You really think Jesus is going to be courteous when one stands before Him at the white throne?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Jesus and Jenner
- Thread starter Aaron
- Start date
I think you all are missing the point.
When we meet God at the appointed time, the truth will be crystal clear to all. Every kneel shall bow. Every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.
No one will be demanding or expecting any courtesies from God - especially sinful ones. No pronoun specificities. No nothing.
Bruce Jenner will not even be selfishly thinking about "Caitlyn" and how "she" is to be addressed.
He will have much deeper things on his mind and heart - depending on his relationship with Christ.
When we meet God at the appointed time, the truth will be crystal clear to all. Every kneel shall bow. Every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.
No one will be demanding or expecting any courtesies from God - especially sinful ones. No pronoun specificities. No nothing.
Bruce Jenner will not even be selfishly thinking about "Caitlyn" and how "she" is to be addressed.
He will have much deeper things on his mind and heart - depending on his relationship with Christ.
Didn't realize that we were standing at the white throne. At that point it is too late to make changes. Even there, gender confusion is not the real issue.
The original question was "Would Christ speak to "Caitlyn" Jenner as a man, or as a woman?"
I answered that. What's the problem?
I am not standing at the white throne. I will go out on a limb and say that Jenner will be.
I will agree with you that being mentally ill is not sin. HOWEVER, the Bible clearly tells us that homosexuality is a sin and those that dress as the other gender are being sinful so I don't think that God sees this as a "mental illness".
Matt 3:7 "O generation of vipers," - I wonder if that what those folks wanted Jesus to call them.
I don't follow Jenner (or any other celebrity) closely, but I know he has asserted that he is not "gay" in the past. He - and someone who hopes to transform into a woman - is interested in women.
That jibes with other men I have met over the years who are attempting to transform to women, it is not because they are homosexual. It appears to be a faulty mental perception of what it "feels like" to be a certain gender, based on traditional gender roles.
I wonder how Jenner is meant to "go and sin no more"; what I mean by that is "what would that look like in this scenario"?
A similar question could be posed re my own situation: I am a remarried divorcee with children only from my second marriage. Assuming as some Christians do that what I have done is sinful, how am I to "go and sin no more": does that mean, for example, putting away my second wife and declaring my children illegitimate in the hope I can be reconciled with my first spouse?
God created Bruce Jenner a man.
No. See Matthew 19.
Regarding the name issue, Mark Dever's 9Marks Ministries has a Dear Abby sort of feature on its website, written by Jonathan Leeman who is editorial director of 9Marks and an elder at Capitol Hill Baptist Church. Leeman shared several months ago that:
www.9marks.org/mailbag/45/
I think we will all be there. That's where the "book of life" is opened. I think it corresponds to the passage in Matthew 25 where Jesus separates the sheep from the goats. In both places, we (both righteous and unrighteous) are judged according to our deeds.
Hogwash. Would he have referred to the woman at the well as Mrs. Present Cohabiter, if that is what she preferred, though the truth was something else?
Christ deals with people on the basis of truth.
Courtesy?
Hear Evangelist to Christian in The Pilgrim's Progress. "Civility, notwithstanding his simpering looks, he is but a hypocrite and cannot help thee."
The reason is, because there is no such thing as a tranny, and a man with a man is not a marriage regardless of their words and the foolishness finding its way into the statutes.
Yes, although that would be a strange name. Moreover, the truth WAS that she was presently cohabitating with someone who was not her husband. Her greatest need - her core need - was that she needed the living water of Jesus. Her marital history and living situation were not the primary issue.
Truth and courtesy are not opposites, nor contradictory.
I agree, but you're saying courtesy is to yield to one's illusions, and not to deal with them according to the truth.
*sigh* The point is, the MRS. whatever the cohabiter's name was. He would not speak to her as if she were married to the man if that is what she had wanted or thought she had needed.
And the truth is that Bruce is a man regardless of his illusions and the mutilations he does to his body.
Because she was a sinner, manifest by her adultery.
And yet it was the issue on which Jesus dealt with her, and that found itself recorded in the Scripture. I think neither Jesus nor the Spirit were straining at a gnat.
Soooo, the point is. No Jesus would not yield one iota to Bruce's illusions, nor refer to him by any feminine misnomer.
One starts at the place one believes the hearer to be. Then move on from there.
That's an extremely shallow view of her situation.
Since women did not have the ability to divorce, she had been divorced by five husbands and the man with whom she lived did not respect her enough to marry her. Unless a woman gave themselves over to prostitution, it was quite difficult for a woman to live in society without a man.
What we see is a woman who had a long history of being discarded by men (possibly for good reason, possibly not), who felt worthless.
She was astounded by their conversation because (1) Jesus was speaking to her, a woman; (2) Jesus was speaking to her, a Samaritan; (3) Jesus was speaking to her, an outcast in her own community; (4) and Jesus, as a prophet who knew all about her, still wanted to talk with her with respect and consideration.
Not a gnat, but to demonstrate to her that she could be accepted by God even in the midst of her terrible circumstances. She did not have to live in that diminished situation any longer.
No matter how much you think you have made your point, you have not - at least with me - since you don't seem to have a feel for what was going on in John 4.
I guess you can imagine anything you want. Tying to what is revealed in the narrative is another thing.