Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Could mainstream christianity ever make peace with gay people?
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 136 of 263 (459108)
03-03-2008 10:34 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by iano
03-03-2008 9:32 AM


iano responds to me:
quote:
Telling someone they are a sinner...
...requires that you know the person's actions and have the mind of god to make the determination. You have neither. Therefore, it is not for you to say. Stop worrying about others and start paying attention to yourself.
quote:
Intrinsic in the notion of solutions to problems is the notion of a problem existing in the first place.
But only god can determine if there is a problem of sin. Not you. Your continual need to tell others about what they are doing is to serve your own vanity and pride, not the glory of god.
quote:
Given that telling folk of the gospel is an instruction from God, I do think it honouring to God to follow that instruction.
And you think you rise to that level? What a very high opinion you have of yourself.
By the way, the gospels supposedly aren't the words of the apostles but rather the words of Jesus. Are you now claiming that you're at the same level as Jesus?
quote:
I'm not sure of any biblical warrant for the idea of a saved sinner not being able to see.
It's simple logic: Those who don't sin are the ones who can see. After all, if you can see, then you wouldn't sin. If we're all sinners, even you, then none of us can see, including you.
quote:
Lets agree on a middle ground.
No, let's not. That would be a logical error. Either you see or you don't. Your holy book claims that only one person can truly see, so unless you are trying to say you are god....
quote:
I go by iano's view of the biblical model.
You are free to do so. But, let us not pretend that it is based upon the text.
quote:
The former is merely raportage as to what I believe to be the case.
Again, you are in no position to determine what is or is not a sin, thus you are in no position to report on anything as you do not know. Only god can see.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by iano, posted 03-03-2008 9:32 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by Silent H, posted 03-03-2008 11:25 PM Rrhain has replied
 Message 138 by iano, posted 03-04-2008 11:56 AM Rrhain has replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 137 of 263 (459110)
03-03-2008 11:25 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by Rrhain
03-03-2008 10:34 PM


I don't wish to start a debate with you, but I would like to understand what you are trying to say to iano. Currently you seem to be talking past him.
I understand an idea that only God can judge, or determine what is a sin or who is truly being a sinner. I also understand how people are not supposed to be taking on that role.
However, iano seems to be making a valid point that there is a difference between judging others, or what should be a sin, and noting that according to God's rule book X is a sin. Hence if someone is doing X and God's rulebook says it is a sin, iano would not be judging someone who openly claims to be doing X, by pointing out they are committing a sin.
The Bible is pretty clear in its statements of what is right and wrong, and it tells adherents they must practice these rules, remind others of them, and in some cases act against those who violate the rules. While iano should refrain from acting as God, telling others what God does think of them, or what will happen to them, what is incorrect in iano stating that according to God's rule book X is a sin, and if they want to follow Xianity, they need to keep that in mind?
Again, you don't have to debate me on this. I'm more or less asking for a clarification of your position.

h
"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing." - Robert E. Howard

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Rrhain, posted 03-03-2008 10:34 PM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by Rrhain, posted 03-06-2008 3:37 AM Silent H has not replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 138 of 263 (459160)
03-04-2008 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 136 by Rrhain
03-03-2008 10:34 PM


iano writes:
Telling someone they are a sinner...
Rrhain writes:
...requires that you know the person's actions and have the mind of god to make the determination.
That's one way to approach it. Another is to take these two steps
1) Believe the Bible is the word of God
2) Interpret passages which indicate that all men are born sinners as meaning precisely that.
Anyone doing the above is now in a position to tell another person that they are a sinner - even if they've never met them before in their life. Clearly step 2) can be expanded upon to include statements on specific sins.
One could argue that I add 'according to my belief' after every statement I make. This would be rather cumbersome and I am assuming that folk around here are smart enough to figure this much out for themselves.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Rrhain, posted 03-03-2008 10:34 PM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by PMOC, posted 03-04-2008 2:36 PM iano has replied
 Message 157 by Rrhain, posted 03-06-2008 3:40 AM iano has replied

  
PMOC
Member (Idle past 5754 days)
Posts: 41
From: USA
Joined: 06-01-2007


Message 139 of 263 (459186)
03-04-2008 2:36 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by iano
03-04-2008 11:56 AM


iano,
How do you get around the idea that by relying on your interpretation of the bible, you are in fact claiming to "know God"?
Why is your interpretation better/worse than your neighbors? Does one of you know God better/worse?
Anyone doing the above is now in a position to tell another person that they are a sinner - even if they've never met them before in their life. Clearly step 2) can be expanded upon to include statements on specific sins.
Clearly this is attempting to make a much larger leap than you give credit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by iano, posted 03-04-2008 11:56 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by iano, posted 03-04-2008 8:15 PM PMOC has replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 140 of 263 (459222)
03-04-2008 8:15 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by PMOC
03-04-2008 2:36 PM


PMOC writes:
How do you get around the idea that by relying on your interpretation of the bible, you are in fact claiming to "know God"?
I do know God. In ways other than relying on my interpretation of the Bible alone it must be said. I'm not sure I intend to "get around the idea" thus.
Why is your interpretation better/worse than your neighbors? Does one of you know God better/worse?
Which neighbour are you talking about specifically.
Clearly this is attempting to make a much larger leap than you give credit.
Why?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by PMOC, posted 03-04-2008 2:36 PM PMOC has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by PMOC, posted 03-04-2008 8:34 PM iano has replied

  
PMOC
Member (Idle past 5754 days)
Posts: 41
From: USA
Joined: 06-01-2007


Message 141 of 263 (459223)
03-04-2008 8:34 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by iano
03-04-2008 8:15 PM


Which neighbour are you talking about specifically.
Any neighbor who harbors a different interpretation of the bible than you.
Perhaps instead of "know God" I should have typed "know the mind of God".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by iano, posted 03-04-2008 8:15 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by iano, posted 03-04-2008 9:03 PM PMOC has replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 142 of 263 (459225)
03-04-2008 9:03 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by PMOC
03-04-2008 8:34 PM


Any neighbor who harbors a different interpretation of the bible than you.
It would seem to me that God intended a meaning and the closer a person happens to correctly interpret that meaning the more they will get to know God (via the Bible).
So I don't suppose another interpreting different to me necessarily means they know God less or more than me. I do note that some people who have an interpretation don't really talk about knowing God at all. In a personal way that is.
Perhaps instead of "know God" I should have typed "know the mind of God".
The two are synonymous to my thinking. Personhood is the "mind" predominantly.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by PMOC, posted 03-04-2008 8:34 PM PMOC has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by PMOC, posted 03-04-2008 10:04 PM iano has replied

  
PMOC
Member (Idle past 5754 days)
Posts: 41
From: USA
Joined: 06-01-2007


Message 143 of 263 (459229)
03-04-2008 10:04 PM
Reply to: Message 142 by iano
03-04-2008 9:03 PM


You admit then that there is room for error in your interpretation? And yet you claim that you are not judging when you "point out" sin. Hoping to know God and then judging others based on that interpretation/hope does not serve God, it serves only your arrogance and ego.
Either only God can know sin and judge it thus, OR both God and YOU are capable of knowing and judging sin.
It is arrogant for you to assume the latter, to assume that you know God's mind. And it results in a very unchristianlike bigotry toward homosexuality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by iano, posted 03-04-2008 9:03 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by Silent H, posted 03-05-2008 12:22 AM PMOC has replied
 Message 147 by iano, posted 03-05-2008 4:54 AM PMOC has replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 144 of 263 (459244)
03-05-2008 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 143 by PMOC
03-04-2008 10:04 PM


And yet you claim that you are not judging when you "point out" sin.
A person does NOT judge a person who openly claims to do X, by pointing out that God's rulebook says that X is a sin and so they would be a sinner.
If YOU have an issue with iano's "interpretation" of what God's rulebook says, then that is something else than whether iano is judging people.
Either only God can know sin and judge it thus, OR both God and YOU are capable of knowing and judging sin.
OR, there is another explanation altogether. God knows and judges sin, and to help people do right he gives them a rulebook with all the rules. In that rulebook he tells people to read the book, so they know the rules, and help others understand them.
Hence, one is not judging others, when pointing to said rulebook and saying this is what God says we should avoid doing.
It is arrogant for you to assume the latter, to assume that you know God's mind.
Are you not judging at this point?
And it results in a very unchristianlike bigotry toward homosexuality.
Look, I'm not a Xian at all, but I grew up in a Xian household and I studied the Bible. I am at a loss as to how you have come to an interpretation that Xianity is not inherently anti-homosexual. It is openly labeled an abomination, adherents are exhorted to punish such acts, and it is normally indicated as a sign of weakness.
Can you explain how Xians are supposed to act toward homosexuals (quoting from the Bible)?
I get people not enjoying iano's position, I don't either, but he doesn't seem extremely bigoted or judgmental at all. He has a system of ethics derived from a specific scripture and he is explaining it. Given the topic of this thread (which he didn't start if I remember right) his statements explaining a Xian concept of homosexuality as sin, only makes sense.
Edited by Silent H, : + crucial NOT

h
"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing." - Robert E. Howard

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by PMOC, posted 03-04-2008 10:04 PM PMOC has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 145 by Taz, posted 03-05-2008 12:39 AM Silent H has replied
 Message 149 by PMOC, posted 03-05-2008 8:31 AM Silent H has not replied
 Message 150 by PMOC, posted 03-05-2008 8:32 AM Silent H has not replied
 Message 151 by PMOC, posted 03-05-2008 9:22 AM Silent H has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 145 of 263 (459249)
03-05-2008 12:39 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by Silent H
03-05-2008 12:22 AM


Silent H writes:
but he doesn't seem extremely bigoted or judgmental at all.
I don't want to get into another argument with you, since I don't have the time right now to read and write long posts like we did a week ago.
Don't you find it odd that even though iano goes on and on about how we are all sinners and such, he seem to pay particular close attention to this one sin of homosexuality? I call this bullshit from his end. He is clearly singling out homosexuality while at the same time claiming it to be just another sin so we can't say anything back to him. Why doesn't he go on and on about people eating shellfish or wearing clothes made of 2 kinds of cloth?
This is a bullshit tactic to condem people without having to admit that they just condemned people. Surely, even you can see this.
I will admit iano's stance to be genuine when I see him giving equal weight to other sins mentioned in the bible. Before then, as far as I'm concern he is just another christian bigot hiding behind a thin veil of religious self-righteous bullshit.
I am at a loss as to how you have come to an interpretation that Xianity is not inherently anti-homosexual. It is openly labeled an abomination, adherents are exhorted to punish such acts, and it is normally indicated as a sign of weakness.
For once, I agree with you on something.
Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by Silent H, posted 03-05-2008 12:22 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by iano, posted 03-05-2008 4:47 AM Taz has not replied
 Message 152 by Silent H, posted 03-05-2008 5:08 PM Taz has not replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 146 of 263 (459258)
03-05-2008 4:47 AM
Reply to: Message 145 by Taz
03-05-2008 12:39 AM


Don't you find it odd that even though iano goes on and on about how we are all sinners and such, he seem to pay particular close attention to this one sin of homosexuality?
You have seen the title of this thread haven't you?
Open a thread called "Could mainstream Christianity ever make peace with x class of sinner" and I'd be happy to comment.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Taz, posted 03-05-2008 12:39 AM Taz has not replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 147 of 263 (459259)
03-05-2008 4:54 AM
Reply to: Message 143 by PMOC
03-04-2008 10:04 PM


From a post addressed to Rrhain who argues along similar lines to yourself.
One could argue that I add 'according to my belief' after every statement I make. This would be rather cumbersome and I am assuming that folk around here are smart enough to figure this much out for themselves.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by PMOC, posted 03-04-2008 10:04 PM PMOC has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 148 by PMOC, posted 03-05-2008 8:26 AM iano has not replied

  
PMOC
Member (Idle past 5754 days)
Posts: 41
From: USA
Joined: 06-01-2007


Message 148 of 263 (459262)
03-05-2008 8:26 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by iano
03-05-2008 4:54 AM


Well. I'm not saying it, but one could add: "You are a bigot, according to your belief." What is the difference?
"According to my belief" does not mitigate anything.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by iano, posted 03-05-2008 4:54 AM iano has not replied

  
PMOC
Member (Idle past 5754 days)
Posts: 41
From: USA
Joined: 06-01-2007


Message 149 of 263 (459263)
03-05-2008 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by Silent H
03-05-2008 12:22 AM


I am at a loss as to how you have come to an interpretation that Xianity is not inherently anti-homosexual. It is openly labeled an abomination, adherents are exhorted to punish such acts, and it is normally indicated as a sign of weakness.
Xianity also appears to be blatantly pro slavery and pro misogyny yet many xians implicitly claim to know god well enough to redefine and interpret the statements in the bible to better conform to a more evolved contemporary human morality. They go to such great lengths to equivocate away those passages but actively choose to leave homesexuality alone, because it suits their bigotry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by Silent H, posted 03-05-2008 12:22 AM Silent H has not replied

  
PMOC
Member (Idle past 5754 days)
Posts: 41
From: USA
Joined: 06-01-2007


Message 150 of 263 (459264)
03-05-2008 8:32 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by Silent H
03-05-2008 12:22 AM


double post
Edited by PMOC, : double post

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by Silent H, posted 03-05-2008 12:22 AM Silent H has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024