"Research! Who needs it?" |
Here's just something I noticed briefly. Bill Maher's Religulous contained an interview between Rev. Jeremiah Cummings and Bill Maher in which we see the following exchange.
Jeremiah Cummings: Okay, but now, but now, things like houses and cars and clothes and money, they come as a result of my seeking God first.
Bill Maher: I don't remember that in the New Testament specifically.
[a subtitle appears - "Because it's not there."]
Jeremiah Cummings: But it's there.
[Subtitle - "No it's not."]
Jeremiah Cummings: I remember it.
Bill Maher: A passage about...
Jeremiah Cummings: I remember it.
[Subtitle - "I'm sure you do."]
Bill Maher: The houses, the cars and the clothes, they'll come.
Bill Maher thinks the Rev. is misquoting or outright lying about a non-existent verse in the scriptures, but in the New Testament, we do actually read,
And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel’s,
But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.
Mark 10:29-30
These verses say exactly what Rev. Cummings was saying. If you seek God first, rather than worldly wealth, then the lord will provide you with what you need and often more. Bill Maher is wrong.
That being said, let me say that I do disagree with Rev. Cummings and agree with Bill Maher on the point that a paid ministry is unwise. It opens the door to all sorts of corruption and ulterior motives. There's something wrong with a preacher who rolls up in a Cadillac, covered in bling, while the congregation starves.
Nevertheless, even though I disagree with the Reverends interpretation and application of the verse, the verse is, in fact, there and Bill Maher is wrong.
2 comments:
It's hard to have a meaningful conversation about anything, not just religion, with someone who takes snippets from the source document or quoted material, repeats it in a mocking tone, then draws inflammatory conclusions based on half-truths.
Or non-truths.
Post a Comment
Is there something here you like (or dislike)? Let me know! Your opinion matters!