CHRISTIAN HYPPOCRISY

[VanceMack]

Your reference to Marx just killed your credibility

I believe in LOCO PARENTIS when it comes to schools....
parents elect school boards and state reps..........enough said

Horseshit. The Marxists have been pushing this agenda OPENLY in both universities and now the public schools. The entire BLM movement was BUILT on Marxist principles. The CRT and 'anti-racism' agenda is nothing but a bullshit twisted pack of lies meant to divide the country. And as far as the agenda of targeting children and creating gender confusion, hatred amongst racism etc...you are either complicit willfully or blindly....but you are absolutely complicit.

 

[Goshin]

agree------------if parents are upset then they should home school

Most people who can afford it send their kids to private school. Many others homeschool if they can. Not just Christians, by a long shot.

That, in itself, says something about the state of our public schools.

Not everyone can. Son#1 was born with dyslexia. The public school had programs and specialists for that; the private schools did not. Homeschool was considered but since we are not learning-disorder specialists ourselves it did not seem feasible.
I probably should have done it anyway... in the long term Son#1 probably learned more from me than he ever did in school. In 13 years of public school he had *one* excellent teacher who really helped him, and the rest were nearly useless. I still pray for that *one* teacher every time I think of her, she was a gem.

 

[Goshin]

Those New Testament citations are from Paul's epistles, letters he wrote to congregations around the Mediteranean offering his opinions on a variety of subjects. He was trying to keep everyone on the same page and he succeeded, he is the reason Christianity didn't become just another sect of Judaism like the Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes.
But those were his opinions. Nobody, well, 'body' might be the wrong term, no-one gave him the authority to decide what is a sin. Any consideration of homosexuality as being sinful has to come back to the Mosaic laws in Leviticus and run up against that whole "if this why not that and that and that" argument.

True, those were all Paul. The Apostle Paul.

I seem to run into more and more people who want to throw Paul out of the Bible for various reasons. Be a mighty thin New Testament if that were done.

But he was accepted as an Apostle by the other Apostles, so the question is largely moot... for serious believers, at least.

The question of the correct interpretation of those verses is a more reasonable topic of debate, imho, but given that a decisive and final understanding is improbable, probably pointless.

As for me, I don't believe in being mean to folks, even if I don't agree with the way they live. Bible seems pretty clear on that.

 

[Grand Mal]

True, those were all Paul. The Apostle Paul.

I seem to run into more and more people who want to throw Paul out of the Bible for various reasons. Be a mighty thin New Testament if that were done.

But he was accepted as an Apostle by the other Apostles, so the question is largely moot... for serious believers, at least.

The question of the correct interpretation of those verses is a more reasonable topic of debate, imho, but given that a decisive and final understanding is improbable, probably pointless.

As for me, I don't believe in being mean to folks, even if I don't agree with the way they live. Bible seems pretty clear on that.

I got no problem with Paul being in the Bible. He had more to do with the Christian church becoming as influential as it is than Peter, the rock Jesus left his church resting on. But when he spoke it wasn't the word of God, it was the word of Paul. Some Christians want every word in the Bible to be God speaking to them but that's reading something that isn't there.
Interpretation is a sticky subject given the variety of contexts and multiple translations. What sometimes happens is people not getting their beliefs from the Bible, they bring their beliefs to the Bible looking for affirmation. And given that variety of contexts I could probably find affirmation for nearly anything.
Your last line is it in a nutshell. The thread that runs through everything Jesus taught is mutual respect, regard, affection even and no judgement.

 

[mrjurrs]

The internet meme pictures are childish, lazy, and are used by idiots who can't carry a discussion with other literate adults.

Said the cat avatar.

 

[Goshin]

I got no problem with Paul being in the Bible. He had more to do with the Christian church becoming as influential as it is than Peter, the rock Jesus left his church resting on. But when he spoke it wasn't the word of God, it was the word of Paul. Some Christians want every word in the Bible to be God speaking to them but that's reading something that isn't there.
Interpretation is a sticky subject given the variety of contexts and multiple translations. What sometimes happens is people not getting their beliefs from the Bible, they bring their beliefs to the Bible looking for affirmation. And given that variety of contexts I could probably find affirmation for nearly anything.
Your last line is it in a nutshell. The thread that runs through everything Jesus taught is mutual respect, regard, affection even and no judgement.

I agree that context is extremely important... so much so that it is hard to overstate its importance in interpretation.

I also agree that in some letters verses and contexts, Paul was expressing an opinion, not necessarily commandments from God directly. Still, as an Apostle his words carry much weight regardless.

Yes, a lot of people do "go looking for affirmation", which is the entirely wrong way to go about interpreting Scripture. In any given large group of people, Christians or whatever, you find some percentage of folks who aren't too bright, or not overly honest in their devotion to their alleged principles.

I've known people who try to "claim" Biblical promises or commandments that were, for instance, only given to the Levites of a certain time period under specific circumstances, and I facepalm internally.

It's a complex business which is why there are priests and pastors, typically a bit more educated on the matter (at least hopefully).

I am a mere layman, but I have studied carefully for half a century... as I think anyone who devotes themselves to a given belief system ought to do.

Scripture should be approached with spiritual humility and a mind open to God, considered carefully in light of the context, time and place, particularly who is speaking and who are they talking to, and why, and handled with the care one shows a sharp blade.

It is regrettable there are many who call themselves by His name, and do not take suitable care with His word.

 

[Grand Mal]

I agree that context is extremely important... so much so that it is hard to overstate its importance in interpretation.

I also agree that in some letters verses and contexts, Paul was expressing an opinion, not necessarily commandments from God directly. Still, as an Apostle his words carry much weight regardless.

Yes, a lot of people do "go looking for affirmation", which is the entirely wrong way to go about interpreting Scripture. In any given large group of people, Christians or whatever, you find some percentage of folks who aren't too bright, or not overly honest in their devotion to their alleged principles.

I've known people who try to "claim" Biblical promises or commandments that were, for instance, only given to the Levites of a certain time period under specific circumstances, and I facepalm internally.

It's a complex business which is why there are priests and pastors, typically a bit more educated on the matter (at least hopefully).

I am a mere layman, but I have studied carefully for half a century... as I think anyone who devotes themselves to a given belief system ought to do.

Scripture should be approached with spiritual humility and a mind open to God, considered carefully in light of the context, time and place, particularly who is speaking and who are they talking to, and why, and handled with the care one shows a sharp blade.

It is regrettable there are many who call themselves by His name, and do not take suitable care with His word.

Good post.
I especially like the last phrase. I'm not a Christian but the teachings in the Bible are important to me and I feel protective when I see them being abused. I often find myself arguing here with people who, in my opinion, are perverting the meaning to support a social or political agenda or being too literal about parables and allegories. The key, in my opinion, is to read carefully, paying attention to what's written, how the words are used and what they mean, not what you want them to say.
The best example off the top of my head is the story about the Garden of Eden. It's not about snakes and apples, It's about losing a state of innocence, a state of grace, by learning to call this good and that evil. When we were primitive innocents nothing was good or evil, everything just was. And the typical Christian perception of 'original sin', that we are born guilty of the sin of the disobedience in the Garden, is the main reason I can't be a Christian. We lost our innocence and had to become agricultural but I don't buy the guilt thing, which means I don't buy the need for redemption.
Anyway, this post ran on a bit.

 

[Goshin]

juGood post.
I especially like the last phrase. I'm not a Christian but the teachings in the Bible are important to me and I feel protective when I see them being abused. I often find myself arguing here with people who, in my opinion, are perverting the meaning to support a social or political agenda or being too literal about parables and allegories. The key, in my opinion, is to read carefully, paying attention to what's written, how the words are used and what they mean, not what you want them to say.
The best example off the top of my head is the story about the Garden of Eden. It's not about snakes and apples, It's about losing a state of innocence, a state of grace, by learning to call this good and that evil. When we were primitive innocents nothing was good or evil, everything just was. And the typical Christian perception of 'original sin', that we are born guilty of the sin of the disobedience in the Garden, is the main reason I can't be a Christian. We lost our innocence and had to become agricultural but I don't buy the guilt thing, which means I don't but the need for redemption.
Anyway, this post ran on a bit.

Hm, well whether you take Eden and original sin literally or allegorically, I think it is safe to say that all humans inherit "in our blood" (genes) the capacity for both good and ill. I'd also say that if there lives any person old enough to vote who has never sinned, or wronged someone to put it another way, I'd be quite astonished.

I do firmly believe in the need for redemption.

As I get older, though, I find myself much slower to judge others. Though I always seek to be better, I am a flawed and imperfect man and will only see Heaven by Jesus' grace. In terms of moral behavior I have age on my side, and it would be hubris to judge someone who is not as "far along in their walk" too harshly. I prefer to advise, suggest, encourage and offer options to those who look to me for guidance.

I also find myself much more inclined to mind my own business. I find little profit in sticking my nose where it isn't wanted, or quoting scripture "at people" who are not interested in hearing it. I generally only offer counsel to those who seek it, explicitly or implicitly.

 

[tshade]

Horseshit. The Marxists have been pushing this agenda OPENLY in both universities and now the public schools. The entire BLM movement was BUILT on Marxist principles. The CRT and 'anti-racism' agenda is nothing but a bullshit twisted pack of lies meant to divide the country. And as far as the agenda of targeting children and creating gender confusion, hatred amongst racism etc...you are either complicit willfully or blindly....but you are absolutely complicit.

You just confirmed by post on your credibilty

 

[tshade]

Most people who can afford it send their kids to private school. Many others homeschool if they can. Not just Christians, by a long shot.

That, in itself, says something about the state of our public schools.

Not everyone can. Son#1 was born with dyslexia. The public school had programs and specialists for that; the private schools did not. Homeschool was considered but since we are not learning-disorder specialists ourselves it did not seem feasible.
I probably should have done it anyway... in the long term Son#1 probably learned more from me than he ever did in school. In 13 years of public school he had *one* excellent teacher who really helped him, and the rest were nearly useless. I still pray for that *one* teacher every time I think of her, she was a gem.

disagree----the public school do great work with what they are given. The dynamics of teaching are such that it is nearly impossible to judge them unless you have been in their shoes....

 

[VanceMack]

You just confirmed by post on your credibilty

EDUCATION; The Mainstreaming of Marxism in U.S. Colleges (Published 1989)

www.nytimes.com

Cultural Marxism Is Real — The James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal

Cultural Marxism exists. It has a history, followers, adherents, and left a perceptible mark on academic subjects and lines of inquiry.

www.jamesgmartin.center

The Prevalence of Marxism in Academia - Econlib

As the Iron Curtain crumbled, people often joked, “Marxism is dead everywhere – except American universities.” The stereotype of the Marxist professor runs deep. But is this stereotype grounded in statistical fact? Here are the results from a 2006 nationally representative survey of American...

www.econlib.org

Deliberately or otherwise, there are none so blind as those that will not see.

 

[Fishking]

View attachment 67386248

When I saw that the title was all caps, I knew there was a high probability that this would be a dumb OP, and I was right. Lets innumerate:
1. This is a political meme and doesn't deserve a unique thread. We literally have a specific thread dedicated for these memes.
1.a. This means you're begging for attention but are too lazy to make a good attempt at it.
2. Homosexuality comes up in the New Testament as well, and it's still not shown favorably.
3. Christians shouldn't be persecuting gay people, even though in Christian belief it's a sin.
3.a. Not allowing transwomen into women's sports isn't persecution. It's fairness.
3.b. Not supporting the mutilation of children, giving them damaging hormones and lying about it not being harmful, and confusing the hell outta kids (especially the vulnerable ones) isn't persecution either.

 

[HangLow]

​

 

[LouC]

View attachment 67386248

Oh, I am certain it has nothing to do with Hypocrisy, I am betting is has everything to do with one of those other ancient Greek bastards!

 

[Goshin]

View attachment 67386481​

The conservative answer to that goes something like this:
"The second half of the meme is talking about money taken from others by force of law, and given as healthcare or welfare. You're complaining that gov't didn't rob the rich at gunpoint in order to give you the spoils often enough. That isn't charity, it is legalized theft."

Another point is this: Gov is already spending three trillion dollars a year it doesn't have, mostly on "domestic spending", and incurring that in debt, which affects inflation and prices over the long term. The military budget is a pittance in comparison, just fyi.
That isn't sustainable. Raising taxes that much probably isn't sustainable either... take too much capital out of the system and it will collapse (see Venezuela). If you kill the golden goose, nobody gets anything.

As for immigration.... look there are *billions* of people who'd like to come to America and improve their lives. The US can't hold them all. Most of them don't speak English, and many don't know how to survive in a free capitalist country like ours. Many have no job skills relevant to the modern US. The line has to be drawn somewhere.

Don't get me wrong, I sympathize with the sentiment. But looking at the matter from a practical standpoint, the gov can't give everyone everything they want, or let BILLIONS climb over the border unchecked. That doesn't end well for anyone.

To put it more personally, are you willing to host ten immigrants, from another country and culture, in your house, feed and clothe them, teach them English and how to get on in America, teach them a job skill, and support them until they are able to support themselves, knowing that will probably take 4-5 years? If you said yes, have you done so? No? Why not?
Perhaps you protest that you CAN'T: you don't have the room, you lack the resources, you couldn't feed them. That's a reasonable response... and exactly what I'm talking about on a larger scale.

Hey I love to help people. I jump at the chance when I can. I have to be realistic about what resources I have and what resources I can expend, though. Unlike Gov I can't just print money and hope we don't drown in inflation and debt.

 

[tshade]

When I saw that the title was all caps, I knew there was a high probability that this would be a dumb OP, and I was right. Lets innumerate:
1. This is a political meme and doesn't deserve a unique thread. We literally have a specific thread dedicated for these memes.
1.a. This means you're begging for attention but are too lazy to make a good attempt at it.
2. Homosexuality comes up in the New Testament as well, and it's still not shown favorably.
3. Christians shouldn't be persecuting gay people, even though in Christian belief it's a sin.
3.a. Not allowing transwomen into women's sports isn't persecution. It's fairness.
3.b. Not supporting the mutilation of children, giving them damaging hormones and lying about it not being harmful, and confusing the hell outta kids (especially the vulnerable ones) isn't persecution either.

??? the meme does not bring up what you are writing.......you lose the debate

 

[Easton Kai]

But not how to spell (see: thread title)

LOL!!!

 

[Fishking]

??? the meme does not bring up what you are writing.......you lose the debate

It actually does. I just added more to cover any bases that might need it. I'm being proactive there. Since you actually didn't refute anything I wrote, I'd say you definitely came out on the short end.