Jordan Winsby Tells Lies

Artisanal Toad
jordan2 This is Jordan Winsby. He runs a website called “I Still Have Questions” on which he claims to have Biblical answers. In other words, he holds himself out to be a teacher and is held to a higher standard.
Unfortunately, Jordan tells lies. He admits he isn’t a pastor or a scholar (although he claims to have studied Greek), but that doesn’t excuse the fact he’s lying about what the Bible says. He’s making claims that only God can make. He’s judging his brothers. In short, he’s a typical churchian.
It’s reasonable to ask why I’m being so hard on this poor child when obviously his parents are to blame for him being the way he is and the answer is simple. He is living proof that not many should be teachers. The best one can say of his gross ignorance of the Bible is that such ignorance is normal these days, but he holds himself out to be a teacher and offers to corrupt people with his ignorance.
Jordan Winsby, is the Apostle Paul a liar? Either the Apostle Paul is a liar or Jordan Winsby is a liar. In a recent comment Jordan Winsby made the following claim:

 

the Bible actually says multiple times that sex before marriage is sin.

 

Regular readers of this blog already know that is a lie as well as why it’s a lie, but the churchian logic of Jordie’s reasoning is worth looking at. He said:

 

1 Corinthians 7:2 says as much by saying a man and woman should get married so they don’t fall into sexual immorality (specifically sex before marriage). People weren’t controlling themselves. Thus, sex before marriage fits under the definition of sexual immorality in which case the Bible says it’s wrong

 

In the first sentence Jordan Winsby makes the bald claim that sex before marriage is a sin with no support at all. Then he claims “sex before marriage” is sexual immorality, which means that all the passages that forbid sexual immorality include sex before marriage. In other words, “It’s a sin because I say it’s a sin!”
His comments demonstrate that Jordan Winsby has no clue what sexual immorality means. It’s not that his analysis is wrong, it’s that there is no analysis. He claims something is a sin, but God never said that. This is not a matter of opinion, it is laid out for us in Scripture. The Apostle Paul explained this in Romans 4:15 and Romans 5:13.

 

15. “for the Law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there also is no violation.”
13. “for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.”

 

Sin is what God says it is, because God says it is. We know something is a sin because it is a transgression of the Law and we can see what the prohibitions are. Sin is also something that violates your conscience, but that only applies to you because your faith is weak. And just because your faith is weak, you don’t get to claim your brothers are in sin. But Jordan, this isn’t about issues of conscience, this is about sexual immorality. The Bible is clear what sexual immorality is. Pay attention, Jordan.
  1. A man may not uncover the nakedness of any close male relative (Leviticus 18:6).
  2. A man may not uncover the nakedness of his mother (Leviticus 18:7).
  3. A man may not uncover the nakedness of his father’s wife (Leviticus 18:8).
  4. A man may not uncover the nakedness of his sister (Leviticus 18:9).
  5. A man may not uncover the nakedness of his half-sister (Leviticus 18:9).
  6. A man may not uncover the nakedness of his son’s daughter [granddaughter] (Leviticus 18:10).
  7. A man may not uncover the nakedness of his daughter’s daughter [granddaughter] (Leviticus 18:10).
  8. A man may not uncover the nakedness of his father’s wife’s daughter by his father [half-sister by father] (Leviticus 18:11).
  9. A man may not uncover the nakedness of his father’s sister [aunt] (Leviticus 18:12).
  10. A man may not uncover the nakedness of his mother’s sister [aunt] (Leviticus 18:13).
  11. A man may not uncover the nakedness of his father’s brother’s wife [aunt] (Leviticus 18:14).
  12. A man may not uncover the nakedness of his son’s wife [daughter-in-law] (Leviticus 18:15).
  13. A man may not uncover the nakedness of his brother’s wife [sister-in-law] (Leviticus 18:16).
  14. A man may not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter [step-daughter] (Leviticus 18:17).
  15. A man may not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her son’s daughter [step-granddaughter] (Leviticus 18:17). [Polygyny ONLY]
  16. A man may not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter’s daughter [step-granddaughter] (Leviticus 18:17). [Polygyny ONLY]
  17. A man may not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her sister as a rival while the woman is still living (Leviticus 18:18). [Polygyny ONLY]
  18. A man may not uncover the nakedness of a woman during her menses (Leviticus 18:19).
  19. A woman may not have sexual intercourse following the birth of a child: for 40 days if the child is a boy, for 80 days if the child is a girl (Leviticus 12:1-8)
  20. A man may not have sexual intercourse with another man’s wife (Leviticus 18:20).
  21. A man may not have any form of sex with another male (Leviticus 18:22).
  22. A man may not mate with with an animal (Leviticus 18:23).
  23. A woman may not allow an animal to mate with her (Leviticus 18:23).
OK, that’s 14 instances of incest, 3 instances of incest that are restricted to polygynous marriages, 1 of adultery, 1 of male homosexuality, 2 of bestiality and the prohibitions against sex during the proscribed period following childbirth and while a woman is on her menses. But, did I leave something out?
What about all the instances in which sex played a part in the act of idolatry?
They aren’t sexual immorality because they’re forbidden sexual practices, they’re sexual immorality because they’re idolatry. Just to be clear, consider vaginal intercourse. That’s where your penis penetrates a woman’s vagina. Consider that the exact same act can occur under different circumstances and as you can see, the result isn’t nearly as cut and dried as you might think.
  • It’s usually perfectly legitimate when you’re doing it with your wife. (SEX!)
  • It’s forbidden to have sex with a woman too soon after the birth of a child. (SIN)
  • It’s forbidden do it while she’s menstruating. (SIN)
  • It’s adultery if you do it with another man’s wife. (SIN)
  • It’s incest if you do it with a blood relative (SIN)
  • If you have sex with your virgin babysitter, you have a second wife. (SEX!)
  • If it’s a widow and she doesn’t want to marry you, it’s just sex. (SEX!)
  • If it’s a prostitute you’ve violated the prohibition against banging whores. (SIN)
  • It’s forbidden to make up new rules about sexual morality. (SIN)
Jordan, this is your opportunity to catch a clue. You came here thinking you knew what the Bible says. Quite obviously you don’t. There is nothing in that entire list about sex outside of marriage because sex is how marriages are begun. If sex outside of marriages was forbidden then marriage would be forbidden.

Jordan Winsby Needs Help!

Jordan, there’s still hope, even for you. You’re young and you have time.
Going by your photos and your attitude, you need some serious self-improvement. That, of course, is frowned upon by the church these days. Read this essay several times, you need it. You might want to consider this one as well. You absolutely need to learn Game and I recommend The Rational Male series by Rollo Tomassi to start with and follow that up with “Married Man Sex Life” by Athol Kay. Right now you’re just a whiny gamma bitch, but the good news is there’s hope even for someone like you.
I can’t tell how tall you are but if you’re at least 5′ 10″ this should be easy for you. You have a good facial structure, you’re not fat and appear to have enough of a mesomorphic body-type that putting on muscle wouldn’t be that difficult. I recommend the book “Man 2.0: Engineering The Alpha” by John Romaniello and Adam Bornstein.
You need to join a dojo and learn how to fight. Believe it or not, getting punched in the face regularly it will do you a world of good. While Enderby is a rather small place, I notice there are several gyms, including Flow Martial Arts and Fitness. I recommend Muay Thai as a striking style and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu (BJJ) for a grappling style, but just learning how to box and throw a punch is more than 80% of all men ever get. The point is there are people in your area that can train you.
In terms of what you believe the Bible says, as you are now so once was I. Then I started actually studying my Bible. Forget about taking seminary courses, they don’t teach the Bible- they teach churchian doctrine and use the Bible as support. Which is not the same as teaching the Bible.
In dozens of posts on this blog I have addressed basic questions about when and how a person is actually married. What does the Bible actually say about sexual morality? It is quite obviously not what you think. What is sin? What defines sin? What about divorce? What is adultery?
Judging from your comments, you have no clue what the Bible actually says about this stuff which means you have never studied it and in all likelihood you don’t know how to study. Take the topic of polygyny, for example. Your knee-jerk reaction is probably that polygyny is wrong. I could take you through the Scriptures and show you that God doesn’t change. Then I could show you that God said He had two wives (Jeremiah 31:31-32), that God gave King David multiple wives (1st Samuel 12:8), that God regulated the practice of having multiple wives and even sometimes commanded it (Deuteronomy 25:5-10).
And if you’re like most churchian gammas, you’d still reject it all because that’s what you wanted to believe. Because tradition. Jesus had something to say about that: “In vain to you worship me, teaching as doctrine the precepts of men.”
When it comes to exegesis, antinomies are not allowed, which means you are the one engaging in eisegesis, not me. You claimed I’m trying to justify my sin yet you know nothing of me. This chart isn’t finished yet (it needs to be cleaned up a bit) because I still regularly get insights on how all this works together, but this is a roadmap. You won’t find any antinomies in it.
But, as Vox Day so eloquently put it:

I don’t expect you to agree, I don’t even expect you to understand.

25 thoughts on “Jordan Winsby Tells Lies”

  1. Haha, somebody is a little salty about losing a debate. Was reading this with a positive attitude, but I’m sorry, you made a few good points but overall, what Jordan says sounds like the Biblical definition of what sexual immorality consists of. You are extremely Old Testament, you gotta read into the NT a little bit more there bud. You’ve got a totally confused version of what sex and sin is, and obviously you haven’t spent any time actually listening to what the Bible says and how sexual acts is portrayed. You need to know that the Bible doesn’t say what SHOULD have happened, rather, what DID happen, and the lessons that were taught through those events. You trying to justify having multiple wives, sleeping with virgins, etc, it’s like saying that what happened with David and Bathsheba could be justified and deemed “A-okay.” God ISN’T a polygamist, your opinions are not the end all by all (you clearly think so), and you need to take some time to understand what the Bible truly says about this, because I’ve only got a year and a half of Bible College under my belt and I can STILL say in full confidence to you right now that you’ve got a bunch of highly educated Bible College teachers that are teaching the complete opposite of what you just told me. Probably because they actually read and understand the Bible. So please, don’t bash Jordan’s opinion when yours is clearly veering over the cliff of heresy.
    Reply
    1. I’m sorry, you made a few good points but overall, what Jordan says sounds like the Biblical definition of what sexual immorality consists of.
      I quoted the Apostle Paul, who said immorality (sin) is defined in the Law. I quoted the Divine Law. Lying Jordan (and now you) tried to insert a meaning into the definition of sexual immorality that does not exist. In doing so you are violating God’s Law (Deuteronomy 4:2 and 12:32) by adding to the Law.
      I made a statement of fact: There is no prohibition anywhere in Scripture that forbids a man and woman who are eligible to marry from having sex, regardless of their marital status. Lacking such a prohibition, that activity is not a sin. That isn’t my opinion, that is the Apostle Paul stated in Romans 4:15 and 5:13, which I quoted.
      Neither you or Lying Jordan cite any passage in Scripture that contradicts this. The definition of the sexual immorality (porneia) is clear and I quoted it, all 23 specific points as well as the catch-all of sexual acts as a part of idolatry.
      I’ve only got a year and a half of Bible College under my belt and I can STILL say in full confidence to you right now that you’ve got a bunch of highly educated Bible College teachers that are teaching the complete opposite of what you just told me. Probably because they actually read and understand the Bible.
      You assume that because they have collegiate credentials they are highly educated. You assume they teach the opposite of what I am saying because they “actually read and study the Bible” but the evidence says they teach the opposite of what I say because they do not read and study the Bible. I’ll make this very simple for you. Go to your highly educated teachers, acquaint them with this thread and ask them to refute me with something more substantive than the opinions of mixed-up Bible College students.
      This is their opportunity to show you and Lying Jordan that they’re capable of refuting some random Toad on the internet. Surely they, who are so educated, can refute me with ease. I’m sure they’ll interpret Scripture with Scripture, only Scripture, and they won’t have any antinomies in their exegesis. After all, they’re Bible College teachers and they have the answers. Invite them to come over and dazzle me with their brilliance, refute me with Scripture and leave me croaking in the dust.
      God ISN’T a polygamist
      Let’s look at the Scriptures and see what God has to say about that…
      Jeremiah 31:31-32“I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,” declares the LORD.”
      But were they married? Evidently they were, because one has to be married in order to divorce.
      Reply
      1. Haha, wow, calm down there hot stuff, I don’t think you understand anything in the Bible as much as you think you do. I’m gonna cut my responses back here because I know that you’re not gonna let down, or listen to anything I have to say, that’s understandable, this is your blog, your world, and your own personal version of Christianity. You’ve resorted to heavy name calling on Jordan’s behalf, and now on mine, and frankly that is the known path that most people take when they feel threatened, they resort to name calling to try to sound like the bigger man. Writing a post like this about someone else is actually also worthy of a law suit, so you DO need to be careful what you say about people, especially private information, last names, locations, that kinda stuff. I can clearly see that you stand firm on your opinion, that no matter what I say (trust me, I had written a LOOOOONG response, but just thought it would be a waste of my time) you won’t actually take the time to understand what I’m saying to you. So, I’m going to leave you with this: Take some time to listen to a NON-literalist person explain the Bible, chew on it, digest it, understand it from that perspective, because what you’re telling me right now isn’t Christianity, it’s your own personal religion.
        Reply
        1. I don’t think
          Too true, that says it all.
          You seem upset that I’ve identified you and Jordan as liars. It seems strange to me that telling lies doesn’t seem to bother you but being called out as a liar does. I suppose that’s par for the course for people training to be pastors these days.
          I cited the evidence, I quoted the testimony and you supported Jordan Winsby in his lies. Then you told a lie of your own and you refuse to repent. I called you out on it. Then you engaged in some bulverism, questioning my motives.
          You could have taken a deep breath and admitted you were wrong. Because you are. Factually and demonstrably. You deliberately, in the face of irrefutable and contrary evidence, made a false statement. You lied.
          You could have gotten technical and said you didn’t really lie, it all depended on the word “ISN’T” because now that God divorced Israel He only has one wife so he’s no longer a polygamist.
          You could have admitted that you were in over your head in an area you’d never studied and really didn’t understand (which is true). But, you’ve got a year and a half of Bible College under your belt! You display arrogance, “having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one’s own importance or abilities.”
          You did none of those things. Instead, you doubled down on your lies and switched to bulverism.
          “Writing a post like this about someone else is actually also worthy of a law suit”
          Thus proving you know as little about the law as you do about the Bible. You and Jordan are not tall enough for this ride.
          I suppose you should be forgiven, though. At 1.5 years in college you are a sophomore. The definition of which is “an educated fool.” You certainly live up to that. Perhaps you’ll grow up one day, but you do need to stop lying.
          Reply
        2. Seems to me like modern Christians are too afraid to read the bibles literal parts literally. They read the scripture with all the poetic license of Pink Floyd lyrics and then say “God knows my heart”, thinking it will excuse their willful ignorance and desire to misinterpret what is clear. Seems to me that THOSE type of people are peddling their own “personal religion”. Read the literal as literal and the poetic as poetic. One who reads everything only literally or only poetically puts himself, and others, in a dangerous place.
          Reply
  2. As much as I feel honoured that you took the time to create a whole blog post about me, you’re really showing your lack of knowledge about the Scriptures every time you speak. You claim to know what the Bible really says, but you’re really showing yourself to be a blind guide leading the blind (Matthew 15:13-14). You will twist and distort all Scripture so that you can justify your sinful lifestyle, and not only that, but you’re trying to teach others to think likewise. You are exactly the type of person Jesus was speaking about in Matthew 23:15 – “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves.”
    And the reason you distort what Romans 1:18-32 says is because I believe you are one of those people who has been given over to a debased mind (Romans 1:28). You exchanged the truth about God for a lie (Romans 1:25). You have become so arrogant in your thinking that you really think the whole Church is wrong and you alone are right. Please, for your sake, stop spreading your heresy around to others. And I pray you heed the words in Acts 3:19 – “Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out,” I see someone else has tried reasoning with you as well, but you still fail to see your own lies you convinced yourself are true. You are the very definition of a false teacher in 2 Peter 2:1-2. I hope one day you will see the lies you believe for what they are, and the destruction you are causing with your heresies before it’s too late.
    Reply
  3. Can anyone here specifically cite to the passage that states fornication is a sin and is not permitted in the NT? I am aware of only one place, in which it is there is a laundry list of sinners who will not inherit the kingdom of heaven, and one of them is fornicators (I don’t know chapter and verse).
    Neither DistractedDrummer nor Jordan have told us the specific passages which define sexual immorality for Christians, which ought to be defined in the OT or the NT or somewhere; and does that include unmarried men having sex with unmarried women.
    I am not saying there is no such passage. There might be. I am not saying Toad is right or wrong. I just want to see chapter and verse that describes what sexual immorality is.
    Reply
  4. They read the scripture with all the poetic license of Pink Floyd lyrics and then say “God knows my heart”, thinking it will excuse their willful ignorance and desire to misinterpret what is clear. Seems to me that THOSE type of people are peddling their own “personal religion”. Read the literal as literal and the poetic as poetic. One who reads everything only literally or only poetically puts himself, and others, in a dangerous place.
    Churchianity –and ALL graduates of seminaries and Bible colleges today are churchians, as that is what dominates and controls these institutions– is dedicated to the mission of ensuring that the Bible conforms to the tenets of modernism. No part of Scripture should ever make anyone feel uncomfortable, make them fight their cultural conditioning, make them think, make them search their own souls, or make them realize that following Jesus is not only life-changing, but much more than just deh feelz. In other words, it requires knowledge and wisdom involving study of The Word, something that leads people conditioned in the culture down some very –unacceptably– uncomfortable paths. THIS is why Scripture has to be massaged, “reinterpreted,” distorted, even denied when it says the “wrong” things. This is why DD and Jordan are deep in deflection, denial, and ad hominem. They can’t refute with Scripture any of AT’s points, but don’t dare admit that they 1) are clueless about the Scripture’s meaning and 2) find God’s Word intolerable to their modern sensibilities when it comes to sex and marriage. Otherwise we would be reading a point-by-point, chapter-and-verse takedown of AT’s points.
    Reply
  5. Distracted Drummer, Jordan, we’re Protestants here, sola scriptura. I’ve been trying to bring chapter and verse to bear against Toad’s arguments for almost a year now, and you can see from the comment threads how little success I’ve had. Quit running *your* mouths about what God’s Word says and actually quote it. Or do what I had to, swallow your pride, and learn from wiser men.
    Reply
      1. I’m to the point I don’t mind Catholics because getting attacked by Jesuits is what put me on my A-game. Once I figured out the code they taught me a lot. I think they figured it out because after the last epic fight they’ve either left me alone or changed tactics.
        As far as Jordan and the DisturbedDrummer are concerned, they’re sophomores in Bible College. The literal meaning of sophomore is sophisticated moron, or more politely, an educated fool.
        Seminaries and Bible Colleges don’t teach the Bible, they teach doctrine and selectively use the Bible for support. Which is why these kids were encountering an argument they’d never heard before and it blew their minds. They fell back on what they’d been taught, which is bulverism and ad hominem
        Reply
  6. Seminaries and Bible Colleges don’t teach the Bible, they teach doctrine and selectively use the Bible for support. Which is why these kids were encountering an argument they’d never heard before and it blew their minds. They fell back on what they’d been taught, which is bulverism and ad hominem
    The silver lining to this dark cloud is that maybe –just maybe— this discussion has planted some seeds of doubt in these two young minds, or prompted them to start questioning the veracity of what they’ve been taught so far. That would be a wonderful thing.
    Then again, critical thinking is a capital offense in seminaries and bible colleges. Never mind.
    Reply
  7. Mr. Toad:
    I came across this chaps blog recently and was surprised to find the author nibbling (paragraphs 3 & 4) at the whole marriage question as well, although he is not quite where we are. The blogger would appear to be a Lutheran pastor. Maybe he would be interested to join the discussion here. I would have invited him but his blog would not allow me to leave a comment as I do not have a blog of my own.
    Reply
  8. Do you even know what churchian means you undeminational Heathen. I did you the favor of looking up what it means.
    “A Christian who believes that it is extremely important to not only be a Christian, but, also to be a member of their specific denomination” – Urban Dictionary
    Reply
    1. Benjamin, it’s past your 10:30 curfew.
      Boys, if I’m such a heathen and heretic you have a duty to refute me. If you spent more time studying your Bible and less time gaming and fapping, you’d have something to say.
      Reply
  9. I know this was a long time ago post but, as you have not made another post in a year, i have been looking over some of your older post as i have only read a fraction of them.
    That being said, notice how no one ever did quote where the NT, or OT for that matter, stated that sex before marriage is a sin. Let it go on record, they cannot quote where the Law or Jesus stated this.
    Reply
    1. Actually, 1st Cor 7:1 touches on this.
      On the subject of a man having sex with a woman who is not his wife, Paul said “It’s good not to do that.”
      If the woman is married, it’s still adultery and forbidden. If she’s a virgin, it’s marriage sex and they’re married. If she’s a prostitute, that is now forbidden and it’s a sin.
      However, if the woman is not a virgin, not married and not prostituting herself, there is no prohibition. The most Paul would say about it was “It’s good not to do that.”
      Reply
  10. Pingback: Voicing Disagreement… – Artisanal Toad's Hall
  11. Pingback: Marriage, Whores and Churchians – Artisanal Toad's Hall

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *