Pastor Congratulates Women For Following Scripture - No Jewelry and No Braided Hair.

Questions From Readers (1961)

● How are the comments on feminine adornment at 1 Timothy 2:9, 10 and; 1 Peter 3:3, 4 to be understood?—J. H., United States.

The texts in question read: “Likewise I desire the women to adorn themselves in well-arranged dress, with modesty and soundness of mind, not with styles of hair braiding and gold or pearls or very expensive garb, but in the way which befits women professing to reverence God, namely, through good works.” “And do not let your adornment be that of the external braiding of the hair and of the putting on of gold ornaments or the wearing of outer garments, but let it be the secret person of the heart in the incorruptible apparel of the quiet and mild spirit, which is of great value in the eyes of God.”

Bible commentators, such as Adam Clarke, tell of the elaborate coiffures, or braiding of the hair and interspersing it with gold ornaments, that were the vogue among pagan women in the days of the apostles. Such a glamorous and showy display was most unbecoming to Christians and therefore was spoken against by both Paul and Peter.

Those sects of Christendom, however, who go to the extreme of forbidding all feminine adornment on the basis of these apostolic injunctions are obviously mistaken. We may not conclude that all braiding of the hair or all wearing of ornaments is wrong, for Peter includes “the wearing of outer garments,” and certainly women must wear such. The point of this Scriptural admonition is not what Christian women may or may not wear but on what they are to place the emphasis: not on the outward but on the inward adornment, on the mind and heart, on the right kind of disposition, if they would be attractive and appealing. Alas, it is far easier to wear the outer than to develop the inner adornment!

The Christian woman will do well to dress moderately, modestly and with tastefulness, avoiding gaudiness and sensuousness. Just as she should not attract undue attention by wearing gaudy or flashy jewelry, so she should be careful that her use of cosmetics is not unduly obvious. That adornment in moderation is not objectionable can be seen from the general use of jewelry by the ancient servants of Jehovah.—Gen. 24:53; Ex. 3:22; 2 Sam. 1:24; Jer. 2:32; Luke 15:22.

Well-Arranged Dress Shows Reverence for God (2003)

...

Dress That Befits Christian Ministers: When the apostle Paul wrote to the Christian overseer Timothy, he encouraged “women to adorn themselves in well-arranged dress, with modesty and soundness of mind, . . . in the way that befits women professing to reverence God, namely, through good works.” (1 Tim. 2:9, 10) To ensure that our attire is well-arranged requires careful thought. Clothing should be neat, clean, and modest​—not gaudy, sensuous, or provocative.​—1 Pet. 3:3.

Paul also cautioned against going overboard with “styles of hair braiding and gold or pearls or very expensive garb.” (1 Tim. 2:9) Being balanced in the use of jewelry, makeup, and other adornments is a wise course for Christian women to follow.​—Prov. 11:2.

The counsel Paul directed toward Christian women also applies in principle to Christian men. Brothers should avoid styles that reflect the thinking of the world. (1 John 2:16) For example, in some lands baggy, oversized clothing is popular, but this style does not present a fitting appearance for a minister of God.

...

Anyway...

“Make sure of the more important things.”—PHIL. 1:10.

I.e. “the weightier* [Or “more important.”] matters of the Law, namely, justice and mercy and faithfulness.* [Or “faith.”]”​—Matthew 23:23; Luke 11:42. The last text describes it as “justice* [Or “righteous judgment.”] and the love of God!” Since mercy and faithfulness are important aspects of the love of God. Lovers of God are merciful and faithful. The love of God also requires love of neighbour (everyone, regardless of physical location, not the way "neighbour" is used nowadays). As Jesus put it, “this, in fact, is what the Law and the Prophets mean.”—Matt. 7:12 (after describing what has become known as the Golden Rule). And, “on these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets.” After just mentioning these 2 commandments in answer to the question what the greatest commandment was. (Matt. 22:34-40)

1 John 4:20,21 (last 2 verses, the subject continues in the next chapter, see quotation below that):

If anyone says, “I love God,” and yet is hating his brother, he is a liar. For the one who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. And we have this commandment from him, that whoever loves God must also love his brother. (see also verses 7-19; note that John had definitely seen Jesus, so Jesus is not the same God he speaks of here.)

“By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and carry out his commandments. For this is what the love of God means, that we observe his commandments; and yet his commandments are not burdensome, because everyone who* [Lit., “everything that.”] has been born from God conquers the world. And this is the conquest that has conquered the world, our faith.” (1 John 5:2-4)

“But no human can tame the tongue. It is unruly and injurious, full of deadly poison. With it we praise Jehovah, the Father, and yet with it we curse men who have come into existence “in the likeness of God.” Out of the same mouth come blessing and cursing.

My brothers, it is not right for things to happen this way.” (James 3:8-10)

Coming back to my previous comment about military service and war, the Nox in Stargate SG-1 (a pacifist race of aliens) have got the right idea:

Daniel makes an interesting point in this scene after 0:14 (the 2nd point at 0:22):

a reply to: WeMustCare

Once you start doing that, isn't it a slippery slope that leads to each person, or church, cherry-picking what they want to follow...and not want to follow?

-WeMustCare 🤷‍♂️

No Nope and negative it's simple if you just read your Bible. The KJV to be exact.
The laws given to the Jews thru out time and different societies were applied
before what Jesus Christ did on the cross. If those laws apllied to todays gentiles?
"No flesh would be saved" in this age after the cross. People don't understand
the Bible because they don't read the Bible.It's Gods will that none should
parish that's Jesus. It's simple. God wants you!

originally posted by: whereislogic
Daniel makes an interesting point in this scene after 0:14 (the 2nd point at 0:22):

Just to put that scene into a little more context, the Nox had just taken away the weapons from the SG-1 team. So that's why Daniel's 1st point was: "You guys just don't wanna give up, do you?" (cause they were making weapons)

This all happened after they attacked (ambushed) the Goa'uld (Apophis and his guards), and getting killed in the process, at which point the Nox interfered by making them disappear, healing them (I guess since they were dead it was a resurrection) and taking away their weapons. And then you get the scene in the first video, entitled "take your ways with you". Where the Nox explain that they had taken away their weapons and told them they should go back home (through the Stargate; that explanation as to where their weapons were was not included in that clip, but it's part of the same scene). Suggesting the SG-1 team to leave is by the way taking another page out of the Bible (remember, on that occasion, SG-1 attacked first, they began the fight, much like the US and its allies began the fight in Iraq and Afghanistan after 9-11, and earlier in the 90's after Iraq invaded Kuwait).

You can avoid adding fuel to a raging fire by simply walking away. “Where there is no wood the fire goes out,” the Bible says. It also advises: “Beginning a fight is like opening a floodgate;* [Or “like opening a dam.” Lit., “letting out waters.”] Before the quarrel has burst forth, take your leave.”

Sometimes you just have to walk away. If SG-1 had done that, Apophis would have never even known they were there, and they wouldn't have been killed (apart from Teal'c, who survived the fight and was disappeared by the Nox just before Apophis could kill him). If the Nox hadn't been around, they'd all be dead, returned to dust over time. “For dust you are and to dust you will return.” (Gen 3:19) They would have ceased to exist (no eternal bliss in heaven, nor eternal torture in hell): “For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all.” (Ecclesiastes 9:5) “On that very day [when a person dies] his thoughts perish.” (Psalm 146:4) There is no immaterial or spirit part of a human being that survives the death of the physical body. That teaching was a religious myth popularized by ancient Babylon, who taught that: “Death was a passage to another kind of life.”—The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, p. 556. (now part of the teachings of the entity the Bible refers to as “Babylon the Great”. (Rev 17:5) In time, Babylonish religious beliefs and practices spread to many lands. So Babylon the Great became a fitting name for false religion as a whole. It's just a modified version of Satan's first lie to Eve: “You certainly will not die.” (Gen 3:4) Now it's: 'the real you won't die' (as in the soul, or some immaterial, spirit or energy part of a human being survives the death of the physical body, the real you, as incorporated in the teachings concerning reincarnation, and the myth of the immortal soul as adopted by Christendom and the pastor mentioned in the OP, the pagan Greek philosopher Plato was heavily involved, read the part concerning the origin of this myth that I skipped below for details).

Myth 1: The Soul Is Immortal (One Myth Leads to Another)

...

FACT:

At death a person ceases to exist

Myth 2: The Wicked Suffer in Hell

...

What does the Bible say?

“For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, . . . for there is no work or thought or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol, to which you are going.”​—Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10, Revised Standard Version.

The Hebrew word Sheol, which referred to the “abode of the dead,” is translated “hell” in some versions of the Bible. What does this passage reveal about the condition of the dead? Do they suffer in Sheol in order to atone for their errors? No, for they “know nothing.” That is why the patriarch Job, when suffering terribly because of a severe illness, begged God: “Protect me in hell [Hebrew, Sheol].” (Job 14:13; Douay-Rheims Version) What meaning would his request have had if Sheol was a place of eternal torment? Hell, in the Biblical sense, is simply the common grave of mankind, where all activity has ceased.

Is not this definition of hell more logical and in harmony with Scripture? What crime, however horrible, could cause a God of love to torture a person endlessly? (1 John 4:8) But if hellfire is a myth, what about heaven?

Compare these Bible verses: Psalm 146:3, 4; Acts 2:25-27; Romans 6:7, 23

FACT:

God does not punish people in hell

Myth 3: All Good People Go to Heaven

a reply to: whereislogic

I have had one NDE were I experienced God's full presense in the celestial realm.

All my subsquent NDE's were darkness with no consciousness until I woke up somewhere else and safe.

a reply to: GENERAL EYES

NDE stands for "near-death experience". So you weren't dead? You didn't die? It wasn't an "after-death experience"? (quoting Dr. Kenneth Ring, professor of psychology and author of Life at Death who believes “that we continue to have a conscious existence after our physical death.”)

Useful to keep in mind when responding to someone giving information from God's word, the Bible, (i.e. the explanation of the One who created us and all life, so he should know) what happens when you actually do die. I added a rather long remark in the article below, which made the next-to-last paragraph below rather long.

The Near-Death Experience—Proof of Immortality? (Awake!—1984)

“The soul of man is immortal and imperishable.”​—Plato, Greek philosopher, c. 428-348 B.C.E.

“Such harmony is in immortal souls.”​—William Shakespeare, English playwright, 1564-1616.

“The soul is indestructible . . . its activity will continue through eternity.”​—Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German poet and dramatist, 1749-1832.

“Our personality . . . survives in the next life.”​—Thomas Edison, American inventor, 1847-1931.

FOR thousands of years man has believed that he has inborn immortality. The ancient Egyptian rulers filled their tombs with the comforts and luxuries of life so that the body would be well served in its reunion with the ka, or soul.

Thus man has tried to convince himself that the certainty of death is annulled by the survival of an immortal soul or spirit. Others, like the English poet Keats, want to believe but doubt. As Keats wrote: “I long to believe in immortality . . . I wish to believe in immortality.” What do you believe about man’s supposed immortality?

In Keats’ words we perhaps have a simple clue to the conclusions that are being drawn by some doctors and psychiatrists, as well as people who have undergone an NDE (near-death experience). For example, in tests carried out by physician and professor of medicine Dr. Michael Sabom on those who had an NDE, “a definite decrease in the fear of death and a definite increase in the belief in an afterlife were reported by the vast majority of persons with an NDE.”​—Italics ours.

To what conclusion did psychiatrist Dr. Elisabeth Kübler-Ross arrive after checking out over a thousand cases of NDE? In her book On Children and Death she stated: “And so it is with death . . . the end before another beginning. Death is the great transition.” She adds: “With further research and further publications, more and more people will know rather than believe that our physical body is truly only the cocoon, the outer shell of the human being. Our inner, true self, the ‘butterfly,’ is immortal and indestructible and is freed at the moment we call death.”

Dr. Kenneth Ring, professor of psychology and author of Life at Death, draws the following conclusion: “I do believe . . . that we continue to have a conscious existence after our physical death.” Then he adds: “My own understanding of these near-death experiences leads me to regard them as ‘teachings.’ They are, it seems to me, by their nature, revelatory experiences. . . . In this respect, [near-death] experiences are akin to mystical or religious experiences [Italics ours.]. . . . From this point of view, the voices we have heard in this book [Life at Death] are those of prophets preaching a religion of universal brotherhood.”

A Contrasting Viewpoint

But what do other investigators say? How do they explain these near-death and out-of-body experiences? Psychologist Ronald Siegel sees them in a different light. “These experiences are common to a wide variety of arousal in the human brain, including L.S.D., sensory deprivation and extreme stress. The stress is producing the projection of the images into the brain. They are the same for most people because our brains are all wired similarly to store information, and these experiences are basically electrical read-outs of this wiring.”

Dr. Richard Blacher of Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, wrote: “I suggest that people who undergo these ‘death experiences’ are suffering from a hypoxic [oxygen deficiency] state, during which they try to deal psychologically with the anxieties provoked by the medical procedures and talk. . . . We are dealing here with the fantasy of death, not with death itself. This fantasy [within the patient’s psyche, or mind] is most appealing, since it solves several human concerns at one time. . . . The physician must be especially wary of accepting religious belief as scientific data.”

Siegel indicates another interesting point about the “visions” of the nearly dead: “As in hallucinations, the visions of the afterlife are suspiciously like this world, according to the accounts provided by dying patients themselves.” For example, a 63-year-old man who had spent much of his life in Texas related his “vision” as follows: “I was suspended over a fence. . . . On one side of the fence it was extremely scraggly territory, mesquite brush . . . On the other side of the fence was the most beautiful pasture scene I guess I have ever seen . . . [It was] a three- or four-strand barbed-wire fence.” Did this patient actually see barbed wire in “heaven” or in the realm beyond death? It is obvious that these images were based on his life in Texas and recalled from his own brain data bank​—unless we are being asked to believe that there is barbed wire “on the other side”!

In fact, so many NDEs are closely related to the patients’ experiences and background in life that it is unreasonable to believe that they are having a glimpse of a realm beyond death. For example, do those NDE patients who see a “being of light” see the same person regardless of whether they are Christian, Jewish, Hindu or Muslim? In his book Life After Life, Dr. Raymond Moody explains: “The identification of the being varies from individual to individual and seems to be largely a function of the religious background, training, or beliefs of the person involved. Thus, most of those who are Christians . . . identify the light as Christ . . . A Jewish man and woman identified the light as an ‘angel.’”

At a strictly scientific level, Dr. Ring admits: “I remind my audiences that what I have studied are near-death experiences, not after-death experiences. . . . There is obviously no guarantee either that these experiences will continue to unfold in a way consistent with their beginnings or indeed that they will continue at all. That, I believe, is the correct scientific position to take on the significance of these experiences.”

Common Sense and the Bible [whereislogic: should I even bother with this section? Not that anyone cares about either. And I already quoted the Bible on the matter in my previous comment. Doing it anyway...]

As for death, psychologist Siegel gives his opinion: “Death, in terms of its physical sequels, is no mystery. After death the body disintegrates and is reabsorbed into the inanimate component of the environment. The dead human loses both his life and his consciousness. . . . The most logical guess is that consciousness shares the same fate as that of the corpse. Surprisingly, this commonsense view is not the prevalent one, and the majority of mankind . . . continue to exert their basic motivation to stay alive and formulate a myriad of beliefs concerning man’s survival after death.”

About 3,000 years ago the same “commonsense view” was given by a king who wrote: “For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they anymore have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten. Also, their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished, and they have no portion anymore to time indefinite in anything that has to be done under the sun. All that your hand finds to do, do with your very power, for there is no work nor devising nor knowledge nor wisdom in Sheol [mankind’s common grave], the place to which you are going.”​—Ecclesiastes 9:5, 6, 10.

Certainly the Bible leaves no room for considering near-death experiences as a prelude to life after death. King Solomon’s description of death and its effects has no hints of an immortal soul surviving into some other form of conscious existence. The dead “are conscious of nothing at all.”

Of course, those who practice spiritism and communication with the “dead” are only too pleased to have the apparent support of hundreds of near-death experiences. Psychologist Siegel quotes one lecturer on the paranormal, or supernatural, as saying that “if we are to examine the evidence for an afterlife honestly and dispassionately we must free ourselves from the tyranny of common sense.” (Psychology Today, January 1981) Interestingly, this same lecturer “argues that ghosts and apparitions are indeed hallucinations, but they are projected telepathically from the minds of dead people to those of the living!” That certainly does not agree with Solomon’s conclusion that the dead are dead and know nothing.

Near-Death Experiences​—How Explained?

How, then, can all the near-death and out-of-body experiences be explained? Basically, there are at least two possibilities​—one is that presented by some psychologists to the effect that the still-active brain of the near-dead person recalls and forms images under the stresses of the near-death experience. These are then interpreted by some patients and investigators to be glimpses of life after death. In fact, as we have seen from the Bible, such cannot be the case, for man does not have an immortal soul, and there is no such thing as life after death as perceived in these cases.

But there is a second possibility to be taken into account that may explain some of these experiences. It is a factor that most investigators will not admit. For example, Dr. Moody explained in his book Life After Life that “rarely, someone . . . has proposed demonic explanations of near-death experiences, suggesting that the experiences were doubtless directed by inimical forces.” However, he rejects the idea since he feels that instead of the patients’ feeling more godly after the experience, “Satan would presumably tell his servants to follow a course of hate and destruction.” He adds, “He certainly has failed miserably​—as far as I can tell—​to make persuasive emissaries for his program!”

In this respect Dr. Moody makes a grave mistake in two ways. First, Satan would not necessarily promulgate hate and destruction through these experiences. Why not? Because the Bible states: “Satan himself keeps transforming himself into an angel of light. It is therefore nothing great if his ministers also keep transforming themselves into ministers of righteousness.” (2 Corinthians 11:14, 15) If he can perpetuate the basic lie that he has always maintained​—“You positively will not die”—​he can do it through the apparently most innocent and enlightening means.​—Genesis 3:4, 5.

Second, he has not failed miserably to make persuasive emissaries for his program of lies about the immortal soul! To the contrary, he now has doctors, psychologists and scientists fully supporting the lie that he has promulgated through priests and philosophers down through the ages! How appropriate is Paul’s summation of the situation when he wrote: “If, now, the good news we declare is in fact veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through”!​—2 Corinthians 4:3, 4. [whereislogic: and how accurate were these predictions (prophecies): “For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome* [Or “healthful; beneficial.”] teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled.* [Or “to tell them what they want to hear.”] They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.” (2 Timothy 4:3,4) “However, the inspired word clearly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired statements and teachings of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, whose conscience is seared as with a branding iron.”(1 Timothy 4:1,2). And how pertinent these warnings + advice: “So we should no longer be children, tossed about as by waves and carried here and there by every wind of teaching by means of the trickery of men, by means of cunning in deceptive schemes.” (Ephesians 4:14) “And stop being molded by this system of things,* [ Or “this age.”] but be transformed by making your mind over, so that you may prove to yourselves the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.” (Romans 12:2) “Look out that no one takes you captive by means of the philosophy and empty deception according to human tradition, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ;” “We have much to say about him, and it is difficult to explain, because you have become dull in your hearing. For although by now* [Lit., “in view of the time.”] you should be teachers, you again need someone to teach you from the beginning the elementary things of the sacred pronouncements of God, and you have gone back to needing milk, not solid food. For everyone who continues to feed on milk is unacquainted with the word of righteousness, for he is a young child. But solid food belongs to mature people, to those who through use have their powers of discernment* [Or “their perceptive powers.”] trained to distinguish both right and wrong.” (Col 2:8; Hebrews 5:11-14) Not all that men may call “knowledge” is to be sought, because philosophies and views exist that are “falsely called ‘knowledge.’” (1Ti 6:20) Thus Paul wrote about some who were learning (taking in knowledge) “yet never able to come to an accurate knowledge of truth.” (2Ti 3:6, 7) “... having an appearance of godliness but proving false to its power and from these turn away. From among these arise men who slyly work their way into households and captivate weak women loaded down with sins, led by various desires, always learning and yet never able to come to an accurate knowledge of truth.” (2Ti 3:5-7) “Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, turning away from the empty speeches that violate what is holy and from the contradictions of the falsely called ‘knowledge.’ By making a show of such knowledge, some have deviated from the faith. May the undeserved kindness be with you.” (1Ti 6:20,21) Such as the contradiction that there is life after death, then you didn't really die then did you? If you (or the 'real' you, as in your soul, energy or spirit that makes you: 'you') are still alive, it's not really after death. It's no different from the ancient Babylonian theologians teaching that death was a passage to another kind of life (see previous comment), i.e. death = life. A blatant contradiction, that without me spelling it out like that, would otherwise be hidden behind "empty speeches", sophisticated and cunning, and promoted by those who like to call themselves "scientists" when they are talking like pagan philosophers and promoting their mysticism concerning the soul, but that doesn't make it any more true.]

Nevertheless, as we have seen, some psychologists believe that man has a conscious existence after death. This personal interpretation of the meaning of near-death experiences obliges us to raise the following pertinent questions on behalf of those who believe the Bible: Is there any Biblical basis at all for saying that man has an immortal soul that abandons the body like a butterfly out of a cocoon? What about those texts in the Bible that use the words “soul” and “immortality”?

The Soul​—Is It You? Or Is It in You?

originally posted by: Astrocometus
No Nope and negative it's simple if you just read your Bible. The KJV to be exact.

You know that the King James bible was named after a man who was a flaming homosexual, right? There is nothing special about the King James bible. It isn't 'THE" Bible to go to. Problems with the King James are easily googled. Beware of King James Onlyism.

This is all about usual power and control vectors that drive all human endeavour and always seems to begin with the male desire to control the female.

The bible verses referred to here are purported to be written by Saul who reinvented himself as Paul. They are instructionals, telling Timothy who he and his friends should be. They fly in the face of the teachings of Jesus and the New Covenant.

originally posted by: covent
This is all about usual power and control vectors that drive all human endeavour and always seems to begin with the male desire to control the female.

The bible verses referred to here are purported to be written by Saul who reinvented himself as Paul. They are instructionals, telling Timothy who he and his friends should be. They fly in the face of the teachings of Jesus and the New Covenant.

Absolutely, most organized religion flies in the face of Jesus' teachings as did the his male disciples who would not accept Mary Magdelene as Jesus' #1 disciple and as a religious leader.

originally posted by: quintessentone
Absolutely, most organized religion flies in the face of Jesus' teachings as did the his male disciples who would not accept Mary Magdelene as Jesus' #1 disciple and as a religious leader.

... according to the Gnostics. You are saying that the Gnostics are actually Jesus teaching. Most of the world, and 2,000 years of Christian theology disagree with you.

The Gnostic 'gospels' were written around 200 AD whereas the Canonical gospels were eyewitness accounts written down starting around 40AD. The Gnostics were rejected from being canonical for a few reasons. The Gnostics see the God of the OT as evil, and they dismiss Judaism which counters the canonical gospels. The Gnostics stress secret knowledge whereas the canonical scripture has Jesus Himself saying that nothing is taught secretly and everything He said is open for all. The Canonical gospels are all about Jesus and the Kingdom of God on Earth, but the Gnostics reject that. There are lots of theological and historical reasons the Gnostics were rejected by the Council of Carthage in 397AD.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: quintessentone
Absolutely, most organized religion flies in the face of Jesus' teachings as did the his male disciples who would not accept Mary Magdelene as Jesus' #1 disciple and as a religious leader.

... according to the Gnostics. You are saying that the Gnostics are actually Jesus teaching. Most of the world, and 2,000 years of Christian theology disagree with you.

The Gnostic 'gospels' were written around 200 AD whereas the Canonical gospels were eyewitness accounts written down starting around 40AD. The Gnostics were rejected from being canonical for a few reasons. The Gnostics see the God of the OT as evil, and they dismiss Judaism which counters the canonical gospels. The Gnostics stress secret knowledge whereas the canonical scripture has Jesus Himself saying that nothing is taught secretly and everything He said is open for all. The Canonical gospels are all about Jesus and the Kingdom of God on Earth, but the Gnostics reject that. There are lots of theological and historical reasons the Gnostics were rejected by the Council of Carthage in 397AD.

Where did I mention the Gnostics?

Was She an Apostle of Jesus Christ?

Mary Magdalene’s role in the canonical gospels is small; in non-canonical gospels like Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip and the Acts of Peter, she plays a prominent role — often asking intelligent questions when all the other disciples are confused. Jesus is depicted as loving her more than any of the others because of her understanding. Some readers have interpreted Jesus “love” here as physical, not just spiritual, and hence that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were intimate — if not married.

www.learnreligions.com...

..."when all the other disciples are confused." ...

a reply to: quintessentone

Yeah .. the gnostic "gospels "

Pt. 1. The Gospel of Thomas with the Greek Gospel of Thomas fragments
Pt. 2. The Gospel of Mary
Pt. 3. The Gospel of Philip
Pt. 4. The Gospel of Truth by Valentinus
Pt. 5. The holy book of the great invisible Spirit or the Egyptian gospel
Pt. 6. The secret book of John
Pt. 7. The secret book of James
Pt. 8. The book of Thomas
Pt. 9. The dialogue of the savior
Pt. 10. The second discourse of great Seth
Pt. 11. The book of Baruch by Justin
Pt. 12. The round dance of the cross.

Villanova.EDU

a reply to: FlyersFan

Where did I mention the Gnostics in relation to that specific post?

It's clear than within the Bible are hints of truth but if those multitudes that prefer blind faith/blind thought because it answers all the hard questions of life and death for them, then they are free to choose that path. I don't choose that path, i choose, as many theologians (not that I am on their level) do, to question, discuss and analyze all information sources because the contradictions are too bothersome to me to just ignore them.

originally posted by: quintessentone
Where did I mention the Gnostics in relation to that specific post?

What you said is directly from Gnostic teaching.
It's not scriptural from the Canonical accepted gospels.

If you see it in the Canonical accepted gospels .. then you are seeing what you want to see .. because 2,000 years of theology and scripture study of the canonical gospels says otherwise.

Whatever.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: quintessentone
Where did I mention the Gnostics in relation to that specific post?

What you said is directly from Gnostic teaching.
It's not scriptural from the Canonical accepted gospels.

If you see it in the Canonical accepted gospels .. then you are seeing what you want to see .. because 2,000 years of theology and scripture study of the canonical gospels says otherwise.

Whatever.

Not whatever.

I was replying to Covent and agreed with her/his take on the contradictions of the Bible. We follow the path of truth finding and if you don't, that is your choice.

The contradictions remain today.

That’s a nice thought, but has any prayer failed more spectacularly? Christianity is more than just Roman Catholics and Baptists and Methodists and maybe a few more—there are now 45,000 denominations, and Christianity is fragmenting at a rate of two new denominations per day. (h/t commenter Greg G.)

www.patheos.com...

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: Astrocometus
No Nope and negative it's simple if you just read your Bible. The KJV to be exact.

You know that the King James bible was named after a man who was a flaming homosexual, right? There is nothing special about the King James bible. It isn't 'THE" Bible to go to. Problems with the King James are easily googled. Beware of King James Onlyism.

Yeah well doesn't matter what you say to me because I've noticed you're
wrong about a lot of things. Especially dispensationalism. The KJV is the
closest thing to a perfect translation we have despite who it was named
after. In fact I wouldn't trust your knowledge as far as I could toss you out
of this forum.

originally posted by: Astrocometus
Yeah well doesn't matter what you say to me because I've noticed you're
wrong about a lot of things.

I'm not 'wrong about a lot of things'. And I'm right about this. The KJV is named after a flaming homosexual, and fundies who cling to the KJV don't approve of homosexuality. It's ironic and oh so funny.

Especially dispensationalism.

I've had an account here 20 years and, to the best of my memory, I have never discussed dispensationalism .. let alone in the past three weeks that you have been here.

The KJV is the closest thing to a perfect translation we have despite who it was named
after.

You KJV cultists love to say that. But , no it's not.

What are the Major Known Translation Issues with the King James Bible
Problems with the King James Version
Errors in the KJV ..and boy are there a lot

TONS of articles out there showing how the KJV is not the best translation ... how the translators were influenced by the Crown ... how new older manuscripts have been found since the KJV came out and those are more accurate, meaning that the KJV translated manuscripts that were not accurate to begin with ... etc etc.

a reply to: FlyersFan

1 - you can't toss me from the forum. keep dreaming.

That was the whole point. lol

Once saved always saved to deny this is to deny what Christ did
for us. You might need to learn reading comprehension before
boasting.

I doubt there's much I could learn from you. I believe in
the blood of Jesus Christ far more than you.

a reply to: FlyersFan

I'm not 'wrong about a lot of things'. And I'm right about this. The KJV is named after a flaming homosexual, and fundies who cling to the KJV don't approve of homosexuality. It's ironic and oh so funny.

As if Popes and Bishops haven't been "flaming homosexuals" throughout history! LOL

Anyway, you can't believe that a few flaming homosexuals were able to confound God and corrupt his word, can you?

originally posted by: Astrocometus
Once saved always saved to deny this is to deny what Christ did
for us.

The doctrine of demons.
Scripture is clear ... people of faith can fall away.

Hebrews 3:12-14 "Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God. 13 But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called “today,” that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. 14 For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end."

Matthew 24:13 - "but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved."

originally posted by: Astrocometus
You might need to learn reading comprehension before
boasting..

Compared to you ... I"m a freak'n scholar.
My reading comprehension is just fine.
I notice you can't argue with the fact that the KJV translated outdated manuscripts.
Older more accurate manuscripts were discovered after the KJV came out.
It's not 'the best translation'. It translated the wrong manuscripts.
You'd know that if you had any 'reading comprehension'. ha ha ha

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
As if Popes and Bishops haven't been "flaming homosexuals" throughout history!

]

... and adulterers. Don't forget that one. Popes, Bishops, Protestant Ministers and Pastors ...Lots of sexual stuff going on with them. Not all, of course. But many.