ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, March 13, 2015

Mailvox: suicide of a San Francisco church

A soon-to-be ex-member sends along his the decision of the church "elders" to knowingly embrace sin as church policy:
Dear Friends,

I want to speak with you on behalf of the Elder Board of our church about a pastoral conversation we have been having over the past 9 months. In May of 2014 the Board asked me for a book that was clearly grounded in Scripture that we might study on pastoring our brothers and sisters in Christ who are part of the LGBT community. We read Ken Wilson's A Letter to My Congregation. The book is rare in that it shows great empathy and maturity to model unity and patience with those who are in different places on this conversation, all the while dealing honestly with Scripture. Since our church already lives in the reality of a multiplicity of viewpoints held with humility, this book seemed to us a good choice. I want you to hear where we have arrived as a Board and invite you into a conversation and healthy discussion about how we arrived there. 

Our pastoral practice of demanding life-long “celibacy”, by which we meant that for the rest of your life you would not engage your sexual orientation in any way, was causing obvious harm and has not led to human flourishing.

(It’s unfortunate that we used the word “celibacy” to describe a demand placed on others, as in Scripture it is, according to both Jesus and Paul, a special gift or calling by God, not an option for everyone). In fact, over the years, the stories of harm caused by this pastoral practice began to accumulate. Our pastoral conversations and social science research indicate skyrocketing rates of depression, suicide, and addiction among those who identify as LGBT. The generally unintended consequence has been to leave many people feeling deeply damaged, distorted, unlovable, unacceptable, and perverted. Imagine feeling this from your family or religious community: “If you stay, you must accept celibacy with no hope that you too might one day enjoy the fullness of intellectual, spiritual, emotional, psychological and physical companionship. If you pursue a lifelong partnership, you are rejected.” This is simply not working and people are being hurt. We must listen and respond.
Imagine the feeling! Someone, somewhere, has suffered FEELBAD! One guess what the response will be.
Summary: What has actually changed here?

On one hand, nothing. This aligns with our existing core vision: the doors of this church are as wide as the arms of the Savior it proclaims. We remain passionate about having as many people hear the gospel as possible. City Church will continue to receive into membership all those with a credible profession of faith and expect the same commitments represented in their membership vows.

On the other hand, we want to be clear what this now means. We will no longer discriminate based on sexual orientation and demand lifelong celibacy as a precondition for joining. For all members, regardless of sexual orientation, we will continue to expect chastity in singleness until marriage. Please pray for our Board as we continue to discuss pastoral practices with our LGBT brothers and sisters in Christ. Pray for our denomination, the Reformed Church in America, as it does the same.

One sad piece of news: two of our Elders, Tyler Dann and Bruce Gregory, resigned from the board. We received these resignations with sadness and understanding. These are fine members of our church who love Jesus deeply.
Well, I'm sure the City Church of Ken Wilson will flourish every bit as well as the Episcopalian and Anglican churches have since they embraced other forms of anti-Christian heresy. "By their fruits you will know them," we are told.  And when the organizations wither and die, we'll be assured that it had nothing whatsoever to do with their embrace of open and unrepentant sin.

I find it interesting that these progressive churches still insist on turning a cold shoulder to unrepentant murderers and child molesters. It's really rather intolerant and unChristian of them, isn't it?

Notice in particular the gentle and understanding tone in which the missive is written. That is the insidious whisper of Hell.

Labels: ,

190 Comments:

Anonymous Tar Heel March 13, 2015 3:19 PM  

In this case, we can do without the fruits, Vox.

Blogger Rich March 13, 2015 3:25 PM  

But why is chastity before marriage still expected? Doesn't that also cause "damage?"

Blogger Doom March 13, 2015 3:26 PM  

In some senses, it is all good. Separates the wheat from the rest. What of the believers actually do believe, this begins the shake. They are obviously in the wrong place, a place that puts politics of identity above God. Soon they feel it is upside down, which it is, and begin seeking higher ground.... or just admit they are agnostic which many of them are. Those wishing to bear fruit will find good soil in which to do so. Those who are agnostic, too, drift off. With no real thing to believe in, there is no reason to continue paying for nothing, or everything, or whatever the gatekeepers are suggesting at any given point, that changing at a nauseating pace. Bleh. All good, all good. Such upsets might save some of the few that are believers from hell, allowing the others to brand themselves for easy pickings when it's their time. Goats.

Blogger MATT March 13, 2015 3:27 PM  

I often wonder if these people actually read the Bible.

Anonymous Daniel March 13, 2015 3:27 PM  

No, I agree. By their fruits, we know them. The funny part is that the fruit they bear are by definition sterile.

It is kinda biblical: Be fruitless and divide.

Blogger Noah B March 13, 2015 3:29 PM  

LGBT culture and chastity do not coexist.

Blogger JartStar March 13, 2015 3:30 PM  

Unlike the Mainline Protestant churches which have fallen on this issue, independent churches will quickly evaporate. The Mainlines had hundreds of years of ballast in the form of millions of members, hundreds of millions of dollars in resources, and most and a rich theological heritage, so it takes a long time for them to fall apart.

Blogger JartStar March 13, 2015 3:32 PM  

I wonder if any of these denominations or churches believe in Biblical inerrancy?

Anonymous DrTorch March 13, 2015 3:32 PM  

and has not led to human flourishing

That's my favorite part. Here I thought it was supposed to be about the Kingdom of God flourishing.

Blogger Moor March 13, 2015 3:34 PM  

99 times out of 100 these changes result more from the emotional pressure of friendships with those who are hurting than out of theological reflection on the Bible. Unfortunately, many in our culture have misunderstood or forgotten the difference between being "nice" and being "kind".

Kindness is what causes the battlefield surgeon to amputate, despite the tremendous pain involved, because he knows he's saving your life.

Niceness is that insipid smiling doctor who so quickly jots the prescription for the opioid that's not-so-slowly ruining the life of the white-collar addict.

Anonymous Homesteader March 13, 2015 3:35 PM  

If an organization hold views I disagree with, I don't join.

Perhaps, if I'm reflective, it then forces me to reconsider my views and actions in light of their opposing stance. Either I am confirmed, or transformed.

But I don't demand that it change for ME. I'm one individual, of no significant import or wisdom. And as Groucho quipped, I wouldn't join the club that'd have me under those circumstances.

It's the unrelenting vanity of the entryists that grates, coupled with the unrelenting appeasement of the supposed stewards of our cultural institutions. Irresistable force, meet former-immovable-rock-now-tumbleweed.

Yeats foresaw it all..

Anonymous Varenius March 13, 2015 3:36 PM  

...you must accept celibacy with no hope that you too might one day enjoy the fullness of intellectual, spiritual, emotional, psychological and physical companionship.

Celibacy conflicts with only one of those aspects.

Anonymous Moldbugger March 13, 2015 3:41 PM  

Fruits of the Reformation.

Rome welcomes you home.

Blogger ScuzzaMan March 13, 2015 3:44 PM  

"...invite you into a conversation and healthy discussion about how we arrived there."

I enjoyed this part the most. It's a brilliantly disguised piece of emotional sleaze, a threat pretending to be an invitation to dialogue.

We're going to tell you how it is, what you should do, and what you have to put up with, and you're going to smile and say nothing except to tell us our shit tastes like chocolate, or you're an unhealthy person.

Assholes.

Blogger Chiva March 13, 2015 3:44 PM  

"and invite you into a conversation and healthy discussion about how we arrived there."

In other words, if you vigorously disagree then you will be asked to leave.

Anonymous statz March 13, 2015 3:44 PM  

Be careful Rome - the barbarians are at the gate for you as well.

Blogger James Dixon March 13, 2015 3:46 PM  

> Rome welcomes you home.

Actually, no, it doesn't. I've checked and I'm not welcome.

Blogger CM March 13, 2015 3:49 PM  

Celibacy conflicts with only one of those aspects.

Seriously.

Like sex is the only way to express love or to be loved.

I told my husband once that if David and Jonathan lived today without any influence from their faith and culture, they would've been told (and likely believed) they were gay.

The perversion of a very good and amazing friendship. It's what satan does best, is it not?

I have pity for the lgbt crowd. It may sound condescending, but its true. I feel like many are being constantly lied to about their true identities and value... things that can only be found in Christ with the TRUTH.

If I were a psychologist and a theologian, I'd write a book.

Blogger Ben March 13, 2015 3:50 PM  

I find it interesting that these progressive churches still insist on turning a cold shoulder to unrepentant murderers and child molesters.

It goes even beyond that, to the point of identifying as the sin. So it's not even, "Yes, I murdered people and no, I'm not sorry for it," it's, "Murdering is my identity. It's literally who I am."

I never understand why people choose to define their essential being why who or what they feel like screwing at that particular moment.

Anonymous patrick kelly March 13, 2015 3:51 PM  

"> Rome welcomes you home.

Actually, no, it doesn't. I've checked and I'm not welcome."

Have you checked east of Rome?

Anonymous Varenius March 13, 2015 3:51 PM  

Be careful Rome - the barbarians are at the gate for you as well.

Yeah, it's hardly any better on this side of the Tiber these days.

Anonymous Anonymous March 13, 2015 3:54 PM  

I like that the accusation is depression suicide... are all attributed to celibacy rather than to the lack of treatment for mental conditions.

-AmicusC

Blogger Maple Curtain March 13, 2015 3:54 PM  

"In May of 2014 the Board asked me for a book that was clearly grounded in Scripture that we might study on pastoring our brothers and sisters in Christ who are part of the LGBT community."

Dear churchian:

Would it hurt too much for you and your fellow members to ask, 'Why are they a part of the LGBT community?'

Anything to do with sin and fallen humanity, in themselves, their parents, their community?

Blogger Longstreet March 13, 2015 3:54 PM  

I always find this sort of thing grimly amusing. I wonder how welcoming and accepting and affirming these folks would be if Fred Phelps and family wanted to join?

Rome welcomes you home.
That's very nice of you, but I'm already home.

Blogger CM March 13, 2015 3:54 PM  

I never understand why people choose to define their essential being why who or what they feel like screwing at that particular moment.

And WHY would any church (or christian) think its compassionate to indulge such thinking?

Anonymous Stickwick March 13, 2015 3:57 PM  

The book is rare in that it shows great empathy and maturity...

It's annoying how often "maturity" is used to describe the decision to embrace something that's antithetical to your ostensible beliefs. See also: thoughtful, evolved, enlightened.

Anonymous Varenius March 13, 2015 4:02 PM  

patrick kelly: Have you checked east of Rome?

A good call, as the East is in many ways "Catholicism for Protestants" (meaning that you get to connect with the ancient faith while avoiding some of the things that Prots balk at).

Anonymous Stilicho March 13, 2015 4:03 PM  

It's annoying how often "maturity" is used to describe the decision to embrace something that's antithetical to your ostensible beliefs. See also: thoughtful, evolved, enlightened.

Don't forget "growing in office"... best euphemism ever for corruption, decay, betrayal, and moral cowardice all rolled into one tidy package...(see also "personal growth")

Blogger JCclimber March 13, 2015 4:05 PM  

A sister church of ours had a welcoming outreach to the LG community. Not LGBT. Just LG. The caveat was that they had to be celibate to be members.

Wow, here's a conservative church that also accepts us? Finally? Let's bring in some of our friends. But the standards were upheld. Until some of them felt they had enough people in leadership (lay position, not clergy) positions to try to and make a policy change.

There were storm clouds swirling for a few months after a couple dozen of the LG people were removed from the church rolls. Not all, because several had allowed God to consecrate them and they upheld the standards too, in the meeting.

That church is growing and thriving again. In the heart of liberal San Francisco. And the church would have been removed from the denomination if they'd caved in to the demands anyway, so I don't know what the SJW idiots were thinking except that they thought to over rule the clear word of God. They also should have known because that church had a much beloved pastor resign because it came out that he'd had a short extra-marital affair 35 years before, in another state, and about 20 years before he became a pastor. Not going to turn a blind eye to adultery, not going to turn one to openly gay/lesbian.

Victory is possible if you stand your ground and get enough others to stand it with you.

My kudos to Tyler Dann and Bruce Gregory, praise God that at least 2 elders have both standards and functioning testicles.

Anonymous Moldbugger March 13, 2015 4:07 PM  

Reformed Church... Yup. Martin Luther was an evil psycho monk who betrayed his order for nun-booty. THIS IS WHAT LUTHER'S "CHURCH" IS ALL ABOUT.

Rome still welcomes you home, even if you piss on the generous invitation.

Anonymous Anonymous March 13, 2015 4:08 PM  

I hope you let an anonymous one through, but there's a lot more to this story.

Not only do we see this decline, but I believe it was this very same church that exited the relatively conservative PCA in favor of the RCA over the issue of women's ordination back in 2006.

http://cbmw.org/uncategorized/city-church-leaving-pca-for-moderate-rca-over-women-in-ministry/

They went from a squishy moderate church in a conservative denomination ("we just want women deacons") to what you see above in about a decade.

Blogger JCclimber March 13, 2015 4:08 PM  

"In May of 2014 the Board asked me for a book that was clearly grounded in Scripture that we might study on pastoring our brothers and sisters in Christ who are part of the wife swapping/swingers community."

Hey, how about we throw that particular word swap at them? But since they are SJW, I doubt they would see the illogic in their rejection of this new wording.

Blogger JCclimber March 13, 2015 4:10 PM  

Reformed Church... Yup. Martin Luther was an evil psycho monk who betrayed his order for nun-booty. THIS IS WHAT LUTHER'S "CHURCH" IS ALL ABOUT.

Rome still welcomes you home, even if you piss on the generous invitation.

Still haven't seen a single biblical refutation of ANY of his 98 thesis.

Blogger David March 13, 2015 4:11 PM  

If the church of statism can have a "living" constitution, can't Christianity have a "living" Bible?

The social pendulum is still very close to the most leftward deflection in several centuries. INclusion is still very fashionable in the mainstream, even as EXclusion is growing rapidly at the periphery.

I suspect that the urge to look different from others (purple hair, visible tattoos, etc.) for the sake of being different is going to give way to tribal markers and overt exclusion.

Maybe that will make it easier to know with whom you may want to associate, sort of like an "I'm with stupid" T-shirt that lets you exclude two people at a time.

Anonymous Varenius March 13, 2015 4:11 PM  

Moldbugger, stop trolling.

Anonymous Strange Aeons March 13, 2015 4:15 PM  

He forgot to declare his pro-homo position to be "on the right side of history".
- 1 social justice point

Anonymous BigGaySteve March 13, 2015 4:17 PM  

"LGBT culture and chastity do not coexist."
You have obviously never heard of the lesbian death bed.

There is no need to change your church to accommodate gays. The Temple of the Gay Bacon Eating Rabbi is far more welcoming and the LGBT is CHEAP when it comes to donations, they will put less in the plate than they spend on an apple martini. The MCC with its gay men's chorus is basically brunch set to an episode of GLEE.

Anonymous Quartermaster March 13, 2015 4:22 PM  

"Rome welcomes you home."

"Rome" is on the same road to perdition as the mainline Protestant denominations. As one poster above stated, "Rome" still has not dealt with any of the Theses Luther posted.

By the by, The Lutherans came from Luther. The "Reformed" Church came from John Calvin. There are significant differences.

Blogger S1AL March 13, 2015 4:25 PM  

Evil. Psycho. Monk.

Nah, too easy. I'm gonna let that one go.

Following the Bible is, apparently, just too damn hard for people who aren't suffering constant persecution. I keep praying I'm wrong about that.

Blogger Danby March 13, 2015 4:25 PM  

"Be careful Rome - the barbarians are at the gate for you as well."

At the gates? They've been inside the gates for 2000 years. Bishops among the worst of them.
R G Hunthausen.
I rest my case.

Anonymous Tamertoff March 13, 2015 4:26 PM  

There is only one honest way to read this: another spiritual organization is throwing out archaic and disdainful views and embracing a more honest form of spiritual development and teaching. And that's only good.

Blogger Danby March 13, 2015 4:27 PM  

ummm... I'd be interested to see those 3 additional theses.

Blogger CM March 13, 2015 4:27 PM  

Still haven't seen a single biblical refutation of ANY of his 98 thesis

I don't think you know what the 95 thesis are... because if you did, you'd see that the catholic church actually did reform alot of their positions concerning them.

And stop blaming Luther for the protestant reformation. He didn't want to split the church. There was a lot of political upheaval at thw time that largely took advantage of the opportunity they saw him provide. Very little coincidence that the peasant revolts of the time ran parallel to the reformation.

Blogger Guitar Man March 13, 2015 4:29 PM  

I wonder how Peter and his wife would feel about all of those pedo priests that stained the RCC for centuries now.

Blogger CM March 13, 2015 4:33 PM  

As one poster above stated, "Rome" still has not dealt with any of the Theses Luther posted.

Rome still sells indulgences? Who knew! I guess there's a lot of people suffering in purgatory!

Anonymous Varenius March 13, 2015 4:34 PM  

"Rome" still has not dealt with any of the Theses Luther posted.

Not true -- the Council of Trent dealt extensively with them. Whether its rebuttals are convincing is another matter.

Blogger J Curtis March 13, 2015 4:34 PM  

Fruits of the Reformation.

Rome welcomes you home


Tell that to Notre Dame. Straighten them out first and I'll be impressed.

Blogger JartStar March 13, 2015 4:42 PM  

The idea that the RCC is immune to the views of the laity in the pews is a pipe dream which insulates conservative Catholics from seeing what is right before their eyes. LatinAmerica Survey

More: A Conservative Catholic Now Backs Same-Sex Marriage - NYTimes.com

Blogger subject by design March 13, 2015 4:43 PM  

The RC church does not technically "sell" indulgences, but they are granted.
http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/does-the-catholic-church-still-sell-indulgences

Blogger subject by design March 13, 2015 4:46 PM  

More on indulgences and what they are here:

http://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/indulgences

Blogger CM March 13, 2015 4:46 PM  

Damn it, this shouldn't be a prot v catholic thread. Both segments have problems. And the denominations of prots each have their own faults.

This is about the church (in general) capitulating to the culture around them. Very few denominations have remained steadfast against culture... and most people would consider those bastions of anti-culture purity to be odd and strange... and distasteful (daughters on pedestals, courtship, shapeless sack-dresses?)

Neither catholic or protestant is proving to be steadfast in the matter of cultural war. They habe both been infiltrated by SJWs of some shape or size. It is a true testament to the God we worship that his church has managed to perpetuate for so many centuries in spite his filthy, calloused, and damaged hands & feet.

Blogger hank.jim March 13, 2015 4:56 PM  

No longer a church, but a feel good congregation.

Blogger Lovekraft March 13, 2015 5:02 PM  

this: "LGBT culture and chastity do not coexist." - Noah B

Anonymous jrl March 13, 2015 5:04 PM  

I think saying celibacy means you will not "engage your sexual orientation" is misleading and disingenuous. Celibacy is abstention from sexual intercourse, not abstention from recognizing and enjoying who you are.

Blogger hank.jim March 13, 2015 5:09 PM  

Non-celibate gays don't have sexual intercourse as we know it.

Notice that the church implicitly accepts gay marriage as a condition for gay sex.

Blogger Foster March 13, 2015 5:20 PM  

@ S1AL "Evil. Psycho. Monk.

Nah, too easy. I'm gonna let that one go.

Following the Bible is, apparently, just too damn hard for people who aren't suffering constant persecution."

"Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." -James 2:24

So, tell me again, whose denomination abandons strict adherence to the clear sense of the Bible for their own pet theological theories?

Blogger CM March 13, 2015 5:21 PM  

Celibacy is abstention from sexual intercourse, not abstention from recognizing and enjoying who you are

You are so right.

They should have gone with Romans 1 & 2 (where gay sex is a perversion) and that other NT verse on the abomination.

Blogger Dystopic March 13, 2015 5:27 PM  

The fascinating thing is, as far as I know (and according to Francis Porretto, also), there is no prohibition against sex before marriage, only a warning that it is a great temptation toward sexual immorality, which is the actual problem. See 1 Corinthians 7:2.

This means that there is far stronger language used against homosexuality in the Bible than sex before marriage. And nowhere does it say that marriage must be sanctioned by the state.

So this church is encouraging the greater sin and yet enforcing the lesser temptation? It makes no sense. There is no Scripture I know of that could be used to support that.

It is as you say. Evil. I do not wish harm on gays, but encouraging sin is the exact opposite of the church's proper function.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey March 13, 2015 5:30 PM  

And then you wonder why increasing numbers of White folks are leaving the Church and seeking something more traditional, more authentic.

Blogger CM March 13, 2015 5:30 PM  

So, tell me again, whose denomination abandons strict adherence to the clear sense of the Bible for their own pet theological theories?

And Ephesians 2:8-9?

Anonymous Nathanael March 13, 2015 5:31 PM  

"The presence of the outside-organized event held inside the Vatican is being forthrightly hailed by organizers and the secular media as feminist victory over the traditional stance of the Church. Among the organizers and speakers were Deborah Rose-Milavec, one of the US’s most prominent agitators for female ordination, and Tina Beattie, a British feminist academic notorious for her advocacy for abortion, homosexual relations, and “gay marriage,” and who once compared the Catholic Mass to homosexual sex."

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-hosted-feminist-conference-featuring-prof-who-compares-mass-to-gay

Yes, welcome back to Rome where you will not only have to deal with the same faggotry, but also the Papist heresy too. No, thanks.

Blogger S1AL March 13, 2015 5:32 PM  

"So, tell me again, whose denomination abandons strict adherence to the clear sense of the Bible for their own pet theological theories?"

I don't even know to which side of this debate you belong... and I don't *have* a denomination. If you're taking a pot-shot at Sola Gratia, I will simply refer you to the Council of Orange.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 March 13, 2015 5:34 PM  

If I acted on my sexual attractions the way that the LGBT community does with theirs, I'd be in prison for rape.

Anonymous BigGaySteve March 13, 2015 5:46 PM  

"If I acted on my sexual attractions the way that the LGBT community does with theirs, I'd be in prison for rape."

This is why most gays cant imagine the need to shoot a guy who broke in through a window in the middle of the night.

Blogger ScuzzaMan March 13, 2015 5:53 PM  

JCclimber: "But since they are SJW, I doubt they would see the illogic in their rejection of this new wording."

No, because it is not about the logic, it is about the feelbad.

They're changing their standards because it makes them feelbad to have the world thinking bad thoughts about them, and they'd reject your formulation because it would make them feelbad about themselves to acknowledge the truth of it. They are totally consistent, so no, they wont see the illogic. For them it doesn't even exist.

Which highlights a critical truth; if you crave the world's approval you cannot be a faithful Christian.

Your god (your feelings) won't let you.

Anonymous Shut Up, Tad March 13, 2015 5:53 PM  

Tamertoff March 13, 2015 4:26 PM
There is only one honest way to read this: another spiritual organization is throwing out archaic and disdainful views and embracing a more honest form of spiritual development and teaching...........


Shutup, Tad.

Blogger IM2L844 March 13, 2015 5:57 PM  

I simply don't buy into the notion that what we think about is beyond our control, but I might change my mind.

Anonymous Beard March 13, 2015 6:00 PM  

There is only one honest way to read this: another spiritual organization is throwing out archaic and disdainful views and embracing a more honest form of spiritual development and teaching. And that's only good.

Blogger Dystopic March 13, 2015 6:04 PM  

"There is only one honest way to read this: another spiritual organization is throwing out archaic and disdainful views and embracing a more honest form of spiritual development and teaching. And that's only good."

The disdain is not ours. It is yours. If you support this sort of thing, you are practicing disdain for the Scripture you claim to follow. If you wish to serve your chosen demons, falsehoods and general bad ideas, that is your own business. We won't stop you. But do not think for a moment that you can somehow be a Christian, also.

Anonymous Desperate, Aren't You? March 13, 2015 6:09 PM  

Beard March 13, 2015 6:00 PM

You are repeating yourself, Tad.

Blogger Foster March 13, 2015 6:12 PM  

CM: "So, tell me again, whose denomination abandons strict adherence to the clear sense of the Bible for their own pet theological theories?

And Ephesians 2:8-9?"

Ephesians 2:8-9 and James 2:24 can be reconciled, when one realizes first that Catholics agree with Protestants that God's regenerative grace precedes all human activity. It is grace that saves us alone, not faith alone, which is accepted through faith and built upon by the good works of the Christian. All of this is necessary for the full development of the Christian heaven-bound. That is why in the *very next verse* St. Paul says: "For we are God's handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do." That is also why Martin Luther felt the need to mistranslate Romans 3:28, and this Catholic and apostolic teaching is further testified to in Revelation 20:12: "Another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works."

Let us now read from the REV (Revised Evangelical Version) Luke 18: Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. You know the commandments: 'Do not kill. Do not steal. Do not commit adultery. Do not bear false witness. Honor your father and mother.'" And he said, "All these I have observed from my youth." And when Jesus heard it, he said to him, "One thing still you lack. Know that the commandments have nothing to do with your salvation, because they contain works. Have faith alone in me alone, and you will have treasure in heaven."

Blogger CM March 13, 2015 6:15 PM  

I didn't say they couldn't. I have very little issue with reconciling what appear to be conflicting verses.

It just seemed your point revolved around the use of that verse.

Blogger S1AL March 13, 2015 6:19 PM  

Foster, please don't be silly. Several other versions of the Bible rendered that verse with the word "alone."

Anonymous patrick kelly March 13, 2015 6:26 PM  

" "Catholicism for Protestants" "

Heh, had not heard that one before....although there's been quite an increase in protestant converts arriving the last 30 years or so....I just about abandoned all faith before coming to Orthodoxy.....can't say I was a very good protestant at the time.....not that I'm a better Orthodox Christian at all....

Can't we all just get along? Or at least share some good whiskey and cigars while we're arguing?

Blogger grendel March 13, 2015 6:32 PM  

I love how they act like the choices are sodomy or celibacy. Because there's no way you could heal and enter into a biblical marriage if you've ever identified as sodomite.
It is all part of the weird, inconsistent "born this wahay" liberal label system. Depressed? Born this wahay. Gay? Born this wahay. Black? Born with the same genetic potential as anyone else. Druggie? Born this wahay. Downs syndrome? A horrible genetic mistake which must be aborted so it doesn't suffer. What the hell?

Blogger Foster March 13, 2015 6:33 PM  

@ CM: "And stop blaming Luther for the protestant reformation."

To whom much is given, much is expected. No one denies that Luther couldn't predict the full consequences of his anarchist theology. Nevertheless, I will blame him, because he is to blame. When I was a Protestant, I thought he was to blame too, although at that time I called it "credit."

@S1AL: Stop while you're behind. http://biblehub.com/interlinear/romans/3-28.htm

Anonymous Soga March 13, 2015 6:36 PM  

If those Churchians treated alcoholics the way they treated LGBT (Between "It's ok, we won't judge you, you can have a drink! Look at how much I love you!" and "Ummm... just pray about your drinking issue, k? No judgment here, bro. Look at how much I love you!"), I think alcoholics would be depressed and have a higher rate of suicide too, because they would be stuck in their addictions.

Anonymous Moldbugger March 13, 2015 6:42 PM  

Luther raped a nun. He attempted to destroy the Church for nun-booty. Perversion is inherent to his spawn. Apparently it is "trolling" to apply telelogic reasoning. Yet I thought this was a Catholic and NRx blog?

@S1AL... You are too short for this ride.

Blogger Markku March 13, 2015 6:45 PM  

This is the exact opposite of a Catholic blog. I remember Vox saying something like I appreciate Catholicism for its history, but I don't think it has anything to do with my religion. Not a direct quote, just closest to what I can recall.

I would put it less politely myself, and say I don't consider Catholicism Christian.

Blogger IM2L844 March 13, 2015 6:47 PM  

Can't we all just get along?

No. Most recently, I blame Sam Harris and his idiotic "science of human flourishing" theory of morality. Consequences, however pleasurable, are not justifications.

Blogger Noah B March 13, 2015 6:51 PM  

"Luther raped a nun."

Fascinating. Did he also play lacrosse?

Blogger Noah B March 13, 2015 6:52 PM  

"You have obviously never heard of the lesbian death bed."

I have now.

Blogger Foster March 13, 2015 6:52 PM  

@Markku "I would put it less politely myself, and say I don't consider Catholicism Christian."

How would you interpret James 2:24 and Rev. 20:12, (since those are the verses I mentioned above), Markku? How do they fit into a Protestant hermeneutic?

Anonymous Wyrd March 13, 2015 6:54 PM  

He attempted to destroy the Church for nun-booty.

I like nun-booty from time to time but I try not to make a habit of it.

Anonymous Huckleberry -- est. 1977 March 13, 2015 6:56 PM  

Yet I thought this was a Catholic and NRx blog?

I know I'm going to be sorry I asked, but what, exactly, made you think so?

Blogger Markku March 13, 2015 6:58 PM  

James 2:24: The only way that another Christian can see whether someone has living faith or dead faith (as in verse 26) is by his works. We cannot see the heart, like God does. But we still have to make the decision whether to fellowship with said person or not. We must make it based on works. If we are mistaken in our judgement, God will still save him because he sees the thing itself, whereas we see only what correlates with it.

Rev. 20:12: That's easy. First Resurrection happens in verse 5. Nobody who is justified in Jesus's name is going to face the judgement of verse 12.

Blogger CM March 13, 2015 7:04 PM  

How would you interpret James 2:24 and Rev. 20:12

why do you think they don't?

Maybe because i was raised episcopal that i have this weird relationship with prot and catholic (scripture first + rich theology) and most of my issues with catholic theology are relatively minor...

So maybe there's something about these verses that make baptists and ECAs knee jerk that i don't know about?

But please... do tell... what exactly does a good catholic think a protestant has issue with in these verses?

Blogger Markku March 13, 2015 7:06 PM  

why do you think they don't?

Heal your butthurt. There is no evidence that it was anything other than an honest question, because he didn't know the answer.

Anonymous Shut Up, Tad March 13, 2015 7:10 PM  

@ Desperate, Aren't You?

> You are repeating yourself, Tad.

Its the syphilitic dementia kicking in.

Blogger Markku March 13, 2015 7:10 PM  

I also have a question. This is an honest question, though one of the possible answers might cause me to think a few things to myself. But I will not share them.

You go to a random Catholic communion. Chances are (that is, over 50%):

a) You are given wine
b) You are not given wine

Which is it?

Blogger Noah B March 13, 2015 7:12 PM  

As in wine vs. blood of Christ or as in wine vs. grape juice?

Blogger Markku March 13, 2015 7:12 PM  

As in, the bread only, or bread and wine.

Blogger Markku March 13, 2015 7:14 PM  

Or grape juice or blood of Christ, I don't care. The question is, do you eat, or drink and eat?

Blogger S1AL March 13, 2015 7:19 PM  

"@S1AL: Stop while you're behind. http://biblehub.com/interlinear/romans/3-28.htm"

I mean, I know Google is pretty new, but still...

http://www.concordia.hk/news/data/Romans_3_28_Man_is_justified_by_faith%28Alone%29_%28full_version%29.pdf

Luther *was not* the first to add the word, and most certainly not the first (or second, or third) to interpret it that way. Whatever other problems you may have with Luther, this is a silly (meaning trite) issue on which to focus.

Anonymous Varenius March 13, 2015 7:34 PM  

patrick kelly: ...there's been quite an increase in protestant converts arriving the last 30 years or so..

My experience with Orthodoxy has been largely through a congregation that's overwhelmingly Protestant converts. They try hard to be authentically Orthodox, but sometimes I wonder how well they succeed. The sermons definitely have a strong American Evangelical feel to them.

Or at least share some good whiskey and cigars while we're arguing?

Great, there you go, convincing the Protestants that Orthodox are a bunch of booze-swilling party hounds...

Blogger Foster March 13, 2015 7:40 PM  

@Markku. Your interpretation of James 2:25 is not credible in light of the immediate context of the verse (verses 24 and 26), about how *God* (not other Christians) justified Abraham and Rahab. The verse is clearly concerned with God's perspective, not appearances.

Regarding your interpretation of Rev 20:12, you're grasping at straws to avoid the obvious meaning of the text, and once again, a look at the immediate context reveals the poverty of your interpretation: Rev 12:4-5 "And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection." The saints who are referred to in this verse are all *beheaded*. Obviously, there have been saints throughout history who were not beheaded, who would be raised up with the rest of "the dead great and small" in verse 12. Your account is also incoherent in terms of the books talked about. In verse 15, it says that anyone whose name was not written in the book of life is thrown in the fire. But in verse 12, the dead are judged according to what is written in the book of life. How can they be judged according to what is written about them in the book of life if their names don't show up there?

It smells like you tailoring your interpretation according to the theology you originally had rather than allowing the text to shape your theology. The book of life is opened because some of the dead, (as in, all the saints who didn't have to face the Antichrist in verse 4-5), have their names written there. You're not saved by faith alone because... you're not saved by faith alone.

Care to comment, Markku?

Anonymous NUN BOOTY PLEASE March 13, 2015 7:42 PM  

Works = Papism ???

Anonymous Varenius March 13, 2015 7:44 PM  

Markku, wine is considered optional, so it may or may not be offered at any given service. It is always part of the Eucharistic liturgy, though (meaning that it is on the altar whether or not offered to the congregation).

Anonymous Moldbugger March 13, 2015 7:51 PM  

Markku pwned, another churchian down. Well done, Foster.

Anonymous MrGreenMan March 13, 2015 7:51 PM  

@Foster

"James 2:24"

Markku is more than capable of handling himself, but I leave as a reference the extensive work of Dr. Brian Vickers on the subject of the great misunderstanding of Paul and James. Having had an extremely brief conversation with Dr. Vickers in addition to taking a number of classes and sessions from him, the very short synopsis is:

The parable of the sower gives us four types. Two of these type - those that fall on deaf ears and those that immediately dry up in the sun - are very easy for a congregation to understand. However, and American culture is particularly geared at steering Christians toward that third type - the type where faith is choked out by all the other things of life, and, so there is faith, there is no putting that faith into action and practice, and ultimately the head and heart truly disconnect, and we get up to the gates of the city of refuge but never really enter it. You don't want to be this third type, and, whereas Paul talks an awful lot about the first two types, James fills in this essential piece about understanding the third from the forth, with works being the fruit of faith, and thereby one can discern between the third and fourth type.

Dr. Vickers accepted that this was close enough to summarizing his research it for a programmer, but very much the Reader's Digest version..

Anonymous Varenius March 13, 2015 7:53 PM  

Markku: I don't consider Catholicism Christian.

Would you say the same of Eastern Orthodoxy? Why or why not? (I'm genuinely curious.)

Blogger Markku March 13, 2015 8:04 PM  

Making a distinction between Bema Judgement and White Throne Judgement is not ME grasping at straws. You may disagree with it, but I didn't invent it.

Matthew Henry (author of one of the most popular - if not THE most popular - commentaries of the Bible), seventeeth Century:

"1. Who those were that received such honour-those who had suffered for Christ, and all who had faithfully adhered to him, not receiving the mark of the beast, nor worshipping his image; all who had kept themselves clear of pagan and papal idolatry."

Not pagan, not Catholic: First Resurrection for you.

But maybe this is not the correct interpretation. Still not a problem. Faith will grow the fruit of works. There is nobody who will have had living faith, but still no works. The two groups are the same groups. The only situation where this problem realizes itself, is if you suddenly understand that you claim to have the faith, but have no works. Do works, then, and fix the problem? No. Attempt at works will not help at all, because your faith is dead, and you simply understood it now. Get the faith. Don't sweat about the works yet. They will follow naturally. I am not absolutely certain I will face the Bema instead of the White Throne, but what I am absolutely certain of, is that the judgement is "heaven".

Your interpretation of James 2:25 is not credible in light of the immediate context of the verse (verses 24 and 26), about how *God* (not other Christians) justified Abraham and Rahab.

Christ's sacrifice was not yet in place in the time of Abraham and Rahab.

The saints who are referred to in this verse are all *beheaded*. Obviously, there have been saints throughout history who were not beheaded

The beheaded for Christ, AND those who had not worshipped the Beast.

Care to comment, Markku?

Now your butthurt is showing, too. What would make you think that if I answered your first question, I wouldn't answer your second? No need to answer; rhetorical.

Blogger Markku March 13, 2015 8:07 PM  

Would you say the same of Eastern Orthodoxy?

I have positive impression of Eastern Orthodoxy. I have not found anything particularly concerning about it. I would take communion with someone in that tradition, though I would reserve the right to change my opinion if something turns up.

Anonymous zen0 March 13, 2015 8:11 PM  

@ Foster

The saints who are referred to in this verse are all *beheaded*. Obviously, there have been saints throughout history who were not beheaded

The language is figurative in that verse. It is the book of Revelation, for goodness sake.

Blogger Noah B March 13, 2015 8:22 PM  

How can they be judged according to what is written about them in the book of life if their names don't show up there?

Just a thought here, but maybe... "you're not on the list"

Blogger Markku March 13, 2015 8:23 PM  

I say "particularly" because I am uneasy about infant baptism. But that is not enough to make the judgement that they are categorically on the outside.

Blogger Markku March 13, 2015 8:25 PM  

How can they be judged according to what is written about them in the book of life if their names don't show up there?

I didn't notice this question. Maybe my mind kind of got shut down at its stupidity.

Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the BOOKS were opened: and another book was opened, which is the BOOK of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

Books, plural. Book of life is one of them.

Anonymous Steve March 13, 2015 8:25 PM  

Markku - You go to a random Catholic communion. Chances are (that is, over 50%):

a) You are given wine
b) You are not given wine


There's always bread and wine at a Catholic Mass. Whether wine is offered to the congregation during communion is another matter - it might not be, if it's impractical due to circumstances. But it usually is.

I don't consider Catholicism Christian

Yes, Christianity didn't catch on till 1500 years or so after the Crucifixion. :-)

Blogger Markku March 13, 2015 8:26 PM  

But it usually is.

Ok, thanks.

Anonymous Varenius March 13, 2015 8:31 PM  

Steve, thanks, you explained it better than I did.

Blogger Markku March 13, 2015 8:33 PM  

Steve, thanks, you explained it better than I did.

Yep, I specifically asked about chances, and then to make absolutely sure, I redefined it as over 50% certainty. And YET, I didn't get an answer for you. Let's just say that there was an amount of temporary headache.

Anonymous Varenius March 13, 2015 8:35 PM  

Markku, is it fair then to say that your problem with Catholicism is primarily the Papacy?

Blogger Markku March 13, 2015 8:37 PM  

No, numerous distinct theological problems. The Eastern Orthodoxy might have them too, but I have seen no evidence of that. Every time I have asked, or heard someone ask, a question of the Eastern Orthodox, I have heard an answer I consider orthodox. That is not 100% certainty, but it is certainly over 50%.

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus March 13, 2015 8:40 PM  

Steve: "Yes, Christianity didn't catch on till 1500 years or so after the Crucifixion. :-)"

Why not? That's when Bibles were invented. Before then, people had books called "Bibles" but they weren't really Bibles because they had too many books, and people hadn't had the courage to throw out the books of the "Bible" that were unworthy of a modern, sophisticated readership. It was like they thought they didn't have the authority to do so, or something.

:P

Anonymous zen0 March 13, 2015 8:48 PM  

@ Markku

I say "particularly" because I am uneasy about infant baptism. But that is not enough to make the judgement that they are categorically on the outside.

That's good, because Jesus was not baptised til he was about 30. Coincidently, David was about 30 when he became King of Israel.

I think there has to be some level of cognitive volition, for the consequences of non-compliance of one's oath are quite severe.

Anonymous Varenius March 13, 2015 8:50 PM  

Markku, I think you would find other problems if you were to look more closely. The only "saving grace" might be that the Orthodox are more likely to see things as unknown/unknowable versus the Catholic tendency to minutely define everything, so there is less potential for conflict with your views. (I'm thinking of things like the nature of the Eucharist.)

Blogger Danby March 13, 2015 8:52 PM  

@Markku,
The technical language is whether communion is offered under both species.

In a Catholic understanding, one does not receive bread or wine. One is receiving Christ Himself, under the appearance of bread or wine. And since Christ Himself is the same always, whatever appearance He has, then receiving the Host or the Cup is the same act.

In some circumstances, a person who cannot receive under one species will substitute the other. Someone who suffers from Krohn's disease and cannot consume wheat, will receive under the species of wine, as an example.

Bread and wine are used for every Mass, Catholic or Orthodox, but given the logistical problems of distribution, the possibility of contagion, and the expense, it is the option of the celebrating priest whether Communion will be offered under the species of wine. It is common to do so these days, at least in the US, but in my childhood it was usually reserved for great feasts like Easter and Christmas. In some dire circumstances, bread per se may be almost unobtainable, and communion may consist of only a drop of the Precious Blood, confected from homemade wine made from stolen raisins, as Russians priests were sometimes able to do in the gulags.

Blogger Markku March 13, 2015 8:53 PM  

I might, but it doesn't affect my life right now one way or the other. So far, I have gathered data with the basic interest that I have towards ANY data. If Eastern Orthodoxy touches my life in some way, I will take a closer look then.

Anonymous Steve March 13, 2015 9:03 PM  

Markku, Varenius, you are both welcome.

Titus Didius Tacitus - Forget the Bible printing shenanigans. The real problem is that the Papacy has been getting soft for the past few centuries, what with the Koran-kissing silliness and crying about inequality and listening politely to the ravings of American lesbian nuns.

Pope Sixtus V of "While I live, every criminal must die!" was my kind of pontiff.

From the infallible source that is Wikipedia:

Sixtus proceeded with an almost ferocious severity against the prevailing lawlessness. Thousands of brigands were brought to justice: within a short time the country was again quiet and safe. It was claimed that there were more heads on spikes across the Ponte Sant'Angelo than melons for sale in the marketplace.

And today's Church frets about the "human rights" of convicted murderers. Progress, they say.

And religious were executed if they broke their vows of chastity.

That would certainly have brought a swift, but fair, conclusion to both the paedophile and militant gay entryist problems.

Christianity in general needs to rediscover its balls, crush heretics, and go on Crusade or else our grandkids will be salaaming to some foul-smelling swarthy moon god.

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus March 13, 2015 9:03 PM  

In a sealed system without immigration, all deviations like this would be flushed out of the system in time, as churches that went gay died and those that rejected the queer agenda lived, till all existing churches were reasonably healthy.

In a sealed system, "fish without a bicycle" feminism would go the same way, as the women most susceptible to anti-fertility propaganda were replaced in the next generation by sisters who were like them but less educable by man-hating lesbians. (This would also lead to some dumbing down though, as being dumb is helpful from the point of view of being ineducable.)

statz: "Be careful Rome - the barbarians are at the gate for you as well."

The Pope is ushering the barbarians through the gates. No Pope since Vatican II has really supported a contrary position.

This is even more deadly in combination with corruption, because it means that instead of the corruption being eliminated by competition, the corruption contributes to wiping away the entire native population, which is weakened and flushed away as a group.

Apart from the benefits of getting rid of whites as a group, as long as you dominate the institutions of influence you can maintain levels of corruption so high that sterility dominates wherever you rule, as long as there is enough immigration to supply you with more suckers.

Anonymous zen0 March 13, 2015 9:03 PM  

@ Titus Didius Tacitus

Why not? That's when Bibles were invented. Before then, people had books called "Bibles" but they weren't really Bibles because they had too many books, and people hadn't had the courage to throw out the books of the "Bible" that were unworthy of a modern, sophisticated readership. It was like they thought they didn't have the authority to do so, or something.

Au Contraire, dear Tacitus:


The first “canon” was the Muratorian Canon, which was compiled in A.D. 170. The Muratorian Canon included all of the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, and 3 John. In A.D. 363, the Council of Laodicea stated that only the Old Testament (along with the Apocrypha) and the 27 books of the New Testament were to be read in the churches. The Council of Hippo (A.D. 393) and the Council of Carthage (A.D. 397) also affirmed the same 27 books as authoritative.


The big change was the invention of the printing press, and the next big change was the emergence of Bible Societies at the beginning of the 19th century.

Blogger JartStar March 13, 2015 9:03 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger JartStar March 13, 2015 9:04 PM  

Catholic or Protestant we can both agree that Worthy is the Lamb!

Worthy Is the Lamb

Anonymous Cash March 13, 2015 9:06 PM  

The best part of being Catholic is the cool little statues that help sell your house!

Blogger James Dixon March 13, 2015 9:06 PM  

> Have you checked east of Rome?

East of Rome isn't really accessible where we live. :(

Anonymous Stg58 / Animal Mother March 13, 2015 9:17 PM  

...And ladies and gentlemen, that's it for tonight's episode. I hope you've enjoyed the program. Tune in next time for the next exciting edition of CatholicAttack!

Anonymous Too-Soon-ami March 13, 2015 9:22 PM  

In May of 2014 the Board asked me for a book that was clearly grounded in Scripture that we might study on pastoring our brothers and sisters in Christ who are part of the LGBT community.


Wrong response: Trying to find a book, as requested.
Right response: "They aren't our brothers and sisters in Christ, if they are part of that community." (much quicker, too)

Anonymous zen0 March 13, 2015 9:23 PM  

> Tune in next time for the next exciting edition of CatholicAttack!

Look on the bright side.....at least the sectarians are not slaughtering one another. That mantle has passed to the Muslims, and should be encouraged.

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus March 13, 2015 9:30 PM  

zen0: "Au Contraire, dear Tacitus..."

OK, but just in case it's not already clear, I was just being silly and not claiming to have authority to say if Catholic Bibles have too many books or Protestant Bibles have too few. I don't want to contribute to the usual sectarian pile-on; it was just a joke.

Anonymous zen0 March 13, 2015 9:36 PM  

Titus Didius Tacitus

it was just a joke.

You're making me feel like Sheldon Cooper here.

.... heh.

Anonymous ZhukovG March 13, 2015 9:46 PM  

Doesn't the Body of Christ have enough enemies without its various parts trying to beat each other up. Now granted it was Moldbugger who arrived first to do the devil's work. But he should have just been ignored.

Blogger Rantor March 13, 2015 9:47 PM  

@JartStar, saw a live preview of these songs at Ligonier Conference in Orlando. Great new hymns.

Blogger Rantor March 13, 2015 9:51 PM  

As for the subject at hand, our church has had a Wednesday night series on sexuality. The pastor's theme Wednesday was compassion for the LGBTQ, the need to teach them the gospel so they will turn from their sin.

Anonymous TheVillageIdiot(Ret.) March 13, 2015 9:53 PM  

How are the queers going to consummate these so call marriages?
And will they be recognize as legal in which states and what church?

DannyR

Blogger Crude March 13, 2015 9:54 PM  

Summary: What has actually changed here?

At first, nothing. In fact several of our more prominent members will mockingly crow 'But the others said our church would be destroyed and it's -still here-!' a day after this announcement. We'll experience an uptick in membership, in fact, as some LGBT activists show up and say they want to be part of a church "that accepts everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, just like Christ would". They will disappear the moment the drama of this moment passes, which should be about two weeks or a month tops.

Once everyone who actually cares about Christian teaching has left, we'll have a core lingering membership made up of political leftists who think the church makes a good way to do 'community outreach' for leftist politicians during voting season, the progressively sanctimonious, and a few people for whom the whole church is basically just a social outlet with some familiar faces. Actually preaching the gospel will slide lower and lower on our list of priorities, because the last thing a progressive wants to do is tell anyone that their religion is wrong (unless it's a religion that preaches sexual morality beyond 'no means no'). Since we'll all quietly be in agreement that actually living a life according to Christian teaching - or even worshiping God - is pretty well irrelevant and embarrassing to talk about, we'll look for other excuses to get something approximating human activity in our "communal worship space".

Eventually we'll decide political outreach is a good idea, bringing in speakers - and hopefully, attendees - to talk about left-wing political issues or, more importantly, how to attack and undermine Christians who in any way uphold orthodoxy. We'll hold something that looks something like a very general moment of silence where those in attendance can pray to God (or just think deeply, which is just as good, as is checking your cell phone) before these services. We'll try to do it afterwards too, until we notice no one sticks around for that.

Ultimately we'll notice our flagging attendance and utter unwillingness to convert anyone, and decide the space we own is better off being rented out while we find 'a more appropriate location for our services'. We will never find one, outside of possibly meeting at someone else's house every week in a very small group until they relocate out of the area for employment reasons.

Anyway, this will all take a year or two to really get underway, and we look forward to all of you joining us on the journey laid out for us. Here's to 2015 and a couple years beyond!'

Blogger Lucas Temple (a.k.a. Armenia4ever) March 13, 2015 9:54 PM  

I'm surprised there is anything left that resembles a "church" in San Francisco.

That part about expecting chastity in singleness till marriage is amusing, considering many same-sex relationships or rather random romps.

Anonymous zen0 March 13, 2015 9:58 PM  

> How are the queers going to consummate these so call marriages?

Give us a break, will ya? Do we really have to think about it?

oh damn. too late.

Blogger JartStar March 13, 2015 10:11 PM  

Rantor,

One of the finest collections of Christian music I've heard in my life, and all scripture based lyrics.

Blogger Silent Cal March 13, 2015 10:17 PM  

Catholic or Protestant we can both agree that Worthy is the Lamb!

Yes Indeed!

Anonymous Stg58 / Animal Mother March 13, 2015 10:20 PM  

Jartstar,

Excellent! Beautiful music.

Anonymous takin' a look March 13, 2015 10:29 PM  

Interesting link anybody heard of this Faris Malik before?

Blogger Danby March 13, 2015 10:35 PM  

For what it's worth, I don't believe that "moldbugger" is a real Catholic. He certainly doesn't talk like any Catholics I've ever known, and I've travelled in some pretty obscure backwaters. He's just another Feenyite (Feeny was excommunicated as a heretic) autist who thinks that membership in a very doctrinally pure organization will not only save him, but makes him better than other people. He's probably the same guy as "Rome or Die" a few months back. OR maybe he's just a troll, He certainly gets a reaction, but most people have been learning to disengage, because the sectarian shit-flinging isn't entertaining.

Anonymous zen0 March 13, 2015 10:39 PM  

> takin' a look March 13, 2015 10:29 PM
Interesting link anybody heard of this Faris Malik before?

Eunuchs are NOT homosexual, they are asexual.

What kind of shit you tryin' to pull here, takin'?

Blogger Danby March 13, 2015 10:41 PM  

@takin' a look
On the basis of the headline alone, he's just another narccisstic gay man making everything about himself.
And Jesus Ben Sirach certainly didn't think so.

Anonymous zen0 March 13, 2015 10:41 PM  

@ Danby

For what it's worth, I don't believe that "moldbugger" is a real Catholic

The only real anything he might be is a real asshole.

Anonymous takin' a look March 13, 2015 10:59 PM  

-Zen0 and Danby

Even the most narcissistic assholes can provide something to be learned from or at least refuted. I thought this was interesting and relevant to the thread.

Blogger Danby March 13, 2015 11:05 PM  

@Takin'
He admits in his 2nd 'graf that he was looking specifically to justify his homosexuality in the bible. Dishonest approach and obviously dishonest results. Eunuch is a very specific Classical Greek term with a very specific meaning, a male person who is incapable of coitus.Think about it, we know the Greeks had an extensive and precise vocabulary to describe homosexuality, they didn't need to coerce another word into service.

Anonymous takin' a look March 13, 2015 11:10 PM  

This section made my jaw drop.

Among the orthodox Christians, Tertullian said that eunuchs "repudiate marriage."64 Jerome felt that eunuchs from their mother's womb were "those of a colder nature, who do not seek lust."65 Gregory of Nazianzos (Oration 37:16-17) warned born eunuchs against being arrogant about their abstinence (with women, presumably) and at the same time against committing ritual prostitution, which had probably been a tradition among eunuchs since Babylonian times:

"Be not proud, you who are eunuchs by nature. Your abstinence is practically
involuntary. You are not tempted, and your abstention is not tested by trials.
That which is good by nature is spurious; that by deliberate choice, is laudable.
What praise is due to fire for burning? Burning is in its nature. What praise is
due to the rain for falling down? It is the Creator who makes it do so. What praise
to snow for being cold? or to the sun for shining? It shines without wanting to.
I praise that which desires what is better. Praise to you, if, born flesh, you become
spirit; if, weighed down like lead by the flesh, you take wing by the word; if, born
low, you find heaven; if, bound by flesh, you rise above the flesh.

"Since your abstention is not laudable, I ask something else of eunuchs. Do not
commit prostitution in divine matters. Having yoked yourself to Christ, do not
dishonor Christ. Perfected by the Spirit, do not make yourselves equal to the Spirit.
'If I yet sought to please men, says Paul, I would not be the slave of Christ.'
If I serve a creature, I will not be called a Christian."


Forget the author's narcissistic biases. I'd never even heard of any sort of distinction like this with regard to eunuchs. I'd always thought they were slave men who had their genitals removed so they could be around the harems and courts.

Blogger Silent Cal March 13, 2015 11:14 PM  

anybody heard of this Faris Malik before?

Scripture Twister

which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures. 2 Peter 3:16

Blogger Danby March 13, 2015 11:49 PM  

@Takin'
Eunuch != castrated
A eunuch was any man who was unable to perform coitus. Some would be castrated, some would be impotent, some few would be what we today call intersex.
The important point is that they were asexual, and hence could be trusted to be immune to some of the intrigues common in Near Eastern courts.

Anonymous Wyrd March 14, 2015 12:10 AM  

A eunuch was any man who was unable to perform coitus. Some would be castrated, some would be impotent, some few would be what we today call intersex.

I'd like a source for this assertion. Not that I consider your claim false, but all references to eunuchs I've encountered have been for those who had their meat and/or two vegetables removed.

Blogger Danby March 14, 2015 12:17 AM  

See the bliblical references above to "eunuchs from their mother's womb"
Do try to keep up.

Anonymous Wyrd March 14, 2015 12:21 AM  

My mistake. I should have been reading instead of typing. Apologies.

Anonymous dc red dogs March 14, 2015 12:39 AM  

Markku - nice to see someone else who respects Matthew Henry, a fantastically gifted writer. I am not sure you realize, however, that he wrote with fear and trembling, and did not want to be quoted - ever, by anyone - as a real authority. He was a likeable Englishman, who may have indulged himself with a little too much pride on his mild English "Presbyterian" (how he must have loved - perhaps even to an idolatrous extent - that word) dissent, and who took great relish in his criticisms of what he incorrectly (and even, perhaps, ignorantly) thought of as non-English religions - so far, so good, how can we blame him for not really knowing what was really English and what was not, being, as he was, just a humble subject of a line of libertine kings who wickedly claimed divine authority and who pragmatically brooked little dissent - and who can blame a happy and privileged Englishman for siding with other Englishmen in the great debates of his day ... but rather than hoping to be quoted 200 years later as an expert on what really happened in the Book of Revelation he would certainly have preferred to be thought of as no more - or less - than a humble and devout man who spent a lot of time in prayer and who set forth in sermons and print his humble guesses, many of which were right, but some of which had to be wrong, as he would have (joyfully )admitted.
Quick summary - Matthew Henry is not remotely reliable on the Book of Revelation, and it may be an insult to his humble Christian memory, and to the humble joy he took in making guesses, to quote him on that subject. Me and you probably aren't experts on what the Book of Revelation really means, either, but that is a different story.

Anonymous Luke March 14, 2015 12:40 AM  

"Imagine feeling this from your family or religious community: “If you stay, you must accept celibacy with no hope that you too might one day enjoy the fullness of intellectual, spiritual, emotional, psychological and physical companionship. If you pursue a lifelong partnership, you are rejected.” This is simply not working and people are being hurt. We must listen and respond."

IMO the pastor should have "responded" to homos wanting sex to unfag and find a woman to marry. For several years until she gets unhaaaaappy(or until she's had all the kids she wanted), they could then have sex.

Anonymous Monkey Poo March 14, 2015 12:40 AM  

No True ______

Anonymous Atombum March 14, 2015 12:40 AM  

O.K. It`s late Friday night. John C. Wright has a look thats` so COOL. Top Hat,Cane,Beard,and MANS` Parasol. What does Vox have? Black and white fotos of bald head like the `missing Putin`. At least Wright has a ZZ Top Song named after his Style, `Sharp Dressed Man`. C`Mon, Vox! Show us your Stlye! Lets` show the SWJs how it is done!

Anonymous Atombum March 14, 2015 12:53 AM  

Lets` make `Sir` Antony Hopkins look like the tourist that his role as `Dr. H. Lector` really is!

Blogger Eric March 14, 2015 1:13 AM  

I'm amazed they can come to this conclusion with only a passing mention of anything in the bible. Were I a congregant I'd expect such a large reversal to be grounded in theology.

Anonymous Jack Amok March 14, 2015 2:01 AM  

In May of 2014 the Board asked me for a book that was clearly grounded in Scripture that we might study on pastoring our brothers and sisters in Christ who are part of the LGBT community.

A book? Grounded in Scripture? To study? Huh. If only Christians had something like that...

Blogger Matamoros March 14, 2015 2:27 AM  

Danby For what it's worth, I don't believe that "moldbugger" is a real Catholic. He certainly doesn't talk like any Catholics I've ever known

Evidently you haven't known many Catholics as opposed to the liberals posing as Catholics. I have read his comments, and they have been good and consistent with the Faith, teaching and theology of the Church.

The whole Catholic Church is dumping, at a more or less rapidly increasing pace, the leftist feel good "catholicism" of the 1960s. The official teaching never changed, mind you, but the left's "interpretation" of it produced a lack of catechesis and understanding of what the teachings are.

Tables are being replaced with altars, the altar rails are returning, etc. It is called by some "hard identity Catholicism".

For more info on this you can check out Fr. Richard Heilman, for example.

Here are a couple links:

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2013/08/wherein-fr-z-responds-cordially-to-a-non-provocation-and-writes-about-hard-identity-catholicism/

http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/05/per-aspera-ad-astra-on-hard-identity.html#.VQPT-4hSkec

Blogger Dave March 14, 2015 4:26 AM  

Someone who desires to walk the path to Christ while being attracted to the same sex is in the most difficult position - being stuck between the LGBTQQIP2SAA community as being a "self-hater" for being celibate, & the Christian community for being "gay", celibate or not. The loneliness can be, and is, unbearable at times. And, then there's the subject of how to deal w/ the loneliness - "It is not good that the man should be alone" after all.

Blogger Eric March 14, 2015 7:52 AM  

The whole Catholic Church is dumping, at a more or less rapidly increasing pace, the leftist feel good "catholicism" of the 1960s.

Someone might want to mention that to the pope.

Anonymous Monkey Poo March 14, 2015 8:38 AM  

"Evidently you haven't known many Catholics as opposed to the liberals posing as Catholics. I have read his comments, and they have been good and consistent with the Faith, teaching and theology of the Church."

What part is consistent? The claim that Martin Luther was a "psycho evil monk rapist"? Or that all protestants are perverts after "nun booty"?

Blogger Danby March 14, 2015 10:51 AM  

@Matamoros,
I am Catholic. I've been fighting the good fight against liberalism and apostasy in liturgy committee meetings and grass roots campaigns for 30 years, in one of the more liberal Dioceses in the US. I've managed to get one traitorous priest laicized and I'm certainly not restricted to liberal Catholics in acquaintance.

I've been a reader and occasional commenter on Fr.Z's blog for years, and I genuinely admire the man. Try to imagine him saying the sorts of things that moldbugger or Rome or Die have said in this forum. Not astonishing things, consoling things, unpopular things, but abusive things, vituperative things, and insane things.

Blogger Foster March 14, 2015 11:14 AM  

Regarding Moldbugger's claim that Luther was a rapist, I have never read anything that would support this claim. Although Luther married a former nun, there's no evidence I know of that it wasn't a consensual union. He may have shown a careless disregard for the well-being of Turk-besieged Christendom, he *was* a bigamist, but I don't think Luther was a rapist. Why do you believe so, Moldbugger?

Markku, I retract my criticism of your interpretation of verses 4-5, although I do not share it because I don't think it is the most natural reading, that being, that the verses are speaking of a single class of people. Especially in light of verse 15, "And if anyone was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire," I say it's twisting the text to say that the members of the second resurrection written in the book of life is an empty set. It would be more natural under your interpretation for the verse to say, "None of these were written in the book of life, and they were cast into the fire."

Regarding James 2:25, if Abraham and Rahab's situation is not applicable to the Christian, then why is James, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, applying it to the Christian's situation? All you're giving me is reflex "Old Testament reference = not applicable to me as a Chrstian." But James *is* applying it to you.

Anyway, you were correct, Markku, I really was asking because I could not imagine how someone could escape the import of verse 12. I disagree with you for the reasons stated above, as well as from the (to my mind) absurdity of suggesting that for at least a thousand years between 500 and 1500 there were virtually no Christians on the planet. Catholics are Christians. We preserved the book whose meaning Protestants pervert. Do you think it is a coincidence that atheism was unheard of in the Christian world prior to the Reformation? Polygamy, Gay marriage, Contraception and Abortion, It's all part of the decline. But Rev 20 is not so damning for your case as I had thought before we engaged, so thank you.

Blogger JDC March 14, 2015 11:21 AM  

That's the first I've ever heard of Luther being a rapist...drunkard, anti-semite, foul-mouthed, antinomian perhaps...but never rapist. In fact, Luther helped a group of refugee nuns escape, and over a period of about a year found homes / husbands for all of them...except Katie - who spurned every suitor presented. She declined all offers and stated that Luther was the only one she would marry...and he agreed (even to the angst of his friends who thought he went too far with this clergy getting married idea). It is rumored that he married her only out of obligation, and his own guilt over his part in the mistreatment of RCC's in Germany. Against all odds however the marriage worked. He dearly loved her and had many children. Moldbugger...you should retract your claim or else sequester yourself to the penalty box and sit in the comfy chair as punishment for your false accusations

Anonymous Anon1 March 14, 2015 11:22 AM  

Danby, meet Foster.

also Danby... get on Twitter sometime.

"abusive things, vituperative things, and insane things."

Blogger Markku March 14, 2015 11:23 AM  

I say it's twisting the text to say that the members of the second resurrection written in the book of life is an empty set.

It's not empty. There's at least those who died before Christ was cruficied, and that is already a huge set. Then, there's antediluvians as a subset of that.

Regarding James 2:25, if Abraham and Rahab's situation is not applicable to the Christian, then why is James, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, applying it to the Christian's situation?

Because works apply, just not the way you think. It is faith that justifies, and dead faith is not faith. Works are its necessary evidence, like the fruits tell if the tree is good. If the tree is not good, then gluing fruits to it is going to do no good. There is no circumstance, where the answer to the problem "maybe I'm not saved" is "do more works". The tree - the faith - is the way it is.

Do you think it is a coincidence that atheism was unheard of in the Christian world prior to the Reformation?

No.

Blogger Markku March 14, 2015 11:28 AM  

Or, well, actually that depends on the exact meaning of "coincidence". Do you mean "completely unrelated to each other, even by indirect paths, but purely random", or "not directly related"? If former, then no. If latter, then yes.

Anonymous Beau March 14, 2015 12:07 PM  

I'm surprised there is anything left that resembles a "church" in San Francisco.

That part about expecting chastity in singleness till marriage is amusing, considering many same-sex relationships or rather random romps.


Abstinence before marriage (between a man and a woman) is still taught in San Francisco. Not everyone has given up.

Blogger Matamoros March 14, 2015 2:25 PM  

Danby I am Catholic. I've been fighting the good fight against liberalism and apostasy in liturgy committee meetings and grass roots campaigns for 30 years

Good! Thank you for your part. Each of us must win back the Faith from its denial and watering down; if only to save our own souls.

Within the Catholic Church there are many mansions, as you will. The mission and outlook of the Dominicans is different than that of the Augustinians, who are different from the Jesuits, etc.

There is a place for soft evangelism, and a place for hard identity Catholicism. A place to not ruffle too many feathers, and a place to be blunt about the actual teachings of the Church; and history of other groups.

Moldbugger is being pretty blunt, but probably not far off the mark. Never heard that Luther was a rapist; but he violated a woman who was committed to God - that can certainly be considered a type of rape.

Is bluntness always the best strategy, no. Is it needed, yes.

Within the realm of the Catholic Church, granting that one believes what is required to be believed to be a Catholic, there is a lot that can be argued over many subjects, approached in numerous ways and presented in differing mileaus while remaining a loyal and faithful Catholic.

In regards to conversions, many more Protestants convert to a hard identity Catholicism, than to a soft identity approach. Always have.

Blogger Foster March 14, 2015 3:11 PM  

"It is faith that justifies, and dead faith is not faith. Works are its necessary evidence..." The way you are using the words, in this you are in keeping with Catholic doctrine.

So you say works are the evidence of one's faith. I say works are an integral part of one's faith. We both agree that an adult nominal Christian who does not do good works will not enter into heaven. Do I have that right?

"No." You are mistaken. The reason why there are several known atheists in the Islamic world before the Reformation, and in the Pagan world, but none in the Catholic world until the Reformation, is that Islam and Protestantism both tend to say that God transcends human reason and applying the tools of philosophy, namely logic, or "scholastic accretions" and "pagan philosophy" as Protestants would say, is not a valid way to develop theology. But a God who does not keep faith with the rational world he has created, is incomprehensible and a fiction. A human being told that philosophy and theology have nothing to do with each other will usually choose philosophy, because it is easier to deny what your Father told you, than to deny what you see in front of your nose. I suggest you read Erasmus and Luther's discourses on Free Will, and see with whom you end up agreeing.


Blogger Foster March 14, 2015 3:29 PM  

"It's not empty. There's at least those who died before Christ was cruficied, and that is already a huge set."

Markku, are you saying that the OT Patriarchs, Moses, David, Daniel, etc. were judged according to their works? But by your own standards, then they should have landed in hell too, since no one can get to heaven based on their works, NT or OT, no?

Blogger Markku March 14, 2015 4:02 PM  

Markku, are you saying that the OT Patriarchs, Moses, David, Daniel, etc. were judged according to their works?

Yes, and salvation was possible due to the sin offering system, which took a loan from the grace that would come to the world through Christ's sacrifice. The sin offerings erase the evil works in that system, which is no longer in place.

"No." You are mistaken.

From your answer it seems to me that you read my response the wrong way around.

Blogger James Dixon March 14, 2015 4:04 PM  

> But by your own standards, then they should have landed in hell too, since no one can get to heaven based on their works, NT or OT, no?

That's why the sacrifices at the temple were necessary, and why it was necessary to send a savior. The fact that the people alive at the time he arrived rejected him is immaterial. He still fulfilled his role, and thus the original covenant.

Blogger Markku March 14, 2015 4:19 PM  

So you say works are the evidence of one's faith. I say works are an integral part of one's faith. We both agree that an adult nominal Christian who does not do good works will not enter into heaven. Do I have that right?

It sounds like you describe it accurately. In specific, I don't think the works play any part in salvation. The question is only, do you have faith. But faith happens to lead to producing works, just like being a good tree leads to producing good fruit, which was Jesus's analogy. We can, and should, draw conclusions about who should be in the congregation based on works. Since we cannot see the faith.

But the important difference comes when you realize that you have a problem with works, and fear it is severe enough that you might be going to hell. Just doing more works is not going to help the problem at all. The tree is either living or dead, and under no circumstances will it help to glue fruits to it. If you realize such a thing, then you have to ask whether you have been born again at all. That is the question. Not the amount of your works.

Blogger Punzdeleon March 14, 2015 5:00 PM  

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. I may (Spirit willing) use this Sunday in our adult study of John 16:4-16. Your point, "Notice in particular the gentle and understanding tone in which the missive is written. That is the insidious whisper of Hell." will be the main focus.

Blogger Markku March 14, 2015 5:27 PM  

I like to use this, more succinct phrase:

Hear Satan woo

Anonymous zen0 March 14, 2015 10:30 PM  


Young's Literal Translation

John 9:4

it behoveth me to be working the works of Him who sent me while it is day; night doth come, when no one is able to work: --

Just sayin'

When is the night?

Anonymous Discard March 14, 2015 10:32 PM  

When all the Christians have left the mainstream protestant churches, the clergy get to sell off the assets and give themselves very generous pensions.

Blogger WildClaw March 15, 2015 12:14 AM  

So you say works are the evidence of one's faith. I say works are an integral part of one's faith. We both agree that an adult nominal Christian who does not do good works will not enter into heaven. Do I have that right?

If a disabled man cannot work or is no longer able to work good deeds, but still has faith, then he will be saved. (Let's ignore the fact that even disabled men can spread God's love and message)
Likewise, if a man has the chance and ability to do works but time and time again refuses to, then it is evidence of a lack of true faith.

It's the modern leftist Protestant churches that spew the : tolerance, nothing-but-love, and faith without actions kind of feel-good nonsense. I understand that it will have more appeal, but it's kinda compromising the Bible's meanings.

Blogger WildClaw March 15, 2015 12:15 AM  

@Discard, they'll sell it to the Muslim immigrants who will then convert it into a mosque.

Blogger Foster March 15, 2015 12:56 AM  





"From your answer it seems to me that you read my response the wrong way around."

I understood you perfectly. I happen to believe the connection between the rise of atheism and the rise of Protestantism in the West is direct. Both historically exhibit a tendency to drive God out of the secular world. For this same reason many of the Eastern heresies were adopted by the Emperors in Constantinople. A God who is imminent is one to whom an account must be rendered.

And of course, once doubt arises about the nature of God's revelation, it is no great step to move on to God himself.

Blogger Foster March 15, 2015 12:59 AM  

"I didn't notice this question. Maybe my mind kind of got shut down at its stupidity.

Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the BOOKS were opened: and another book was opened, which is the BOOK of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

Books, plural. Book of life is one of them."

I didn't notice this answer. Perhaps my own mind was similarly shut down, since the most natural way to read the text is that things are written about those being judged in BOTH books, implying there were things written about them in the book of life, as I originally said. The snark does not pay.

Anonymous Anon1 March 15, 2015 9:07 AM  

dear Danby,

Welcome to the interwebs!

you did recieve your AOL cd-rom presumably?

now say goodbye to your excuses.

Blogger JDC March 15, 2015 9:31 AM  

St. Augustine
"O dear Lord, I want to make a pledge to you: I want truly to die to myself so that you might live in me. I myself want to be silent, so that you might speak within me. I want to be still within myself so that you might act within me."

Blogger Markku March 15, 2015 11:01 AM  

"I didn't notice this answer. Perhaps my own mind was similarly shut down, since the most natural way to read the text is that things are written about those being judged in BOTH books, implying there were things written about them in the book of life, as I originally said. The snark does not pay."

No, there's "the books" (βιβλίον), same as in Daniel: "Dan 7:10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened."

Then, Revelation mentions yet another book, not previously mentioned in the Old Testament (but mentioned by Paul in Philippians): The Book of Life. Look at the odd phrasing. The books; and another book. The Greek is similar*. Literally: "and scrolls were opened and another scroll was opened which is of life". What is called βιβλία, as per Daniel, contains the deeds. What is called βιβλίον τῆς ζωῆς contains the final judgement, whether it is resurrection or the lake of fire.

Again, not my invention. Age-old Protestant theology. Matthew Henry:

The books were opened. What books? The books of God's omniscience, who is greater than our consciences, and knows all things (there is a book of remembrance with him both for good and bad); and the book of the sinner's conscience, which, though formerly secret, will now be opened. And another book shall be opened-the book of the scriptures, the statute-book of heaven, the rule of life. This book is opened as containing the law, the touchstone by which the hearts and lives of men are to be tried. This book determines matter of right; the other books give evidence of matters of fact. Some, by the other book, called the book of life, understand the book of God's eternal counsels; but that does not seem to belong to the affair of judgment: in eternal election God does not act judicially, but with absolute sovereign freedom. 5. The cause to be tried; and that is, the works of men, what they have done and whether it be good or evil. By their works men shall be justified or condemned; for though God knows their state and their principles, and looks chiefly at these, yet, being to approve himself to angels and men as a righteous God, he will try their principles by their practices, and so will be justified when he speaks and clear when he judges.

*καὶ βιβλία ἠνοίχθησαν καὶ ἄλλο βιβλίον ἠνοίχθη ὅ ἐστιν τῆς ζωῆς

Anonymous Freddy March 15, 2015 6:57 PM  

Regarding interpreting Revelations, why not

http://www.preteristarchive.com/StudyArchive/k/kik-marcellus.html ?

Blogger JCclimber March 16, 2015 9:36 AM  

The Book of Life is a separate book from the "books".
The Book of Life is mentioned by Moses in the Old Testament in Exodus 32.
and by David in Psalms 69.

The "books" are the recording of all the things which you have done in your life, your thoughts, that are the record of you. Think of them as massive hard drives recording your information. By what is written in these books, you will be judged. Better hope that you've let Jesus use His bloods as eraser fluid on the sins in those books. This is why these books are opened during the judgment.

The Book of Life records names, the names of those saved by Jesus' sacrifice, which is from Adam to the last person whose name is recorded before Revelation 22:11 puts away the pen.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts