President Trump is pissed with Taylor Swift!
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (168)
sorted by:
I used that one because at least some interpretations say that the point why Jesus didn't condemn her was that there weren't any impartial witnesses to her sin. The people who brought her to him were trying to trap him. So perhaps it wasn't so much about forgiving her sin as it was the lack of that kind of proof for her sin which would have stood in a court of mere humans because the only witnesses present (at the court) were biased.
So, if you combine that with that part of the sermon on the mount: “Do not judge others, and you will not be judged. For you will be treated as you treat others. The standard you use in judging is the standard by which you will be judged. And why worry about a speck in your friend’s eye when you have a log in your own? How can you think of saying to your friend, ‘Let me help you get rid of that speck in your eye,’ when you can’t see past the log in your own eye? Hypocrite! First get rid of the log in your own eye; then you will see well enough to deal with the speck in your friend’s eye” (Matthew 7:1–3, NLT)
I don't know, perhaps avoid jumping to conclusion based on what you see on MSM, social media, and so on? How much do we really know of any of those people? Sure, some like the Clintons seem to have so many incidences in their past that they can't be innocents or even close to it in any way or form, but with people like Swift what we see is mostly Taylor Swift, the trademark, not so much Taylor Swift, the person. Maybe they are alike, or maybe Taylor Swift, the person, is somebody who is mostly just doing what her handlers tell her to do, and her public character is more of an act played by an actress than it is the real her. There doesn't seem to be all that much actual proof pointing towards either direction. If her public persona is an act recommended, or pushed, on her she certainly is guilty of at least greed, but would that make her evil?
Jesus said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." He was ok with stoning her to death, as it is written in the Old Testament, BUT ... he was making a point.
One by one, they each dropped their stone and walked away.
The point is: How can YOU punish a sinner when you are also a sinner, yourself?
IMO, the purpose of Jesus was to deal with the fundamental problem that His people had a hard time following The Law, completely.
God gave His people free will. This means that they will make choices that are not what God really wants, but He made them the way they are, so what to do?
First, His people were not doing what He wanted them to do, so He taught them a lesson by having a flood.
But they still sinned.
So, He made a special promise with one man, Abram/Abraham, to bless his specific lineage, in the idea that this particular family would do as they should, due to this special, more personal relationship with God.
God wants His people to not only do the right thing, but to UNDERSTAND what the right thing is, and to WANT to do the right thing. He doesn't want robots with no free will. What good is doing the right thing if you have no other choice?
But they still sinned. Problem was, they didn't fully understand what sin was.
So, He sent Moses to write down The Law. Still, many sinned.
The OT says that people must die when they sin.
Combined with free will, this is a problem.
So, God came to Earth in the form of Jesus to wipe away the death penalty that so many of His people had built up over their lifetimes, by dying Himself, for them. He served their death penalty.
This wiped away the OT death penalty for His people who were living at the time. It maintained the OT rule that sin must be punished by death, but that penalty was served by Jesus. It also set a new rule.
Sin was no longer punished by death in the current world. Instead, sinners will have a lower rank in the Kingdom of Heaven, or not get in at all.
It makes it easier to follow The Law. One can even fall off the wagon, and get back on track. This is a good thing for people who are imperfect, as we all are. But there is still a penalty for sin, having to do with Heaven.
In 1 John, it says that sin is the transgression of The Law. That is what sin is. It is not something that we don't like. It is simply transgressing The Law.
In Matthew, Jesus says that those who follow and teach The Law will have a high rank in Heaven, and those who evade and teach the evasion of The Law will have a low rank.
The point is to do what is right because you KNOW what to do and WANT to do it (which is what is meant by following The Law).
That is what God wants in the Kingdom of Heaven: People who follow The Law, because they understand it and want to do the right thing.
Should a sin, like adultery, be punished with death, as the OT says? If so, then those holding the stones and ready to dish out the punishment should also be killed because they are also sinners.
Eventually, almost everyone gets wiped out, and what is the point in that?
I realize this is a different perspective than what mainstream churches push, but then they have a lot of things wrong, and this perspective fits the story we read in the Bible.