Matthew 25:31-46:
Is there any way in which it would not be acceptable, in terms of the underlying sentiment and message of this passage, to substitute thus:
Your thoughts?
Even Saddam is able to accept Jesus as his saviour confess his sins and get into heaven. If that’s what you are implying.
That isn’t what I am implying.
OK then, could you elaborate a little then.
OK, this is Jesus saying, When you were kind toward people, you were (in effect) kind toward me, when you were shitty toward people, you were (in effect) shitty toward me.
There is a whole group of people to whom (a segment of) the Christian church is collectively and individually shitty. Do I need to spell out who they are?
I’m still not exactly sure what the “debate” is here. Mangetout, I thought that your restatement of Matthew in the OP fairly captured the scriptural sentiment: every fellow human is a proxy for God, and so we will each be judged according to how we behave toward our fellow humans as if we behaving thus toward God.
I am not sure what “the Christian church . . . collectively” has got to do with this issue. Neither the church as a whole, nor any individual denomination or congregation or faction, acts as a single rational mind. Each soul will be judged on its own merits, not as a member of a collection.
Well, the ‘collectively’ bit counts if it is a collective effort to be shitty to fellow humans and if individualks subscribe to the effort.
Maybe you do. “Christian Church” encompasses a wide array churches. Even the Arians call themselves Christians. I’m sorry if I seem dense to you but I’d like to positive of what you’re asking before attempting an answer. You’ve been a just a little vague up to this point.
Yeah, but Mangetout, you’ve got to root out that sin from your church, according to Paul.
Sorry about the mistakes.
[Mental note to self] put guitar down before typing[/mental note to self]
OK, it’s about how Christians (not all of them) treat homosexuals.
Polycarp offered a great response about this issue here in the thread love the sinner…= separate but equal.
There has also been some good discussion around this issue in the threads Who started the homosexual/Christian dichotomy?; Homosexuality = Sin?; and Mangetout’s last thread on this subject, homosexuals; what do you want/expect from me, a Christian.
Very well then. I think it is appalling. I believe it should be love the sinner, hate the sin. Some have a really hard time drawing a distinction between the sin and the sinner. Christians are not perfect, myself included. Sin is sin to God, there are no degrees. So being the lousy sinning Christian I am, I have no right to point out anyone elses sins without first taking inventory of my own. Which after I do I’m not very likely to go pointing the finger at anyone else. You know, "He who is without sin, and all that. I should in fact embrace them and love them as Jesus would, regardless of what the sin is. So in that context yes.
Oh and just in case anyone was wondering I’m a Southern Baptist. Yikes!!!
I’m not at all fond of the phrase myself; Esprix’s thread Love the Christian, hate Christianity brought home (for me) the real difficulty in drawing a distinction between what people are and what they do.
Christians do not have a corner on the hatred market. I think if you could see into the hearts of all people, you would find the capacity to hate those different from us distributed pretty evenly. I think you will find a larger capacity for love in the Christian community than in a control group however. That just doesnt make good press, and isnt fodder for those who already have an axe to grind.
We all fall short of the Glory of God. Even though He has given us pretty implicit instructions to love each other, we all too often find reasons not to.
I can hate sin without hating a person that commits it. It is a general phrase though. I hate murder as well. Murder is a sin. Could I love a muderer? Yes. Should I? Yes. We are called to love our neighbors as ourselves. There is no stipulation that says, unless he’s a homosexual, or a murderer, or a rapist, or a child molester, or a mass murdering dictator, or anything else you want to stick in there. It should be my wish for everyone to be saved. How can they know the true love of Jesus unless it’s shown through us. I hate the sin I do, it doesn’t mean I hate myself. I however hold myself to a higher standard than I would any non Christian. Not because I’m better than them, but because I should know better. I am mearly a beggar telling others where I found bread. You don’t have to go there eat. I won’t think any less of you as human if you don’t. If Esprix wishes to love the Christian and hate Christianity that is certainly his/her perogative. I don’t have a problem with that.
I should probably mention at this point that I am not at all convinced of the sinfulness of homosexuality, in the form in which it exists in the modern world and particularly in the context of a committed relationship. But that is and has been subject matter or another thread.
However, I think I would be right in saying that at least some homosexual individuals would not agree that homosexuality is merely something that they do, but is rather an intrinsic and essential part of what they are, certainly the same is true of my own (hetero, as it happens)sexuality, in as far as I am able to understand myself.
My parents taught me that loving the sinner, hating the sin was a bit different.
It was like when I was little, and I’d misbehave and my mom would discipline me. She would tell me that she loved me, but that she didn’t always love my behavior. Makes sense. (I mean, you love your kid, but not the fact that your kid just decided to be cute and say the F word in front of Daddy’s boss.)
I fully agree with that. Allow me to try and draw an anology here however pathetic it may be.
I have two dogs, one of the dogs is a breed bred for herding hard headed livestock and hunting wild bores. She is by nature a fearless fighting dog. She has attacked our other dog very visciously. In so much that we have to keep them separated. This is bred into these dogs to be dominant, strong and fearless. I hate that she does this but I absolutely love this dog. She is incredibly smart, loving, affectionate and eager to please. Since she was bred to be this way she is in no way at fault for her actions.
I have no idea if homosexuality is a result of genetics, environment, or upbringing or even any combination of things. It’s really irrelevant as far as I’m concerned. They are humans just like me and as such are deserving of everything that is afforded anyone else.
I think part of the problem here comes from the word abomination. I don’t know if that is a fair translation as it means hated. I think a more accurate translation, considering the rest of scripture would be, not what God had originally planned for humans. Outside of or against Gods plan or will. I never took it for the present literal meaning of the word. Anything that is outside or against Gods plan or will could be considered an abomination in biblical terms though. So all us sinners are an abomination, goes back to “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”.