• Xenforo Cloud is upgrading us to version 2.3.8 on Monday February 16th, 2026 at 12:00 AM PST. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

War Room Lounge V26: Neoliberal Clicks

Status
Not open for further replies.
I hear Christians say this whenever confronted sin. But what does that actually mean? Does it mean Gods law is no longer applicable in order to walk in fellowship with Him?

It's philosophical, deep and nuanced, so therefore a lot of common people or dogmatic theologians feel they "must" interpret it as A or B when the answer is XYZ.

Jesus came to free humanity from the letter of the Law, justification through grace as they say.

The Law was fulfilled by his death, the mark against humanity removed and redemption became possible. That did not turn evil to good or good to evil, rather one should follow the Ten Commandments for example as the New Testament stipulates.

All of this is laid out in exquisite detail by Paul and Peter in the Gospels.

For an easy textbook example: When Jesus criticized the Pharisees for being willing to save their endangered livestock on the sabbath, but not to heal or save the sick.

The Law was there for Manknd's benefit, Jesus brought a drastically new way of thinking and behavior that completed the Law and expanded on it.

Rather remarkable, really.
 
Anyone hear about those two Scandinavian women killed in Morocco? What a horrific event
 
Anyone hear about those two Scandinavian women killed in Morocco? What a horrific event

I hear people are losing their heads.
 
The no :eek::eek::eek::eek:phile-name-calling rule predates homer's drama, and from what I understand it includes a no-bait provision (ignore or report and move on) and some dubs discretion (warning via pm if baited). I'm sure a mod can go into greater detail.

That was kinda it's own thing but mods always try to take some discretion on how this is handled. We mostly just want a drop in the discussion altogether. There's been times where 10 threads on the front page were somewhat about that topic and that's pretty fucked up if you ask me. It isn't to protect people from pushing for those views. We would ban someone in time if we believed that to be true. We just rather not have this topic be what Food threads are to Mayberry.
 
That was kinda it's own thing but mods always try to take some discretion on how this is handled. We mostly just want a drop in the discussion altogether. There's been times where 10 threads on the front page were somewhat about that topic and that's pretty fucked up if you ask me. It isn't to protect people from pushing for those views. We would ban someone in time if we believed that to be true. We just rather not have this topic be what Food threads are to Mayberry.
Seems like some posters forget this place is still an MMA forum at the end of the day that has a reputation to protect for the sake of advertisers.
 
Seems like some posters forget this place is still an MMA forum at the end of the day that has a reputation to protect for the sake of advertisers.

I think it's also just a matter of stepping back and realizing when things are off. Another mod pointed out to me the surge in this and at first, I didn't believe it was that bad. Within a week though, I saw it a lot and realized I may have been a little desensitized to it that I didn't realize how often it was being brought up. We get different new headlines drive certain stories to the WR from time to time. We just don't want to have the place unknowingly become a gutter for specific topics.
 
Anyone here ever have experience with hair loss remedies that are short of surgically transplanting follicles?

I'm talking shit like ForHims and Rogaine.
My buddy used Rogaine, its not a cure, but it may slow it down.
 
I think it's also just a matter of stepping back and realizing when things are off. Another mod pointed out to me the surge in this and at first, I didn't believe it was that bad. Within a week though, I saw it a lot and realized I may have been a little desensitized to it that I didn't realize how often it was being brought up. We get different new headlines drive certain stories to the WR from time to time. We just don't want to have the place unknowingly become a gutter for specific topics.

I think this is a reasonable stance. Still, I think it makes sense that you (as in: mods) reflect certain decisions. The banning of @Rod1 for example was just a really big blunder (don't wanna rehash that discussion, but it comes down to the fact that he got banned for stating the fact that different 'legal ages' apply and what someone in the US might consider criminal is legal or even normal in other Western countries). As long as this anti-:eek::eek::eek::eek:-discussion-or-namecalling-or-anything stance still allows for decisions to be revisited, we are gonna be fine, though. Modding in the WR is better than it has been at any time in the ~5 years I have been regularly reading here.
 
Do you believe that two different fibres can be woven together in the same cloak? That's an OT law with serious consequences.

I believe there is a very good reason God made that law.

Jesus didn't prohibit his disciples from picking heads of corn on the Sabbath though I doubt a single one was on the brink of perishing due to hunger.

Was he suggesting the Sabbath had been abolished and to no longer observe it or was he explaining that picking the heads of corn was not a violation of the Sabbath to begin with? I would argue the latter.

I believe under the New Covenant, Christians are supposed to be led by the Holy Spirit.

Love for God is defined in the Bible as following His commandments. Jesus said the greatest commandment is to love God with all your mind, heart, and soul...ie follow his commandments and his ways with all your mind, heart, and soul. How does the Holy Spirit change this?
 
Last edited:
It's philosophical, deep and nuanced, so therefore a lot of common people or dogmatic theologians feel they "must" interpret it as A or B when the answer is XYZ.

Jesus came to free humanity from the letter of the Law, justification through grace as they say.

The Law was fulfilled by his death, the mark against humanity removed and redemption became possible. That did not turn evil to good or good to evil, rather one should follow the Ten Commandments for example as the New Testament stipulates.

All of this is laid out in exquisite detail by Paul and Peter in the Gospels.

For an easy textbook example: When Jesus criticized the Pharisees for being willing to save their endangered livestock on the sabbath, but not to heal or save the sick.

The Law was there for Manknd's benefit, Jesus brought a drastically new way of thinking and behavior that completed the Law and expanded on it.

Rather remarkable, really.

But you haven't explained anything. He 'fulfilled the law'...Does that mean it's no longer applicable? Ive seen people say that my whole life but no one can explain what that actually means. It seems to be a bit of a NPC response whenever discussing an evangelicals ungodly and sinful ways like it covers them or something.

And im not sure about this exquisite detail you are referencing. If the details were so exquisite why the centuries long debates over its interpretation?

The exquisite detail I see are all of the scriptures that say you will be saved, blessed, and brought into fellowship...If you follow the commandments.
 
But you haven't explained anything. He 'fulfilled the law'...Does that mean it's no longer applicable? Ive seen people say that my whole life but no one can explain what that actually means. It seems to be a bit of a NPC response whenever discussing an evangelicals ungodly and sinful ways like it covers them or something.

And im not sure about this exquisite detail you are referencing. If the details were so exquisite why the centuries long debates over its interpretation?

The exquisite detail I see are all of the scriptures that say you will be saved, blessed, and brought into fellowship...If you follow the commandments.

I'm not sure we disagree. I think the Ten Commandments are clearly still meant to be valid as are the Old Testament Teachings, that is what Christ meant when he said, "Law of the Prophets," meaning all the teachings of the Old Testament from God.

Christ Came to Fulfill the Law (Not my words, the title of the New Testament Passage from Matthew)

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19 Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

- The fulfillment of the promise made to Abraham, Isaiah, and proclaimed by John the Baptist

- You must be better/holier/more faithful than the Pharisees who mostly did not practice what they preached

(Romans 3:27-31 is also very relevant.)


The New Testament obviously renders some parts of the Old Law obsolete - blood sacrifice, the eating of certain foods, and basically kosher lifestyle and behavior, including circumcision.

Jesus Christ, apart from all the miracles and such, also did three brilliant things, as he said - 1 introduced God's new way of thought and action for mankind, 2 - presented the Old Testament in how it should apply to mankind in the new age, 3 - summarized much of the Law of the Prophets for clearer understanding

Quite the theological trifecta.

Thanks for the questions as well, it is good for shoring up Biblical knowledge. It is one thing to say, "Oh I know this!" and another to demonstrate the knowledge.

Cross reference:

2 Corinthians 3:4-6 English Standard Version (ESV)
4 Such is the confidence that we have through Christ toward God. 5 Not that we are sufficient in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but our sufficiency is from God, 6 who has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

To make it very, very simple while Christ "saved from sin and death," it does not mean that we should not do what is right and what God said he wanted, which Christ and his promised message through Paul and Peter go at lengths to reinforce.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think this is a reasonable stance. Still, I think it makes sense that you (as in: mods) reflect certain decisions. The banning of @Rod1 for example was just a really big blunder (don't wanna rehash that discussion, but it comes down to the fact that he got banned for stating the fact that different 'legal ages' apply and what someone in the US might consider criminal is legal or even normal in other Western countries). As long as this anti-:eek::eek::eek::eek:-discussion-or-namecalling-or-anything stance still allows for decisions to be revisited, we are gonna be fine, though. Modding in the WR is better than it has been at any time in the ~5 years I have been regularly reading here.

Rod1s ban was reversed
 
I can't wait until my monthly payments for various things goes down/disappears completely cause they're paid off and I can afford my own place where I don't have roommates playing D&D till 2 in the morning fucking YELLING THE WHOLE TIME.
 
I can't wait until my monthly payments for various things goes down/disappears completely cause they're paid off and I can afford my own place where I don't have roommates playing D&D till 2 in the morning fucking YELLING THE WHOLE TIME.
Just go flip the table next time
 
Just go flip the table next time
I stumbled downstairs to get water and one was like "oh shit, Greg... did we wake you up"

My response:
"That'd require me being able to fall asleep first. Night..."
 
Are you sure you should use "came across" and Mr. Tingle in the same sentence? Some folks might think you're baiting them into getting infractions.
that's either a short lawsuit or one seriously epic rope

I went back and checked. The book in question was "A Gronking to Remember", which was written by Greg McKenna, aka Lacey Noonan, not Mr. Tingle.
 
I swear attorneys don't understand rules... Court Rules dictate that no out of custody pleas be set on Thursdays... there's an out of custody plea set today, a Thursday.....

And they wonder why so many people make fun of lawyers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top