Here is my column this morning in the New York Times. As is the case (even on my own paper, USA Today), the writer does not select the titles. In this case, “One Big, Happy Polygamous Family” seems a bit mocking. Thus, I have added my own title.
Since the Supreme Court’s 2003 decision in Lawrence v. Texas, Americans have enjoyed unprecedented freedom in their lifestyles and private relationships. The decision held that states could no longer use the criminal code for social engineering, dictating the most intimate decisions of citizens in their choice of partners and relations. But even as states have abandoned laws criminalizing homosexual and adulterous relations, they have continued to prosecute one group of consenting adults: polygamists.
Last week in Utah, one such family filed a challenge to the state’s criminal law. That family — a man, Kody Brown, and his four wives and 16 children — is the focus of a reality program on the cable channel TLC called “Sister Wives.” One of the marriages is legal and the others are what the family calls “spiritual.” They are not asking for the state to recognize their marriages. They are simply asking for the state to leave them alone.
Utah and eight other states make polygamy a crime, while 49 states have bigamy statutes that can be used to prosecute plural families. And they’re not a small population: the number of fundamentalist Mormon or Christian polygamists alone has been estimated to be as high as 50,000. When Muslim as well as nonreligious plural families are considered, the real number is likely many times greater.
The case of the Browns, for whom I am lead counsel, is a clear example of unacceptable government intrusion. The family has not been accused of child abuse or other crime, in almost a year of being under criminal investigation. With such allegations stripped away, the only thing remaining is a family that does not look like those of other Utah citizens. The question is whether that is enough to declare them criminals.
While widely disliked, if not despised, polygamy is just one form among the many types of plural relationships in our society. It is widely accepted that a person can have multiple partners and have children with such partners. But the minute that person expresses a spiritual commitment and “cohabits” with those partners, it is considered a crime.
One might expect the civil liberties community to defend those cases as a natural extension of its campaign for greater privacy and personal choice. But too many have either been silent or outright hostile to demands from polygamists for the same protections provided to other groups under Lawrence.
The reason might be strategic: some view the effort to decriminalize polygamy as a threat to the recognition of same-sex marriages or gay rights generally. After all, many who opposed the decriminalization of homosexual relations used polygamy as the culmination of a parade of horribles. In his dissent in Lawrence, Justice Antonin Scalia said the case would mean the legalization of “bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality and obscenity.”
Justice Scalia is right in one respect, though not intentionally. Homosexuals and polygamists do have a common interest: the right to be left alone as consenting adults. Otherwise he’s dead wrong. There is no spectrum of private consensual relations — there is just a right of privacy that protects all people so long as they do not harm others.
Others have opposed polygamy on the grounds that, while the Browns believe in the right of women to divorce or leave such unions, some polygamous families involve the abuse or domination of women. Of course, the government should prosecute abuse wherever it is found. But there is nothing uniquely abusive about consenting polygamous relationships. It is no more fair to prosecute the Browns because of abuse in other polygamous families than it would be to hold a conventional family liable for the hundreds of thousands of domestic violence cases each year in monogamous families.
Ultimately, the question is whether polygamy is allowed under the privacy principles articulated in Lawrence. The court did not state exclusions for unpopular relationships. Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said the case “does not involve whether the government must give formal recognition to any relationship that homosexual persons seek to enter” but rather “two adults who, with full and mutual consent from each other, engaged in sexual practices common to a homosexual lifestyle.”
The Browns are quite similar. They want to be allowed to create a loving family according to the values of their faith.
Civil libertarians should not be scared away by the arguments of people like Justice Scalia. We should fight for privacy as an inclusive concept, benefiting everyone in the same way. Regardless of whether it is a gay or plural relationship, the struggle and the issue remains the same: the right to live your life according to your own values and faith.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor at George Washington University.
New York Times: July 20, 2011
82 thoughts on “Privacy Without Politics: Why The Sister Wives Lawsuit Is About Privacy Not Polygamy”
Comments are closed.
Elaine,
That can be summed up…”Get Over it” ….the Christian way….
Mike S.,
I will offer this…the more I have ready/learned (your choice) the more I realize that there is so much more I do not know…I used to have books numerous books opened…stacked upon each other..that you knew they were all going to fall…since the internet…(thank Al, only kidding) I actually realize how much I do not know…
Thank you…
AY,
You are on a great roll here. I’m just reading and admiring. I will say though that I don’t dispute that the Torah also was an edited and re-edited version.
One reading of the first few pages of Genesis makes it sublimely obvious. I suspect the same is true of all prophets and their beliefs, who knows what editing went into the Koran after Mohamed’s death? We believe the completeness of texts aged in millenia at our own peril. That doesn’t even take into account the fact that people back then were more accomplished in metaphor and understood it better.
Mike S.,
I don’t want your absolution. On the other hand, you have nothing to say to the shut out, driven away, despised young men of your polygamous fantasy world except “tough luck.” You and Mr. Turley are hard men, not unlike your ally pastor Jeffs himself.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UKes1CZygs&w=560&h=349%5D
Those boys just aren’t your problem, are they?
Miles
raff,
What is kind of scary…is the first three lines intentional or not…condense history by about 7000 bc…..The next five take only about 33 years….The next four wrap it back to the beginning… I wonder if there is something symbolic in the Three, Five, Four….But that is just me….
btw there is….
And look what it has done for your Gnosticism raff….
Heck raff,
I thought Jimmy Swaggert had a hand in it…..
AY,
I remember the good Benedictine Sisters drumming the Apostles Creed into us in Catechism class. It was a hard one to memorize…for me at least!
Mike S.,
Again…we are on the same page…I love the allegiance of the Nicene Creed which basically states this
1.
a formal statement of the chief tenets of Christian belief, adopted by the first Nicene Council.
2.
a later creed of closely similar form (Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed or Constantinopolitan Creed) referred, perhaps erroneously, to the Council of Constantinople (a.d. 381), received universally in the Eastern Church and, with an addition introduced in the 6th century a.d., accepted generally throughout western Christendom.
The Apostles’ Creed
“The Old Roman Creed”
BELIEVE in God almighty [the Father almighty—(Rufinus)]
And in Christ Jesus, his only Son, our Lord
Who was born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary
Who was crucified under Pontius Pilate and was buried
And the third day rose from the dead
Who ascended into heaven
And sitteth on the right hand of the Father
Whence he cometh to judge the living and the dead.
And in the Holy Spirit
The holy church
The remission of sins
The resurrection of the flesh
The life everlasting. [Rufinus omits this line.]
Although there are many more versions…this kind of explains it….
The Apostles’ Creed vs. Gnosticism
By James Kiefer, L-Soft list server at ASUACAD
CREED generally emphasizes the beliefs opposing those errors that the compilers of the creed think most dangerous at the time. The Creed of the Council of Trent, which was drawn up by the Roman Catholics in the 1500’s, emphasized those beliefs that Roman Catholics and Protestants were arguing about most furiously at the time. The Nicene Creed, drawn up in the fourth century, is emphatic in affirming the Deity of Christ, since it is directed against the Arians, who denied that Christ was fully God. The Apostles’ Creed, drawn up in the first or second century, emphasizes the true Humanity, including the material body, of Jesus, since that is the point that the heretics of the time (Gnostics, Marcionites, and later Manicheans) denied. (See 1 John 4:1-3)
http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/apostles.htm
The Apostles Creed and attributes:
1 I believe in God the Father Almighty Peter
2 Maker of heaven and earth John
3 And in Jesus Christ his only Son, our Lord James
4 Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost; born of the Virgin Mary Andrew
5 Suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried Philip
6 He descended into hell, the third day he rose again from the dead Thomas
7 He ascended into heaven; sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty Bartholomew
8 From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead Matthew
9 I believe In the Holy Ghost, the holy Catholic Church James, the son of Alpheus
10 The communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins Simon the Zealot
11 The resurrection of the body Jude Thaddaeus
12 Life everlasting. Amen Matthias
Now isn’t this all rosy….
AY,
Watch your tongue! The Bible does not have source credibility. It was written by God. Or Buddha, or Allah or someone big!
The book of Matthew is more problematic is that the Book just bares his name but the author is unknown…..
It is probably one of the most read as it is positioned first but has inherent issues and source credibility…..
The Gospel According to Matthew (Greek: κατὰ Ματθαῖον εὐαγγέλιον, kata Matthaion euangelion, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον κατὰ Ματθαῖον, to euangelion kata Matthaion) (Gospel of Matthew or simply Matthew) is one of the four canonical gospels, one of the three synoptic gospels, and the first book of the New Testament. It tells of the life, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.
“Matthew” probably originated in a Jewish-Christian community in Roman Syria towards the end of the 1st century;[1] mainstream biblical scholarship suggests that the anonymous author drew on a number of sources, including the Gospel of Mark, the sayings collection known as the Q source, and material unique to his own community.[2] The narrative tells how Israel’s Messiah, having been rejected by Israel (i.e., God’s chosen people), withdrew into the circle of his disciples, passed judgment on those who had rejected him (so that “Israel” becomes the non-believing “Jews”), and finally sent the disciples instead to the gentiles.[3]
Authorship and sources
The Gospel of Matthew does not name its author. The Christian bishop, Papias of Hierapolis, about 100-140 AD, in a passage with several ambiguous phrases, wrote: “Matthew collected the oracles (logia – sayings of or about Jesus) in the Hebrew language (Hebraïdi dialektōi – perhaps alternatively “Hebrew style”) and each one interpreted (hērmēneusen – or “translated”) them as best he could.”[4] On the surface this implies that Matthew was written in Hebrew and translated into Greek, but Matthew’s Greek “reveals none of the telltale marks of a translation.”[5] Scholars have put forward several theories to explain Papias: perhaps Matthew wrote two gospels, one, now lost, in Hebrew, the other our Greek version; or perhaps the logia was a collection of sayings rather than the gospel; or by dialektōi Papias may have meant that Matthew wrote in the Jewish style rather than in the Hebrew language.[6]
Papias does not identify his Matthew, but by the end of the 2nd century the tradition of Matthew the tax-collector had become widely accepted, and the line “The Gospel According to Matthew” began to be added to manuscripts.[7] For many reasons most scholars today doubt this – for example, the gospel is based on Mark, and “it seems unlikely that an eyewitness of Jesus’s ministry, such as Matthew, would need to rely on others for information about it”[8] – and believe instead that it was written between about 80-90 AD by a highly educated Jew (an “Israelite,” in the language of the gospel itself), intimately familiar with the technical aspects of Jewish law, standing on the boundary between traditional and non-traditional Jewish values.[9] The disciple Matthew was probably honoured within the author’s circle, as the name Matthew is more prominent in this gospel than any other,[10] and it is possible that some of the “M” material may have originated with Matthew himself.[11]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Matthew
But Susan,
One book which now combines 2 distinct time frames….
Contents of The Lost Books of the Bible
The Gospel of the Birth of Mary
The Protevangelion
The Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ
The Infancy Gospel of Thomas
The Epistles of Jesus Christ and Abgarus King of Edessa
The Gospel of Nicodemus (Acts of Pilate)
The Apostles’ Creed (throughout history)
The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Laodiceans
The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to Seneca, with Seneca’s to Paul
The Acts of Paul and Thecla
The Epistles of Clement (The First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians)
The Epistle of Barnabas
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Philidelphians
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrneans
The Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarp
The Shepherd of Hermas (Visions, Commands, and Similitudes)
Letter of Herod To Pilate the Governor
Letter of Pilate to Herod
The Lost Gospel of Peter
The Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians
Contents of The Forgotten Books of Eden
The Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan (The First and Second Book of Adam and Eve)
The Secrets of Enoch
The Psalms of Solomon
The Odes of Solomon
The Letter of Aristeas
The Fourth Book of Maccabees
The Story of Ahikar
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs
To read them in its entirety will give you a new understanding of some of the falsehood promoted by the modern churches….granted these books are translations by the people at the behest of the archbishop of Canterbury… who probably had his own axes to grind… or more better cross’s for others to bare…..
Elaine,
You gotta love Monty Python in the morning!
AY,
Good stuff. One further point though.The Council of Nicaea, 320 CE, was presided over by the Emperor Constantine, a sun worshipper and edited much text in its attempt to define an authoritative Christian Church, beholden to the Empire and its Emperor. Later Councils further edited the materials.
Well Thank you Elaine M…….I want to know where this Holy Grail is located…Do you think that the “Knight Templar’s” took it as a spoil of war….or they loaned money against it and the debt was never repaid or not paid in a timely manner….
Officially endorsed by the Catholic Church around 1129, the Order became a favored charity throughout Christendom, and grew rapidly in membership and power. Templar knights, in their distinctive white mantles with a red cross, were among the most skilled fighting units of the Crusades.[4] Non-combatant members of the Order managed a large economic infrastructure throughout Christendom, innovating financial techniques that were an early form of banking,[5][6] and building many fortifications across Europe and the Holy Land.
The Templars’ existence was tied closely to the Crusades; when the Holy Land was lost, support for the Order faded. Rumors about the Templars’ secret initiation ceremony created mistrust, and King Philip IV of France, deeply in debt to the Order, took advantage of the situation. In 1307, many of the Order’s members in France were arrested, tortured into giving false confessions, and then burned at the stake.[7] Under pressure from King Philip, Pope Clement V disbanded the Order in 1312. The abrupt disappearance of a major part of the European infrastructure gave rise to speculation and legends, which have kept the “Templar” name alive into the modern day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_Templar
Damn….another instance the RCC has it nasty fingers in something….
AY,
From Monty Python for you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zjz16xjeBAA&feature=relmfu
The Gospel According to John (Greek τὸ κατὰ Ἰωάννην εὐαγγέλιον), commonly referred to as the Gospel of John or simply John,[1] is an account of the public ministry of Jesus. It begins with the witness and affirmation by John the Baptist and concludes with the death, burial, Resurrection, and post-Resurrection appearances of Jesus. This account is fourth of the canonical gospels, after the synoptics Matthew, Mark and Luke.
The Gospel’s authorship is anonymous. Its Chapter 21 states it derives from the testimony of the ‘disciple whom Jesus loved.’ Along with Peter, the unnamed disciple is especially close to Jesus, and early-church tradition identified him as John the Apostle, one of Jesus’ Twelve Apostles. The gospel is closely related in style and content to the three surviving Epistles of John such that commentators treat the four books together,[2] yet, according to most modern scholars, John was not the author of any of these books.[3]
Raymond E. Brown did pioneering work to trace the development of the tradition from which the gospel arose.[4] The discourses seem to be concerned with the actual issues of the church-and-synagogue debate at the time when the Gospel was written[5] c. AD 90. It is notable that, in the gospel, the community still appears to define itself primarily against Judaism, rather than as part of a wider Christian church.[6] Though Christianity started as a movement within Judaism, gradually Christians and Jews became bitterly opposed.[7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John
Susan,
If you think about when these were written, the ability of the folks to write and the most important one is the materials used to write on…..Some of the writing crumbled because the aged quickly, but then again, you must consider who allowed these to be written………..Then this will explain why there are 4 of what they consider to be the Major Gospels….If you will compare the first 5 chapter of the Bible are known as the Pentateuch…learn a little about these….
The first five books of the Bible are sometimes called the Pentateuch which means “five books.” They are also known as the books of the law because they contain the laws and instruction given by the Lord through Moses to the people of Israel. These books were written by Moses, except for the last portion of Deuteronomy because it tells about the death of Moses. These five books lay the foundation for the coming of Christ in that here God chooses and brings into being the nation of Israel. As God’s chosen people, Israel became the custodians of the Old Testament, the recipients of the covenants of promise, and the channel of Messiah (Rom. 3:2; 9:1-5).
There are as many versions of these books as there are countries and interpreters….What I am trying to get at…is “These Books” say what the leaders wanted them to say…If you stop and think, not really much has changed in the last,say…5 thousand years…..
One last point is…though they are known as Matthew, Mark, Luke and John…..The last shall become first and the first shall become last….anything symbolic in that….
The problem with most folks and religion….they take what they are spoon fed and run with it as the truth….not much difference between religious propaganda and political… You do not always have to question what people say….but if something does not rub you the right way…then as Jesus would do…or at least..it is written that he would stand up to you, the authorities and try and get his point across….So what color is your Jesus….I was always shown White pictures….from what I know now….he probably was dark skinned, stank and had long hair….
Luke….
The Gospel According to Luke (Greek: Τὸ κατὰ Λουκᾶν εὐαγγέλιον, to kata Loukan euangelion), commonly shortened to the Gospel of Luke or simply Luke, is the third and longest of the four canonical Gospels. This synoptic gospel is an account of the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth. It details his story from the events of his birth to his Ascension.
The author is traditionally identified as Luke the Evangelist.[1] Certain popular stories, such as the Prodigal Son and the Good Samaritan, are found only in this gospel. This account also has a special emphasis on prayer, the activity of the Holy Spirit, women, and joyfulness.[2] Luke presented Jesus as the Son of God, but turned his attention especially to the humanity of Jesus, featuring His compassion for the weak, the suffering and the outcast.
According to the preface[3] the purpose of Luke is to write a historical account,[4] while bringing out the theological significance of the history.[5] The evangelist divides history into three stages: the first ends with John the Baptist, the second consists of Jesus’ earthly ministry, and the third is the life of the church after Jesus’ resurrection.[6] The author portrays Christianity as divine, respectable, law-abiding, and international.[1] Here, Jesus’ compassion extends to all who are needy, women are important among his followers, the despised Samaritans are commended, and Gentiles are promised the opportunity to accept the gospel.[7] While the gospel is written as a historical narrative, many of the facts portrayed therein are based on previous traditions of the recorded Gospel story and not on what some might consider to be historical record.[8]
Most modern critical scholarship concludes that Luke used the Gospel of Mark for his chronology and a hypothetical sayings source Q document for many of Jesus’ teachings. Luke may also have drawn from independent written records.[9] Traditional Christian scholarship has dated the composition of the gospel to the early 60s,[10][11] while higher criticism dates it to the later decades of the 1st century.[12][13] While the traditional view that Paul’s companion Luke authored the gospel is still often put forward, a number of possible contradictions between Acts and Paul’s letters lead many scholars to dispute this account.[14][15] According to Raymond E. Brown, it is not impossible that Luke was the author.[16] According to the majority view, the author is simply unknown.[6]
Biblical Scholars are in wide agreement that the author of the Gospel of Luke also wrote the Acts of the Apostles.[17] Many believe “the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles originally constituted a two-volume work” [18][19][20], which scholars refer to as Luke-Acts.[21]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Luke
Mark
According to Irenaeus, Papias of Hierapolis, writing in the early 2nd century, reported that this gospel was by John Mark,[9] the companion of Saint Peter in Rome, who “had one purpose only – to leave out nothing that he had heard, and to make no misstatement about it.”[15] A number of modern scholars believe that the gospel was written in Syria by an unknown Christian around AD 70, using various sources including a passion narrative (probably written), collections of miracles stories (oral or written), apocalyptic traditions (probably written), and disputations and didactic sayings (some possibly written).[7] Some of the material in Mark, however, goes back a very long way, representing an important source for historical information about Jesus.[7]
Mark wrote primarily for an audience of gentile Greek-speaking residents of the Roman Empire: Jewish traditions are explained, clearly for the benefit of non-Jews (e.g., Mark 7:1–4; 14:12; 15:42), and Aramaic words and phrases are expanded upon by the author, e.g., ταλιθα κουμ (talitha koum, Mark 5:41); κορβαν (Corban, Mark 7:11); αββα (abba, Mark 14:36). When Mark makes use of the Old Testament he does so in the form in which it had been translated into Greek, the Septuagint, for instance Mark 1:2; 2:23–28; 10:48b; 12:18–27; also compare 2:10 with Daniel 7:13–14.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark
“And do you think that because I am reasonably explaining what the Scriptures say that that constitutes ramming it down people’s throats? I would never do that.”
Susan,
It’s laudable that you wouldn’t want to ram your religion down people’s throats, but I didn’t say YOU were:
“I have no problem with you believing what you do. Where I do have a problem is when believers try to ram their beliefs onto others who don’t believe as they do”.
I was talking about those of your co-religionists who would impose your belief on others. The Judaism believes, and has done so long before Jesus, that life begins when a child takes its’ first breath. Many Christians believe otherwise and define abortion as murder. Why should their beliefs take precedence over mine?
I grew up in a in a society that had “Sunday Blue Laws” banning many activities on Sunday, the Christian Sabbath. As a Jew, whose Sabbath is on Saturday, why should I be prevented from doing certain things on Sunday.
Muslim Sabbaths are Fridays, where do their rights come in?
As a child I was made to sing Christmas Carols, like “Silent Night” at assemblies, even though the majority of kids in my school were Jewish and didn’t believe in Christmas. Why should that be?
That is the ramming I was referring to. When you wrote on this thread spreading your Gospel you were preaching to us. Your answer to this question was to quote what Jesus said per the gospel of Matthew. That being your contribution to the discussion you were quoting your religion to say polygamy is wrong. While that certainly is your right to believe and to practice, why should the Browns be forced to follow your religious beliefs?
I respect your right to follow your beliefs, but I do not grant you the right to impose them on others.
Now as far as the harm of your spreading the Gospel here, which is not a blog dealing in religion per se, here is the problem. I’ve lived almost 7 decades on this planet. I’m well educated, with a good deal of experience.
I’ve read the Gospels. In this past year I was close to death on many occasions. Don’t you think in my time on this planet, with the experiences I’ve had, that I’ve figured out for myself what I truly believe in? Do you think you can give me any argument that would sway me to your way of thinking?
As a Jew, we don’t proselytize. As a matter of fact we are required to first discourage people that want to convert to our religion. A big part of that is that we believe all people are beloved by God and feel his grace, so there is no need to “save” them. We are not the “Chosen” people because we feel God loves us best, but we are chosen to take up the burden of trying to heal the world for all. Not by conversion, but by working with all humans to make life on this planet a paradise.
Your tradition and beliefs are different and I sincerely hope they bring you blessings and joy. However, I am alive today because I received against all odds a tremendous blessing last year and I’ve never prayed to Jesus. Finally though, the hubris of humanity is any belief that thinks it understands the actions of a Creator of something as magnificent as this
Universe. We are mere specks to that Creator and incapable of understanding its motives. Take whatever comfort you can from your beliefs, just don’t impose them on me.or my country.
Les, Paul said “if Christ has not been raised your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins…If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied.” 1 Corinthians 15. Christianity is grounded in objective, historical facts. If Christianity isn’t true, it is worthless. We don’t get to choose which reality and truth exists.
Mike, actually Jesus did allow for divorce. He said originally that was not the plan but because of the hardness of peoples’ hearts, God made a provision for two cases: adultery and abandonment (see Matthew 19:7-9). And do you think that because I am reasonably explaining what the Scriptures say that that constitutes ramming it down people’s throats? I would never do that. If someone knew the cure for cancer and kept it to themselves, would that be loving? Just because you chose to reject the message of Christianity doesn’t make it not true. “It is appointed unto man to die once, and after this, the judgement.” Hebrews. If you think about it, without the judgement (justice) of God, there would be no meaning to life. As the writer of the book of Ecclesiastes said, “all is vanity” for all that is under the sun (meaning apart from God). Everything will shrivel and die. Where is the hope, the meaning in that, apart from the ultimate plan of God? (which is merciful) It astonishes me that modern man would prefer to kill God (and risk an eternity of punishment) in order to pursue his lusts.
Lastly, Otteray Scribe, the New Testament was completed by 90 A.D; most books were written in the 60s A.D. Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, which I quoted, would have been widely circulated while those 500 witnesses were still alive.