The Normalizing Of Bastard Children

Are Bastard children acceptable?

  • Yes, I had some

    Votes: 6 27.3%
  • yes,people can do what that want even if it opposes Gods law

    Votes: 4 18.2%
  • Not sure

    Votes: 6 27.3%
  • No. All my kids are Blessed (Born in wedlock)

    Votes: 1 4.5%
  • No,Gods will is for children to be born in wedlock.

    Votes: 5 22.7%

  • Total voters
    22
  • Poll closed .

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
If this is truly the case, shouldn't every word of St. Paul's be immediately stricken from the Holy Writ?

If not, why not?

Thanks!

--David

Galatians 3
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

.

People can have poor motives, but still offer valuable insights.
People are rarely good at being all bad.
 
Upvote 0

Tropical Wilds

Little Lebowski Urban Achiever
Oct 2, 2009
4,760
3,103
New England
✟192,560.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I had a child outside of marriage. I don’t regret it in the slightest. He is a gift in each and every sense of the word and anybody who would use that word to describe him, or any child, is not anybody who’s opinion I would care about. The whole “don’t blame the child for the parents” thing is just as bad and in some ways worse, so I have no use for that either.
 
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Some people might complain about the word Bastard being used but I just want to say this is Gods language so it can never be unclean so please respect that. The problem is Christians have been influenced by the heathens of this world and been persuaded to abandon Gods clean sacred language.
"bastard" is not God's language, it is man's language, specifically English. the word God used in that passage was something else. We shouldn't be afraid of the word, especially when used properly, but we do need to be aware of its contextual meaning in our culture to determine if it's a responsible word to use or not. Most modern translations have stopped using this word for this reason because the word "bastard" is derogatory where other words can carry the meaning without the insult Translations are looking to translate the meaning of the word not lace it with insult.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If you believe in it fine, I'm not here to talk you out of it but God makes it clear want he wants.
Why do you think YHWH forbade eunuchs, illegitimate and those with deformities from entering the presence of the Lord in the OT?
 
Upvote 0

CharismaticLady

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 14, 2019
2,596
654
76
Tennessee
✟140,294.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Acts 10:9-23

Hint: It's not just about food

Some think it is not about food at all, but cleansed unclean meat, and unclean meat represented the Gentiles under the law.

Leviticus 20:
25 You shall therefore distinguish between clean animals and unclean, between unclean birds and clean, and you shall not make yourselves abominable by beast or by bird, or by any kind of living thing that creeps on the ground, which I have separated from you as unclean. 26 And you shall be holy to Me, for I the Lord am holy, and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be Mine.

Before the flood, both man and animals were vegetarians. Meat was not meant for food. Some animals were only for sacrifices to God, and called "clean."

After the flood both man and animals could eat anything that moved. Still only the original "clean" animals were still used for sacrifices.

At the giving of the law, God then changed what God's people could eat to the same as was sacrificed to Himself.

The gospel was to go to everyone, so once again there was no distinction as clean or unclean, as there were no more sacrifices and Gentiles had been cleansed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bekkilyn
Upvote 0

CharismaticLady

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 14, 2019
2,596
654
76
Tennessee
✟140,294.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
"bastard" is not God's language, it is man's language, specifically English. the word God used in that passage was something else. We shouldn't be afraid of the word, especially when used properly, but we do need to be aware of its contextual meaning in our culture to determine if it's a responsible word to use or not. Most modern translations have stopped using this word for this reason because the word "bastard" is derogatory where other words can carry the meaning without the insult Translations are looking to translate the meaning of the word not lace it with insult.

Like "gay" no longer means "jolly"
 
Upvote 0

CharismaticLady

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 14, 2019
2,596
654
76
Tennessee
✟140,294.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
If this is truly the case, shouldn't every word of St. Paul's be immediately stricken from the Holy Writ?

If not, why not?

Thanks!

--David

Galatians 3
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

.

Because Paul specifies what is inspired, and what is not. He tells us when something is just His opinion, and what are commandments of the Lord.
 
Upvote 0

Leet

Active Member
Feb 24, 2015
367
407
✟77,484.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Sex outside wedlock is a sin but no child is truly a bastard. They were chosen and known by God like anyone else. An unwed family in the church should be discipled with love and it's the Spirit's job to convict them. A single parent should not be up for judgement by the congregation.
Stupid poll, sorry not sorry.
 
Upvote 0

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,592
Northern Ohio
✟314,577.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Just wandering if people here think having a Bastard child is acceptable or marriage before the child's birth is essential?
This is not what the Hebrew word means. This is a reference to a women that is married and has a baby with someone other then her husband.
What Is a "Mamzer"?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ChicanaRose

Well-Known Member
Mar 26, 2019
1,250
1,331
west coast
✟75,698.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I just ask OP what is the goal of calling a baby a bastard? It is as bad as pro-abortion fellas calling the unborn "it", "parasite", etc. It is kind of dehumanising the little ones.

I was actually going to ask if the OP is pro-life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Not David
Upvote 0

St_Worm2

Simul Justus et Peccator
Supporter
Jan 28, 2002
27,247
45,335
67
✟2,916,149.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Paul specifies what is inspired, and what is not. He tells us when something is just His opinion, and what are commandments of the Lord.
Hello again CharismaticLady, I agree that he does this, occasionally, but the vast majority of what was written in St. Paul's Epistles is not specific in this regard. So what do we do with all of that?

So I can better understand what you mean, how bad do you believe what Paul (apparently) says on his own to be? Do you mean that any/all of this kind of teaching from the Apostle (where he tells us that he did not receive a word directly from the Lord) is always bad advice, advice that is in league with that of false prophets and prompted by the spirit of Antichrist?

If you do not, how can we tell the difference?

Thanks!

--David
p.s. - so that you'll know where I'm coming from, I believe that the Lord intended every word of St. Paul's to be in his Epistles, that even the words that Paul says are from him, and not directly from the Lord, are still what God wanted us to have, and what He needs us to know.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Christ is Lord

Well-Known Member
Aug 27, 2019
578
410
Top Secret
✟27,506.00
Country
Virgin Islands, British
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
if some jerk told me that I was unclean because I was having my period , I’d have to leave the room before he got slapped . Women have periods because we don’t go into heat like a dog would . Our ability to have sex isn’t coupled to our fertility
Haha. I agree but being “unclean” wasn’t seen as a bad thing. Today some Christians read those OT passages and feel that it is a bad thing.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Last edited:
Upvote 0

CharismaticLady

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 14, 2019
2,596
654
76
Tennessee
✟140,294.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Hello again CharismaticLady, I agree that he does this, occasionally, but the vast majority of what was written in St. Paul's Epistles is not specific in this regard. So what do we do with all of that?

So I can better understand what you mean, how bad do you believe what Paul (apparently) says on his own to be? Do you mean that any/all of this kind of teaching from the Apostle (where he tells us that he did not receive a word directly from the Lord) is always bad advice, advice that is in league with that of false prophets and prompted by the spirit of Antichrist?

If you do not, how can we tell the difference?

Thanks!

--David
p.s. - so that you'll know where I'm coming from, I believe that the Lord intended every word of St. Paul's to be in his Epistles, that even the words that Paul says are from him, and not directly from the Lord, are still what God wanted us to have, and what He needs us to know.

No, not Antichrist. Just human, and prejudiced.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

CharismaticLady

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 14, 2019
2,596
654
76
Tennessee
✟140,294.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
the OP is deliberately trying to be crass just for clickbait and then hides behind "Gods language"

I don't have a problem with King James language. I know the historical meaning of bastard, and don't hear very much in the way of swearing, so I'm not offended with the OP.
 
Upvote 0