The Ten Virgins

Oh may we strive by the grace of God to be as those wise virgins who were ready for the call at midnight, whose lamps were full, and who entered joyfully into the presence of the king.
Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.
Matthew 25:1She shall be brought unto the king in raiment of needlework: the virgins her companions that follow her shall be brought unto thee. With gladness and rejoicing shall they be brought: they shall enter into the King’s palace.
Psalm 45:14-15
The Lord makes many comparisons in Scripture. He compares His people to sheep, and He is the good Shepherd (John 10). He compares His people to wheat and glory is His barn (Matthew 13:24). He compares His people to a young child, loved when they were young and held fast until they are old (Isaiah 46:3-4). He compares them to dust, clay, branches and many other things. Then in Matthew 25 Christ likens the Kingdom of Heaven unto ten virgins. We notice many things about these virgins from this one verse. There is not one virgin but there are ten virgins. They appear outwardly pure and fair in all respects like as the young virgins who were brought before the king in Esther 2:2. We notice God does not say “virgins are the Kingdom of Heaven” or “the Kingdom of Heaven is ten virgins.” Catholic theology that uses this parable to falsely give veneration and adoration to Mary as a perpetual virgin despite her having several addition children with Joseph after Jesus was born (12:47) is hereby, as in every place in Scripture, firmly refuted. Jesus says the kingdom of heaven is likened unto ten virgins. Jesus is illustrating the Kingdom of Heaven, as He so often does, by comparison to something. In this case, Jesus compares the Kingdom of Heaven to ten virgins.
You Might also like
-
Christians Should Rejoice over Dobbs
Written by Carl R. Trueman |
Tuesday, July 12, 2022
The coming months will be fascinating, and I suspect rather depressing, to watch. When it comes to abortion, especially after Dobbs, Christians face a choice of social respectability or religious fidelity. And the Christian commentariat already seems divided on which way to go.The Dobbs decision has revealed fault lines in American Christianity. These fault lines lay just below the surface for a long while, but are now clearly exposed. As long as abortion was legal by Supreme Court decree, it was possible to identify as pro-life but keep that commitment at the level of theory; one could hold pro-life views but not be perceived as a threat. All that has now changed. To identify as pro-life post-Dobbs is not simply to hold an opinion many regard as wrong; it is to be part of an act of political and social “oppression.” And predictably, many Christians are feeling the need to “nuance” their relationship to the overturning of Roe.
The National Catholic Reporter has excelled itself in this regard. The strangest argument in its pages was made by Fr. Thomas Reese. He studiously avoided any expression of gratitude for the decision, and said it is a result of America’s domination by big corporations. The response of big business to Dobbs would seem to indicate his case is, to put it charitably, a little overstated.
Then, in an article attributed to “editorial staff,” the Reporter revealed the real reason for its nuance about Dobbs: Donald Trump appointed the Supreme Court justices who made it possible, and Trump was “arguably the most corrupt and morally degenerate president in history.” That claim may or may not be true—the competition for the title is a little stronger than the Reporter acknowledges—but the argument is specious at best. As to the article’s later assertion that “women will die without Roe’s protection,” one wonders whether the editorial staff of this prominent Catholic magazine are as familiar with their own church’s teaching on life and personhood as they are with Twitter (which has clearly had a baneful effect on otherwise intelligent people’s ability to construct an argument). It would seem not. By the standards of Catholic teaching, women have been dying by the millions for decades thanks to Roe.
Read More
Related Posts: -
“Pop Squad” and the Rise of Post-birth Abortion
“Pop Squad” offers a rare window into the mind of an abortionist. It also hints at a path for his redemption.
Progressive media has been quick to dismiss recent accusations by high-ranking Republicans like former President Donald Trump and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis that Democrats support “post-birth” abortion. Debunking DeSantis, an article from the fact-checking website Politifact notes that no U.S. state, not even those with the most permissive abortion laws, allows for the killing of newborn infants, and that the federal Born Alive Infants Protection Act already confers legal personhood upon any infant born alive after a failed abortion. MSNBC contributor Steve Benen finds it beyond belief that “Republicans like Trump…seriously expect voters to believe that there are women, medical professionals, and Democratic policymakers who ‘want abortion literally when the child is coming out of the birth canal.’ That’s insane. There are no such people.”
Assuming that were true, one nonetheless wonders why these rebuttals never state that post-birth abortion is morally wrong. They merely point out that abortionists are prohibited by law from dispatching infants once they are born, in which case Republicans are attacking a non-issue. Perhaps to affirmatively denounce infanticide would play into the hands of the enemy, many of whom use the term to refer to abortion at any stage in a pregnancy.
Briefly setting aside the question of what abortion advocates actually think about infanticide, let us imagine a world in which the slaughter of children—not fetuses in utero—is not only legal but mandatory. Such a world is the setting for “Pop Squad,” a 2006 short story by science fiction author Paolo Bacigalupi. A cinematic adaption has since appeared on the popular streaming service Netflix as an episode of Love, Death & Robots, an anthology series consisting of animated short films. As absurd as “Pop Squad” may seem, closer inspection reveals that its premise has already been taken for granted by much of modern society.
Following George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four and Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, “Pop Squad” continues the “banality of evil” trope by casting as its protagonist a bureaucratic enforcer of a ruthless regime. The film centers around Officer Briggs. He raids an apartment where the inhabitants are illegally raising children. In the original story, Briggs recounts with sheer disgust what he witnessed upon entry: “I squeeze my finger over my nose and breathe through my mouth, fighting off nausea… The shit smell thickens, eggy and humid. The nosecap barely holds it off. Old peas and bits of cereal crunch under my feet. They squish with the spaghetti, the geological layers of past feedings.” He discovers a “brood” of children from whom emanates an endless cacophony of “howls” and “shrieks.” The mother is dragged away, kicking and screaming, and Briggs aims his pistol, ready to “pop” the children. He pulls the trigger just as a boy offers him a green stuffed dinosaur.
Why are kids being put to death? Does the human race not need the little vermin to replenish itself? It turns out that affordable rejuvenation (“rejoo”) treatments enable individuals to live on indefinitely. Desperate to halt environmental degradation, the state has made rejoo mandatory, as it causes infertility. Any children born to people who refuse rejoo are summarily executed. In Briggs’ words, “we can’t keep letting people into this party if no one ever leaves.”
The scene cuts to Briggs’ self-driving police cruiser escaping the rundown neighborhood. It soars through the clouds and approaches a futuristic spire where Briggs attends a symphony. His romantic partner, Alice, performs a majestic solo. At a ceremony afterwards, Alice, described in the story as “perfectly slim” and “well curved,” remarks that she “can’t imagine stopping the rejoo treatment just like that.” “Why give all this up?”, she asks, standing atop a balcony outside the dazzling art deco concert hall, the city glimmering in the backdrop. “So not having kids seems a small price to pay for getting to live forever!” Briggs teases that he would marry Alice had they not been immortal. Alice, alluding to her upcoming rejoo session, responds that “if we weren’t gonna live forever, I’d let you get me pregnant.”
Intentional or not, Alice is a caricature of those who identify as DINKs, or “Dual Income, No Kids.” To quote one journalist, DINKs “present themselves as permanent adolescents with a lot more money and time to spend on themselves.” “We don’t have kids to feed, but we’ve got lots of money to spend on goodies,” says one woman in a TikTok video showing her and her husband purchasing $252.88 of mostly processed foods. For her, marriage appears to be a never-ending streak of fun dates: “You cannot tell me that grocery shopping and a fresh slice of Costco pizza isn’t a good date night.” Aside from perhaps a shared income, the marriage resembles a non-marital relationship, and just like Alice and Briggs, many DINKs are indeed unmarried and will never marry. If given access to rejoo, DINKs will no doubt choose it. For now, many make the most of their finite youth by sterilizing themselves.
Not all DINKs spend their childless lives going on Costco shopping trips. Alice, for one thing, spent 20 years (or 15 years in the story) perfecting her solo. Briggs recalls her practice routine: “[S]he practiced on the balcony, testing herself, working again and again against the limitations of her self. Disciplining her fingers and hands, forcing them to accept [the instructor’s] demands, the ones that years ago she had called impossible and which now run so cleanly through the audience.”
Historian Christopher Lasch observes that the elite in Western societies live a highly regimented lifestyle consisting of private schools, extracurriculars, and social events, all to inculcate delayed gratification. This attitude of command and control extends to the corporeal. In 2022, American households earning at least $125,000 a year spent over $200 billion on wellness-related products. “It is as though the white-collar class thinks of the body as a machine to be preserved and kept in perfect functioning condition, whether through prosthetic devices, rehabilitation, cosmetic surgery, or perpetual treatment.” They express “an impatience with biological constraints of any kind,…a belief that modern technology has liberated humanity from those constraints…”
Read More
Related Posts: -
Is It Complicated or is It Difficult?
Most things in the Christian life are not complex. We pray, we tell people that Jesus died for them, we read our Bibles, we fast, we attend church. But though those things are not complex, they are difficult.
I have a Bible reading plan, four different Bible apps on my phone, the capability to listen to the Bible on audio, and around 7 paper Bibles. And I didn’t read my Bible the day before I started writing this post. Therefore, it would seem that the absence of the Bible in my life came not from a lack of resources, plans, or technology, but rather from a lack of discipline.
I think that this is important to point out, because often, when we moderns have a failure in our life, we tend to attribute it to not having the right tools. Now, tools are helpful, tools definitely can help you towards your goals, but tools without discipline are useless. We tend to think of things as complicated when they are really just hard. You are not gaining weight primarily because your watch doesn’t track your calories, you are gaining weight because you can’t stop eating what you know you should not be eating. Reading a finance blog may be helpful, but you don’t need to read one to realize that you can’t buy something for $120 when you have $100 in the bank.
I remember telling one of my friends what was necessary to be a good small group leader. It boiled down mainly to 1) pray for everyone in your group every day, and 2) call and check up on each one at regular intervals. All you need is a phone and your knees. But I struggled so much to do it simply because I wasn’t disciplined enough. And I think therein lies the secret to why we overcomplicate things so much.
Read More