Jeff

Formerly known as MythosMayhem. Theologian dedicated to promoting the love and relationship of One God and Father who is over all, through all and within all.

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

@DroppingTrooth But if using only one, that ‘being wrong’ chance is greatly enhanced.

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

Your foundation is based a misunderstanding of what repent means. Many teachers say it’s a change of direction, but that isn’t the meaning of the word.

It literally means ‘after-perceiving’ or ‘after-understanding’, and is a new mentality upon a new understanding. I liken repentance to a child who once believed in magic tricks, but one they have an understanding of sleight of hand, they can no longer believe that the tricks are actual magic. It’s a new perception that cannot be reverted back.

That repentance can lead to different outward actions, but is the catalyst, not the change itself.

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

What is love? (baby don't hurt me). 🤣

As a parent, do you attempt to change your child’s character? Can you force them to be artistic, or musically-inclined, or mechanically-inclined?

While we can control certain aspects of outward action, we cannot change what is inherent within an individual.

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

@DroppingTrooth Have you never met a Christian addicted to alcohol, pornography, gambling, etc.?

Do you believe then that they don’t have true faith?

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

@DroppingTrooth There are four hermeneutics to interpret Scripture. Most today only understand one.

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

Caring for holiness, and determining another’s conviction, specifically where Scripture is fluid, are two separate things. We should esteem all others more highly ourself, regardless of what our personal convictions are.

When I reflect love, I draw others to the Spirit of Christ within; when I reflect judgment, I build a barrier with those same persons.

The Scripture speaks of righteous judgment, but many don’t fully understand this. Many continue to judge by the outward, such as within the list of 1Cor 6:9, but God, who is the only righteous Judge, judges from what cannot be seen by man, the heart.

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

@DroppingTrooth This unity is why I continue to post on the variances of Scriptural interpretation, and the damage of building theological walls when we should be loving others as ourself.

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

Again, my personal belief is that Paul isn’t speaking of physical relations here, as the audacity of verse 1 points out. In no realm is it is good for a physical human man to attach himself to a physical human woman.

But even in a physical sense, does not Paul go on to teach in verse 17, “Nevertheless, each person should live as a believer in whatever situation the Lord has assigned to them, just as God has called them.”

Who are we then to demand another change the situation to which the Lord has assigned them?

“Each person should remain in the situation they were in when God called them.” v. 20

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

I’ve not dismissed any Scripture. The only two verses that may be considered as pertaining to homosexuality are Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, which I have fully explained.

I listed the Talmudic references to show that even Jewish rabbis see other instances of gender being more than currently known, as they are fluent in the Hebrew text and its meaning.

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

This is true. Notice that Paul ends verse 7 with “Therefore indeed, it is already altogether a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded?”

Paul is saying that instead of judging others, it’s better to just be wronged and move on, living our own life honorably.

Too many see Scripture as a guide to rule other’s lives when we, as Christians of faith, should be focused simply upon ourselves and let Christ’s light shine through us as a beacon, not a tool of force.

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

Have you ever studied the word sin, and its meaning?

Many Christians see sin as outward actions, such as the list in 1Cor 6:9, but this isn’t the Greek meaning of sin.

In the original Greek the word translated as ‘sin’ is the compound word ‘hamartia’. The first part of the word, ‘ha’ means without; the second part ‘martia’ is a conjugation of the Greek ‘meros’ meaning portion or form.

Essentially, sin is the state in which everyone is born into, not recognizing the Spirit of God within, and are thus ‘without their proper portion or form’. When we then truly understand (aka repent) and believe the good news (gospel) of Christ teaching us of the Spirit within, we are ‘transformed’, or after-formed, into a new creation.

Once we have been ‘transformed’, we walk in that salvation daily, attempting to live within the convictions of our newfound faith on the Spirit of God within.

With that being said, there are many faithful, properly-formed, Christians who struggle with their own convictions within the list of 1Cor 6:9 or without, while others do not feel conviction for them. This is their, or our, personal walk.

And then there are those who are still unformed, living life solely by the flesh, not regarding the Spirit at all.

When we read of Paul judging a person or situation, there are literal, metaphorical, moral and anagogical hermeneutics in which we can read these texts. Within each, we must ensure that we aren’t building our own theology of walls and gate-keeping though.

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

@FightofFaith So then how do you interpret this Scripture?

How is my reasoning incorrect?

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

Yes, the compound word ‘arsenokoitai’ isn’t found in any other Greek text. The two individual words, ‘arseno’ and ‘koitai’ are common in the Greek language, just not together in one word.

Also, there’s no sacrament for marriage at all in the Scripture, regardless of sex or gender. While marriage is mentioned, it’s only as the backdrop for deeper spiritual lessons.

As for the contextual reasoning within Judaism, as they missed the spiritual aspect of much of the Torah and Tanakh, I don’t take their teachings as a whole with much authority, though there have been rabbis within the Talmud who see a reflection of fleshly truth:

https://t.co/NISljdg05G

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

Christ’s kingdom is not of this world, we are merely sojourners here.

As for this particular country, it is founded on personal liberty and freedom so long as it doesn’t adversely affect others. This was constituted by both Christians and Deists when the country was founded.

When we understand that this existence is very temporary and whatever country we live in is not our true citizenry, the cares for the flesh becomes much more moot.

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

@DroppingTrooth @LucifersTweetz He returned within me over three decades ago.

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

@Pathfinder4545 @Kaylavosss Are they baseless? If so, how is it an insult?

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

How do you Paul’s statement in 1Cor 6:12 where he teaches, ““All things are lawful (permissible) to me,” but not all things profit (are beneficial). “All things are lawful (permissible) to me,” but I will not be mastered (empowered by authority) by (under) anything.

Paul explains very clearly that he won’t be empowered under anything, because everything is permissible, but he is aware that not everything is beneficial.

The question we have to ask is: what does Paul then mean by the list in 6:9 of those who won’t inherit the Kingdom of God (which is within) when everything is actually lawful/permissible?

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

There is no other usage of the hapax legomenon, ἀρσενοκοῖται, in the Ancient Greek. It is used only twice in Scripture and no where else.

While we know that word is a noun, which is literally man-mat (bed), we must make any interpretation from the context. Since this was a word that was created solely for 1Cor 6:9 and 1Tim 1:10, we must examine what Paul meant by it.

This is why we must return to the LXX from the Levitical passages of 18:22 and 20:13, as these are same words, though used separate, arseno (man) and koitai (bed), which I explained in my original reply.

Using the first century Didache, 2.2, and Martin Luther’s 1534 German translation, I attempted to show where earlier scholars viewed the word as ‘pederasty/child abuse’ using the Hebrew grammar. There was also the early church’s rite of ἀδελφοποίησις, adelphopoiesis, which was the joining of two male brothers in a liturgy using the same wording as the marriage liturgy, which goes against the modern theology.

I also broke down the only other passages in Scripture where the concept of homosexuality could even be alluded to.

The concept against homosexuality is a fairly recent doctrine, beginning in the 16th century and only translated as such since 1946.

[Jeff @WithinAllOfUs]

@AlexMurashko @shane_pruitt78 Amen, Alex!