I believe you’ve clarified it. The person may not be able to change how they feel or their orientation, but they do have a choice whether to act on it or not in my view anyway. Since you already know my stand on this subject, and the reason for it, enough said. I will have to respectfully continue to disagree with you on most aspects of this topic. I doubt that we can ever agree on what the Scriptures teach on this but I must remain faithful to what I believe and see that it says when I read it, ok?
This means no disrespect toward you.
I believe that the Scriptures exhort us to help each other to better express the love of Christ…and to help each other to live our lives in the best way possible to DO that.
So, as I read it, we need to continue to help each other to be BETTER followers of Christ. And if you are convicted to “correct” a fellow brother or sister in Christ…in order that you might be able to help them see that they might not be seeing something in their life that YOU are convicted to point out to them…then I believe we are instructed to HELP them in seeing that they might have an area that God wants them to work on.
I personally don’t have a problem with ANYONE suggesting that perhaps I am not living my life in such a way as to glorify God. I KNOW that I am VERY imperfect…but every once in awhile, I am taken aback by someone pointing something out to me that I had NO IDEA I was doing to oppose what I was TRYING to do. This has included my best friend, who has rejected God.
But she is a VERY good friend, and she loves me. When SHE says…“Um, Cheri, I LOVE you, but here is something I think you might want to THINK about…” I LISTEN. And you know what? She has never ONCE been wrong.
So, YES… It is GOD’S opinion that matters. And I believe that GOD’S opinon is that we need to help each other live lives that exemplify Him.
I believe that THIS is what is meant by the many Scriptures that tell us to “judge one another.” As Christians, I mean.
If that didn’t clarify anything for you, or if you think I have lost my “marbles”, then by all means post here again. Or email me.
I disagree with this. The reason racist speech should be avoided isn’t that it’s painful for me in my quest for universal love, but because it’s wrong. It’s unfair, it’s disgusting, and it’s dehumanizing. Forget whether it’s painful for me or not.
And that, Stoid, is what I would consider condoning sin. It falls clearly into category 1 & 2 of my little quiz above (the correct answers, by the way, are: 1) Condoning. 2) Condoning. 3) Condoning. 4) Not judging.), in that you are witnessing wrong behavior and obligated to voice your opposition. IMO, that is no different from watching a person being robbed and not doing something to stop it. By standing by and remaining silent, you give tacit approval to the action.
Interesting question. The simple answer is that we are commanded to do so. The longer answer is that it is an internal (family) matter among believers, and should be handled internally. We are to support, rebuke, counsel, edify, and be accountable to each other. Part of the reason we are to judge our own is that the church is a body, not a mass of individuals. Sin in one part of the body affects all of us.
This should sum it up pretty well:
**
Thank you for joining us, Joe. I hope that I presented this in the manner intended…you DID inspire this thread, but I in NO way meant for it to be a slam on you, or anyone else. I was truly provoked to thought by the posts we exchanged in the original thread, and I am grateful. It was clearly (to ME, at least,) something that I needed to think about. Thus, this thread. And THIS would be an example (to ME at least) of a brother in Christ pointing out to ME that there is something I need to examine in my own life as a Christian.
I agree TOTALLY here. But what I am looking for is a discussion about things that are WRONG (and sinful) but not a matter involving actual WRONG …in a legal sense. GOD will deal with the rest IN TIME, and I am heartily glad to allow Him to DO so. I hope I made things more clear in my previous posts as to what I was asking about.
I assume everyone has read these, so I am just going to say that (for ME) 1 and 2 are a “cake-walk.” They are clearly wrong and you (and I) would most clearly be (IMHO) mandated by the Scripture to pick up your purse and go home. Well, I know you probably don’t HAVE a purse, but whatever.
In the case of #1, at least, the first thing I would do once I GOT home is to call the police. #2 is a bit more problematical for me, since I wouldn’t want to turn in a friend. I am lucky in that this is almost CERTAINLY NEVER going to happen…none of the people I love would ever DO something like that. If they did, I know I would have to debate my course of action…but in the end, I think that I would have to call the police.
#3 is difficult to answer because I am not sure that my friend is sinning. BUT…say my friend is involved in an extramarital affair, which I KNOW is a sin. I would tell them what I believe. Which is that they are doing great wrong, both to themSELF and to the others involved, and that they need to pray HARD to discover what they need to do. It isn’t my place to call the unknowing spouse and make sure THEY knew about it, but I would not support the adulterous relationship and I would make sure my friend KNEW that. I would also make them aware that all this didn’t make me LOVE them any less.
Sometimes things happen, and you do wrong but with the right intentions. Sometimes a marriage has died, but for practical reasons the legal marriage remains intact. Does this make an adulterous relationship RIGHT? No, it doesn’t. But it happens. Still, if that is true, the “marriage” should be dissolved before the new relationship is entered into.
I know this is not Biblical, in that remarriage is not allowed. I also don’t think God wants anyone to continue in a marriage that makes everyone miserable. All attempts should be made to make that marriage WORK, but if it doesn’t then…I guess there is no point in making everone miserable for the rest or their lives. I know I am not just skating on thin ice here, I have fallen THROUGH the ice. “sigh”
#4 is easy, since I am not sure that homosexuality is a sin. But, if he is a non-Christian, it isn’t my place to judge him anyway. We all sin in plenty of ways, and if it IS a sin to be a homosexual, then it would just add to the list. Lie? Cheat? Gossip? Envy? HATE?
We are all in the same boat here. We all sin. No sin is worse in God’s eyes.
So it isn’t necessary for me to name sins to ANYONE who isn’t a Christian. It doesn’t MATTER what the sin is…ALL and ANY of them have made it necessary to accept the grace of God.
Anyway…thank you Joe for entering this discussion. It means a LOT to me.
The Cross. The crucifixion and resurrection of Christ is what happened.
We no longer live under “The Law,” we live under the “Law of Love.”
Scotticher, thanks for the kind words. If there’s anything I need to clarify, please let me know. I write off the top of my head, and what you get is a disorganized stream-of-consciousness type of post, so I know my stuff can be pretty disjointed and hard to read. 
Except that the little story we were discussing happened before Jesus was executed.
So we’re here once again. The homosexuals must burn in their (unsatisfied) lust. But the hets can remarry and just ask to be forgiven; then continue in their adulterous state.
Originally posted by His4Ever
This is why I say that some forms of Christianity are indistinguishable from devil worship because both belief systems are more concerned with appeasing a wrathful and arbitrary force than with exercising empathy for their fellow humans. If you worship a deity that you obey from fear, and not because of how that belief enriches your life and increases your common bond with other people, then you are no different than an idol-worshipper who sacrifices to an image form fear of his god’s wrath. You should worship the Source of Light and Love, not a wielder of fear and power.
If there is a God, and if He instilled the need to love and be loved that He decrees must go unmet, then He is a tyrant unworthy of respect, let alone worship.
But ** Scotti, ** why is it necessary for you to make clear what you do or do not believe to be wrong? Why is it important to make sure that it is understood that you do not approve? If someone makes a nasty remark, a rude joke, or whatever, and by your lack of reaction they assume that you do not object…so? Why is their opinion of who you are and what you approve of or don’t approve of important? If they ask you to participate actively in something you believe is wrong, then it is appropriate for you to say that you would not do _____, because you believe it to be wrong. But if they are just being themselves, why do you need to let them know one way or another how you feel about it?
And again…aren’t you judging them anyway, whether you speak your judgment aloud or keep quiet? And isn’t the goal not to judge? On the one hand you insist that you want to follow the teaching of not judging, but on the other you keep giving examples of how you have and would judge others. So I admit I’m confused.
And who are you to approve or disapprove? Isn’t that God’s job? You are only in a position to approve or disapprove of your own choices and actions (and maybe your family’s.) Outside of that, you are going against the Word, which is: judge not.
The exception is when others are being directly harmed. Certiainly is the right thing to step in an stop when a person is about to hurt another, if you can. Or stop them from killing the dog. And you can make the choice not to be an accessory or beneficiary of wrongs done by others (the stolen video.) But those are choices you make for yourself.
If you take the admonition to not judge to heart, then don’t judge! If you are truly not judging others, then the question of when to speak or not is moot.
And if you feel you need to convey to others what is good behavior…lead by example.
Actually that did clarify things for me a little bit. :o Maybe I shoulda read this thread before I spewed my opinions about judging in the other thread…
In any event, the way I see it is: Suggesting to someone that they might better serve Christ by doing such and such, is one thing. Being all about damnation is another.
Scotticher-What do you do if the person believes, in their heart and soul, that they are doing the “right” thing? Would you still try to convince them? Let’s say you and person A are both ardent Christians, person A believes in…I don’t know, for the sake of argument- that beating your wife is part of the bible (I know it’s a bit extreme), as far as person A’s Christianity goes (not legally or anything), do you give up on trying to convert them, eventually? Where does your obligation end, or does it?
Sorry if this is a hijack, I’m just intensely curious.
You’ll be qualified to speak on the issue of sexual immorality just as soon as you are no longer committing adultery. Until then, you have no place judging, or even considering, the morality of the loving sexual acts of other consenting adults.
Now I think you are playing games with language to justify your point of view. Hating something about a person should not and does not depend upon whether it is changable or not. If someone has an ingrained, visceral disgust with homosexuality, that does not mean they hate anyone who is a homosexual. It means they hate that aspect of them. It does not follow, no matter how much you insist that it does, that they hate the whole of that person.
In fact, most of my gay friends would take issue with your insistence that their gayness defines who they are, which is what you are essentially asserting. They would and do argue that their homosexuality is a small part of who they are and it is unreasonable and unfair to make assumptions and come to conclusions about their value as people because of this one aspect of them. But that’s what you are doing.
Look at Rudy and Richard of Survivor the First. Rudy went into that thinking he hated homosexuals and said he’d vote someone off just for being gay. At the end, he was best buds with Richard and voted for him to get the million bucks. And he still hated homosexuality…but he had learned, to his great surpise, that he didn’t really necessarily hate homosexuals.
To hate homosexuality is to hate homosexuals, because we are homosexuality. Without us, there is no homosexuality.
It doesn’t matter how much else of a person you like or love, if you hate a core, fundamental, unchangable, defining trait of that person, you hate them.
Of course it does. There are a few things in this world that do define who we are. Our sexuality is one of them. So is religion.
I don’t waste my time on stupid reality programming, so I don’t know enough about either of them to address that point.
**Sdrawkcab **
I agree with a lot of what you are saying but I think you are taking it a little too far. I don’t think people should be as easily defined as you are making them seem to be. Homosexuality is an aspect, albeit a big one, in a person’s character.
I agree with this; if you hate a big aspect of the person’s character then I think it would be extremely difficult for you to like/accept the entire person.
As I said earlier, I think sexuality (homo or hetero) is one of the major characteristics of a person, but I don’t think it’s the only one that “defines” who we are, I will admit that in certain peoples eyes that a person’s sexuality is the only “defining” characteristic, but it’s not the only one. What about a homosexual preacher? You couldn’t put him into one camp or the other. If I am misinterpreting what you are saying, I apologize, but it seems as though you are lumping people into nice neat categories.
I’m going to go with Sdrawkcab on this. If you truly hate an aspect of a person, it will effect how you react to them. It will effect your relationship. It’s analogous to the bigot trying to deny it by saying “some of my best friends are black.” Even if you hate homosexuality and consider one gay guy your friend, you won’t treat him the same as your other friends. There will still be that “ick” factor when you interact. You won’t be totally comfortable as with a true friend. It will damage the friendship.
Either your prejudice or the friend will eventually win and the other will be given up.
I don’t think it’s accurate to equate black and homosexual in this instance. Black is the color of a person’s skin, it’s value-neutral. Homosexuality is, when expressed, an action that some people find deeply repugnant.
I hate transvestism, especially in heterosexual men. It completely grosses me out. But I don’t hate transvestites. (In fact, I adore Eddie Izzard.) It’s just a thing I don’t like.
Again…do you like everything about everyone you care for? And if you dislike something about them, does that mean you dislike them in toto? That’s kinda harsh, I think.
Dislike is not the same as disgust or revulsion.
Yes, it did. But I believe that Christ came to earth to live as a man in order to make it possible for Him to beCOME the “sacrificial” lamb for anyone who chose to accept that sacrifice.
He was here to fulfill that need and He did. (According to the Bible, and I believe the Bible, just in case that isn’t clear here.)
In His life here, He was sort of…“transitioning” between the law, as put forth in Leviticus, and the law of love…which was made possible by Christ’s crucifixion. He was living His life here on earth in order to fulfill the Love of God in allowing us to DISCONTINUE the “law” and move to the “law of love.” As I see it, He lived his life in order to exhibit to people the way it WAS GOING TO BE POSSIBLE for things to BE…after He had made the sacrifice and been resurrected.
In other words, He was a living example of the way God originally intended things to be. And He was instructing us in how He wanted us to start LIVING our lives…under the new “law of love.”
I don’t know if you understand what I MEAN by this, but if not please ask me to clarify and I will try.
Why didn’t he give the “law of Love” originally, if that was his original intent?