Christian conservatives need to read the bible instead of beating on it.

[James D Hill]

That is also a moral judgement.

Everyone has a right to make moral judgement as long as they don't force it upon others. If you want to be some Jesus freak then the more power to you just don't push that pius BS on others. They don't need to sit in high judgment when we try to stop a bad law like the war on drugs or try to make things fair for the gay community by legalizing gay marriage. Get out of the way and let freedom ring.

 

[James D Hill]

The sin Jesus and Paul were most concerned about was greed, something the Religious Right not only doesn't condemn, but seems to cultivate and praise.

The fixation of the religious right on gay sex is mostly a fictive result of their overactive imagination. The Law isn't in effect on Christians, so that's not the source of their obsessive desire to discuss male/male sex. Jesus never mentions it. Paul mentions male/male sex once, in Romans 1 (curiously not as a sin, but as punishment for another sin, idolatry),and proceeds to say explicitly that anybody who judges those people is worse, in Romans 2.

So you don't have to be Sigmund Freud to figure out why the religious right is fixated on male/male sex. Just ask Ted Haggad.

You know that is an outstanding point my friend. The far right seems to have no problem with greed at all. In fact capitalism is driven by greed. What would Jesus think?

 

[Goshin]

Everyone has a right to make moral judgement as long as they don't force it upon others. If you want to be some Jesus freak then the more power to you just don't push that pius BS on others. They don't need to sit in high judgment when we try to stop a bad law like the war on drugs or try to make things fair for the gay community by legalizing gay marriage. Get out of the way and let freedom ring.

Yes, but you just made a moral judgement about what should be enforced by law and what shouldn't. The fact that you made it on a different basis than some other people would, does not change the fact that is is a moral judgement.

 

[James D Hill]

Yes, but you just made a moral judgement about what should be enforced by law and what shouldn't. The fact that you made it on a different basis than some other people would, does not change the fact that is is a moral judgement.

So what? My moral judgement is for freedom and theirs is facism. What point are you trying to make and are you defending Jesus freaks who sit in high judgement?

 

[James D Hill]

In Roman times, those dudes had young male sex slaves. They were a twisted lot!

Yeah if you gave it too your slave in the rear end it was OK but if your slave did that to you it was a scandle.

 

[Goshin]

So what? My moral judgement is for freedom and theirs is facism. What point are you trying to make and are you defending Jesus freaks who sit in high judgement?

The point I'm making is that you started off disparaging making legislation based on moral choices, and I've been pointing out that that position is a moral decision.

In point of fact, almost all important decisions are ultimately about moral choices.

The real argument involves whose morals will legislation be based on, not whether morality affects legislation: it does. Religious, philosophical, secular, utilitarian, it is all morality.

 

[Stuckinred]

Yeah if you gave it too your slave in the rear end it was OK but if your slave did that to you it was a scandle.

Emperor Caesar Jarius Sanduskyest!

 

[hfd]

"Christ was not against abortion nor gays."

How do we know that?

 

[jwzg]

If christians can't control those around them, what good is belief?

Hill, the Bible says "judge not lest you be judged according to the same measure". The word of God is very clear about what behaviors are an anathema to God. I DON'T believe the constitution allows me to impose any other law on you than the laws created under the constitution. However, I will say that as for me and my household, we will follow the teachings of Christ, and I'd advise you or any other big brother to stay out of our business just as I stay out of yours.
Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Board Express

 

[Gardener]

The point I'm making is that you started off disparaging making legislation based on moral choices, and I've been pointing out that that position is a moral decision.

In point of fact, almost all important decisions are ultimately about moral choices.

The real argument involves whose morals will legislation be based on, not whether morality affects legislation: it does. Religious, philosophical, secular, utilitarian, it is all morality.

I couldn't agree more.

From my observations, I would say that much of the left tries to deny their own morality rather than embracing it because they associate the term with arbitrary prejudice rather than understanding it as a system for making decisions as to right and wrong. By very nature, the act of legislation involves moral choice, yet they try to deny even their own morality as they support one choice over another.

Having watched the nature of political views shift over time since I was young, I would say that one of the great failings among much of the left has to do with the way that too many people fail to embrace liberalism as a moral philosophy and judge the world based upon a liberal template. Instead, they simply react against something else while ending up supporting much that isn't liberal at all. Throw the word "morality" into the mix, and rather than define their own morality, far too many will simply deny the relevance and adopt opposing positions. .

 

[Gardener]

So what? My moral judgement is for freedom and theirs is facism. What point are you trying to make and are you defending Jesus freaks who sit in high judgement?

I suppose it all depends upon your definition of freedom, and how an issue is framed. Take abortion, for instance. Frame the issue as a woman's rights issue and one might arrive at the conclusion that the woman has the right to abort a fetus. Frame it as a human rights issue, though, and one might arrive at the position that the right to life trumps the right to end a life.

Trying to ignore your pejorative use of "Jesus Freaks", though, I might point out that He was actually all about social justice, which is something you should embrace if you really are "very liberal" in truth rather than just name. Much of Jesus' actual message is entirely consistent with liberal ideology, which you might recognize were you to only know what liberalism is and actually read a few of His words.

 

[wolfman24]

Interesting story I always like to tell. I jumped from church to church 20 years ago because I got tired of hearing sermons laced with partisan political seasoning - some would just jump right out and essentially say "vote Republican!" Some were more subtle. Hey, if I wanted to hear that stuff, I'd rather stay home and watch the news than go to church. That, to me, isn't what I go to church for.

Finally, I found my current church, a Lutheran church, where - get this! - our senior pastor actually has a masters degree in Foreign Policy (to go along with his seminary training of course). Now, you'd think, here's a man who would have some credibility on the political side, but you know what? NEVER mentions politics in a partisan manner, doesn't allow it. In fact, one Sunday morning, we went out to our cars after church and some zealot put anti-abortion literature on all our car windows. Many of us complained - not that we're for abortion - but "we don't do that" at our church. He got to the bottom of it and it never happened again.

We also have an "associate" church, a Brethern church, in Cleveland whom we're friendly with and help each other. All black, they come down a couple times a year and their choir sings for us - outstanding stuff! We also go up and do stuff with them. Anyway, their pastor, I remember vividly, during one of their concert breaks, said that as long as he's been around the ministry field, he believes 75% of the so-called "preachers," "pastors" or whatever are not worthy of the title - but ours is. That's because we keep "The main thing the main thing," and worship God, not try and advance a political agenda on Sundays, and our pastor is the reason why.

The older you get, the more rare you find men and women with both intellect AND a good heart. Now these so-called "ministers" whom I call wanna-be $4.95 preachers are typically the ones you hear in a church defending or promoting a political agenda, left or right. That's an INSULT to God in my book. God didn't call you there to be Rev.Jackson or Rev.Limbaugh. After all, ask yourself this - do YOU turn on Michael Moore or Sean Hannity for spiritual guidance? If so, you're sick. So why would you turn to a "man of God" for political direction?

Yes, men and women who go to church do have political leanings and such, but simply put, where does THAT belong in church? It doesn't. Men and women who do "preach" with that agenda woven in are not very bright, and certainly not true servants of God.

Sounds like my kind of guy

 

[wolfman24]

Everyone has a right to make moral judgement as long as they don't force it upon others. If you want to be some Jesus freak then the more power to you just don't push that pius BS on others. They don't need to sit in high judgment when we try to stop a bad law like the war on drugs or try to make things fair for the gay community by legalizing gay marriage. Get out of the way and let freedom ring.

Give up man he is not going to change his mind or give in.

 

[SheWolf]

Sorry, haven't read the whole thread... but what gets on my nerves is how Christians act like American is their country and belongs to them. They say, America is a Christian country. On Fox, they promote this mentality that Christians should be offended by the phrase Happy Holidays, and everything everything during the Christmas season should be about acknowledging Christians. It doesn't make sense to me at all. A lot of my friends are Jewish, but they don't complain about how Christmas tree displays are oppressing them.

There are many minority religious groups in America, and they don't complain about Christmas as much as Christians actually do... and the Christians are the one's with their displays and traditions everywhere. And FTR, I am not complaining about those traditions. I am just complaining about their attitude of superiority or something.

This country is about freedom of religion. It's not Christians and their traditions first.

 

[James D Hill]

"Christ was not against abortion nor gays."

How do we know that?

He was not against marijuana either my friend and he drank wine so he must not cared about getting a buzz in moderation.

 

[SMTA]

I am sick and tired of so called Christian conservatives sitting in high judgment of others when that is not the teachings of Jesus Christ. Christ said "Judge not or you will be judged". He also said "Those of you without sin cast the first stone" and of course "worry not about the speck in you neighbors eye when you have a beam in your own". He also called the Pharisee's hypocrite for praying like a bunch of wildmen just to put on a show for others just like the Penticostals do now.

It looks like the religeous right is a bunch of hypocrites when they stand against gay marriage,legalized marijuana and abortion. Sin that is personal is between you and God and not the business of a bunch of self righteous moral crusaders. If you don't like something then don't do it but don't sin by being self righteous and a zealot unless you agree with AC/DC "Hell is not a bad place to be". At least you would have some kick ass rock music down there.

Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly. (John 7:24)

Matthew, Ch. 7:
1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

That covers judgement.
The problem is that Christians, like everyone else, are guilty of trying to force their interpretation of the bible upon others without regard for their own actions, and with their individual slant.

Same thing takes place at DP when folks argue about a specific argument or quote.

Welcome to the real world, as you have passed judgement upon different Christian denominations based upon your opinion and personal prejudice.

Your childish AC/DC example further reduces any credibility of your observations.

Frankly, your comments reek of baiting and trolling Christians and religious conservatives.

Your personal prejudices are just as bad as those whom you have tried to condemn.

 

[head of joaquin]

You know that is an outstanding point my friend. The far right seems to have no problem with greed at all. In fact capitalism is driven by greed. What would Jesus think?

The religious right postures about keeping gays out of their churches, when they should be keeping the rich out. Indeed Paul says to do just that -- but of course the religious right does the opposite of what the New Testament actually says.

1 Corinthians 5:11 But rather I wrote to you not to associate with any one who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber--not even to eat with such a one.

 

[mac]

I am sick and tired of so called Christian conservatives sitting in high judgment of others

But it's ok for you?

 

[spanky]

The religious right postures about keeping gays out of their churches, when they should be keeping the rich out. Indeed Paul says to do just that -- but of course the religious right does the opposite of what the New Testament actually says.

1 Corinthians 5:11 But rather I wrote to you not to associate with any one who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber--not even to eat with such a one.

"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.'

I guess that black balls the catholic church.

 

[head of joaquin]

But it's ok for you?

It's the religious right that thumps bibles and purports to follow the gospel. They don't. I don't think James is doing the same thing, by definition.

The New Testament condemn hypocrisy more than anything else. And the religious right is soaking in it.

I'm a Christian and the religious right is heretical and a threat to Christianity in my opinion. Nonbeleivers aren't. I like nonbelevers and am glad to share the good news with them. They tend to understand it more than the hypocrites of the religious right.

 

[mac]

It's the religious right that thumps bibles and purports to follow the gospel. They don't. I don't think James is doing the same thing, by definition.

and you have no problem judging them.

Bit hypocritical, no?

:shrug:

 

[head of joaquin]

and you have no problem judging them.

Bit hypocritical, no?

:shrug:

Of course not. Paul says we must judge purported christians who are greedy and hypocritical. It harms Christianity. He says not to judge non-Christians. The religious right are greedy heretics and most be judged and condemned by faithful Christians.

Don't you rightwingers ever bother to read this stuff:

1 Cor 5: 9

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with immoral men; 10not at all meaning the immoral of this world, or the greedy and robbers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11But rather I wrote to you not to associate with any one who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber--not even to eat with such a one.

12For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13God judges those outside. "Drive out the wicked person from among you."

All faithful Christians must drive out the religious rightwingers from the church.

 

[mac]

Of course not. Paul says we must judge purported christians who are greedy and hypocritical. It harms Christianity. He says not to judge non-Christians. The religious right are greedy heretics and most be judged and condemned by faithful Christians.

Don't you rightwingers ever bother to read this stuff:

I'm not a right winger.

1 Cor 5: 9

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with immoral men; 10not at all meaning the immoral of this world, or the greedy and robbers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11But rather I wrote to you not to associate with any one who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber--not even to eat with such a one.

12For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13God judges those outside. "Drive out the wicked person from among you."

All faithful Christians must drive out the religious rightwingers from the church.

Nor am I a bible scholar, but this seems purely an example of twisting scripture to fit ones argument, if you ask me. You sit and judge, while complaining about judgmental people. :shrug:

 

[head of joaquin]

I'm not a right winger.



Nor am I a bible scholar, but this seems purely an example of twisting scripture to fit ones argument, if you ask me. You sit and judge, while complaining about judgmental people. :shrug:

I don't know what you are, but 1 Cor 5 is clear. Don't judge nonchristians -- we have to share the gospel message with them not judge them (that's God's business according to Paul). But to just "brothers" -- i.e., people who call themselves Christains -- but who are greedy and immoral. You have an obligation to judge them to protect the Christian witness.

It's plain as day. Why are you trying to gloss this plain language, I have to wonder?

Finally, your attack on James Hill makes no sense from a Christians perspective since my understanding is he's not a Christian. So he doesn't have any obligatio to follow the gospel message. So why are you attackng him instead of the hypocritical rightwingers who are destroying the Christian witness with their greed, hypocricy, and judgmental proclamation in clear violation of 1 Cor 5 and Jesus' admonitons.

I can only assume you simply don't want to follow the clear language of the gospel and prefer to defend the hypocrisy and immorality of the religious right, which is what you are doing.

Tell me what part of this you don't understand:

1 Cor 5: 9

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with immoral men; 10not at all meaning the immoral of this world, or the greedy and robbers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11But rather I wrote to you not to associate with any one who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber--not even to eat with such a one.

12For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13God judges those outside. "Drive out the wicked person from among you

 

[mac]

I don't know what you are, but 1 Cor 5 is clear. Don't judge nonchristians -- we have to share the gospel message with them not judge them (that's God's business according to Paul). But to just "brothers" -- i.e., people who call themselves Christains -- but who are greedy and immoral. You have an obligation to judge them to protect the Christian witness.

It's plain as day. Why are you trying to gloss this plain language, I have to wonder?

Finally, your attack on James Hill makes no sense from a Christians perspective since my understanding is he's not a Christian. So he doesn't have any obligatio to follow the gospel message. So why are you attackng him instead of the hypocritical rightwingers who are destroying the Christian witness with their greed, hypocricy, and judgmental proclamation in clear violation of 1 Cor 5 and Jesus' admonitons.

Actually, what is being talked about in Corinthians is "sexual immorality" and criminality, and Jesus plainly said "Judge not lest ye be judged." You are claiming that your version of immorality is worthy of judgement, but theirs isn't. That is not only judgmental, but hypocritical to boot.