1John 5:1 regeneration before faith

Synergy

Well-known member
No, SCRIPTURE dictates the context.

Not what I said.

I said that the idea that "New Jerusalem" (which is NOT the context of Matt. 23, btw) allegedly means "New Pharisee" is insane.

Please stop twisting my words.
So tell us why the context of Matt 23 gives you the license to do the following: Jerusalem Pharisees, and not to the hundreds of other passages that contains the word Jerusalem. This is going to be interesting....
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
So tell us why the context of Matt 23 gives you the license to do the following: Jerusalem Pharisees, and not to the hundreds of other passages that contains the word Jerusalem. This is going to be interesting....

Seriously?!

Matt. 23::29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, 30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. 31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. 32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. 33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
Matt. 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: 35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. 36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. 37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

The fact that this entire diatribe is addressed to the Pharisees, and that Jesus makes a distinction between them and "thy children", makes the meaning very clear.
 

Synergy

Well-known member
Seriously?!

Matt. 23::29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, 30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. 31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. 32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. 33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
Matt. 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: 35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. 36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. 37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

The fact that this entire diatribe is addressed to the Pharisees, and that Jesus makes a distinction between them and "thy children", makes the meaning very clear.
It still does not go in your favor. Are you saying that Christ only wanted to gather the children of Jerusalem the Pharisees? Seriously? Looks like you are in need of at least one more revision before it can synch up with Reformist theology. Keep those revisions coming.

I don't see a problem with Jesus expanding the subject scope from Pharisees to Jerusalem. That was in preparation for Him saying that He wanted to gather all the children of Jerusalem (not just the Pharisees' children) but they were not all willing.
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
It still does not go in your favor.

I disagree.

Are you saying that Christ only wanted to gather the children of Jerusalem the Pharisees? Seriously? Looks like you are in need of at least one more revision before it can synch up with Reformist theology. Keep those revisions coming.

Matt. 7:6 “Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.

I don't see a problem with Jesus expanding the subject scope from Pharisees to Jerusalem.

Because God doesn't like it when you twist His Scripture.

That was in preparation for Him saying that He wanted to gather all the children of Jerusalem (not just the Pharisees' children)

"thy children" is figurative, not literal.

but they were not all willing.

Why did you change "you" to "they"?
 

Alexander the adequate

Well-known member
Well.... Maybe you should have STARTED with that question, instead of the snarky and inisulting assumption that I was simply "parrotting".

Yes, it came from my own study.
The grammar is very straightforward. No other interpretation is grammatically possible.
That's why your misinterpretion shows your theological bias.
ok
 

Synergy

Well-known member
Matt. 7:6 “Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.
So this is the only defense you have for striking out Jerusalem and putting in Pharisees? Ran out of revisions?

The fact remains that by your logic then Christ only wanted to gather the children of Jerusalem the Pharisees.
Because God doesn't like it when you twist His Scripture.
Which is what you do when you do the following: children of Jerusalem the Pharisees.
"thy children" is figurative, not literal.
Figurative or literal, the children of Jerusalem are the children of Jerusalem.
Why did you change "you" to "they"?
It makes no difference to the fact that Jerusalem is Jerusalem.
 

Caroljeen

Well-known member
Sorry, but "your children" is THIRD person, not "second person".

The pronoun you would use to replace "your children" is "them":

"How often have I desired to gather [them]".



I already told you that I wasn't going to hold my breath, since I knew you wouldn't be able to demonstrate it.
What is your point?

The children are part of the metaphor of the hen (God) trying to gather his chicks (children) but the children of Jerusalem resisted God's attempts to get them to return to him and killed his prophets instead. In like manner, they (the children of Jerusalem, pharisees and scribes) are resisting the words of Jesus, the prophet like unto Moses. who was sent by God.

The bottom line to this whole story is that the children of God can resist God. And if they can resist God then so can those who God draws who are not yet his children.
 
Last edited:

Synergy

Well-known member
And that's why your posts are worthless.
You also haven't read Scripture where Paul does not suffer a woman to teach.
You're in trouble now with the Ladies. You need to read scripture in its entirety before you make absolute statements like that.

One of the judges in the Old Testament was a woman. Deborah did more than teach, she was a Judge. Judges 4:4,"Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, was judging Israel at that time. And she would sit under the palm tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the mountains of Ephraim. And the children of Israel came up to her for judgment. "

Acts 18:26:
"He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him and explained to him the way of God more accurately."

Galatians 3:28:
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Titus 2:3-4:
"Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, and so train the young women to love their husbands and children"

Acts 21:9:
"He had four unmarried daughters, who prophesied."

Joel 2:28:
"And it shall come to pass afterward that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions."
 

Carbon

Well-known member
You're in trouble now with the Ladies. You need to read scripture in its entirety before you make absolute statements like that.

One of the judges in the Old Testament was a woman. Deborah did more than teach, see was a Judge. Judges 4:4,"Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, was judging Israel at that time. And she would sit under the palm tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the mountains of Ephraim. And the children of Israel came up to her for judgment. "

Acts 18:26:
"He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him and explained to him the way of God more accurately."

Galatians 3:28:
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Titus 2:3-4:
"Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, and so train the young women to love their husbands and children"

Acts 21:9:
"He had four unmarried daughters, who prophesied."

Joel 2:28:
"And it shall come to pass afterward that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions."
Any lady that knows scripture would agree with Theo.
Your the one who is in trouble.
 

Carbon

Well-known member
Any Lady who knows scripture in its entirety will agree that there were female believers who judged, taught, and prophesized. Have you looked at the verses I quoted?
Why not read the actual stories? You’ll see that it’s pretty sad that there wasn’t a guy worthy to rule at these times.
You're also in trouble now, in the dog house to be more exact.
Lol. 😀

Read and learn before commenting
 

Synergy

Well-known member
Why not read the actual stories? You’ll see that it’s pretty sad that there wasn’t a guy worthy to rule at these times.

Lol. 😀

Read and learn before commenting
If you truly believe that females should not judge or teach then where is your petition to remove females from judicial and teaching positions? Or are you just blowing smoke and hiding behind the smoke?
 

HealTheLand

Active member
It's not "[my] logic".
It's YOUR logic.

I deny the insane notion that words are used in the EXACT same way every time they're used in Scripture. The fact that most terms have multiple definitions disproves your idea. The meaning of terms is determined by CONTEXT.

and by God /Spirit. to know truth (more correctly) we would need to ask God, and seek truth - from truth (Christ /God) not just trust (in) our own minds... for we (can) see (rather) dimly down here on Earth - that is to say - not like God (or quite different). and many seek with their mind to understand - but without the Spirit to help the understanding - one could be wandering in errors (guesses, figurings, theology, logic) of their - own minds - to their own detriment and to any who follow their teachings/ideas/logic - without Spirit.
 

Predestined

Well-known member
If you truly believe that females should not judge or teach then where is your petition to remove females from judicial and teaching positions? Or are you just blowing smoke and hiding behind the smoke?
They are super good at evangelism also. Look at the woman at the well.

4:21 Jesus said to her, "Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 4:22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. 4:23 But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such as these to worship him. 4:24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth."

Jesus did not accuse her of changing the subject; he answered her question. It did not matter where one worshiped God—it was how God was worshiped. There would no longer be limitations of geography in worshiping God for God is spirit, and he will be worshiped in spirit and truth.

4:25 The woman said to him, "I know that Messiah is coming" (who is called Christ). "When he comes, he will proclaim all things to us." 4:26 Jesus said to her, "I am he, the one who is speaking to you."

The woman stated her belief in the coming Messiah who would reveal all things to them. Jesus then revealed something to this unnamed, foreign woman that he did not reveal to Nicodemus, “I am he, the one who is speaking to you” (John 4:26). The Samaritan woman was the first person to whom Jesus revealed himself as Messiah in the Gospel of John, and this is the first “I am” statement in the gospel as well (Cunningham and Hamilton, 122; see “‘I am’ in John’s Gospel”).

But wait...there's more...

Then the woman went to her people and said, “Come and see a man who told me everything I have ever done! He cannot be the Messiah, can he?” (v. 28).

4:30 They left the city and were on their way to him. . . . 4:39 Many Samaritans from that city believed in him because of the woman's testimony, "He told me everything I have ever done." 4:40 So when the Samaritans came to him, they asked him to stay with them; and he stayed there two days. 4:41 And many more believed because of his word. 4:42 They said to the woman, "It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is truly the Savior of the world."

She became the first evangelist in the gospel of John. She went and told her people about Jesus and brought them to him, so they could see and hear for themselves.
 

Synergy

Well-known member
They are super good at evangelism also. Look at the woman at the well.

4:21 Jesus said to her, "Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 4:22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. 4:23 But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such as these to worship him. 4:24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth."

Jesus did not accuse her of changing the subject; he answered her question. It did not matter where one worshiped God—it was how God was worshiped. There would no longer be limitations of geography in worshiping God for God is spirit, and he will be worshiped in spirit and truth.

4:25 The woman said to him, "I know that Messiah is coming" (who is called Christ). "When he comes, he will proclaim all things to us." 4:26 Jesus said to her, "I am he, the one who is speaking to you."

The woman stated her belief in the coming Messiah who would reveal all things to them. Jesus then revealed something to this unnamed, foreign woman that he did not reveal to Nicodemus, “I am he, the one who is speaking to you” (John 4:26). The Samaritan woman was the first person to whom Jesus revealed himself as Messiah in the Gospel of John, and this is the first “I am” statement in the gospel as well (Cunningham and Hamilton, 122; see “‘I am’ in John’s Gospel”).

But wait...there's more...

Then the woman went to her people and said, “Come and see a man who told me everything I have ever done! He cannot be the Messiah, can he?” (v. 28).

4:30 They left the city and were on their way to him. . . . 4:39 Many Samaritans from that city believed in him because of the woman's testimony, "He told me everything I have ever done." 4:40 So when the Samaritans came to him, they asked him to stay with them; and he stayed there two days. 4:41 And many more believed because of his word. 4:42 They said to the woman, "It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is truly the Savior of the world."

She became the first evangelist in the gospel of John. She went and told her people about Jesus and brought them to him, so they could see and hear for themselves.
There's more....
Mary Magdalene was the Apostle to the Apostles when she proclaimed to the Apostles that Jesus is now alive and resurrected.

There's more....
The Virgin Mary became the living Temple of God. She surpassed even the angels in purity and virtue.
 

Predestined

Well-known member
Who stayed with Jesus at the Cross?

The Gospel of John says that several women and one disciple stood "near the cross", and that Jesus spoke to them from the cross. The women are identified as Jesus' mother Mary, his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clophas (or Cleophas), and Mary Magdalene. The disciple is identified only as "the disciple whom Jesus loved".

John stayed. The rest of the macho men took off. It was like "Jesus who? We don't know any Jesus.
 

Carbon

Well-known member
If you truly believe that females should not judge or teach then where is your petition to remove females from judicial and teaching positions? Or are you just blowing smoke and hiding behind the smoke?
I truly agree to what Theo said concerning Paul about women teachers. This other stuff is just your added nonsense.
 

Carbon

Well-known member
There's more....
Mary Magdalene was the Apostle to the Apostles when she proclaimed to the Apostles that Jesus is now alive and resurrected.

There's more....
The Virgin Mary became the living Temple of God. She surpassed even the angels in purity and virtue.
Lol. As I thought, nothing to do with it. 😂🤣
 

Synergy

Well-known member
I truly agree to what Theo said concerning Paul about women teachers.

So let's take a closer look at 1 Corinthians 14:34-35:
“Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak (λαλεῖν), but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak (λαλεῖν) in the church.”

In chapter 11 of 1 Corinthians, just three chapters before the supposed restrictions on women speaking in the church, Paul gives women instructions on how to pray and prophesy in the church assembly (1 Corinthians 11:5). One can pray silently, but prophesy is always audible. If Paul instructed women on how to prophesy in the church, he did not expect them to be silent. It is illogical to suggest that Scripture requires women to be silent in the church just moments after instructing women on how to prophesy in the church.

So what's going on?

Keep in mind, for the first time women were allowed to participate in the church service. They were no longer relegated to the balcony, hidden behind a curtain. They were on the main floor. Therefore, their common practice of talking or chattering amongst themselves had become a distraction to the service. That's why Paul says that “if they [women] want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home”.

This all coincides with the fact that λαλεῖν is translatable to talk, which becomes a disruptive chatter to those presiding over the service.

The shackles that Reformers are still trying to impose on women is broken!
 

Predestined

Well-known member
So let's take a closer look at 1 Corinthians 14:34-35:
“Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak (λαλεῖν), but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak (λαλεῖν) in the church.”

In chapter 11 of 1 Corinthians, just three chapters before the supposed restrictions on women speaking in the church, Paul gives women instructions on how to pray and prophesy in the church assembly (1 Corinthians 11:5). One can pray silently, but prophesy is always audible. If Paul instructed women on how to prophesy in the church, he did not expect them to be silent. It is illogical to suggest that Scripture requires women to be silent in the church just moments after instructing women on how to prophesy in the church.

So what's going on?

Keep in mind, for the first time women were allowed to participate in the church service. They were no longer relegated to the balcony, hidden behind a curtain. They were on the main floor. Therefore, their common practice of talking or chattering amongst themselves had become a distraction to the service. That's why Paul says that “if they [women] want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home”.

This all coincides with the fact that λαλεῖν is translatable to talk, which becomes a disruptive chatter to those presiding over the service.

The shackles that Reformers are still trying to impose on women is broken!
The secular Women's Liberation movement is forcing church leaders everywhere to distinguish carefully between attitudes toward women derived from customs and traditions of the past (often strongly macho-dominated) and what the Bible actually teaches and what the early church actually did.

This is from Ray C. Stedman One of the best teachers ever.

 
Top