Izzy, I am not an expert on social etiquette or the rigorous procedures for appropriateness of debate – though I feel that I do fairly well in most people’s opinion with my ad hoc approach to what is appropriate and acceptable when.
However, I do claim to be an expert on what is appropriate moral behavior for Christians, as a result of extended study and (I believe) a call to do that job. And that includes, IMHO:
-
It is our task to proclaim the Good News that God loves all people and in token of that sent Jesus to bring God and man into unity again, after egocentric, who-gives-a-hoot-what-God-wants behavior had forged a wedge of separation between them.
-
It is our task to show His love in our own lives, by how we respond to others.
-
It is our task to, while showing love and affection for each other, challenge our brothers and sisters in Christ on what appears to be sinful behavior based on our own understanding of the Gospel. This does not include a chastisement of other people who are not “believers” in the Christian sense – persons who have not accepted Jesus as their Lord and Savior (whether by baptism or by profession of faith).
-
For many Christians, there seems to be a sense that they must stand for the moral proprieties called for in the Bible, and alert others (whether or not they need alerting) to what God has to say about the sin which they observe those others to have been (presumably) committing. I have not seen anything resembling a mandate to do so, except for the “counsel your brother or sister” provision applicable only as between Christians.
-
It is, I think, important to establish a relationship prior to any action raising a presumption of sin on the part of one’s fellow man. And it helps immensely to “walk in his (her) shoes” prior to making that call, as well. When such a relationship is established and the reader gets a sense that the person speaking (or posting) is concerned for them as a fellow human being for whom he/she cares, a great deal more latitude in what can be expressed is available than if a “cold Bible quote” is posted.
It is on this last point that I would challenge what His4Ever has done. First, in her defense, she did in fact respond to a direct question on her stance on a given controverted issue. But, second, she did not, prior to posting something that would be seen as judgmental, establish a groundwork of mutual community between herself and her readers. (And one assumes she is well aware that posting to a thread to which self-professed gay people have responded and are apparently reading, and in fact responding to a person who was self-professedly gay, she would be aware that her response would be seen as judgmental.)
Joe and Jersey are long-standing members here, and do have a sense of community with many of us. However, for the most part, there has been no evident sense of compassion or camaraderie between them and the gay community on the board. The italicized words serve to distinguish between the two of them as people whom several gay members know IRL and whatever may be in their hearts towards gay people generally and their personal gay friends as well, on the one hand, and what a randomly chosen poster might perceive from their statements vis-a-vis homosexuality and religion on the other; I do not mean to indict them for anything other than failing (IMHO) to lay that groundwork of brother/sisterhood prior to making the comments they felt called to make on the basis of their own witness for Christ.
As has been noted elsewhere, this has become something more than a place for the exchange of ideas; it has become a community. And within the context of community here, they are answerable, just as IRL, for dealing with their neighbors in a spirit of Christian compassion and grace. I think, divorced of the criticism implicit above, both would agree that that is their task, along with being staunch for what Scripture tells them is correct.
There is, as we agreed to let lie fallow, some ground for interpretation as regards the relevant Scriptures. Just as His4Ever, Joe, and Jersey are, though apparently guilty of violating kosher laws, not sinning in failing to keep kosher because Scripture for them must be read in the greater context, including God’s message to Peter implying strongly that the dietary laws are lifted for Christians, and any humanely charitable reading of divorce-and-remarriage standards would not see His4Ever as sinning in ridding herself of the creature that was her first husband and remarrying, so too may gobear and Mr Visible be exempt from the mandate in Leviticus and Paul’s strictures – because those provisions, though apparently literally condemning of them, may in fact not be applicable to their situation, when the whole thrust of Scripture is taken into account. That calls for a major GD on which opinions will vary – but it needs to be taken into account in reviewing posts here.
