The Tension of Faith

Protections for minors and and protections for society against felons with guns are not discrimination. At least you're freely admitting that your position *is* one of discrimination against gays, but in Colorado businesses that do not serve all comers regardless of disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, religion, age, national origin, or ancestry are discriminating. The Supreme Court will decide whether the Colorado law stands. They were as fervent in their Christianity as you. If they could be wrong, you could be wrong. That's your opinion, something, as I mentioned above, the Supreme Court will decide.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Grammar.

My goodness, caps again. Hope you can hold it together there.It is not within my power to define what is hateful. Society decides that, and then you make your own decisions about whether to be hateful or not. Yes, because you treat some people (in this thread gays) as if they were not entitled to all the same rights guaranteed other human beings in this country. You put yourself in the category of inhumane, I merely noted it. God is just your excuse for hate. You earlier denied that screeds like this were threats, but it's difficult to see it in any other way. You're threatening me with God's wrath. I'm not feeling the love here. And I responded, to which there has been no answer. Why can't God love unrepentant evildoers? A God who serves only those who provide unconditional fealty cannot be considered a God of love but of compulsion. You are right that if your God exists I will be punished, but it won't be by a God of love but of vengeance. Summarizing, you say demons possess people in the Bible, but you don't say that the apparition you saw was a possessed person, so demons aren't apparitions. And you say that angels do not appear as apparitions. And you concede that apparitions have no Biblical foundation. Sounds pretty much like there's no such thing as apparitions, not as long as you remain within the confines of your version of Christianity. This is different from what you said before, which is the problem with making stuff up, it's hard to keep it consistent. Plus this is in itself inconsistent. What you've just said is that the supernatural is natural because it's created, but we call it supernatural anyway. But what we call it doesn't affect what it is. If the supernatural is actually natural, then continuing to call it supernatural doesn't make it supernatural. It's natural, you said so. So if it's natural then we should be able to study it scientifically, just like everything else that is natural. Right? But I thought Satan was a trickster and deceiver, that people under Satan's sway were unaware it was Satan. "Satan disguises himself as an angel of light" (2 Corinthians 11:14) and "Satan immediately comes and takes away the word which is sown in them." (Mark 4:15) If you're under Satan's power you wouldn't know it, and even if you did you wouldn't admit it. I think your hateful nature plus your denials that you're under Satan's control is pretty much proof that you're a Satan sycophant. I'll remind you once more that you're not God. Declaring something so doesn't make it so. Declaring the miracles at that website (Religion's Top 10 Astonishing Miracles) petty does not make it so. You must show that they are petty.That being said, when anyone provides proof of miracles I'm not going to be picky about whether they're petty or not. A miracle would be pretty amazing, no matter how trivial. Let God or an angel or a demon cause a dim light to glow hovering in the center of this room, certainly a very insignificant miracle, and I'll set up equipment to study it.--Percy

Evidently not, and you have the memory of a gnat. I just quoted you what the New York Times wrote about Minnesota vs. Hershberger (Supreme Court Roundup; Justices Reject Minnesota Exemption of Amish From Road Law):

quote:

---

The Court said a criminal law that does not single out religion for adverse treatment will be upheld even if it puts a burden on some religious practices.

---

And as Jar reminded you, most Christian bakers have no problem baking wedding cakes for any couple.--Percy

What confusion? The simplest solution, especially given all the associated rights of health insurance, inheritance, hospital rights, joint tax returns, etc., is to let any two people marry.I'm curious, what does your version of Christianity say about someone who has XY chromosomes but is otherwise female, or who has XX chromosomes but is otherwise male, or who has XXY chromosomes or ambiguous genitalia? Who can they marry? Which side of sports do they compete on? Which bathroom do they use?--Percy

Evidently you're wrong. Again. Your Christian prejudices and tendency to cast hate (in this case claiming gay parents are bad parents) are leading you astray, not to mention revealing your ignorance. Check this out: Dumping children into the foster care system should be a last resort. Check out Outcomes of children who grew up in foster care: Systematic-review:

quote:

---

In both systems, children who leave care continue to struggle on all areas (education, employment, income, housing, health, substance abuse and criminal involvement) compared to their peers from the general population. A stable foster care placement, establishing a foothold in education and having a steady figure (mentor) who supports youth after they age out of care seem to be important factors to improve the outcomes.

---

Note that it mentions as important missing factors those same ones mentioned by, I think, DWise1.You are again speaking out of ignorance while promoting a system that is grossly inadequate where the welfare of children is concerned.I can see why there is so much tension in your faith. It keeps pushing you toward the worst answers and solutions.--Percy

Yes, we have an example before us right now.--Percy

Oooh, two one-liners in a row, combined with the ALLCAP messages never a good sign for you.Please, if you don't have something intelligent to contribute, don't post.--Percy

Just start acting like a true Christian bringing love and good news and stop behaving like a God of vengeance and all your problems of participation here will melt away.--Percy

That's not an honest restatement at all. Your difficulties here stem from your hateful attitudes and the insulting and antagonistic way you treat people. You just a few messages ago threatened me with God's judgement: Internet interaction is moving away from individual websites and toward destination websites like Facebook, Twitter, Walmart, Amazon, Netflix, etc. Because we're not attracting new members, as current members drift away or die (we seem to have an older demographic), EvC Forum *will* die. Keep your eye on the "EvC Forum active members" number at the top of the page. Three years ago it was above 300, soon it will drop below 100. Making things worse, Google puts search results for EvC Forum way far down from the top (pages and pages down from the top) because we don't meet their mobile criteria.But that has nothing do to with my noting of your behavior. When you deliver messages of hate then I will call attention to it.--Percy

Your post was this: If you don't have anything intelligent to say, please don't post.--Percy

The question remains unanswered. How do you know you're not one of the deceived Christians. Certainly your campaign of hate and strong defenses of it hints at Satan's involvement. I'm just speaking from your perspective, of course. My secular assessment is that you're a vortex of hate using God as an excuse.--Percy

The studies I pointed you at indicate that there is no basis for any of the concerns you state here. You are making up objections. No one is playing false roles. More appropriately, religious views of particular sects that they accept on faith should not be driving social policy.--Percy

This opinion piece appeared in today's Washington Post: It's well worth reading, but here are some excerpts:

quote:

---

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard a case from a baker who argued his Christian convictions led him to refuse to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. Last week, we witnessed the spectacle of white Christians in Alabama who convinced themselves either that the man they hoped to elect as their senator was not so creepy around young girls as to get himself banned from a mall (fact check: he was), or that the behavior that got him banned is actually biblical in character, and therefore okay (exegesis check: it isn’t). In the end, 80 percent of white evangelicals voted for Moore.

​

When we’ve reached a place where good Christian folk think it’s a matter of major theological principle not to sell pastries to gay people but are willing to give pedophiles a pass, I think it’s safe to say that American Christianity today white American Christianity in particular is in a pretty sorry state.
...
But perhaps most importantly, white Christians seem unwilling to be guided by the plain truth of our shared faith. Instead of forming judgments about how to live our lives based on how our religious convictions interact with real-life circumstances, we pass off irascible reactions as theological principles. White evangelical Christians like guns, for example, and do not especially like immigrants. Compared to other demographics, we’re excited about the death penalty, indifferent to those who are impoverished or infirm, and blind to racial and gender inequalities. We claim to read the Bible and hear Jesus’ teachings, but we think poor people deserve what they (don’t) get, and the inmates of our prisons deserve, if anything, worse than the horrors they already receive. For believers in a religion whose Scriptures teach compassion, we’re a breathtakingly cruel bunch.

​

Indeed it’s hard to know who we do feel pity toward, except ourselves for we believe that we are the real victims in today’s world. Those among us who are evangelical Christians are especially paranoid: While Americans overall are twice as likely to say there is more discrimination against Muslims than against Christians, the numbers are almost reversed for white evangelical Protestants. And apparently things are getting worse: the percentage of evangelicals who said that religious freedom in the U.S. declined over the past decade rose from 60 percent in 2012 to 77 percent in 2015.
...
And fear moves us away from the core of Christianity love. There is no fear in love; but perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not reached perfection in love, says the first epistle of John.
...
While all other religious groups, like Americans overall, oppose letting small business owners refuse to serve gay and lesbian people by margins of roughly two to one white evangelicals, by 56 percent to 39 percent, say shopkeepers should be allowed to so discriminate.
...
Those prophesies about the 1960s were wrong; but they fueled the alliance of white Christians with right-wing politics from the 1980s forward, and that alliance has repelled many younger people from religion out of a distaste at seeing religion so eagerly bend the knee to short-term political gain. That is to say, Christians’ response to a misperceived crisis have become, in fact, a self-fulfilling prophecy.
...
We should take no care for the morrow, but preach compassion and mercy to all, without distinction. If we do that, they’ll know we are Christians by our love rather than our fear.

---

Love, not fear which makes Christians lash out in hate, is true Christianity.--Percy

Yeah, sized you up pretty well, didn't it.What part did you object to the most? Making a theological big deal out of selling wedding cakes to gays while voting for pedofiles? Rejecting the main stream media while believing every Twitter rumor and Facebook post? Preferring the word of Vladimir Putin over our own CIA and FBI? Liking guns but not immigrants? Liking the death penality but not the impoverished? Giving lip service to Jesus' teachings but believing poor people deserve what they get, and prison inmates worse? Declaring yourselves victims while discriminating against Muslims? Alienating younger Christians by so eagerly seeking political gain at the expense of faith?Or was it his last sentence you hated most:

quote:

---

We should take no care for the morrow, but preach compassion and mercy to all, without distinction. If we do that, they’ll know we are Christians by our love rather than our fear.

---

Do you have anything that isn't non-substantive and content-free to say?--Percy

You are wrong once again. All the items are from the recent news, some as recently as last week, none older than a few weeks. I'll explain. Calling immigrants dangerous is just the Christian right's excuse for not liking immigration. The Christian right in general doesn't like immigrants. See How Americans View Immigrants, and What They Want from Immigration Reform: Findings from the 2015 American Values Atlas. Scroll down to the section on "The Cultural Impact of Immigrants by Religious Affiliation". White evangelical Protestants rank highest in viewing immigrants as "Threatens traditional American customs and values." The point it actually made is that the Christian right has elevated the theological importance of refusing certain pastries to gays above that of keeping pedophiles out of public office. The recent example is Roy Moore, the defeated Senatorial candidate in last week's Alabama election. When Trump met with Putin a few weeks ago he was assured that the Russians did not hack the 2016 presidential election, despite what he's been told by the CIA and the FBI. Trump said he believes Putin. See the article, Christians are more than twice as likely to blame a person’s poverty on lack of effort. You see fear everywhere, of gays, of immigrants, of different cultures, of government, of the main stream media, and so on. You could more accurately say, "Evangelicals only love people like themselves." There wasn't "all this stuff against prisoners." It was a single mention referring to Trump's assertion that criminals aren't treated badly enough. For instance, there was when he said that police can stop protecting the heads of those being placed into police cars. It got cheers. Yeah, I think that was already plenty of ignorance and malice. It's an opinion piece, but it does draw upon a number of facts. Read it again, this time clicking on the links that provide the support for its claims.--Percy