Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Re: 'God Prefers Kind Atheists Over Hateful Christians'
No. Paul talks a lot about sexual immorality.(which he defines as any sexual activity, or even thoughts, that occur between anyone other than a man and his wife).
Romans 1:26-27, for example, specifically talks about lesbianism.
How is it unsolicited if somebody "asks about your religious beliefs." Isn't the very act of asking about religious beliefs opening the door to that conversation? And your answer is that religious people should never speak of their religious beliefs?
To me, the condemnations in the old testament were not set aside, just the laws given for making restitution or penance for sin. Otherwise, the ten commandments would have been thrown out too.
Christ says there is a new covenant. To be, that suggests that it's not the sins themselves that have changes, it's the method by which we repent of those sins that has changed. In the Old Testament, there is very heavy emphasis on all that has to be done to free yourself from sin and to seek forgiveness, like the sacrifices for instance. In the new covenant of the New Testament, no longer is it necessary to kill a bull or bring turtledoves to the temple to make "good" on your sins as it were. Jesus's coming undid all of that. Now you need only believe.
The New Testament also, imo, made it clear that sin is between the individual and God. Jesus said that the two commandments that we need to concern ourselves with is loving God and loving our neighbors. To me, that suggests it's not our place to call out the sins of others. Thus regardless of what I feel is sin, it's far more important for me to love others and love God. It also says that man looks at the sin while God looks at the heart. If I'm supposed to strive to be like God and follow his example then I shouldn't be looking at anyone's sin at all but at their heart.
My only exception to that would be the justice system but that's not a matter of sin as much of a matter of community and having a just and safe world.
Click me, click me!
Yeah, but one big hateful stance on something could be all that people see, even though it is just a minor part of your faith.
I think that people can be hateful, and repent. I've hated people before. I normally get to church on Sunday or driving in my car even and get smacked with conviction that my hate is wrong.
Not to mention the crap that religious doctrine has shoved down the throats of the masses for centuries that is spewing hate. Hate for women, hate for sexual pleasure, hate for those different than us. It's not always a front and center hate either. A lot of time it's disguised as doctrine, but it's the h-word.
Zuma Zoom
I don't know about other people around here, but I don't go around talking about people's sin in my everyday life. It's not my business. My MIL is a lesbian and we never discuss her lesbianism, but I often get into religious discussions with her because I value her as one of the single most important female influences on my spiritual life. Despite her being a lesbian, her faith makes her a role model to me. In the same token, she doesn't spend time pointing out any of my obvious sins. We just love each other for who we are.
A message board, like this, is completely different. We bring up things for discussion, so if religion is being discussed I like to talk about what I believe. I don't have conversations like I have here in my real life, because it isn't appropriate (unless of course someone asks me about something I believe in specifically, but they don't).
I don't assume that the people who are very anti-religion on this board go about their daily lives telling every religious person they see on the street how stupid they are. Maybe they think it, but they certainly aren't calling groups of people out on the street. I don't think it's any different for the religious folks.
i realized after the fact that i posted about 2 different themes in there.
let me clarify:
1: catholic church (because they are generally the most vocal offenders, IMO): stop preaching about the evils of homosexuality to the general public.
2: if someone comes up to you and says, "hey, i'm gay. what do you think will happen to me?" i personally think it would be cruel to say, "i think you're going down in flames, partner. no pun intended, of course." why do you have to tell someone that? what really is the point? the only thing it accomplishes is you making someone else feel like crap. if you're cool with that then that's your own thing, but don't hide under the blanket of "BUT BUT, that's my RELIGION! GOD told me that in the bible!!!!" because that is a complete cop out.
IIRC, the big commandment is "love thy neigbor as thyself". right?
Ah, I'd forgotten about Paul. Doesn't he also have some pretty controversial things to say about oppressing women and slavery being OK, also?
Okay so if someone asks me what I believe, I'm supposed to say, erm, nothing. How's the weather?
I don't go out of my way to tell people what I believe and when I do, I rarely discuss hell because I think the Bible is a bit unclear on that point, especially given that from what I understand Jews don't believe in the concept of Hell. So IDK about all of that.
But if I am asked, then why should the onus be on me to be delicate?
To me, everyone is a sinner and there is no measure of how big or little of a sinner one is except on man's scale. We are all imperfect beings. I don't call out one group over another because that's incorrect as far as I'm concerned.
Click me, click me!
1 - The Catholic church isn't alone in this. See WBC, for example.
2 - Sure, we are supposed to love our neighbors as ourselves, but part of that loving is being honest. When I ask someone a question, I expect them to love me enough to answer honestly. If someone specifically asks you about your beliefs, they should be prepared for the honest truth. I don't see why they would ask if they didn't want to know it. I guess you could say, "Sorry. I don't want to talk about it.", but then the Bible also tells us that we are supposed to share our faith with the world, so it wouldn't be God-honoring (IMO) to ignore the question.
There is more to this scenario than just love. There is honesty and ecangelism, both of which are also commands made by Jesus.
Anyone who would say someone who is gay is most definately going to hell isn't speaking the truth. I guess I should say the truth as I see it but I'm not sure how anyone could argue effectively that the Bible says such a thing. So I definately wouldn't be the one to say that.
Click me, click me!
i've managed to be a catholic for 36 years without sh!tting on people. i just say, "i'm a catholic" and leave it at that.
if it develops into a real conversation then that's not the same situation as what i was talking about.
i think in my undercaffinated haze i'm trying to describe your second paragraph.
I'm assuming it's just a matter of degree, but generally speaking Leviticus gets thrown around a lot for it's condemnation of homosexuality. Leviticus has a lot of things that do seem to have been totally set aside though (wearing mixed fibers, planting fields with two different crops, etc.)
I appreciate hearing your perspective, BTW, and AW's, as well. Theology (oddly enough) is really interesting to me.
Yeah. I don't know any Christians that believe that either. I see them on TV waving signs that say these things, but the Christians I know recognize that faith alone is what gets us into Heaven, regardless of our sin in this life.
To me, many of those laws you're referring to weren't laws per se as much as guidances for healthy living given the circumstances and technology the Israelites were living with at the time.
They were wandering the desert for 40 years and then preparing to live in a new land. To me, those things were told to keep them healthy and keep the land flourishing. Many of the prohibitations are unnecessary now because of our access to clean water, refrigeration, etc as well as a difference in soil and an expanded knowledge of the ways the world works as it pertains to medicine, science, and biology.
I don't consider them laws as much as public health warnings.
Click me, click me!
Not all Christians think that being gay, or same-sex sex is a sin, so there's that. If somebody, for instance, asked me what I thought about their soul in relation to their gayness, I'd say with all honesty that I don't think God cares one way or another who we love, and who we have sex with will have no impact on our afterlife.
There are a lot of people out there who loooove to go around damning others to hell, but I certainly don't think that they're representative of all Christians.
Fair enough, thanks.
Put the OT Law aside and go back to before that Law even existed. There were seven basic Laws of Noah, one of which was to avoid sexual immorality. Before God made any Covenants with His people, He still told us that there are several basic things He expects of us (both Jews and Gentiles). These aren't ceremonial law or things that have to do with how we get dressed - they are principles required in order to be viewed as righteous in His eyes.
Sure, we are no longer bound by OT Law, because Jesus fulfilled it. But the Bible still tells us that God expects us to live righteously and the guide for righteous behavior outside of the Law IMO can be seen in the Laws of Noah.
The main argument against that is that people who focus on that one particular verse are missing the complete point of the passage.
It's a condemnation of greek rituals, and non-committed sexual relationships not the act of homosexuality itself. Not only that, but Paul chastises those that judge those acts in the next passage.
I think you're missing the point in the last passage too. Even if Paul is only referring to sexual immorality in worship in these verses, where he talks about judging in Roman 2, he is simply talking abouit judgment in the sense of punishment for sins. After all, this letter was written to the church body. It is saying that you shouldn't punish another person (like stone them to death as they would have prior to God's Grace) for their behavior since God views all of our sin the same. Paul isn't, IMO, saying that a person can't decide for themselves whether or not a certain behavior is righteous in God's eyes. That's not judgment.
There are other passages in 1 Corinthians and Timothy that discuss homosexuality and sexual immorality. You can argue context and meaning all you want, since it isn't completely clear. We're dealing with centuries of cultural change and not reading the text in the original language.
Because of this, as I said in a PP, you can always fall back on the basic truths in the Bible that God used to judge righteousness, as seen in the Laws of Noah. God has shown HIS judgment of sexual immorality throughout the ages. We can bicker over our interpretations of what sexual immorality means in the year 2012 and that is fine. None of it matters since our interpretation is between only us and God. We can apply that interpretation to our own lives without worrying about anyone else. Interpretation =/= judgment.
ETA - I forgot my point in posting. As far as homosexuality being a part of pagan worship, that's a good indicator that God didn't want us IMO being involved in the behavior at all. Throughout the Bible God wants us distancing ourselves from blasphemy and idolatry. Even Jesus spoke specifically about this.
This is one area I'm going to have to take issue with. Quite a number of Christian traditions were borrowed from paganism (including the timing of many of the holy days), how does it make sense to argue that something being a part of pagan worship means God doesn't want anything to do with it?
Sexual immorality can be debated among people all they like; the minute you impose restrictions on gay marriage is the moment at which I believe you sit in judgment and take it upon yourself to punish for what you perceive to be a sin.
There are other passages in 1 Corinthians and Timothy that discuss homosexuality and sexual immorality. You can argue context and meaning all you want, since it isn't completely clear. We're dealing with centuries of cultural change and not reading the text in the original language.
Because of this, as I said in a PP, you can always fall back on the basic truths in the Bible that God used to judge righteousness, as seen in the Laws of Noah. God has shown HIS judgment of sexual immorality throughout the ages.
This contradicts itself, imo. You can't argue that Paul was mayyyyybe speaking in context and mayyyybe the text has been altered by perception and societal mores over time, and then in the next breath state that this part of the Hebrew Bible should be followed to the letter. And if you're going to follow the laws of Noah, I'm presuming you should also criminalize taking the Lord's name in vain or being Catholic -- if you believe in these laws, you can't pick and choose which you think should be applied to modern-day life as it pertains to the population as a whole and dismiss everything else as an anachronism or unworkable.
Updated September 2012.
Christianity is about having a relationship with God, through Jesus Christ. It'd be very hard if not impossible to maintain any type of relationship with God, especially through Jesus, that didn't end up resulting in good works. So good works tend to be a symptom (lol) of a *true* Christian. BUT, I think good works are God's POINT of bringing Jesus to us in the first place, and I think that good works can easily put you in the psychological state of love and peace which is the other point of accepting Jesus. So they all kind of manifest each other and help the individual to stay in that continuum.
I have said for years that my Jewish lesbian boss is the best Christian I know, lol. She is so kind generous, selfish, doesn't get caught up in the BS, etc. I totally agree that someone who calls themselves an Atheist but still lives as a Christian in terms of doing and thinking the way that Jesus suggests, is much more what God wants then anyone who is hateful and selfish and then says they are Christian and go to church.
Since we're on the subject, I have a question.
My personal understanding of the Catholic Church is that the belief is the actual sexual act between gay couples is the sin. Not actually being gay. I've always equated it with same sex couples who have sex out of wedlock.
Did I misunderstand?
I wouldn't be surprised. I'm a cradle Catholic, who rarely goes to Mass and feels like everyone's relationship with God is personal and none of my business, fwiw.
I have a very close gay friend who is so conflicted by this whole issue. He was raised in a Catholic house but is so torn over how God is supposed to be love, but so many people of faith hate who he is. It's sad to see how it affects him, and being his friend has been a blessing to me, not just with his friendship, but by allowing me to see things from his point of view.
I don't believe in criminalizing anything. I believe God's Law is something completely separate from man's. I'm not sure why people always infer that just because I believe something spiritually I feel that it should be imposed on everyone. I don't know how else to tell people that I feel my faith is mine alone.
FTR - I also believe gay marriage should be legal. Give to God what is God's and to man what is man's.
As for the contradiction, can you explain a little further? I'm confused. I'm saying that Paul could completely be talking specifically about pagan worship in Romans and it doesn't change the fact that there are many other areas of the Bible that discuss the same behavior outside of the context of pagan worship.
It seems the hardest thing about anti-gay interpretations and more progressive ones is agreeing on the definitions of our terminology.
For instance, do these scriptures talk about same-sex relationships being wrong, or sexual acts for the sake of a one-night stand or orgy style what's truly immoral? I mean, some people had religious rituals that includes orgies or rape and Jesus's disciples really had to hash out what they didn't want their converts getting into now as Christians that was common place in their culture before.
Back decades ago, there is a very recent interpretation of the term "homosexual" as the same as "pervert" which today is completely opposite.
It's very important to know what all these terms mean in today's language and not use them so interchangeable as to not discredit your own argument.
I don't disagree with what you're saying at all. I think context and language is very important. But I think there are some things we will never know because we aren't living in that time. What did "pervert" mean? We have a modern interpretation that doesn't include homosexuality (to most people), but maybe that was the common word for a homosexual back then?
It's the same with anything you're interpreting from the Bible. You can only go so far and then you have to remember that you weren't present at the time it was written and that you aren't a part of the culture it was written for.
That's where the Holy Spirit comes into play. I think that we each have to look at the text and allow the Holy Spirit to help us make reason of it all in today's world - not always intellectually, but spiritually. That's why it's the Living Word - it's alive and open for personal interpretation.
But I think what I'm walking away from this thread with is the reminder to always start any dicsussion I have on religion with the disclaimer that it is only my interpretation and that I only apply it to my personal relationship with God.
Anything you can achieve through hard work, you could also just buy.