Anybody Want To Discuss Holiness Here

[Katholikos]

Full Truth, do you keep [b]all [/b] the commandments of Deuteronomy (and the rest of the OT)?

Believing that "a woman shall not wear anything pertaining to a man" would mean that women should not wear ANYTHING, since men wear dress-like garments in certain cultures. If women therefore can't wear pants and can't wear dresses, what's left for them to wear?

Should we also have our rebellious sons stoned to death, to "purge this evil from our midst" as the 22nd chapter of Deuteronomy (22:18-21) also commands?

Do you keep all of the Jewish feasts? And the dietary laws?
Or do you pick and choose among the 613 OT commandments? How do you know which ones YHWH wants you to obey and which you can ignore?

Of what use is an infallible Bible without an infallible teacher? Are you an infallible reader? The only rightful interpreter of the Scriptures is the Catholic Church, founded by Christ for the salvation of the world, through whom the New Testament was written and the Bible was given to us.

The 2,000-year-old CHURCH, who is "the household of God, the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth" (1 Tm 3:15), is our teacher.

Your desire for holiness is a very good thing. But you need the guidance of the Church to achieve it. We're all called to become saints.

Peace be with you, Jay

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='FullTruth' post='1181136' date='Jan 31 2007, 12:43 AM']
I give you no other proof other than I believe in the Christ, and he rose from the dead.

I do not entertain those who seek signs, and for me to prove the things of the spirit. I say repent and make your way holy before the Lord and you will see what I am saying is true.

Fixxer, I want to thank you. You just testified of what I have been saying to others in this post. Holiness is a desire, and you lack it.
[/quote]
See here is where we draw the line. You may disagree with someones opinion, but saying someone lacks holiness is judgemental and unchristian. God alone judges hearts and holiness, not you.

[123]

[quote]In today's world with men wearing long hair, having tatoos, and smoking up a storm, and women with short hair, wearing practically nothing, and going to bars - acting so permissive it isn't funny, I think it is a time to talk about a revival of sorts[/quote]

Sounds fun...Smoking, Having a good ale, or enjoying time at a bar ( modestly of course.) is not an obstacle to holiness, tattoss arent either, they seem tacky to me, but they are not mentioned in Bible as condeming our walk with God. I guess I don't get the women with short hair either, their really isnt anywhere in the Scriptures that says that women should have only long hair.

[cmotherofpirl]

Full truth you migft be interested in this thread:
[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=63787"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=63787[/url]


BTW:I have long hair, wear pants, don't smoke , but drink alcohol, and listen to classical music.

not quite as satanic as you thought

[123]

[quote]not quite as satanic as you thought

[/quote]


...That we know of...

[Sarcasm] You know them-their Christians, always know'n about da devil
and shtuff. Gotta' be keepin yah eyeballz out for dem.[/Sarcasm]

[FullTruth]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1181359' date='Jan 31 2007, 12:16 PM']
Full truth you migft be interested in this thread:
[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=63787"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=63787[/url]
BTW:I have long hair, wear pants, don't smoke , but drink alcohol, and listen to classical music.

not quite as satanic as you thought
[/quote]
Reprove taken and appreciated.

And for living in such a way, may I ask, is there peace and joy in it, for following the one you love that you wear your hair long, and don't smoke.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='FullTruth' post='1181486' date='Jan 31 2007, 04:05 PM']
Reprove taken and appreciated.

And for living in such a way, may I ask, is there peace and joy in it, for following the one you love that you wear your hair long, and don't smoke.
[/quote]

Those choices are not religious in nature. My hair is long because its easier to let it grow than go to beauty parlors etc, and smoking disgusts me.

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='FullTruth' post='1180946' date='Jan 30 2007, 10:35 PM']
In today's world with men wearing long hair, having tatoos, and smoking up a storm, and women with short hair, wearing practically nothing, and going to bars - acting so permissive it isn't funny, I think it is a time to talk about a revival of sorts.
I think TV, worldy music like Metalica, and watching movies with graphic violence, and doesn't praise YHWH are sin before YHWH. If there is to be a massive turning to the true church, we need to institute some new holiness standards.

I've often said, YHWH is the only authority in my life. I obey human authorities, but only when they are in agreement with YHWH. Here's some things to think about, if YHWH is the authority of your life as well.

If the Lord is your authority in life, you won't want to watch TV because you won't put any evil thing before your eyes.

If the Lord is your authority in life, you won't wear pants if you are a Girl, because he considers that an abomination.

If the Lord is your authority in life, you won't cut your hair if your are a girl and will keep your hair short for a man.

Why, because all of this is Scriptural.
YHWH wants men to look like men, and women to look like women, and
not watch TV.

I'm not saying men living in Scotland can't wear kilts, but kilts are quite 'manly' in Scotland.

But don't you think women should look a little more femine, and men to be more manly. I know it's not PC to say such stuff, but where is being PC taking us, straight to liberal morals. In the 1920s, women started to get hair cuts, by the 1960s there was abortions and homosexuality driven by feminism.

I watch TV, but now I will not. YHWH wants me not to watch wicked things, and there is nothing more wicked than TV, with 'baywatch babes', 'big brother houses', and fear inducing tv shows, I consider them evil and not to be in my household.

However, I've never struggled with wearing dresses. LOL!

And you only have to read all the scriptures from this bible search query to understand, being drunken is not a good thing.

[url="http://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=drunken&qs_version=9"]Drunken search topic from Biblegateway.com[/url]

What are your opinions, if you don't mind.
[/quote]

Yourself and the Taliban would have much in common. Should men be forced to have beards? The Taliban think so. We live under the New Covenant. God wants a circumcision of the heart, not of outward things. Haircuts are the least of our problems, IMHO. I think we all need to focus on charity, love, and graciousness. To be honest, I agree with much of what you say about popular culture. But holiness has to come from within as a faith response to God. The minute you start proscribing / requiring anything, you're back under the Old Covenant. BTW, if we want to start throwing scripture around, how about this: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free person, there is not male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Gal. 3:28

[Urib2007]

Tattoos are wrong in God's eyes because of what God stated in His Word. If you look at Leviticus 19:28, you'll see that the Lord plainly and clearly condemns the tattoo.

[b]Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD.
Leviticus 19:28[/b]

I agree with worldly music though. I saw a documentary called "They Sold Their Souls For Rock & Roll" from Goodfight Ministries and it was a real eye opener concerning the music from the past and today. There is so much proof that most music performers are indeed very dark and into satanism. The documentary even shows the performers themselves talking about their allegiance with satan including quotes from interviews.
Metallica was displayed in that documentary, but I'm not aware of what they're believing nowadays. If they are Christians, then praise the Lord Jesus. Charles Manson would play the Beatles to incite his "cult followers" to kill. He even stated that in his interviews and former Manson follower, Susan Atkins, stated that as well. So, music does indeed have a major impact on the listener. Remember the Columbine killings? The two young killers were fans of Marilyn Manson and other rock bands and the music eventually drove them to kill all those innocent victims at school.

I don't watch much TV anyway because it's garbage. So much sex, violence, homosexuality, and blasphemy on TV anyway. TV and movies have become very evil and it's interesting to hear how Madonna doesn't even let her children watch TV because she of all people knows the damage TV does to people. Funny to hear her do that, right?

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='Urib2007' post='1181520' date='Jan 31 2007, 05:37 PM']
Tattoos are wrong in God's eyes because of what God stated in His Word. If you look at Leviticus 19:28, you'll see that the Lord plainly and clearly condemns the tattoo.

[b]Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD.
Leviticus 19:28[/b][/quote]

The key passage in the text you cited is "for the dead." God didn't want his people following the pagan practices of the nations around them. Hence, not boiling a kid in its mother's milk, nor cutting their forelocks, etc. If you're going to refer to the Old Testament, particularly Leviticus, why aren't we living by the rest of the provisions set out therein? We live under the New Covenant. "For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love." Gal. 5:6

[Urib2007]

How do they get around Leviticus 19:28?

Clearly, there it is. "Ye shall not. . .print any marks upon you. . ."

A lot of Christians when confronted with Leviticus 19:28, scream, "Hey dude, that’s not for today. Man, that’s the Old Testament. I’m under the New Testament".

Did you know that "bestiality" (sicko, perverted, sex with an animal) was ONLY forbidden in the Old Testament Levitical Law? Only in Leviticus 18:23 and Leviticus 20:15-16. Dude, only in the Old Testament Law. Does that mean a Holy God NOW – under the New Testament, approves of bestiality?

By the way, have you ever read Leviticus 19:29? The verse immediately AFTER the "it’s not for me" Leviticus 19:28?

Do not prostitute thy daughter, to cause her to be a whore; lest the land fall to whoredom, and the land become full of wickedness.
Leviticus 19:29
This is the only place in the Bible that God directly forbids someone to prostitute their daughter. And since, it’s ONLY in the Old Testament Levitical Law (and "hey, dude, we’re NOT under the law") – it MUST be ok by the Lord for a parent to cause their daughter to prostitute.

Same sick, perverted, wicked, line of reasoning as the "it’s ONLY in the Old Testament-tattoo-bearer-wearer". Same reasoning. . . Same disobedience. . . Same perversion of the Word of God.

There are many other "moral laws’ that are ONLY forbidden in the Old Testament, such as the human sacrifice of children. No where in the New Testament is this forbidden. Does that mean that NOW under the New Testament, God Almighty endorses throwing babies into the fire as a human sacrifice?

And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD.
Leviticus 18:21
Matthew Henry’s Commentary at the beginning of Leviticus 19 explains that most of Leviticus 19 (such as verse 19:28) are moral commandments that applies not only for Israel but for the New Testament Christian today.

"Some ceremonial precepts there are in this chapter, but most of them are moral. . . Most of these precepts are binding on us, for they are expositions of most of the ten commandments."
(Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible, Leviticus 19:28)
IT’S ONLY "FOR THE DEAD"

But by far the Christian tattooers favorite excuse for disobeying Leviticus 19:28 is the "that means nor print any marks upon you – for the DEAD". It’s ok, as long it’s not for the dead". See the "for the dead!!! . .for the dead!!!!".

Is it ok to practice satanic bloodletting, self mutilation or cutting of the flesh as long as it’s not for the dead? It’s in the same verse. . . Hmmm. . .?

Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD.
Leviticus 19:28
Notice also, the phrase "for the dead" is ONLY referencing the "cuttings in your flesh". The condemnation of "nor print ANY marks upon you" is not qualified by the phrase "for the dead". Also, if you’ll notice the verse clearly says "ANY marks" period.

Merrill F. Unger's, very popular and authoritative, Unger's Bible Dictionary under the definition for "Mark" includes the following reference for Leviticus 19:28:

"In Lev. 19:28 we find two prohibitions of an unnatural disfigurement of the body: 'Ye shall not make any cutting in your flesh for the dead, nor any print any marks upon you.' The latter (Heb. qa aqa, incision) refers to tattooing, and has no reference to idolatrous usages, but was intended to inculcate upon the Israelietes a proper reverence for God's creation."
(Merrill F. Unger, Unger's Bible Dictionary, 1974 ed., p. 696)
Notice that Unger teaches that tattoos were forbidden without any reference to pagan, heathen, or idolatrous usages. In other words, the tattoo itself, regardless the reason, was forbidden. Amen. Brother Unger.

Wycliffe’s Bible Encyclopedia under the definition for TATTOOING distinctly says:

"While ‘cuttings in the flesh’ have reference here to mourning customs [for the dead], the tattooing does not appear to pertain to such practice."
(Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, 1975 ed., p. 1664)
The New American Commentary on Leviticus 19:28 writes the condemnation was for, "cutting the body either for the dead or with tattoo marks." (Mark F. Rooker, The New American Commentary on Leviticus, 2000 ed., p. 262) Explicitly recognizing the tattoo was not "for the dead."

Do you see how dishonest and disobedient this "it doesn’t apply to my New-Testament-Christian-marked-for-Jesus-tattoo" is? Find what you don’t like in the Word of God, cut it out (doesn’t apply to New Testament Christians) or misapply (it’s just for the DEAD, when it’s clearly NOT). Same tactics used by the satanic cults and heretics for years. You can prove anything and everything with such deceitful methods.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Urib2007' post='1181527' date='Jan 31 2007, 05:52 PM']
How do they get around Leviticus 19:28?

Clearly, there it is. "Ye shall not. . .print any marks upon you. . ."

A lot of Christians when confronted with Leviticus 19:28, scream, "Hey dude, that’s not for today. Man, that’s the Old Testament. I’m under the New Testament".

Did you know that "bestiality" (sicko, perverted, sex with an animal) was ONLY forbidden in the Old Testament Levitical Law? Only in Leviticus 18:23 and Leviticus 20:15-16. Dude, only in the Old Testament Law. Does that mean a Holy God NOW – under the New Testament, approves of bestiality?

By the way, have you ever read Leviticus 19:29? The verse immediately AFTER the "it’s not for me" Leviticus 19:28?

Do not prostitute thy daughter, to cause her to be a whore; lest the land fall to whoredom, and the land become full of wickedness.
Leviticus 19:29
This is the only place in the Bible that God directly forbids someone to prostitute their daughter. And since, it’s ONLY in the Old Testament Levitical Law (and "hey, dude, we’re NOT under the law") – it MUST be ok by the Lord for a parent to cause their daughter to prostitute.

Same sick, perverted, wicked, line of reasoning as the "it’s ONLY in the Old Testament-tattoo-bearer-wearer". Same reasoning. . . Same disobedience. . . Same perversion of the Word of God.

There are many other "moral laws’ that are ONLY forbidden in the Old Testament, such as the human sacrifice of children. No where in the New Testament is this forbidden. Does that mean that NOW under the New Testament, God Almighty endorses throwing babies into the fire as a human sacrifice?

And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD.
Leviticus 18:21
Matthew Henry’s Commentary at the beginning of Leviticus 19 explains that most of Leviticus 19 (such as verse 19:28) are moral commandments that applies not only for Israel but for the New Testament Christian today.

"Some ceremonial precepts there are in this chapter, but most of them are moral. . . Most of these precepts are binding on us, for they are expositions of most of the ten commandments."
(Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible, Leviticus 19:28)
IT’S ONLY "FOR THE DEAD"

But by far the Christian tattooers favorite excuse for disobeying Leviticus 19:28 is the "that means nor print any marks upon you – for the DEAD". It’s ok, as long it’s not for the dead". See the "for the dead!!! . .for the dead!!!!".

Is it ok to practice satanic bloodletting, self mutilation or cutting of the flesh as long as it’s not for the dead? It’s in the same verse. . . Hmmm. . .?

Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD.
Leviticus 19:28
Notice also, the phrase "for the dead" is ONLY referencing the "cuttings in your flesh". The condemnation of "nor print ANY marks upon you" is not qualified by the phrase "for the dead". Also, if you’ll notice the verse clearly says "ANY marks" period.

Merrill F. Unger's, very popular and authoritative, Unger's Bible Dictionary under the definition for "Mark" includes the following reference for Leviticus 19:28:

"In Lev. 19:28 we find two prohibitions of an unnatural disfigurement of the body: 'Ye shall not make any cutting in your flesh for the dead, nor any print any marks upon you.' The latter (Heb. qa aqa, incision) refers to tattooing, and has no reference to idolatrous usages, but was intended to inculcate upon the Israelietes a proper reverence for God's creation."
(Merrill F. Unger, Unger's Bible Dictionary, 1974 ed., p. 696)
Notice that Unger teaches that tattoos were forbidden without any reference to pagan, heathen, or idolatrous usages. In other words, the tattoo itself, regardless the reason, was forbidden. Amen. Brother Unger.

Wycliffe’s Bible Encyclopedia under the definition for TATTOOING distinctly says:

"While ‘cuttings in the flesh’ have reference here to mourning customs [for the dead], the tattooing does not appear to pertain to such practice."
(Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, 1975 ed., p. 1664)
The New American Commentary on Leviticus 19:28 writes the condemnation was for, "cutting the body either for the dead or with tattoo marks." (Mark F. Rooker, The New American Commentary on Leviticus, 2000 ed., p. 262) Explicitly recognizing the tattoo was not "for the dead."

Do you see how dishonest and disobedient this "it doesn’t apply to my New-Testament-Christian-marked-for-Jesus-tattoo" is? Find what you don’t like in the Word of God, cut it out (doesn’t apply to New Testament Christians) or misapply (it’s just for the DEAD, when it’s clearly NOT). Same tactics used by the satanic cults and heretics for years. You can prove anything and everything with such deceitful methods.
[/quote]
You circumcise your sons on the 8th day?
So you only eat kosher meat?
Worship in the Temple or local synogogue?
Follow all the proscriptions of the Old Testament?
I bet.


Christians do not live under Old Testament law.

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1181561' date='Jan 31 2007, 06:17 PM']
You circumcise your sons on the 8th day?
So you only eat kosher meat?
Worship in the Temple or local synogogue?
Follow all the proscriptions of the Old Testament?
I bet.
Christians do not live under Old Testament law.
[/quote]

Right. Ours is a revealed religion. God revealed "x" amount of Himself under the Old Covenant. But His ultimate revelation was made in the Person of Jesus Christ in the New Covenant. All of God's requirements are fulfilled by loving Him with all our heart, soul, strength and mind, and loving our neighbor as ourself. That's it. In Jesus the Law is fulfilled. Again, that doesn't give us license (I'm covering ground here much better covered by St. Paul), but again, holiness is a faith response to God, not something based on outward proscription.

[Katholikos]

[b][i]Wherever the Catholic sun doth shine,

there's always laughter and good red wine.

At least I've always found it so,

Benedicamus Domino! [/i][/b]

Hilaire Belloc

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Katholikos' post='1181778' date='Jan 31 2007, 08:44 PM']
[b][i]Wherever the Catholic sun doth shine,

there's always laughter and good red wine.

At least I've always found it so,

Benedicamus Domino! [/i][/b]

Hilaire Belloc
[/quote]
: I was just looking for that quote