Casado
New member
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2018
- Messages
- 37
- Reaction score
- 11
- Location
- Deep South
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
I am talking in the way it is used by modern people.
I am talking in the way it is used by modern people.
Because you know the intent behind my using it? Obviously not.
Are you saying the word pigs is insulting? How dare you malign those noble animals! :lamo
There is nothing silly whatsoever when it comes to context. What is truly silly is for a Gentile Christian to direct a biblical verse about Gentiles to Gentile non-Christians.
OM
It wasn't the last Christian, it was Christ, the founder of Christianity who died on the cross.
Christians are still dying and being martyred.
Whether directed to anyone or not, it still holds meaning today for a Christian...do not waste your time spreading the truth of God's Word to those who do not appreciate it...move on to those who do...
God's Word should never be spread falsely.
OM
God's Word should never be spread falsely.
OM
What rock do you live under?
That is, in essence, the question I have been asking Gentile Christians who continue to toss the "pearls before swine" out of context at others.
OM
That is, in essence, the question I have been asking Gentile Christians who continue to toss the "pearls before swine" out of context at others.
OM
It is not out of context if it still has meaning today...
Yes, non-contextual meaning. The verse refers to Gentiles, as the author attempted to frame the narrative that "salvation" was reserved exclusively for the Jews. The non-contextual meaning being tossed about today continues to bastardize and betray the original text.
OM
Non-believers today...some, not all...can act just as piggish as the Gentiles did back then...the meaning/context still stands...
*Sigh* That is a red herring.
Let's get back to square one, shall we? As written, the verse didn't address "non-believers". It is FALSE TESTIMONY to continue saying it does. What the verse DID address was GENTILES (whether they "believed", or didn't), as the entire premise of that book involves "salvation" as being something only a Jew can achieve. Both Matthew and Mark came from this particular position.
Continuing to cite it as directed to "non-believers" (and not Gentiles) is a direct betrayal of the original texts.
OM
When it has apt application today, no it is not...
*Sigh*. Again, "application" should involve context. What you continue to state, what you have just admitted to, is that you find it perfectly acceptable to read into the Bible - rather than read the Bible.
OM
Your reading comprehension is lacking...not what I said at all...
Religious euphoria has been around since before the concept of monotheism.
OM
I never said it wasn't. I am pointing out to you that the medical approach to boost dopamine isn't very effective at relieving depression, which would indicate the issue if more complicated than your answer would suggest.
So Religious euphoria occurs from the elevation dopamine...cool. That would be an interesting argument in favor of religiosity for those suffering from depression, not against it. Moreover, since we humans have emotions driven by neurotransmitters, it doesn't prove one way of the other the existence of God. If you assume there is a God who built humans to have emotions driven by neurotransmitters then you'd expect God's grace and peace in that the faithful brain would be detected as an elevation in neurotransmitters...
Understanding the mechanisms of a clock doesn't disprove the existence of a clock maker.
What is truly silly is for a Gentile Christian to direct a biblical verse about Gentiles to Gentile non-Christians.
OM
Doesn't matter whether the facility is secular or not. That is a just a red herring you are tossing out. Volunteer work is volunteer work, regardless of who does it, where it is done, and by whom it is done. and FWIW, I have a lot of non-religious, as well as religious friends who do volunteer work. The important thing isn't whether or not the volunteer worker is religious or not.....what matters is the work gets done and the needy get helped. If you think a religious person's work is any more important than a non-religious person's, that's on you and your priorities are questionable to say the least.
"Holy spirit" = religious euphoria.
OM
And? I think you missed the point.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?