Honored to have my first byline published by @theammind .
For 40 years, the democracy-promotion establishment protected Khamenei while claiming to oppose him. When the strikes came, they dispatched the protest machine to protect the regime.
Why?
https://t.co/BWk8L2b0lZ
"I'm obliged to be stoned to death like Stephen and to give the pope an occasion for pleasure, but I hope he won't laugh very long. My Epitaph shall remain true: 'While alive I was your plague, when dead I'll be your death, O pope.'"
-Martin Luther (LW, Vol 54, 227).
The difficulty with this argument is that the New Testament never actually calls these men “cousins” of Jesus. The Gospels consistently use the ordinary Greek word ἀδελφοί (adelphoi), which in normal usage means brothers. If the authors intended “cousins,” Greek had a specific word for that (ἀνεψιός, used in Col 4:10), yet the evangelists never use it for the relatives of Jesus.
Appealing to John 19:25 also does not resolve the issue. That passage simply lists several women present at the cross, including “Mary the wife of Clopas.” It never states that the sons of that Mary are the same individuals called the “brothers of Jesus.” That identification is a later inference, not something the text itself makes explicit.
The proposal that Clopas and Alphaeus are the same name likewise remains a hypothesis. The New Testament never says they are the same person. Thus hypothesis was developed later in church history as part of a harmonization that was created to reconcile the perpetual-virginity tradition with passages like Matt 13:55–56 and Mark 6:3, where the brothers and sisters of Jesus are clearly mentioned.
The case becomes even clearer with James the Just. Paul writes in Gal 1:19 that he met “James, the Lord’s brother” (ἀδελφὸν τοῦ Κυρίου). Paul uses the same word used in the Gospels. If “brother” meant “cousin,” the identification would be strangely indirect, since Greek had a precise word for cousin and Paul could easily have used it.
None of this diminishes Mary’s honor or the uniqueness of Christ’s birth. The question is simply what the text itself affirms. On that point, the most natural reading of the Gospel accounts is that the “brothers” of Jesus were his actual siblings within the household of Joseph and Mary.
The Augsburg Confession
Article XXI. Of the Worship of the Saints.
TL;DR: Jesus is the only intercessor, mediator, and propitiation with the Father. And while the saints who came before us are exemplars of the faith, they are not to be worshipped.
Of the Worship of Saints they teach that the memory of saints may be set before us, that we may follow their faith and good works, according to our calling, as the Emperor may follow the example of David in making war to drive away the Turk from his country. For both are kings. But the Scripture teaches not the invocation of saints or to ask help of saints, since it sets before us the one Christ as the Mediator, Propitiation, High Priest, and Intercessor. He is to be prayed to, and has promised that He will hear our prayer; and this worship He approves above all, to wit, that in all afflictions He be called upon, 1 John 2:1: If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, etc.
This is about the Sum of our Doctrine, in which, as can be seen, there is nothing that varies from the Scriptures, or from the Church Catholic, or from the Church of Rome as known from its writers. This being the case, they judge harshly who insist that our teachers be regarded as heretics. There is, however, disagreement on certain abuses, which have crept into the Church without rightful authority. And even in these, if there were some difference, there should be proper lenity on the part of bishops to bear with us by reason of the Confession which we have now reviewed; because even the Canons are not so severe as to demand the same rites everywhere, neither, at any time, have the rites of all churches been the same; although, among us, in large part, the ancient rites are diligently observed. For it is a false and malicious charge that all the ceremonies, all the things instituted of old, are abolished in our churches. But it has been a common complaint that some abuses were connected with the ordinary rites. These, inasmuch as they could not be approved with a good conscience, have been to some extent corrected.
Something to keep in mind is that the US hasn’t actually fought a war with a peer competitor in a looooong time. That would all change if the US and China go to war over Taiwan. It would be a mistake to judge the success of that against military action in the Middle East.
I get why some people think Trump’s foreign policy is just wild flailing. If you don’t understand the China element, it all seems random and disconnected. If you do understand the China element, it all makes sense. You who follow China Uncensored are ahead of the curve.
I kind of feel that if you defended Pol Pot while he was murdering a huge percentage of his own countrymen, no one should ever listen to or read anything of yours ever again.