Letters
An 'instructional aide'
Many advocates of gay marriage claim that Jesus never spoke about homosexuality, an observation based on the Bible. Do the Gospels actually contain all that Jesus said during three years of public ministry?
Gospel passages state that Jesus taught large crowds for up to three days at a time, but the teachings are not recorded. Other biblical passages mention that Jesus gave commandments to his apostles, including orders to his apostles to teach all nations to obey everything he had commanded them. The Bible doesn't name those commandments.
During the first 400 years of Christianity, there was no Bible. The teachings of Jesus were spread by preaching, beginning with the apostles, as found in 2 Peter 3:1-2, "...I have aroused your sincere mind by way of reminder; that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandments of the Lord and Savior through your apostles."
The apostles (including Paul and Jude, biblically) taught that homosexual acts constitute a serious sin. Those teachings were not their own; they came directly from Jesus himself.
It must be understood that the Bible is not meant to be a catechism. It is a book assembled by the Catholic Church in the 5th Century to be an instructional aide for Catholics. The commandments of Jesus not contained in the Bible are found in the catechism of the Catholic Church, the church that Jesus and the apostles founded in order to preserve and uphold their teachings until Jesus comes again.
Mike Martin, Farmington
Advertisement
Displaying comments, from newest to oldest
verified Not so, Tracy and FC, Of all
Not so, Tracy and FC,
Of all the ancient writings we have, there are more copies of the books that make up the bible than any other ancient manuscripts. Originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, the level at which these documents have been preserved is astounding, especially when compared to other ancient texts. From the oldest manuscripts to the newest, they are virtually the same.
Those manuscripts have not been written and re-written. The only issue, if you can call it that, is when the bible is translated into other languages from the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, especially when attempting to do a word for word translation. The other factor is that over time, languages change. This is especially true of the English language. Words that were common to the English language in the 1600's (when the King James Version of the bible was translated) are either not used today, or have taken on differenct meanings over time. New translations are an attempt to deal with this natural phenomenon, and the better translations are those which include scholars from a variety of denominations (they tend to be less bias).
But to say that the Bible has been written, chapters deleted and re-written is just not true. BTW, the "chapter" and "verse" divisions are not in the original manuscripts. They were added to modern translations for reference purposes only and are not considered part of the text.
John A. Chick
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -- Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Colonel Charles Yancey (January 6, 1816)
Excellent post.
Excellent post.
verified Mike - Look to our history.
Mike -
Look to our history. People migrated to America to escape the prosecution of religious tyranny.
And you wish to reverse this why????
------------------------------------------
When I was a young Sailor - I drank like a Sailor, fought like a Sailor, and screwed like a Sailor. Now that I am old and wise - I have a few scars, but many fond memories.
Veritas, that may have been
Veritas, that may have been true 300 years ago, but really, how many now come because of religious persecution? GIve us your tired, your poor, your humbled masses waiting to get a free handout...there is so much corrpuption in the way people are allowed into this country, we don't control our borders with any certainty and then we have to give them free care once they are here....but exactly what did your comment have to do with the LTTE?
verified Stick to the subject,
Stick to the subject, Robert. Your red herring of uncontrolled borders and free care serves what purpose?
America is NOT a theocracy. The author of the LTTE need not impose his religious views on others.
------------------------------------------
When I was a young Sailor - I drank like a Sailor, fought like a Sailor, and screwed like a Sailor. Now that I am old and wise - I have a few scars, but many fond memories.
thats funny, asking me to
thats funny, asking me to stick to the subject after you were the one who oroginally veered off course with the lame comment about persecution (hint, you spelled it wrong).
verified and speaking of correct
and speaking of correct spelling bobby, what does "oroginally" mean? People in glass houses......
verified It allows bobby to argue
It allows bobby to argue against your point by making a completely irrelevant point. Then your sucked into arguing his point instead of the topic at hand. Congrats, veritas for not following in his well recognized trap.
verified Show me in the Constitution
Show me in the Constitution of the United States, or the Constitution of the State of Maine, where the government is given the authority to redefine marraige, and I'll show you the First Amendment, and Article 3 of Maine's Constitution, where government is specifically prohibited from making any laws regarding religion. Marriage is, and always has been, an institution ordained by God, hence the terms "holy matrimony" and the "sacriment of marriage". It will remain so regardless of what you or I think, or any law that is passed by any governing body.
This is not about rigthts. Marriage is not a right. If the State wishes to afford gay couples the same protections and benefits afforded married couples, fine. Just don't call it marriage.
John A. Chick
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -- Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Colonel Charles Yancey (January 6, 1816)
John, I've been saying what
John, I've been saying what you just said for a long time, but the gay/lesbian alliance simply will not meet us halfway. I still say that, if the Civil Union Laws have loopholes that are detrimental to the same-sex partners, then the Civil Union laws are what should be changed, not the definition of Marriage. Unfortuanately, the gays/lesbians have the attitude of "It's our way or the highway", and they will not compromise.
"The democracy will cease to exist when the government takes from those who would work and gives to those who would not." - Thomas Jefferson.
This is wrong marriage was a
This is wrong marriage was a civil law that was set up as a contract for the division of property nothing more. If marriage is a religious contract how can two athiests get married? From what I have read in history books the cost of marriage to the vatican was so great that the ruling was made in the 1100's that priests could not marry. It seems when a priest died all his wealth went to the family and not the church.
verified Sorry jchick Your very words
Sorry jchick
Your very words proves you wrong.
By stating "Holy Matrimony" - your phrase implies there exists also matrimony which is bereft of supernatural 'Holiness' - but is worldly natural.
Same thing with 'Sacrament of Matrimoney" - that also logically implies that Matrimony also exists in the non-sacramental form.
Matrimony in, and of, itself, is that relationship which ideally exists between two loving, committed, persons.
And you surely know it doesn't take marriage to reproduce; nor must reproduction result from marriage. It's always been about contract and property.
------------------------------------------
When I was a young Sailor - I drank like a Sailor, fought like a Sailor, and screwed like a Sailor. Now that I am old and wise - I have a few scars, but many fond memories.
verified I agree with what you are
I agree with what you are saying, but , let me play devil's advocate. "So really, it could be argued that the state is showing preferance to one religion by limiting marriage to heterosexual marriage" If the State limits marriage between two people, is it not limiting the religions that believe in polygamy?
verified Sorry - Marriage was a
Sorry - Marriage was a 'Property Covenant" long before Religion got it's fingers into it.
------------------------------------------
When I was a young Sailor - I drank like a Sailor, fought like a Sailor, and screwed like a Sailor. Now that I am old and wise - I have a few scars, but many fond memories.
The Bible was written,
The Bible was written, chapters delete and rewritten again. The biggest teaching from Jesus was that of love............not unjust unfair judgement.
That's right, Mike Martin!
That's right, Mike Martin! It's a book! Written and re-written. A guide.
verified Huh? I thought we were
Huh? I thought we were governed by the Constitution.
It is the undauntable thought, my friend. The one that says, "I'm right!" ~Bobby Sands
verified You are correct. And nothing
You are correct. And nothing in the Constitution of the United States or the State of Maine Constitution authorizes the government to redefine marriage. In fact, one could argue that the First Amendment protects the religious institution of marriage from government interference.
John A. Chick
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -- Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Colonel Charles Yancey (January 6, 1816)
verified Marriage is already a
Marriage is already a government institution, not one owned by Christians. You may get married in a church, but it will be dissolved in front of a judge. If your church doesn't want to recognize it, fine but as long as the state legislates, licenses, and oversees marriages it will be a civil matter and not one that can be ruled by religion.
It is the undauntable thought, my friend. The one that says, "I'm right!" ~Bobby Sands
Nothing says it can't either.
Nothing says it can't either.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Most Popular Today
verified on "J. Ziehm: LePage forgetting his childhood"
Ernest, No I don't have
Ernest,
No I don't have family that can help me. In fact not only am I raising my own children but I am also taking care of an ill parent. My son is special needs and there are no day cares that will take him with his needs so I have multiple barriers. I have tried to work and lost jobs because I was constantly called by the schools to get my son or to go to take care of a situation with him. Employers are not going to work with a person that needs constant time off to go to medical appointments with a child when there is such high unemployment and many people competing for the same jobs. If I could, I would work, but finding child care is impossible and finding a job that will work around the situation I am in has been impossible to date but I haven't given up.
verified on "P. Nachman: Confidence probably misplaced"
First do...
First do.....?
You've got to do things simultaneously. We are capable of 'multi-tasking, I believe.
Old proverb - "Pray to God, but keep rowing to shore."
verified on "Local schools stand to get more state money for education"
Youre half correct here.
Youre half correct here. Public Schools are a reason private schools thrive. But the private schools in Maine are hurting right now. Not because of the curriculum or the performance (they outperform public education by miles) but because of the economy. St. Doms will accept almost anyone, probably even avowed athiests if they have the $$. This is sad.
I do know there are Christian Schools that are top-level adacemically that are not at all expensive, and the best part is that they still hold the students and parents to the mission statement of a true Christian School. That involves active parental involvement and family-centered Christ-centered living (notice not "God" as that can mean anything to anybody). But this is one reason when combined with the economy that they are hurting right now. The only upside is that the student to teacher ratio is extremely good. No public school can tough the Christian Academies in this area, and the tuition is surprisingly low.
Hebron Academy and St. Doms are just flat out expensive... too expensive for all but the financially cozy...
In order to make comments, you must verify your account.
In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your profile. A member of our staff will call you to verify this information. To join in, fill out your user profile completely and check the box "please verify my status." We'll get back to you within one business day to verify your account.
Login or create an account here.
Our policy prohibits comments that are:
- Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
- Excessively foul and/or vulgar
- Inappropriately sexual
- Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
- Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
- Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned.