Sorry to be a bother, but do you mean that's true of all of his (I guess you could call them) personal statements in his Epistles, or just certain, personal comments of his?No, not Antichrist. Just human, and prejudiced.
A person shouldn't need to rely on their grandparents or surrogate parents to raise them,they should have their own parents raise them.
the OP is deliberately trying to be crass just for clickbait and then hides behind "Gods language"
Remember that Deuteronomy 23:1-10 had more restrictions than that: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. Here are some verses:
Deuteronomy 23 2
''A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord.''
hebrews 12:7-8
''If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.''
So God clearly wants children to enter into the world in a certain manner. Just wandering if people here think having a Bastard child is acceptable or marriage before the child's birth is essential? The world keeps pushing for more and more of Gods will to be eliminated,please bear in mind this ultimately is an issue of how adults and potential parents conduct themselves,not an attack on children so curious how the forum felt on this issue. Thanks.
Sorry to be a bother, but do you mean that's true of all of his (I guess you could call them) personal statements in his Epistles, or just certain, personal comments of his?
Thanks again!
--David
Adam blamed Eve.No bother at all. The ones that are merely cultural. For instance, a woman with short hair was the sign of a prostitute as part of an identifier. Jewish women were uneducated in the Torah, and if not a prophetess, could interrupt meetings with questions, so were to ask their husbands at home. Paul, brought up a Jew and a Pharisee no less would naturally not allow a woman to speak. As for Eve's sin in his reasoning, her's was unintentional, as she had never heard a lie before. Note that nothing happened when she ate. But Adam's was intentional, and it was his sin that opened their eyes and they saw they were both naked. Scripture always points to Adam's sin. Only Paul blames the woman. Hmmmmm Know the scriptures, and you can easily tell the difference between Spirit and personal opinion. It is usually men that can't tell the difference in this particular case. I wonder why? LOL
Women are educated today, and have been for decades. I almost said centuries, but its been only since the second world war that women have been recognized as having a brain. You know it was Jesus who set women free; but men who chained them back up.
Adam blamed Eve.
Do you have a view on if it's good or bad that the single mums got their bastard child rather than be married?
He was communicating Holy Spirit inspired teachings in both situations.So did Paul.
But when Paul was in the Spirit, he said:
Romans 5:14
Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. (Not Eve)
Yes, let's think of yet one more reason to drive people away from Christ. So who is going to be our next target after "bastard" children are all condemned and sent into everlasting perdition?
John: 1:12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God
13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.
Those who believe in Him are part of God's family, and they need not worry about anything else.
As for society:
I Corinthians 5:9 I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. 10 Yet I certainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world.
As for the church:
11 But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner—not even to eat with such a person.
12 For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? 13 But those who are outside God judges. Therefore “put away from yourselves the evil person.”
As for the repentant:
2 Corinthians 2:6 This punishment which was inflicted by the majority is sufficient for such a man, 7 so that, on the contrary, you ought rather to forgive and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one be swallowed up with too much sorrow. 8 Therefore I urge you to reaffirm your love to him. 9 For to this end I also wrote, that I might put you to the test, whether you are obedient in all things. 10 Now whom you forgive anything, I also forgive. For b]">[b]if indeed I have forgiven anything, I have forgiven that one for your sakes in the presence of Christ, 11 lest Satan should take advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices.
2 Corinthians 7:8 For even if I made you sorry with my letter, I do not regret it; though I did regret it. For I perceive that the same epistle made you sorry, though only for a while. 9 Now I rejoice, not that you were made sorry, but that your sorrow led to repentance. For you were made sorry in a godly manner, that you might suffer loss from us in nothing. 10 For godly sorrow produces repentance leading to salvation, not to be regretted; but the sorrow of the world produces death.
Galatians 6:1 Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness, considering yourself lest you also be tempted. 2 Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.
James 5:19 Brethren, if anyone among you wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, 20 let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins.
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. Here are some verses:
Deuteronomy 23 2
''A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord.''
hebrews 12:7-8
''If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.''
So God clearly wants children to enter into the world in a certain manner. Just wandering if people here think having a Bastard child is acceptable or marriage before the child's birth is essential? The world keeps pushing for more and more of Gods will to be eliminated,please bear in mind this ultimately is an issue of how adults and potential parents conduct themselves,not an attack on children so curious how the forum felt on this issue. Thanks.
In the Hebrew/Jewish scriptures "unclean" does not necessarily imply fault of any sort but refers to what is acceptable for ritual purposes mainly in the temple.
You can be unclean for having your period, you can also be unclean for touching a dead body. These are things that have to happen. Someone has to bury the dead and women have their period.
EDIT: This was what happened in the OT. I’m not advocating this view but merely stating facts.
I know the meaning of the word and know that the OP is using the proper historical meaning but I question the motive behind using it as there are other ways of describing the same yet the OP makes it clear since this is "Gods [sic] language" that we should value it regardless what it's colloquial meanings may be.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.
exactly...The poll answer options were biased that I couldn't vote.
I know the meaning of the word and know that the OP is using the proper historical meaning but I question the motive behind using it as there are other ways of describing the same yet the OP makes it clear since this is "Gods [sic] language" that we should value it regardless what it's colloquial meanings may be.
Either it is a KJV only-st sentiment (which I'm not interested in)
or an insensitive sentiment just for shock value or to be overly argumentative (also not interested in)
using "bastard" tells a lot about the tone of the OP and it's just something I can't subscribe to. every child is valued by God regardless of what situation they are born into and I don't know the agenda here of the OP that we should ostracize children and their families born out of wedlock? There are biblical ways of dealing with immorality within the church and those should be followed but it would be counter-gospel to superimpose this to those outside the church, especially OT law which just misses the point altogether.
Like my Grandmother used to say: If you can't say something nice, then don't say anything at all.Ok how would you word the questions?
Name calling in this fashion only serves to alienate. Godly rebuke serves to correct and draw closer.Well I think it's very reasonable to judge people based on their behaviour. That's what God will do and it's fair,if a person feels shame for what they do.....don't do it.
Yeah we can have grace but don't pretend that the rebuke is the problem,because it's only the highlighter to the problem.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?