Where have all the Churches gone ? As I witness less and less of ungodliness in these current times I realise that in my own awakening that I am searching for a place to gather with others and share the word of God. Where does one turn too at this time ? I happened to visit a local parish church recently and behind the masked presence of the priest whom spoke to me behind the mask of which I couldn't understand I asked myself the question, 'to whom are these people bowing to authority'. Romans 1:21 - 1:24 seems to be the answer, in that the Church has 'changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man'... I am new to the bible brought on through spiritual awakening because of what's I see going on, so where are those who live out the bible showing me how to become wise, how to search for the truth ?
You mention Romans 1:21-24. Verse 23 ""And changed the glory of the incorruptible God into images made like to corruptible man, and birds, and fourfooted beasts and creeping things." Those people mentioned in Romans, those given to unnatural sex, have made false images of God. They are false images of God. When God looks at them he sees, animals, beasts, birds, and creeping things. This breaks the second commandment which reads, " Ex. 20:4 "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth." God sees the sexually perverse as animals, etc. Remember when he comes to earth he states this is a generation of vipers? A viper is a snake and Jesus sees an entire generation as snakes---creeping things.
God sees Adam and Eve as camels. Jeremiah 2:23, " How canst thou say, I am not polluted, I have not gone after Baalim? See thy way in the valley, know what thou hast done; thou art a swift dromedary traversing her way." A swift dromedary is a camel, a beast. And the cross-reference in my King James Study Bible takes us back to Adam and Eve. Gen. 3:12, "The woman thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree and I did eat." Husbands and wives who commit unnatural sex cannot say they are not a false image of God for they are a false image. God see them as a camel. They break the second commandment. When God looks at them, he sees a camel.
Marilyn, just another question for you (aside from the present discussion), since you mentioned a cross reference of Jeremiah 3:23 to Genesis 3:12. Since I'm still trying to place your understanding of the Bible with what is normally understood by others, & of course taking into account your earlier mention of the pastor who shared some things with you that greatly upset you, I therefore ask you:
What is this Study Bible that you are reading from? Most Bibles will have another name, or at least mentioned within its early pages, give an indication of who has put it together. I mentioned earlier that mine is the KJV Ryrie Study Bible; anyone familiar with Bibles will immediately know the name as Charles C. Ryrie, a department Chairman, from the Dallas Theological Seminary. And if astute enough, they will probably know my theological position on a number of doctrines & teachings. But your interpretation of Scripture, it's cross references, & indeed your focus on perverted sin, tells me that your Bible is 'different' to what most of us read from. Would you care to oblige me this information? Thank you.
I have used three different Bibles. One I had to put away, it was overused and worn out and the first page is gone that tells me who printed it. That Bible gives me the cross reference from Jeremiah 2:23, "(1)How canst thou say, I am not polluted, I have not gone after Baalim? See thy way in the valley, know what thou hast done; thou art a swift dromedary traversing her way." A swift dromedary is a camel, a beast. And the cross-reference in my King James Study Bible takes us back to Adam and Eve. (1) Gen. 3:12, 13 "The woman thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree and I did eat." Husbands and wives who commit original sin cannot say they are not a false image of God for they are a false image and they break the second commandment. When God looks at them, he sees a camel. The other two do not give that reference. This explains the woe to the hypocrites that say you strain at a nat and swallow a camel. You preach about the lesser sins which are not a trespass and then you commit a trespass, swallow a camel.
I use a Bible from NBP, The National Bible Press-Philadelphia. That one gives many references to Romans 1. Example, Gen. 6:5, (1) "God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." The cross reference (1) sends me to Romans 1:28-31."
The other Bible I use is published by "The world Publishing Company in Ohio. It also gives many references to Romans 1. In my study notes I have recorded many cross references to Romans 1. And there are many.
When you understand the second commandment that those given to unnatural sex are seen by God to be animals, creeping things, fish, beasts, etc, then look at how many times those are mentioned in scripture. Example: Peter fished for fish and God told him to go out into the deep and you will catch men. You have to think deeper to put men and women in the church. Beasts are mentioned over and over again in Scripture.
Thank you for that information; I would have liked to know more about the first Bible you mentioned, with the missing first page, & done some research on it. I can agree with the other reference you gave from the other Bible (i.e. Genesis 6:5 with Romans 1:28-31), even though I don't have that particular cross reference in my Bible. But to connect Jeremiah 2:23 to Genesis 3:12.13 is mystifying to me.
Anyway, I tried to do a Cross-Reference search via Open Bible & I did find these two references, along with many others, that were cross referenced to Genesis 3:12,13. Maybe you could go back to that old Bible you used to find this reference & see where the cross reference is applied, as where the a, b, c, etc are placed are important.
Apparently, in Genesis 3:13, the phrase "What is this that thou hast done?" is the connection to Jeremiah 2:23, "know what thou hast done". So the cross reference has nothing to do with dromedaries, but only a connection to "thou hast done". Any other connection would seem totally unreasonable, whether in context or in English usage. So, I won't pursue further your application of the dromedary to how God looks at us sinners; or even the use of other animals (fish, gnats, creeping things, etc.) for the same reason. Maybe, it might be interesting to check out your other cross references, particularly associating the various types of fornication to being the cause of other sins. As you know, I understand that fornication is just another sin along with every other sin.
I am posting this again because it may have been removed.
Even when I show you scripture that gives us the long list of sins that come from men with men and women who give up the natural use of their body, you do not believe those verses in Romans 1. When I show you that those in S&G have changed into images like animals, birds, creeping things and vipers you do not believe that scripture also stated in Romans 1. I printed the second commandment to show you how they break that commandment. It also explains what Jesus sees when he says, "This is a generation of vipers". He see all people as snakes, children of Satan, the snake.
Can you imagine one person putting an end to all vipers? The Christianity of today has not begun to do this. Are we waiting for the Jesus who will put an end to the vipers?
When Jesus comes he will change the grounds for divorce. Maybe the following will give you some information that will help you understand that oral and anal sex is sin for all people. "But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication [porneia], causeth her to commit adultery [moichao]: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery [moichao]" Matthew 5:32. If a spouse is married to a spouse who commits unnatural sex the spouse who does not believe in unnatural sex has grounds to divorce the one who does.
I am very familiar with the list of sins as declared in Romans chapter 1 & have never denied the severity of them & that judgement is certain on all who are given to any type of sin.
The problem I have with your understanding, as others here do, is the manner in which you force Scripture to mean what it is never intended to mean. A good example is in what you have just written about Romans 1: "those in S&G have changed into images like animals, birds, creeping things and vipers you do not believe that scripture also stated in Romans 1".
So, you believe that those in Sodom have actually changed into those images, or at least, that's how God sees them (& us). Whereas what does the verse say? Verse 23: "And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God INTO AN IMAGE made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things." How does changing the Glory of God (i.e. His Image) into the likeness of animals (i.e. into an idol), suddenly become "that we have become into images like animals, birds, etc."?
So, my perception is still correct: you have developed in your mind that the severity of sin, especially unnatural sex/fornication is the root cause for all sin to emanate from, that everything you see in Scripture points to & supports your belief - even if it means a total denial of the natural understanding of the Scripture. At least on this website, you won't find support, as there will always be someone to withstand such a skewed understanding - though I don't know what effect this type of teaching has on those who might visit your website or read your books. I won't even begin to comment on the rest of your discussion here, when even the basic principles of comprehension are not adhered to. Thank you for your time.
On the 4th day God made animals, all kinds of animals but they were not created in the image of God. God is holy. Animals are not holy.
On the 6th day God made humans and they are created in the image of God---holy and good. When Adam and Eve sinned God dressed them in skins. Gen 3:21 "Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD GOD make coats of skins, and clothed them." In my dictionary skins is a general term for the outer covering of the animal body. Now they are like the animals -not good not holy. After they sinned God saw them as animals. In Romans those given to unnatural sex changed the glory (the goodness) of God into images like birds, four-footed animals, beasts, creeping thing etc. They changed the goodness (his Glory) into what is not like God---animals, etc. They had departed from goodness. They no longer were the image of God. Remember the tree they ate from, the tree of good and evil. They committed evil. That is where evil began. Evil people are not the image of God.
Jesus said this: written in Red: "But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication [porneia], causeth her to commit adultery [moichao]: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery [moichao]" Matthew 5:32. If a spouse is married to a spouse who commits unnatural sex the spouse who does not believe in unnatural sex has grounds to divorce the one who does. Isn't this proof we are waiting for the Jesus who will say this?
You said, "skins (are) a general term for the outer covering of the animal body. Now they are like the animals -not good not holy. After they sinned God saw them as animals."
So what you're saying is that if we cover human beings given to sexual deviancy with the skin of animals, then God sees them as animals. What if I choose not to cover myself with animal skin, but still given to unnatural sex, would I still be seen as an animal by God? Does the skin covering make us resemble animals before God, or is it our sin that makes us sinners before God? Or, maybe the animal skin covering for Adam & Eve was simply a covering to cover their nakedness, which they sensed as a result of sin being committed (which had nothing to do with any sexual deviancy, but a sin of disobedience & pride).
Further, Matthew 5:32, "fornication" doesn't imply 'unnatural sex'. It could include it, but 'fornication' is a word that covers any sexual act, & in this case, such an act that is pursued with another person other than one's spouse. In those days, such grounds for divorce could be pursued in either a pre-nuptial or post-nuptial situation: where the betrothal period was seen as binding as the actual marriage itself. So if evidence of unfaithfulness, even at this early period came to light, the betrothed husband could rightfully put away his (soon to be) wife. To force a meaning of 'unnatural sex' is really a vain attempt to bolster one's support for that belief.
You said "If we cover human beings given to sexual deviancy with the skin of animals, then God sees them as animals?" No, humans do not cover humans with skins. God covers humans with skins as stated in Gen.3:21, "unto Adam and also unto his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins and clothed them." God clothed them in skins. God did not literally kill an animal and use the skin from that animal. God saw them as animals. Animals are not the image of God. After a person commits unnatural sex they have departed from God to serve Satan. They are no longer the image of God. They are like the animals that are not the image of God.
When Jesus sees an entire generation as vipers, they are not wearing Halloween costumes. They did not dress themselves as snakes. He is saying they are children of Satan and not children of God.
The word fornication does not cover all sexual acts. It did not include David's adultery. All sin is not equal. Fornication is idolatry, whoring. 1 Cor. 6:13, "The body is not made for fornication, but for the Lord."
Fornication is the sin of the Gentiles.
Acts 15:28,29: "I lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood and from things strangled, and from fornication from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well."
Fornication is the sin of Babylon.
Babylon is mentioned 260 times in the King James Bible
Rev. 19:2, "For true and righteous are his judgments: for he hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication [porneia], and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand." The entire earth will be corrupted by this most popular sin of unnatural sex. It is the broad way that leads to destruction. This sin began in Eden.
From what you've written, God clothed Adam & Eve with animal skins & saw them as animals. God never clothed me with any animal skin over my God-given human skin, that I'm aware of, so is this skin, that I might have been clothed with, an imaginary skin? Wouldn't it be better understood (& Scriptural) that we have all received the fallen nature of Adam & this is what God sees in his creation, rather than playing around with skins of animals that have no bearing on sin?
You said, "Fornication is the sin of the GentilesThis sin began in Eden". Adam & Eve were neither Jew nor Gentile & there is no evidence at all that they committed fornication. From where did you learn that Adam & Eve fornicated, or is it an assumption to support your belief?
Thank you Marilyn, Sometimes differences have to be settled by prayer, especially one as big as this one. I pray the Lord reveals truth to you. God bless you
God sees Adam and Eve as camels. Jeremiah 2:23, " How canst thou say, I am not polluted, I have not gone after Baalim? See thy way in the valley, know what thou hast done; thou art a swift dromedary traversing her way." A swift dromedary is a camel, a beast. And the cross-reference in my King James Study Bible takes us back to Adam and Eve. Gen. 3:12, "The woman thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree and I did eat." Husbands and wives who commit unnatural sex cannot say they are not a false image of God for they are a false image. God see them as a camel. They break the second commandment. When God looks at them, he sees a camel.
What is this Study Bible that you are reading from? Most Bibles will have another name, or at least mentioned within its early pages, give an indication of who has put it together. I mentioned earlier that mine is the KJV Ryrie Study Bible; anyone familiar with Bibles will immediately know the name as Charles C. Ryrie, a department Chairman, from the Dallas Theological Seminary. And if astute enough, they will probably know my theological position on a number of doctrines & teachings. But your interpretation of Scripture, it's cross references, & indeed your focus on perverted sin, tells me that your Bible is 'different' to what most of us read from. Would you care to oblige me this information? Thank you.
I use a Bible from NBP, The National Bible Press-Philadelphia. That one gives many references to Romans 1. Example, Gen. 6:5, (1) "God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." The cross reference (1) sends me to Romans 1:28-31."
The other Bible I use is published by "The world Publishing Company in Ohio. It also gives many references to Romans 1. In my study notes I have recorded many cross references to Romans 1. And there are many.
When you understand the second commandment that those given to unnatural sex are seen by God to be animals, creeping things, fish, beasts, etc, then look at how many times those are mentioned in scripture. Example: Peter fished for fish and God told him to go out into the deep and you will catch men. You have to think deeper to put men and women in the church. Beasts are mentioned over and over again in Scripture.
Anyway, I tried to do a Cross-Reference search via Open Bible & I did find these two references, along with many others, that were cross referenced to Genesis 3:12,13. Maybe you could go back to that old Bible you used to find this reference & see where the cross reference is applied, as where the a, b, c, etc are placed are important.
Apparently, in Genesis 3:13, the phrase "What is this that thou hast done?" is the connection to Jeremiah 2:23, "know what thou hast done". So the cross reference has nothing to do with dromedaries, but only a connection to "thou hast done". Any other connection would seem totally unreasonable, whether in context or in English usage. So, I won't pursue further your application of the dromedary to how God looks at us sinners; or even the use of other animals (fish, gnats, creeping things, etc.) for the same reason. Maybe, it might be interesting to check out your other cross references, particularly associating the various types of fornication to being the cause of other sins. As you know, I understand that fornication is just another sin along with every other sin.
I am posting this again because it may have been removed.
Even when I show you scripture that gives us the long list of sins that come from men with men and women who give up the natural use of their body, you do not believe those verses in Romans 1. When I show you that those in S&G have changed into images like animals, birds, creeping things and vipers you do not believe that scripture also stated in Romans 1. I printed the second commandment to show you how they break that commandment. It also explains what Jesus sees when he says, "This is a generation of vipers". He see all people as snakes, children of Satan, the snake.
Can you imagine one person putting an end to all vipers? The Christianity of today has not begun to do this. Are we waiting for the Jesus who will put an end to the vipers?
When Jesus comes he will change the grounds for divorce. Maybe the following will give you some information that will help you understand that oral and anal sex is sin for all people. "But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication [porneia], causeth her to commit adultery [moichao]: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery [moichao]" Matthew 5:32. If a spouse is married to a spouse who commits unnatural sex the spouse who does not believe in unnatural sex has grounds to divorce the one who does.
The problem I have with your understanding, as others here do, is the manner in which you force Scripture to mean what it is never intended to mean. A good example is in what you have just written about Romans 1: "those in S&G have changed into images like animals, birds, creeping things and vipers you do not believe that scripture also stated in Romans 1".
So, you believe that those in Sodom have actually changed into those images, or at least, that's how God sees them (& us). Whereas what does the verse say? Verse 23: "And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God INTO AN IMAGE made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things." How does changing the Glory of God (i.e. His Image) into the likeness of animals (i.e. into an idol), suddenly become "that we have become into images like animals, birds, etc."?
So, my perception is still correct: you have developed in your mind that the severity of sin, especially unnatural sex/fornication is the root cause for all sin to emanate from, that everything you see in Scripture points to & supports your belief - even if it means a total denial of the natural understanding of the Scripture. At least on this website, you won't find support, as there will always be someone to withstand such a skewed understanding - though I don't know what effect this type of teaching has on those who might visit your website or read your books. I won't even begin to comment on the rest of your discussion here, when even the basic principles of comprehension are not adhered to. Thank you for your time.
On the 6th day God made humans and they are created in the image of God---holy and good. When Adam and Eve sinned God dressed them in skins. Gen 3:21 "Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD GOD make coats of skins, and clothed them." In my dictionary skins is a general term for the outer covering of the animal body. Now they are like the animals -not good not holy. After they sinned God saw them as animals. In Romans those given to unnatural sex changed the glory (the goodness) of God into images like birds, four-footed animals, beasts, creeping thing etc. They changed the goodness (his Glory) into what is not like God---animals, etc. They had departed from goodness. They no longer were the image of God. Remember the tree they ate from, the tree of good and evil. They committed evil. That is where evil began. Evil people are not the image of God.
Jesus said this: written in Red: "But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication [porneia], causeth her to commit adultery [moichao]: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery [moichao]" Matthew 5:32. If a spouse is married to a spouse who commits unnatural sex the spouse who does not believe in unnatural sex has grounds to divorce the one who does. Isn't this proof we are waiting for the Jesus who will say this?
So what you're saying is that if we cover human beings given to sexual deviancy with the skin of animals, then God sees them as animals. What if I choose not to cover myself with animal skin, but still given to unnatural sex, would I still be seen as an animal by God? Does the skin covering make us resemble animals before God, or is it our sin that makes us sinners before God? Or, maybe the animal skin covering for Adam & Eve was simply a covering to cover their nakedness, which they sensed as a result of sin being committed (which had nothing to do with any sexual deviancy, but a sin of disobedience & pride).
Further, Matthew 5:32, "fornication" doesn't imply 'unnatural sex'. It could include it, but 'fornication' is a word that covers any sexual act, & in this case, such an act that is pursued with another person other than one's spouse. In those days, such grounds for divorce could be pursued in either a pre-nuptial or post-nuptial situation: where the betrothal period was seen as binding as the actual marriage itself. So if evidence of unfaithfulness, even at this early period came to light, the betrothed husband could rightfully put away his (soon to be) wife. To force a meaning of 'unnatural sex' is really a vain attempt to bolster one's support for that belief.
You said "If we cover human beings given to sexual deviancy with the skin of animals, then God sees them as animals?" No, humans do not cover humans with skins. God covers humans with skins as stated in Gen.3:21, "unto Adam and also unto his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins and clothed them." God clothed them in skins. God did not literally kill an animal and use the skin from that animal. God saw them as animals. Animals are not the image of God. After a person commits unnatural sex they have departed from God to serve Satan. They are no longer the image of God. They are like the animals that are not the image of God.
When Jesus sees an entire generation as vipers, they are not wearing Halloween costumes. They did not dress themselves as snakes. He is saying they are children of Satan and not children of God.
The word fornication does not cover all sexual acts. It did not include David's adultery. All sin is not equal. Fornication is idolatry, whoring. 1 Cor. 6:13, "The body is not made for fornication, but for the Lord."
Fornication is the sin of the Gentiles.
Acts 15:28,29: "I lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood and from things strangled, and from fornication from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well."
Fornication is the sin of Babylon.
Babylon is mentioned 260 times in the King James Bible
Rev. 19:2, "For true and righteous are his judgments: for he hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication [porneia], and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand." The entire earth will be corrupted by this most popular sin of unnatural sex. It is the broad way that leads to destruction. This sin began in Eden.
You said, "Fornication is the sin of the GentilesThis sin began in Eden". Adam & Eve were neither Jew nor Gentile & there is no evidence at all that they committed fornication. From where did you learn that Adam & Eve fornicated, or is it an assumption to support your belief?
You're not allowed to post Websites on this site, I'm sure you Know this not an opportunity for advertising,
My intention was not to advertise but to advise Chris to read the article, Where is Hell?. I will not mention my site again.
This comment thread is locked. Please enter a new comment below to start a new comment thread.
Note: Comment threads older than 2 months are automatically locked.
Do you have a Bible comment or question?
Posting comments is currently unavailable due to high demand on the server.
Please check back in an hour or more. Thank you for your patience!
Report Comment
Which best represents the problem with the comment?