Critical Church-Hate Structures: NY Times Declares War on Seventh Commandment
“The conservative Baptist church attended by the accused Atlanta gunman expelled him from its congregation Sunday morning, saying he is no longer considered a “regenerate believer in Jesus Christ.” Washington Post
“The statement on Friday said the church had begun the process of “church discipline” to remove Mr. Long from its membership.” NY Times
“The fear of temptation the killer is reported to have had was born decades before his birth. Absolute moral ideals of virginity….have long been linked to conservative white Christian attempts at what is...popularly known as purity culture...The Asian women murdered in Atlanta were an explicit threat to the purported ideal. ” New York Times
27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery (Mt. 5)
“But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn” (1 Cor. 7:9)
“His disciples said to Him, “If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry” (Mt. 19:10).
---------------------------------------------
If the New York Times knew these verses existed in the Bible, they would shriek to exhaustion, demand the Government declare a state of emergency, and ban the Bible from all public libraries. If the New York Times’ favorite Revs (the Rev Keller, the Bush War-Whisperer Rev Peter Wehner, and now also Swami-Rev David Brooks) knew these verses came out of Jesus’ mouth, they would demand an overnight re-translation of the Bible. Because, what do you see here, but the language of violence (think modern hate or phobia) directed against “alleged” impurity. Indeed, the Church Father, Origen, took these verses literally and mutilated himself in order to purge himself of lust. Why are preachers so afraid of such language today? The New York Times would accuse them of driving teen suicide by causing self-loathing. You would not even think of using such language to refer to --and no need, because THAT never has been and never will be an issue among Christians, any more than cannibalism.
Do you see how Jesus expounds and amplifies the 7th Commandment? But how, you say, do you get from “do not commit adultery” to “the lustful eye”? What does the 7th Commandment have to do with “purity,” or, as the New York Times calls it, “purported (alleged) ideals” of purity? Or “impurity,” for that matter? What does divorce have to do with lust? What does purity have to do with the violence of plucking out eyes or cutting off limbs. Earlier in the same chapter Jesus said, “Blessed are the pure in heart” (5:8). “Blessed are the peacemakers” (5:9). This is the Jesus the world loves--”pure” as in pure motives, notions of justice, peace, mercy etc. But this--this is the language of paranoid schizophrenic psychosis. These are words of self-loathing misogyny and hate--there would have been LOVE NOT HATE signs all over Jerusalem. How do you get from “Blessed” to the violence against “purported” impurity that Jesus now attaches to the 7th Commandment. NOTE:
1. If you don’t see verses 28-32 flowing out of the 7th Commandment (v. 27), nothing you read here will make sense.
2. If you question that Jesus grounds “purity” in the 7th Commandment, nothing here will make sense.
3. If you question that the 7th Commandment is the sum total of the Bible’s teaching on marriage and purity, nothing here will make sense.
4. If you question that the 7th Commandment commands you to be pure, nothing here will make sense.
5. If you question that the 7th Commandment forbids lust, nothing here will make sense.
6. If you question that the 7th Commandment forbids fornication, nothing will make sense here.
7. If you question that the 7th Commandment is not the root and origin of the Bible’s teaching on (as the Times calls it) “purity culture,” nothing here will make sense.
8. If you question that Jesus’ language about “plucking” and “cutting” can be associated with a person’s attempt to comply with the 7th Commandment, nothing will make sense here.
What does this have to do with the New York Times’ war on Church “purity culture?” Why have the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Atlantic gone on the warpath as soon as they discovered the Atlanta murderer’s race, gender, and religion? Because religion (biblical purity) is seen as the remaining obstacle to LGBT (genderology masquerading as race). As everyone knows by now, he was in constant biblical therapy to deal with unbridled lust (Philip of Hesse--Exception Clause Syndrome), and, unable to do so, he followed Origen and sought relief in violence against the objects of his lusts (the “gender-workers” of these parlors--right there in broad daylight in that respectable shopping mall owned by Brother Deacon of the church). Why did he murder the women? Because he could not meet the “purported ideals” of biblical purity culture. This is why “purported purity” is so dangerous. What provoked this murderer to commit murder? His inability to meet the impossible demands of purity culture. Like Philip of Hesse, he found the demands of the 7th Commandment an impossible burden, and sought “a way of escape” outside of Scripture in order to cope with it. Which is precisely, The New York Times argues, what LGBTQ is. A relief valve suited to modern times (Ironically, adultery still carries a stigma, even in Hollywood). Relief from the murderous burden of the 7th Commandment, the source and origin of modern hate-phobia. Purity culture made him the monster that he is. What made him transgress the 6th Commandment (thou shalt not kill)? The impossible demands of the 7th Commandment as expanded by Jesus into the enormous structure of modern biblical “purity culture.”
But how can one Commandment turn and make war on another? Yet, according to the New York Times, this is what happened here. You see it in the Atlanta murderer. This man became convinced that he had to violate the 6th Commandment to fulfill the 7th. “Purported purity” turned into hate. A contrived ideal left over from a barbaric age ruled by toxic males to keep women in line. For how do you keep women in line? You bury them beneath suffocating layers of clothing with the understanding that only by this means will their men avoid committing adultery and its punishment. Here temptation is removed largely through modesty in women. The “gender-workers” in places he found himself forced to frequent were not modest, and still a source of temptation. He told himself that lust originated in women, the immodest temptress. That “he was drawn away of his own lust” (Ja. 1) is beside the point. It was something within him that he could not control.
God told Cain to “rule” over the monster he nurtured at the very “door” of his heart, uploaded to relish sin at the slightest provocation (Gen. 4). Cain would sooner be dead. Such a life would be worse than death. He was not about to “gouge” the eye of his pet, or cut off the limb of his pet. Philip of Hesse demanded that Luther rewrite his creed to allow extra wives. Why? Because as The NY Times would say, he was not about to waste his life trying to meet “purported” ideals of purity. His was a roving eye, and he saw no need to cut it out. Luther did not think he could cut it out. The ax could not be laid to the eye of sin. The ax could not be laid to the root of the right hand of sin.
Origen mutilated himself because he was tempted while teaching women. So why not just “avoid making provision for the flesh" (Ro. 13:14)? These were rich women who sponsored his scholarship. (He wrote more books than a person could read in his lifetime--the Church saw fit to burn them all). He was of that type who “could not dig and to beg was ashamed.” To become a lowly hardworking farmer would have been an eye gouged too deep. He thought he was too big to fail. God would have told him, "Go sit on a rock on the North Pole if have to." No, he was determined to teach rich women--how could God do without him. His father was a martyr, and he himself was tortured for his faith. The Church has since torn her hair out trying to make sense of him. Saintly Job had to make "a covenant with his eye to avoid lust" (Job 31:1). David said, “Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee” (Ps. 119:11).
“There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it” (I Cor. 10:13).
“Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” (Jn. 17:17).
“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (Jn. 8:32).
This is how the Church dealt with sin when sin was still sin. It never bought the line that Origen was a special case: "is it not a little one" ? Lot thought Sodom needed a bigger fire than little Zoar. " The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less, than the half shekel, when they give the offering of the LORD, to make atonement for your souls"(Ex. 30:15)."
There it is, the Church said. The truth is all we have--embrace it and you will be free. If you find it inadequate then it is only because you "love darkness more than light" (John 1). There is no end to modern "addictions." The Freudians have brought the entire manual of depravity into the Church, and now get rich trying to drive these demons out. Paul says "put them away" (1 Cor. 5:13). The sorceries of Freudian false prophets like Dobson have replaced the Scriptures. The Atlanta murderer is their evil fruit.
The point of all the above is simply this: The New York Times wants you to see all LGBTQ-hate-phobia stemming from 7th Commandment purity doctrine, because every aspect of LGBTQ is a transgression of traditional 7th Commandment doctrine. Since the beginning of time, Satan has never been able to pull this off. But now, with help from within the Church, Satan is accusing the Church of orchestrating the greatest hate movement in modern times: 7th Commandment hate against LGBTQ. Imagine the implications here if "God is love." This is a coup worthy of Anti-Christ: the equivalent of Cain taunting God while wearing a Love Not Hate shirt. And it could not have been accomplished without help from within.