Matthew Shepard died for our sins

Great Debates
1

Matthew Shepard died for our sins, and I dare any of you bigots hiding in the woodwork to refute it. This week marks the third anniversary of the murder of Mr. Shepard, and my rage against homophobia and heterosexism continues to bubble at a slow boil. It’s high time that the true moral majority rose up and spoke out against the immoral minority of Fred Phelps, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and their ilk! For every bible-thumping bastard that comes along quoting select passages from Corinthians and Leviticus out of context, there should be ten moral God-fearing citizens coming right back at them with “Judge not lest you be judged yourself,” “Love your neighbor as yourself,” “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” and even that Old Testament chestnut, “Thou shalt not commit murder!”

What is wrong with this primitive culture in which we live? Can’t we realize that the ongoing crimes and oppressions committed against decent innocent law-abiding citizens who just happen to be G/L/B/T are the very same atrocities perpetrated against so many other minority groups targeted by so many other Inquisitors throughout history? Enough is enough, and guess what: God hates YOU for hating f-gs… and so do I.

Long story short: they came for millions of my people along with millions of other minorities in WWII, and now that they’re coming again for the G/L/B/T’s, this hetboy will put his life on the line to defend them. You wrong-headed religiose cavepeople had better keep an eye on your ill-informed bigoted antiquated dogma, because my moral karma is looking to run it over!

Oh, and BTW, here’s a special message for you intolerant Christian evangelicals out there: guess what, your God was gay! It says so right there in the gospels: “Simon, called Peter, was more beloved to Him than any woman.” Actually He was really bi, because He slept with Mary Magdalane too. Whatcha think of that, jerky!

Ok, I’m done venting. Whew. Guess I had a lot pent up there. Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to take shelter in my flame-proof bunker. :cool:

Note: I was tempted to use the subject “Matthew Shepard died for your sins”, but I truly belive that we as a society are complicit in his murder. I’ve certainly done my part by not speaking out against the overtly prejudiced rhetoric of some Irish Catholic friends of mine, and I vow henceforth to be silent no more, even if it costs me their friendship. The dire importance of this issue must preclude any future silences by all of us.

2

Take a pill.

I’m just as outraged at this young man’s murder as you are, but you seem to be doing one of two things…

1 - Preaching to the choir. This board has a history of preaching tolerance, and in particular, fighting Fred Phelps and his ilk. “Fighting ignorance since 1973”-- sound familiar?

2 - Painting with a mighty big brush. To attempt to denegrate Jesus Christ in order to offend Christians, is stooping to a level which seems incongruent with your initial stance.
[sub]Sorry, I know that last sentence sounded awful pretentious – but it’s true)[/sub]

Matthew Shepard didn’t die for my sins. He died because a couple of bigots were psychotically misguided. We should address the subject of violence and homophobia, but let’s not get hoier-than-thou about it, huh?

3

A couple of points:

  1. Matt Shepard was killed in October, not mid-March.

  2. This is really a rant, not a debate. This needs to be moved to the Pitt.

Otherwise, I agree with you, especially about how the moderate and liberal Christians would speak up. For whatever reason, it seems only the conservative/fundamentalist voices are the loudest.

4

Christian checking in here; ‘Matthew Shepard died for our sins’; I don’t have a problem with this statement in that I think it means he died because of our (collective) stupidity and bigotry, nope, you won’t find me arguing with that - even if I have excised all bigotry from my heart (which I think would be a monumental achievement), it could quite reasonably be argued that I have not done enough to promote tolerance.

But the inevitable comparison with Jesus ‘dying for our sins’ will be made; I don’t think the unfortunate death of Matthew has left me feeling clean and atoned for.

5

An interesting point of view in that it provokes thought, but like all other interpretations of the written account (and I include those on which the modern church dogma is based) it could be wrong. Interesting nevertheless.

6

**

Point well taken, and usually I’m pretty good at restraining myself to fully rational, well-reasoned arguments, but I’m PISSED damn it! Besides, isn’t this the board for (if I must) testifying? :slight_smile:

**

I’m not worried about the choir, I’m worried about this thread and others of its ilk. I’ve also arrived at the point where I no longer feel that “tolerance” is sufficient – we have to move beyond antipathetical tolerance to compassionate acceptance. The conventionally accepted standard of societal decency now expects at minimum compassionate acceptance of practically every other minority, so why not G/L/B/T?

**

Screw the brush, I’m so mad that I’m painting with a Wagner Power-Roller! :slight_smile: I will confess that I am certainly bear-baiting with my characterization of J.C., but isn’t your label of “denigrating” inconsistent with your initial stance? How is theorizing that Mr. the Christ was G/L/B/T a denigration, except to those who think that G/L/B/T-ism is immoral?

I say he died for our collective sins. I struggle to maintain the maximum amount of open-mindedness, but there are certain things that I can just no longer tolerate and IMHO shouldn’t be expected to tolerate! If that makes me a bigotophobe and antibigotcentric, then so be it.

7

Aww balls, in my rush to blow off some steam I made an ASS out of U and ME by not double-checking the date and assuming that this was indeed the third anniversary because of the various films on the subject that are coming out or have come out lately. My bad.

I will also concede that I am riding the ragged edge of a rant here. Perhaps this thread could be split among two forums, oh mighty moderator?

8

I’d be disingenuous if I were to claim that I weren’t inviting comparison, but the comparison I’m inviting is that the crucifixions of both Christ and Shepard were slaughters of innocent lambs.

(I have studied the whole removal of original sin via the D&R of J doctrine in some depth, but I must confess that despite repeated explanation I still don’t get what’s so good about Good Friday.)

9

Could I have a little clarification, Are you saying that the death of Matthew Shepard causes our sins to be forgiven and wiped away? or Are you saying that our sins caused Matthew Shepard to be killed? Or have I misssed your point entirely?
If you are saying either of the first two, please explain how.

10

Oh Great Lord of the Quotes, let this all come out right.

I’ll buy that.
By the way, I didn’t see that other thread. I thought this one was just out of no where. Not like you need a reason, but it does bring things into a different light.

The thing is, I knew you were bear baiting. Alluding to J.C.'s sexuality makes no never mind to me, because I’m not a Christian. I don’t care if he was hetero, homo, bi, transgendered or a left handed lobster for that matter.

But you know that that kind of statement would offend a devout Christian. And I know, that you knew that. And you knew that I knew that you knew that. In fact, I know that you knew that I knew that you … um … gnu/new/knew/noo …

Whatever. You get the picture.

Carry on.

11

Yeah, exactly what use of “for our sins” do you have in mind?

12

Hmmm. It’s believed by many Christians that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah, and was, therefore, not only a perfect man, but a perfect Jew. Which would mean full compliance with Mosaic law… which means (amongst other things) no sex outside marriage. Of course, there were instances where He deliberately broke some tenets of the Law (see, for example, Mark 2:23ff) in order to teach a moral lesson…

But, in any case, we really do need to lose the idea that “love” is necessarily sexual love. (In fact, if I could find that verse you quoted, struct, we could probably tell from the Greek what sort of love is intended here… can you give me chapter and verse? I’m not having any luck searching the online translations i’ve got bookmarked). After all, we have God’s assurance that He loves all of us. I’d be very surprised if that was sexual in nature.

And, with reference to your main point: there are a lot of Christians who are speaking out against all forms of hatred and intolerance, and working against them too. Undoubtedly, they (I’m not presumptuous enough to say “we”) should be working harder - after all, the Kingdom of God is not yet at hand - but they are working. The “religious Right” may be very loud and very visible, but they do not speak for the majority of Christians.

13

Our God is neither male nor female, gay nor straight, black nor white. He (or she I guess) is everyone.

And agreed that love is not always sexual. In some countries and cultures, it’s not unusual for grown men to great one another in huge hugs and kisses-it’s simply a sign of affection and greeting. Some cultures are more affectionate physically, but that doesn’t make them gay.

14

More precisely, I knew that that kind of statement would offend a particular type of devout Christian, namely the fundamentalist “Gimme that old time religion” devout type. For that I am guilty as charged, but I would hope that the open-minded progressive-thinking devout types have not been alienated too, as that was not my intent.

15

I didn’t come up with the “Jesus was gay” or the “Jesus hooked up with MM” theories, and I forget where I first heard them, but I’m guessing the cite used to support the theory is John 15:37, “Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved” along with subsequent references to a disciple that “Jesus loved more than all the others.” I may have confabulated the “more than any woman” bit. I’m too tired right now to dig up additional cites, be they in Greek or any other language, but I will say that my hyperbolic invective can be given no more credence than any other interpretation of the gospels. Which only goes to reinforce my point of how dare these people claim to have cornered the market on the proper interpretation and implementation of divine pronouncement.

As for the religious right (Topic: the religious right is neither – discuss) not speaking for the majority of Christians, I’m glad to hear it. However, like Steve Wright said, the fanatical fringe are very loud and very visible, and I don’t see a correspondingly loud and visible response in return. I pray* that this is not due to intimidation, but I fear that it is.

*Prayer for me is a very dicey matter since I’m a lapsed Reconstructionist Jew turned devout agnostic. I do feel the need to pray every so often, but it’s a pain in the neck having to always put qualifiers in my prayer like “Oh God – that is, God, if you exist, and if you do exist than I pray to you in whatever form you do happen to exist in, that is if you even exist in a form that can answer my prayers…” Hey, did you hear the one about the insomniac dyslexic agnostic? He couldn’t sleep at night because he kept wondering if there really was a Dog.

16

How are our sins related to the death of Matthew Shepard?
I don’t see how anyone’s sins, except those of his killers, have anything to do with his death.

17

Ah. I see where you’re coming from, struct. The “disciple whom Jesus loved”, in John’s Gospel, is usually taken as being John writing about himself, not Peter - hence my search-related confusion. (Yes, it’s also generally believed to be love in the spiritual sense. I would seem to have committed myself to looking up the original Greek wouldn’t I? And it’s blinking years since I last read any Greek… this is just going to be a barrel of laughs…)

With regard to the condemnation of the “religious Right”, the problem with being a moderate Christian is, you ain’t allowed to condemn people. Even if you want to. I could rail about, say, Jerry Falwell and how he’ll burn forever if he doesn’t stop misrepresenting Christ’s word, but that would involve me predudging Falwell’s salvational status, which is definitely out. It is better this way, really… nobody wants heresy trials coming back. (You might take some comfort from the SeaHawk thread in the BBQ Pit, though, which at one point included a member of the Southern Baptists describing Falwell as… errrr… describing Falwell in terms unsuitable for this forum.)

18

I’m one committed Christian who was not offended but amused by the thread title. It’s of course obvious that the traditional doctrine of the Atonement is not applicable to Matthew Shepard’s killing, but the idea of a relative innocent being killed for what he believes is part of the traditional definition of martyr – which would make struct’s rant quite on target. (Granted that it’s probable what Matthew died in pursuit of was “rough trade” sex – aside from a bit of “bad judgment” and “yuck-factor” comments, he believed in his right to have sex with willing partners, and evidently died for that belief. It’s hardly up there with Jesus or Nathan Hale, but neither is it totally devoid of purpose.

Puddleglum, I submit to you the old adage that “if you aren’t part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.” You’re certainly welcome to disagree with me – but I’d be interested in seeing the ethical grounds on which you do, as regards this case. There are a lot of us who have no personal investment in gay lib questions who see it as a part of Heidegger’s classic “they came for…” line. Where exactly do you stand, and why?

BTW, as rephrased, I concur in your thinking on numbers. It was, however, my point that a large part of unthinking American society does categorize on similar bases to those I was citing – and my reductio ad absurdam was therefore not at sea. I’d urge you to locate a willing friend and do precisely what David and Jonathan are described in Scripture as doing (no implied actions, but everything they are stated to have done in II Samuel) in your church’s fellowship hall, and see what sort of reactions you get. I did, however, find it offensive that you suggested that the extremes I’d cited in my post were my definition of what constitutes “gay behavior” – I had thought that any reasonable person would infer that I was showing the extremes of what various definitions can include.

19

With all due respet, I do not believe in “Collective sins.” I think the notion is ridiculous.

NOTE ON THE BIBLICAL DEBATE: Holy moly, do people still believe this Jesus-was-Mary-Magdalene’s lover thing? Is this just because it’s the only female name they remember from the gospels?

20

I think that the phrase “Matthew Shepard died for our sins” is best undertood as a shibboleth and not as a statement of fact.
If I am wrong and the phrase does have meaning, is there anyone who could state what it is?