Collapsing Angels and Echoes from Eden - is this good Theology?

In Matthew 19:4-6, the SON repeats what the FATHER said in Genesis 2, and the HOLY SPIRIT repeats it in Ephesians 5. Three times it was said.

Therefore, you should listen and see that Jesus is answering their question while also speaking to the larger issues. Indeed their hearts were hard. We still have hard hearts.

You know Jesus had that pattern of speaking to the larger issues. Like when he responded to the men with stones and the adulterous. Jesus went above and beyond their question. He does the same with Matthew 19:4-6. But these days people do not want to hear or see it because they have instead followed demons and reduced gender, gender roles, male, female, marriage, father, mother down to a set RULES or social constructs rather than the image of God.

 

That's silly.

There it is. The straw man you have been trying to construct since you got here. And you have set it ablaze. Careful. Don’t let it burn you up.

Invictus, there’s another “therefore”, right after Tiffy’s cut and paste . In fact, there are a lot of them. Keep reading. Starting with THEREFORE, also read 2 Corinthians chapters 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, & 12. Don’t be lazy. Read them all, as we should. In chapter 5, there is something about the Judgment Seat of Christ, and good and evil. And then in chapter 7, there is something about cleansing ourselves from every defilement of body and spirit… and godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret, whereas worldly grief produces death.

But just in case that is not clear enough, in chapter 12, Paul writes, “I fear that when I come again my God may humble me before you, and I may have to mourn over many of those who sinned earlier and have not repented of the impurity, sexual immorality, and sensuality that they have practiced.”

Tiffy, it seems that you define your faith by PART of what the Bible teaches, taking it out of context or leaving out parts you dislike, like Satan… but you do not accept the WHOLE, like Christ. Tell me, why did Paul, who you are quoting, address the guy who was excommunicated for banging his mom-in-law? Did the guy not have the FREEDOM to bang who he wanted? If your version is true, Paul would have told them to enjoy themselves and be happy that they no longer have to follow rules. LOL. You guys are confused and listening to demons. The good news is the guy repented and was welcomed back.

Stop reading your Bible like it is a Youtube Short or TikTok, and get the rainbow flag out of your church.

 

It was his father's wife, not mom-in-law.

 

Correcting yourself? Why stop there?

 

You should likewise do. I hope repentance rises up from the ashes of your straw man.

 

The Pericope Adulterae is non-canonical.

 

There is no need for you to concern yourself about that. I have experienced both the LORD's discipline and His approbation.

It is clear to me that you have no understanding whatever of what 'Freedom in the Spirit', is. The man 'who is living with his father’s wife', is an obvious euphamism. There is no prohibition on a son living under the same roof as his mother, but that is not what the euphamism Paul used meant, obviously. It is also clear that whatever WAS happening euphamistically, was most certainly NOT 'living in the spirit'. It was most definitely 'living in the flesh'. God has given no permission to 'live according to the flesh', in the manner that man was living. However, it was the Holy Spirit who restored him to 'life in the Spirit', not mere rule keeping under peer pressure compulsion. True repentence is not possible without The Holy Spirit.

 

Interestingly, there is no indication in the text that the man ever repented.

 

Is he right, Tiffy? It was added later. Where can I get me one of those rainbow flags?

 

Correct.

 

Ah! But is it ART, and is it INSPIRED. I wouldn't like to see it go. I believe it is scripture. The interpolator was inspired. It's one of my favourite stories.

Incidentally, the whole of Chapter 21 may have been not actually written by John, but by his school of disciples from his remeniscences. However its style is identicle to the rest of the book and all manuscripts contain it, so it is also possible it is a supplement, possibly by the author, added later, after the previous 'ending' with the statement of its purpose at 20:30, but before publication.
.

 

A number of writings that aren't strictly canonical continue to be included in printed Bibles and read in Churches. It is a question of status rather than inclusion.

 

Technically, the 4th Gospel is anonymous, like the Synoptics. It does however seem likely, as you noted, that the final chapter of the book as we now have it was composed by a different author, and then added to the preceding chapters by a later editor.

 

True; he is not named. There is an assumption, and that is all it can be, that 2 Cor. 2:1-11 refers to him, because of the repeated reference to Satan, but the passage does not name the man, so nothing can be certain regarding his ultimate expulsion or reinstatement. The passage may speak only of forgiveness generally to any Corinthian church member. (Especially the ones who had stitched Paul up).

 

That is certainly a fair point.

 

In a way I agree with you on that point. I was not meaning to debate WO too much in that post, rather I was trying to show that it is the C of E and TEC that have moved away from Anglicanism. These issues, like WO or gay pride, are only symptomatic and cause us to sink down into the dirt when we try to talk about what it is and where they come from.

As stated, WO is only a symptom of the problem, just like effeminacy, feminist pride, gay pride, etc. are symptoms of the problem. Don’t worry, Tiffy, this is not about RULES, unless we think in terms of the Divine order, rules of nature, or something like that. When we sin in these ways, all ways, we are NOT embodying the image of God. Instead, we are joining the fallen, the angelic and the human. Now, Christ IS the exact image of God, in the flesh. It is in Him that we have salvation, not rules, right Tiffy. And we put on Christ, conform to Christ. We are made new in Christ. The new is us returning to the image of God. In doing so, we leave behind the old self. We stop having sex with our father’s wife. We stop committing adultery. We stop having sex with our same sex and with animals. These things are against nature, against God, and corrupt God’s image. A person has the freedom to do those things, but when they do they are standing with the dragon and his fallen stars, the gods of the world . People also have the freedom to NOT do those things… because Christ came and took the demons’ power over the people AWAY.

That is only a background. And there are many layers.

The first layer. Angels fell.


The second layer. Eden God planted. The place God walked on earth with Adam, where heaven and earth met. Adam was made to be priest. His call was to work and keep the garden, and enlarge it. He named the animals. God made him a helper. Adam named her Woman. Adam failed as priest when he did not deal with the serpent. His helper did, trying to help, and was deceived. Adam disobeyed. Woman was deceived. She unwittingly became anti-priest, for she mediated not between earth and God, but rather she mediated between earth and serpent, and in doing so she brought forth the anti-Eucharist.



That is the overview of the second layer. There are more.

High Priest Jesus, the new Adam, came to set things right.

I see this ACTUALLY in the text, and it is much easier to see than some of the things that progressives read or imagine into the text… things like how servant & messenger Phoebe in Romans 16 was actually a teacher of men because it was tradition that the letter deliverer reads and explains the letter… or claiming that women can be preachers because the woman at the well preached to her village… or a woman can preach because Mary first saw the risen Christ and told people (ignoring how the men did not believe her and went to see for themselves -should we make a doctrine out of that? LOL).

Now, I am not here to debate these progressive views I just mentioned, or others like them. I only repeated them to say that progressives build theology on their non-inspired things that are sourced outside of the Bible. Rather than that, it is more right to understand things in the Bible that are actually within the words and narratives of the scripture, even if such things were not customarily discussed because there was never a need, until now.

 

You are entitled to your viewpoint. That being said, it is pointless to debate these matters now. Everything that could have been said has already been said. Those who felt they could not in good conscience remain in the Episcopal Church have already left. The schism is now a fact. Only time will tell what the lasting effect(s) will be.

 

Agreed. And I'm not trying to talk about the schism or have a debate about the errors of the ACNA, TEC, or C of E. My art and message are about angels and humans falling, for they left their stations, their identities given to them by God. We embody that today in unprecedented ways, even celebrate it. And the church is becoming like the woman in the garden, like anti-priest, administering the anti-Eucharist.

 

It is clear that you have strong artistic talent. I hope that is something that you will continue to pursue.

 

I have 14 Bible versions (including the Latin Vulgate) downloaded to my eSword program. Oddly, the pericope is present in all of them. I wonder why so many versions pass off a non-canonical writing as scripture?