““Mary remained a virgin”??? I guess Jesus’ brothers and sisters all had virgin births too?
Matthew 13:55-56 – Is not this the carpenter’s son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brothers, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? 56 And his sisters, are they not all with us?
End quote. This passage cannot be taken at face value. The word “brother,” or “sister” was used in ancient Jewish society to describe any close relative, or in this case, ‘step brothers or step sisters.’ Nowhere in Scripture does it ever say that so and so was the son or daughter of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Nowhere does anyone but Jesus ever refer to Mary as “mother.” Also, if one maintains that James et al, were truly the brothers and sisters of Jesus, then why did Jesus break the old established Jewish custom of remanding his mother into the care of John, his youngest disciple? While he was dying on the cross, Jesus said to John, and by extension the world, “Behold thy mother.” -
Joh_19:27 After that, he saith to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour, the disciple took her to his own.
If James was truly Jesus’ full biological brother, and Mary his biological mother, he would have been entrusted with her care, not John
Yes, Mary remained a virgin throughout her entire life, and she bore only one biological child – Jesus of Nazareth.
From the beginning and by the 3rd century the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary was well established and defended by Hippolytus, Eusebius and Epiphanius, important early Christian theologians. Much of the church therefore did not accept that Mary could have had any children apart from Jesus.; Eusebius and Epiphanius held that these men were Joseph's sons from former marriage. Jerome, another important early theologian, also followed the perpetual virginity doctrine, but argued that these adelphoi were sons of Mary's sister, whom Jerome identified as Mary of Cleopas.
The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church mentions that a modern scholar, whom it does not identify, has proposed that these men were the sons of Clopas (Joseph's brother according to Hegesippus) and Mary, the wife of Cleopas (not necessarily referring to Jesus' mother's sister).
The official Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox doctrine is that Mary was a perpetual virgin; this view was also held by many of the early Protestants,
including Luther and Zwingli,as well as John Wesley, the 18th century Methodist leader.
Indeed, the majority of early Christians seem to have left this doctrine completely unquestioned.
As I said to other poster that’s a common problem with literal interpretation, which doesn’t take into account the different meanings of the words in different cultures and times.
The Catholic Church teaches that Mary remained virgin, the passage you quote was wrongly translated, as the word for brother and cousin are one and the same in Aramaic. And the only reason Luther, Henry VIII. and the other protestants contested this truth and dogma was because as the depraved sexually-driven individuals they were, they couldn’t imagine such a pure and sacred notion.
Remember the origins of protestantism: Luther wanted to marry a woman after he was ordained priest, instead of leaving the priesthood, he attacked the Church. Henry VIII wanted to divorce and remarry. They have created the roots of modern depravity in secular societies.
... When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.
THE HOLY BIBLE (NIV) - Matthew 1:18-25
I will watch. And I will cry.
Heck, I still cry at the end of "Jesus Christ Superstar".
To have been there and see it happen must have been soul wrenching to the apostles.
These filmmakers from Hollywood/History Channel are never accurate. The writers just cannot tell the story with accuracy. From start to finish they take so many liberties that it is un-watchable by those who have Bible understanding.
If Hollywood cannot bring themselves to tell the story with accuracy, then they should just go with their favourite subject, fiction and fantasy. Otherwise they are guilty of teaching un-truths to the gullible and undereducated.
If truth is what we want, we must go to the source and leave Hollywood to their gullible supporters who will believe anything presented in movie format..
Read God's Word the Bible.
definition of a "virgin" in that time period was an unmarried women .
Scripture’s statement that Joseph "knew [Mary] not until she brought forth her firstborn" would not necessarily mean they did "know" each other after she brought forth Jesus.
Until is often used in Scripture as part of an idiomatic expression similar to our own usage in English. I may say to you, "Until we meet again, God bless you." Does that necessarily mean after we meet again, God curse you? By no means. A phrase like this is used to emphasize what is being described before the until is fulfilled. It is not intended to say anything about the future beyond that point. Here are some biblical examples:
2 Samuel 6:23: And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child to (until) the day of her death. (Does this mean she had children after she died?)
1 Timothy 4:13: Until I come, attend to the public reading of scripture, to preaching, to teaching. (Does this mean Timothy should stop teaching after Paul comes?)
1 Corinthians 15:25: For he (Christ) must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. (Does this mean Christ’s reign will end? By no means! Luke 1:33 says, "he will reign over the house of Jacob forever and of his kingdom there shall be no end.")
You see much the same reference in Mark 6:3-4. Jesus calls them "kin." There was no reason for Mary to remain a virgin after the birth of Christ. It was to confirm his deity as the Son of God. And it is not a sin to lose one's virginity after marriage. Mary was not called to perpetual virginity anywhere in scripture. Don't assume what isn't there.
One should not assume Mary and Joseph had children together or even marital relations. Because it isn’t there.
The Case for Mary's Perpetual Virginity
The Holy Spirit is Mary’s spouse, but Joseph was her spouse and protector on this earth for at least two obvious reasons. First, as Matthew points out in his genealogy in chapter 1, Joseph was in line to be a successor of David as King of Israel. Thus, if Jesus was to be the true "son of David" and king of Israel (see 2 Sm 7:14, Heb 1:5, Rv 19:16, 22:16), he needed to be the son of Joseph. As the only son of Joseph, even though adopted, he would have been in line for the throne.
Also, in a culture that did not take too kindly to espoused women getting pregnant by someone other than their spouse, Mary would have been in mortal danger. So Joseph became Mary’s earthly spouse and protector as well as the protector of the child Jesus.
Sorry, ByFaith. If you say that the Holy Spirit was Mary's spouse, then she has two husbands at the same time...not something Mary's son would have "espoused." And because Jesus calls them kin and brothers and sisters, there is more evidence that is what they are rather than what they are not. The Catholic church has always given Mary a higher status than the Bible. Nothing new here.
I love that legend.
ByFaith, Jesus did not need Joseph to have a line back to David. Mary was in that line and it was a bloodline. If Jesus had to have the line through Joseph, it could not/would not have been by blood.
Luke11:27 And a woman cried out.."blessed is the womb that gave you birth and breasts that nursed you..Jesus replied.."Blessed rather are they who hear the word of God and obey it..
Mat 12:46-50 While Jesus was still speaking..his mother and brothers are waiting to speak to him..when told..He replies "Who are my brothers and who is my mother? Pointing at his disciples he says.."Here are my brothers and mother..for whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother..my sister..my mother..
John 16:23..In that day..you will no longer ask me anything..I tell you the truth..my Father will give you whatever you ask in my name..
Deut.5:8..you shalt not make thee any graven image..or any likeness of anything above the earth..on the earth or below the waters of the earth..
1Cor 6:9 Who will not enter the kingdom of heaven..Idolaters are mentioned..
til I saw the draft that said $9878, I didn't believe that...my... mother in law woz like actualey bringing in money in their spare time from there new laptop.. there uncles cousin started doing this for only sixteen months and just now repaid the debts on their mini mansion and bourt Renault 5. I went here,,, http://ace60.com
They were sticking to exactly what you want them to stick to when telling this story.
Fiction and Fantasy.
Hate to be the one to tell you this, but a person’s blood line during the time of Christ was determined by the father. Actually a woman’s bloodline didn’t matter at all.
You are correct about one thing the Catholic Church has always given Mary a high status. A status that predates the Bible. Even until the time of the reformation, the majority of Christians had a “Catholic” view of Mary. Your position is a creation of man that has manifested itself over the last couple hundred years. Jesus loves His mother and I do too. Why would any woman buy into the misogynistic view of Mary being little more than a useful tool?
Kin, that is your “evidence”?
I have lots of kin that are not siblings
Do people even today only refer to half brothers as such or do they just say "my brother"
Are adopted children always refered to as adopted?
When Jesus was on the cross He gave Mary to John as mother and son. Why did he do that? Did Jesus forget he had brothers that could take care of Mary?
Again with the idol worship?
God commands the Israelites to make two golden statues of angels as part of the lid of the Ark of the Covenant (Ex 25:17-19). That’s an image of something from heaven. Then, in 1 Kings 6, God commands that graven images of flowers and palm trees be made, as well as 15-foot tall statues of cherubim. And in Numbers 21, God commands that a bronze serpent be made and uses it to heal the Israelites. It was preserved for 800 years and then destroyed when some began to worship it (2 Kgs 18:4). Catholics do not worship statues, because only God is deserving of adoration. The Catechism of the Catholic Church is adamant in affirming this (CCC 2112–2114). If someone enters your house, he should expect to find a picture of your mother. So, when someone walks into a Catholic Church—the household of God—he should not be surprised to find a picture of the mother of God, along with the rest of the heavenly family! The Church absolutely recognizes and condemns the sin of idolatry. What anti-Catholics fail to recognize is the distinction between thinking a piece of stone or plaster is a god and desiring to visually remember Christ and the saints in heaven by making statues in their honor. The making and use of religious statues is a thoroughly biblical practice. Anyone who says otherwise doesn’t know his Bible.
BY FAITH . . . "This passage cannot be taken at face value."
Now you're talkin'.
your quote was from 7thAvatar
Not saying I don't agree with it, but give credit where credit is due
"There was no reason for Mary to remain a virgin after the birth of Christ." "And it is not a sin to lose one’s virginity after marriage."
I'm sorry?!! We are talking about the Mother of God here! Not about Barry Soetoro's mom.....
These are the typical problems with all protestant interpretations of the Scripture: subjectivism and ignorance. Without the anthropological, linguistic, historical and theological guidance of the Church, each one draws the most absurd conclusions based on his/her own limited worldview.
1. Jesus giving John the charge of looking after his Mother was a temporary charge.
Mary remaining a virgin? I highly doubt that. She is The Virgin Mary by title cuz she actually did that. Thus it sticks with her no matter what.
2. The Catholic Church didn't want divorce, because the idea of divorce is like looking for another religion.
I'm pretty freaking sure that the Catholic Church was corrupt and still is today. All history bears witness to the Romans hijacking Christianity after severely abusing it...and then Constantine FORCES it upon all the Empire. Genocide, Torture, Theocracy...you name it.
Screw the Romans.
3. Remember, the Pilgrims came to The New World: America for Religious Freedom. Why? Because there was none in Europe! All the Religions of Europe had Central & Absolute Authorities.
4. Remember...Christians & Deists wrought the Declaration of Independence.
Not one of them to my knowledge was Catholic, Muslim, or Atheist.
So enough of everyone's historical revisionist hogwash. I will never forget the horrible things that those Churches did. Religion has been hi-jacked for thousands of Years. Even Jesus fought against THEM.
Marx (Promethean & Nihilist) The view Tyrants have.
"Religion is the Opiate of the Masses."
Church is for the Distribution of the Opiate.
Myself (Lockean & Anti-Promethean) The view a Son of Liberty would have.
Religion is the Cause of the Individual.
Church is for the Organizing of that Cause.
What a load of dung. Mary and Joseph were MARRIED; they were nowhere asked to remain CELIBATE throughout their lives. Mary bore sons, and most likely daughters. Only ONE was a virgin birth.
In those Early years of the Establishment of the Roman Catholic Church, many So Called & Self Proclaiming Wise men entered the catholic History Books By Translating the Words of the Hebrew followers of JESUS, & Distorted his Litters & Those things that Jesus Said, All in Accordance to the wishes of the Roman Church.
The first two comments we read on the Comment section, Contains many of these Distortions and Out & Out LIES. For Example; The Followers & Believers of & in JESUS CHRIST, NEVER CALLED Themselves, CHRISTIANS!, The Scriptures state that THEY WERE FIRST CALLED CHRISTIANS in Antioch! Note, It Did Not Say that THEY Called Themselves Christians, It Said THEY WERE First CALLED Christians There. A Small Fact but any Lie, No matter how Small, Is still a Lie!
This Movie seems like it will be good, as a Fictional telling of the birth, Life & Death of JESUS, But I'll Hold back my Comments until then. That is if the Muslims & Obama don't shut it down first!
1. Where is there any proof that this was a temporary charge? The perpetual virginity of Mary has been taught and believed from the beginning of Christianity. It was even believed by Luther, Zwingli and Wesley (all reformers)
2. The church doesn’t like divorce because when you get married you stand before God and promise to stay together until death, not until you get tired of each other.
3. “The gates of hades shall not prevail”…Jesus
4. The Pilgrims left Europe because they didn’t want to be forced to follow state religion…i.e. the Church of England.
5. Your knowledge is incorrect. Charles Carroll of Carrollton was Catholic
Know what else happened in Antioch?
St. Ignatius of Antioch
The second Bishop of Antioch, Syria, this disciple of the beloved Disciple John was consecrated Bishop around the year 69 by the Apostle Peter, the first Pope. A holy man who was deeply loved by the Christian faithful, he always made it his special care to defend “orthodoxy” (right teaching) and “orthopraxy” (right practice) among the early Christians.
In 107, during the reign of the brutal Emperor Trajan, this holy Bishop was wrongfully sentenced to death because he refused to renounce the Christian faith. He was taken under guard to Rome where he was to be brutally devoured by wild beasts in a public spectacle.
He was dedicated to defending the true teaching handed down by the Apostles so that the brothers and sisters in the early Christian communities, and we who stand on their shoulders, would never be led astray by false teaching. He urged them to always listen to their Bishops because they were the successors of the Apostles.
Ignatius is responsible for the first known use of the Greek word katholikos (καθολικός), meaning "universal", "complete" and "whole" to describe the church,
When Ignatius wrote the Letter to the Smyrnaeans in about the year 107 and used the word catholic, he used it as if it were a word already in use to describe the Church. This has led many scholars to conclude that the appellation Catholic Church may have been in use as early as the last quarter of the 1st
“Mary bore sons, and most likely daughters.” I would love for you to provide one shred of evidence to prove this statement.
you can quote scipture where Jesus is told his brothers are waiting to see him, but you need to prove Mary gave birth to them. Those men could be 1/2 brothers (Josephs children from a previous marriage) or cousins or adopted children.
So please inlighten me. Prove your statement.
"Your mother and brothers are here to see you". Jesus said "who are my mother and brothers? Those who believe in me and follow me are my mother and brothers". I am paraphrasing.
The term "adelphi" that was used in aramic means "cousin or kinfolk". It was a very common term used during this time. In fact, in the book of Tobit we see "this is my brother, Tobit" followed a few short sentences later with "have you met my cousin Tobit?"
This endearing term is still used today in some middle eastern and African cultures, though not that exact word. The word was used to describe a cousin or kinfolk that is referred to as "brother".
This interpretation of the meaning of the word "brothers" is supported by several other references in the gospels to these guys. For example, Matthew reports that watching Jesus on the cross from far away was amongst others, Mary the mother of James and Joses. This cannot be the same Mary, mother of Jesus as John 19:25 has her standing at the foot of the cross. There are other references in Mark and Acts to the people named as Jesus' brothers, but in those they have different fathers, strongly indicating that they were not Jesus' blood-brothers.
But more significantly don't you think it's rather strange for Matthew and Mark to write "Mary the mother of James and Joses" instead of just Mary, Jesus' mother seeing as the gospels are about Jesus and not his brothers?
Also, John reports that when Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved he said to his mother "Behold your son" and to that disciple "Behold your mother". Now if Jesus had all those brothers and sisters it would have been extremely offensive and unusual in a culture where family and kinship ties were totally central for Jesus just to "give" his mother away like that. There's no reason not to think that if Jesus actually had any actual brothers or sisters they would have been quite capable of looking after Mary.
Another point is that if Jesus did have a number of brothers then it didn't take years and years for them to be born. Yet 3-4 years after Jesus' birth Matthew tells us Joseph took the child and his mother back to Egypt. Not children and their mother. Similarly Luke 2 has Jesus at the temple when he was 12 years old. It has his parents returning home while he stayed behind in the temple. Later when they come back to get him, Mary says "your father and I were anxiously looking for you". No mention at all of any siblings. If he was still an only child at 12 then Mary and Joseph must have waited an awful long time to have more kids!
It would certainly complicate matters theologically if Jesus had siblings. What is their status then? Are they sons and daughters of God as well by virtue of being Jesus' half-brothers and sisters? After all, the same womb that conceived by the Holy Ghost bore them as well. It is plainly repugnant to the spirit if not the letter of the gospels to imply that Jesus had siblings. This is a case where ancient Church teaching definitely needs to be invoked to prevent blasphemy and heresy.
In context the Bible verses mentioned can have only one meaning, since Mary was clearly Jesus' mother and His other siblings were with her. If the generic term was meant then literally all believing men and friends of Jesus would be His brethren and all females in the same relation His sisters, which is the distinction He plainly draws.
Jesus Himself in the gospel passages is clearly and plainly drawing a distinction between the earthly relationship of kinship and the spiritual brotherhood and sisterhood. Any other interpretation makes the dialogue utterly meaningless.
If you look at the customs of the time and the laws as well, you will find the answer in scripture.
Are you familiar with how Jesus actually died on the cross? When one was crucified, it caused extreme pressure on your chest and made breathing very difficult. You had to push up with your feet, which had a large nail thru them, to breath. This cause extreme pain. You basically suffocated as your strength gave out.
With this in mind, one would come to the conclusion that if you wanted to speak, you would make sure that what you said was very important because of what you had to endure in order to speak. Jesus did speak from the cross. He said "woman"- which in that era was a term of endearment, "woman, behold your son", then turning to His beloved disciple, He said "Behold your mother".
He then asked John to take her into his home to care for her.
If Jesus had brothers, he would not and could not have done this.
We would have also heard major dissent from his siblings over him saying this.
There was none because there were no siblings.
It was the custom and the law for the next oldest male to have taken in the mother to care for her, but Jesus asked John to do this as Jesus was an only child.
Paul called Timothy his son
Jesus and Peter both calls Abraham father
Do you also believe these are true familial relationships?
If Mary remained a perpetual virgin then Joseph is the real saint...
@ByFaith, what's the driver behind the perpetual virginity of Mary doctrine? To elevate her to the Queen of Heaven (as in sinless and worthy of deity status). This is biblically inaccurate. First of all, John's epistles tell us that if any man says he has not sin, "he is a liar". Mary was a sinner as much as anyone.
Also, and much MUCH more important, Mary was in the Upper Room on the Day of Pentecost when the Holy Ghost was poured out. She received the same salvation that every man, woman and child must experience to be saved: she repented and was baptized (inferred by her participation with Peter, who preached this was necessary), and received the baptism of Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues. She needed to be saved just as much as anyone, and is NO heavenly Queen.
She is a simply a godly example of the faithful saints of the early church.
Jesus gave Mary to John to care for because James was not yet a believer. When Jesus is born then Mary goes and makes a sin offering in Luke 2:24/Leviticus 12.
Then in Matthew 1:25 it says that Joseph did not know her until after Jesus was born.
July 20, 2012 at 4:22pm
Ministers of Hate. They are diseased, brainwashed, ignorant people. Their very existence constitutes proof of the fact that even the devil can cite Scripture.
July 20, 2012 at 4:06pm
It takes courage to speak out on behalf of what we all know is morally right. The swishbuckler Gay Stormtroopers, with Obama in the lead, are again seeking to intimidate, bully, and silence dissidents.
Vote this creep out of office in November. Reclaim your media, which is anti-life and un-American
July 20, 2012 at 3:56pm
The real blame for the actions of lunatics like this rests upon the individual – and Hollywood and the whorish media sluts – who play the race card every time a Caucasian commits a violent crime. Bring back the HUAC! We need another Joseph McCarthy to rise to the forefront and clean out the media’s Augean stables. Hollywood and the media ought to be held co-responsible for these events, because they have been suffusing the public with irresponsible films and subversive propaganda for years. Gory films, gore fests, doting on negativity, pornography, glamorizing violence and mayhem – stirring up racial discord – they bear a huge responsibility for all of this, and yet they are not held accountable. Instead, the Obama tyrants seek to disarm law abiding citizens and deprive us of the right to defend ourselves and our families. The first act of a tyrant is to disarm the people! The propaganda will do its insidious work and the intent of the government is clear. Will Americans wake up and smell the rancid coffee before it is too late?
June 19, 2012 at 4:14pm
In reply to IAMPRAYING4YOU – who wrote that Catholicism is a man-made religion – open your eyes – and open a few “credible” history books – the man who founded the Catholic, i.e., universal Church is none other than Jesus Christ Himself. The Church did not arise from the muddled theology of apostate Catholic priests like Luther, Calvin, Wycliffe, Arius, Nestorius, etc., but from the pages of the New Testament itself. In this day and age, there is no excuse for ignorance concerning the long history of Catholicism, and how it has weathered persecution since the the times of the Apostles and their anointed successors. This woman’s conversion to the most ancient and holy faith of the apostles was wrought by none other than Christ Himself – who confirms the fact that He founded His Church upon a rock, and that the ‘gates of hell itself will not prevail against it.” What a striking validation of Christ’s commission to the Apostles on the day He established His Church in Mt 16 -
(Mat 16:18) And I tell you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
(Mat 16:19) I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
Notice that when Christ uses the word ‘you’ in the above passages, each and every time it is in the singular form – not plural. Thus, Peter was to lead the Church into
June 7, 2012 at 3:39pm
God bless this pastor! However, he is not the one who should have resigned. The members who voted to endorse same sex mockeries of marriage should and been shown the door and booted out of it.
June 7, 2012 at 3:31pm
The fact that 95% of black Americans registered and eligible to vote cast their vote for Obama is disturbing. However, these pastors are to be commended for speaking out on what is right according to the tenets of their religion. I think the underlying message here is that Obama will forfeit their vote if he does not rescind his views on same sex mockeries of marriage. However that may be, his word is not to be trusted. Morally, and theologically, same sex mockeries of marriage are on a comparable footing with Euthanasia and Abortion, although the latter are far more grave due to the inherent lethal consequences of their implementation. Politicians or Supreme Court members who advocate or uphold these criminal policies ought to be ousted from office. Insofar as abortion and birth prevention are concerned, I would think this would be a top priority among black pastors, as the black community has been targeted for ‘Gendercide’ by the abortionists and advocates of population control – i.e., suppression. As such Gendercide is non-specific. It is, after all, a small step from Gendercide to Genocide. Any gender will do when it is marked for extinction. It is time for people to reassess their priorities here. Those who abandon their religious and moral obligations to God, self, and country will have played a key role in bringing about the reign of hell on earth.
June 7, 2012 at 3:09pm
Did they use this guy as the model for the character of “Crackhead” on the PJ’s? Good riddance to his pseudo-Church.
May 31, 2012 at 5:11pm
I think it is wise to bear in mind that the ultimate purpose these stringent laws served in the Old Testament was to set the Israelite people aside and make of them ‘a holy nation’ …i.e., in preparation of the birth of the Messiah, Jesus Christ – the Word of God made flesh. God Himself chose the Israelite nation as the pipeline through which the Messiah would be born of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Hence, it was absolutely necessary to preserve them from the terrible stain of heinous sins such as homosexuality, bestiality, and other vices. In a theological sense, a clearer condemnation of homosexuality will not be found anywhere else in the entire Bible!
May 31, 2012 at 5:03pm
It has been my experience that people who promote homosexuality are usually closet homosexuals or devoid of any moral sense whatsoever.
May 31, 2012 at 4:59pm
Are you insinuating that God was sick when He destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah? Our society is much worse than S and G.
May 31, 2012 at 4:57pm
I don’t think the Pastor said anything that indicated that he was willing to cast the first stone, but he is right in condemning homosexual acts and resisting the homosexual agenda in this country. The man is simply frustrated and I think he should be cut a little slack. I fail to perceive where sexual deviants should be accorded any special ‘rights’ in this country. What ‘rights’ do they demand, anyway? What they need is moral and spiritual counseling. Confirming them in their deviancy and attempting to shove their beliefs down the throat of society is intolerable. Homosexuals, being homosexual, have no concept of morality whatsoever. They suffer from a sexual disorientation – a sexual dysfunction – which has no place being promoted in a healthy society. But our society is not healthy and hasn’t been for a long time – hence the alarming inroads. God help us.
May 31, 2012 at 4:51pm
“Love the sinner and hate the sin.” Is that akin to saying “Love the murderer but hate the murder?” or “Love the child molester but hate the sin?” Let’s face it: Scripture must be in accord with ‘reason.’ As a general statement, love the sinner hate the sin is acceptable, but it is a pericope that is much abused nowadays by people pushing a sick agenda. Along with Judge not, etc. These two passages have been pulled out of context and deliberately perverted. Christ was merely telling those who committed the same sin as the one they were condemning in others, to clean up their own act first – and acknowledge that they were as guilty as those they criticized. Having done that, and repented and converted – then – they were free to form a judgment based upon God’s moral code. Christ was condemning hypocrisy. Sin and sinning are condemned throughout the length and breadth of the Bible. Read it sometime within context.
May 31, 2012 at 4:43pm
Eighty percent of all Americans identify themselves as Christians. As such, our views must be respected and it is preposterous to advance the notion that we should be dictated to by a small but vocal minority. As Christians, we are under an obligation to resist any immoral agenda or any immoral law which conflicts with God’s natural law. The homosexual agenda must be resisted. We shall be held accountable for our actions by God.
May 31, 2012 at 4:38pm
Actually, 80 percent of all Americans identify themselves as “Christians.” So Christians constitute the majority in this country. And Christians have an obligation before God to always uphold His natural law, which must take precedence over man’s laws when they and if they infringe upon what God has ordained. We are, in fact, our “brother’s keepers.” and God will hold us all accountable in this life for the choices we make and whether we have acted righteously in upholding our faith. Jesus Christ made this point crystal clear in the New Testament. So we have a duty to resist sin, and to denounce immorality in government or society at large to protect our children, our future and ourselves from the wrath of God. The homosexual agenda must be resisted.
May 31, 2012 at 4:31pm
You asked if Jesus would do this? The NT makes it very clear that Jesus would ‘not’ approve of the homosexual agenda. However, the pastor in question seems to lack a deeper insight into the Scriptures, although his righteous indignation over what is transpiring in this country is understandable. Jesus came to call sinners to repentance and conversion. Repentance. Conversion. The retributive and often harsh penalties applied to serious sins like adultery and homosexuality in the Old Testament were no longer applicable under Christ’s New dispensation. But make no mistake about it – unrepentant sinners will suffer eternal consequences for their choices in this life. The application of Old Testament justice would deprive sinners of the time it might require in this life for them to finally repent and convert. There are laws that mandate the death penalty in our society – some Old Testament punishments remain in effect – murder, for example, demands justice in this world and the next. In respect to the **** agenda, an attempt is being made to controvert God’s moral laws – and as such this advocacy of homosexuality poses an acute threat to Western civilization and will also lead to the corruption of children. And any Christian worth their salt knows what Christ had to say about those who corrupt children or lead them astray. Homosexuals today take pride in their perversion. How can they repent when they claim that their deviancy is ‘normal?’ Their pride compound
May 29, 2012 at 8:27pm
Because we are supposedly a country based upon laws. Because we are supposedly a ‘moral’ nation. There are always limits, and must be, to personal freedom. We are not a nation of anarchists. At least, not yet.
May 29, 2012 at 8:25pm
Isn’t that what being gay is all about -? – Abuse of self and others? The unscrupulous Gay Stormtroopers will snatch at any straw with complete indifference if they think it might help sow confusion and bolster their arguments. I was outraged when I watched Ellen Degenerate’s disgraceful use a confused child on her program, a child utterly confused about his sexuality – and encouraging him to pursue an open homosexual lifestyle – with applause from her homosexual peanut gallery audience. She ought to be arrested and charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor.
May 29, 2012 at 8:21pm
Your views are in error. Deliberately practicing homosexual acts – or any other acts of fornication, including adultery, will indeed land the unrepentant soul in hell for eternity. See Paul: Romans, chapter one. It is all set out there in black and white.
May 29, 2012 at 8:03pm
The religion of Islam is actually a heresy spawned by a false prophet who evidently believed in his schizophrenic induced ‘visions.’ Theologically, the Koran is a synthesis of various religious belief systems to which Mohammed was exposed to as a young lad when he was a trader working with the caravans that covered the Middle East and Egypt. The Koran combines a someone poorly absorbed amalgam of Old Testament law, unorthodox, Gnostic forms of Christianity,and superstitious left-overs from the primitive Arab religions. Nevertheless, at least in certain passages of the Koran, Mohammed does evince a certain amount of respect toward Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary. The most brutal aspects of Islamic law relate to the laws contained in the Old Testament which called for the stoning of adulterers, homosexuals and children who disrespected their parents Mohammed understood the Old Testament much better than he understood Christianity, unfortunately. Curiously, the American ‘prophet’ Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon religion, shared much in common with Mohammed.