In response to:

Piers Morgan Wants to Amend Moses

Nevirim Wrote: Dec 28, 2012 9:36 AM
Whitebeard, I was going to get back to you over the other blog about the time of Yeshua's birth, and though I agree with you on certain points you have two option, as to knowing when Zacharias served, but I'll save that for another time. Interesting you start out on a right path but then you do exactly what Dr. Micheal Brown points out about "Picking and Choosing" or purporting something that is Not either implied or quote directly within the context of scripture. "Your Quote" "Had that line been "corrupted" by homosexuality or adultery, Messiah could not have been born as foretold. And then your further justification with "These laws, first and foremost, were about protecting the line of human beings through whom Messiah would be born."
Whitebeard Wrote: Dec 29, 2012 6:21 AM
I had to get to work very soon after posting, yesterday, and although no one is likely to see this, now, I will reply for the sake of thoroughness. You have a great deal of knowledge, but misunderstood, completely, what was intended by "corrupted." Homosexuality renders one "unwilling" to procreate. Adultery renders one susceptible to sexually transmitted diseases, which diseases may make one "unable" to procreate. It's not so complicated, really.
IsraelFirsterSecond Wrote: Dec 28, 2012 12:09 PM
Nevirim Wrote: Dec 28, 2012 10:08 AM
cont... "righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."
Then also consider James 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
You are however right that Yeshua did not "change the Law" with regards to Adultery or Homosexuality or Fornication, He pointed out that those who wanted to condemn and justifiably so within the context of the Law had to look further within themselves as to their "holiness before casting their stone." Yeshua could have case His stone, but he came to save sinners, even within their own sins. maybe we should do likewise?!
Nevirim Wrote: Dec 28, 2012 10:02 AM
Did you consider Rahab the "harlot" who is in Yeshua's genealogies, or are you implying that the line of David through "Solomon was without sexual sin." Yeshua had to come through both Nathan and through Solomon's line whether by birth and adoption. Sexually pure? And what about other sins, if one type of sin disqualified Messiah's coming like Adultery and Homosexuality where their any others? the answer is that Messiah came in the form of "Sinful Man" not that any sins from any previous generations "tainted" him. As scripture says: Romans 8:3-4 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: 4 That the
Nevirim Wrote: Dec 28, 2012 9:50 AM
S.A. wrote correctly by pointing out David, how about Rahab, the prostitute who appears in Messiah's line. Let's take your position one step farther! You bring up "sexual sin as a disqualified for Messiah's line, and imply that sexual perfection from generation to generation was needed, what about other sins? For Messiah to be King he came through two lines, Nathan through David, and Solomon through David. Are you telling me that the line of Solomon was "pure sexually?" Messiah was Pure and Holy without sin or any passed impurities for any of his "relatives through Joseph or Mary. He came in "like manner of "Sinful Man" for which all of His genealogies were "tainted with sin." So here's another passage: James 2:10

Fresh off his attack on America’s gun control laws, Piers Morgan set his sights on another set of laws that trouble him, the laws of Moses and the Bible. But before he called for an amendment to the Bible to recognize “gay rights,” Morgan actually asked his guest, Pastor Rick Warren, a very fair question, and Warren stumbled in his answer.

Of course, Morgan’s timing could not have been worse. After all, this was a Christmas Eve interview with a Christian leader, and Morgan is not exactly riding a wave of popularity. And to compare the Bible to the Constitution shows...