and managed to devalue your own gender at the same time. It would be impressive if it wasn't so sad.

I'm not interested in addressing the rest of the grandstanding you've been doing throughout this entire thread. I've read it all before, I could literally just copy and paste your exact responses from nearly any male on this forum. Ironically, your responses (and theirs), only further prove Memefan's initial point when making this post.

I know it probably makes you feel good to come on here and get a few likes from random men who are excited to see a woman repeating their beliefs, but just because you're a woman parroting what men have taught you to believe, doesn't make you special or enlightened.

You actually sound just as terrible as they do when they say such things.

 

[steve]

You've repeatedly attempted to undermine someone's masculinity

You can’t undermine something that doesn’t exist.

Where in Keith Martin when you need him?