Pretty much. Matthew 19:14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. Of the little children is the kingdom of heaven.
I'm not seeing how this relates to telling kids about Santa.
No. I said nothing about Jews. Christians are free to commit suicide as they are no longer under the law. If a Christian commits suicide, it is not sin.
Last time I checked, the Jews are the only people "under the law."
On earth, it can be quantified. We put levels of evilness and goodness on different acts everyday. We are not God. What are the wages of telling your child there is a Santa Claus? Death. What are the wages of killing a child? Death. God makes no differentiation of sin. Sin is sin to God, we are the ones guilty of creating levels of sin. James 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
Thanks for providing a specific citation. Your argument is at least potentially compelling, since from what I can tell you have interpreted James 2 correctly.
I am still wary, though, because in my experience in the bulk of the Bible God treats one sin differently than another sin. Besides the so-called "unpardonable sin" (which is clearly worse, since it cannot be pardoned) Jesus encourages people to work on the sabbath if the "greater good" of the law is achieved (loving God, loving neighbor). Hence if one must choose between resting on Saturday and helping someone out of a jam, the latter is selected over the former.
There are many, many other examples. Recall the varying punishments in the Pentateuch; some are fatal and others not.
I have found the claim "taking things out of context" is paramount to "I don't like that verse, so ignore it." I believe the Bible is the infallible Word of God. Either all of it is correct, or none of it is. A lying toungue (telling your child there is a Santa Claus) is as bad as murder.
Infallibility has got nothing to do with context.
While I recognize that the appeal to context is often influenced by less than objective interests, to simply decry all context-based interpretations on this basis is itself tantamount (not paramount) to brash silliness. There is always some sort of context governing one's hermeneutic endeavor -- sometimes literary, sometimes theological, sometimes thematic -- and we only fool ourselves if we suppose that we can read and understand ANYTHING without context.
Jesus told the story of Lazurus and the Rich Man. Did Christ lie? Absolutely not. Was Lazurus and the Rich Man a true story? Absolutely. Note the "parable" did not begin with "The Kingdom of Heaven is like..."
Jesus tells lots of parables that do not begin with the phrase you cited. To assume that a story "really happened" simply because it is not preceded by a common formulaic script is uncalled for.
The Pauline passage relates to those who lead evil lifestyles, agreed. And Paul says this is what some of you were, but you are washed. Does that mean you still do these things? 1 John 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
Your response didn't address my point. I'll say it again then drop it if necessary. You cited the passage as proof that all sins are equal. But it doesn't say that. It only says that those who practice the same evil lifestyles as those listed will all receive the same punishment, namely, they will not inherit God's kingdom. Hence the passage cannot be used to support your thesis.