As a Christian I am challenged to perfect my faith. Also as a Christian, I am aware that it is impossible for me to do so. The fact that I can never achieve perfection does not discourage me from trying. Christ was the perfect being, the spotless lamb. I, as a Christian, seek to be as Christ like as possible, and in all honesty I am a failure, but that’s okay, we are all imperfect beings.
However, as I have looked inward, I have realized that being a more perfect Christian has nothing to do with the people around me. As Christians, we are told that we can only come to the father, through the son. This means that no person can save my soul, and I can save no one else’s soul. When I look around this world that surrounds me, I see sin everywhere. I see things that in my imperfect understanding of God’s word, I feel are sinful.
I see homosexuality, I see abortion, I see adultery, I see lying, cheating, stealing, violence against children, and on and on.
While I see these things as sin, they are not my sin. We are told as Christians not to judge, lest we be judged, to not cast the first stone, unless we are without sin, that we should first remove the beam from our own eyes before we attempt to remove the mote from our brother’s eye.
So, if I am not practicing homosexuality, then I have not committed that sin, and there is nothing I can do to save the person who has. The same is true of abortion, if I have not participated in an abortion, then I have not committed that sin. And just because I have not committed these sins does not give me the authority to judge those who have. It is not my place to decide whether they have committed a sin or not, that is God’s place. I am responsible for my own soul, as they are for theirs.
This brings me to something that has long bothered me, and while I have addressed it in the past, I now see it more and more. It has become chic among certain circles to identify oneself as, “a good Christian conservative”. What does that even mean?
In my view the two things do not have any relationship. Being a Christian is a spiritual thing, and being a conservative is of this world, it is politics and man’s creation.
But there is a group of people around this nation that have taken this label on as a badge of honor. And that is their right if they so choose. This type of self-identification is very strong here in Sussex County Delaware, especially among Republicans. The GOP has long been the party that has identified, and stood up for freedoms. And religious freedom being our most sacred. Unfortunately, some people have taken on this mantle of “good Christian conservative” as an armor, or a shield against criticism in the political arena. They believe that if they cloak all of their casuistry behind this claim of Christianity, then how can they be challenged on their motives?
Well I consider myself to be both a Christian, and a conservative, however as I have said, I do not feel the two actually compliment each other. I do believe that my faith guides my views of politics, but I have come to believe that I should not attempt to impose my views of faith or morality upon others. Not because it infringes on their rights, though it may in some cases, but because it goes against what I understand Christianity to be.
I have come to feel that this underlying moral fringe of the GOP has driven the party too far to the right. This coterie feels they are inspired by God to make judgments of others. And as “good Christian conservatives”, they then must use the political machine to punish those they have judged as impure. They seek to pass laws, or retain laws that would punish sin. This is not any man’s place, they seek to impose God’s will, without knowing it.
I think the part that bothers me the most, is the fact that, the most ardent of these “good Christian conservatives” are often the biggest hypocrites.
Here in Sussex County we have more than our share of these Christian hypocrites. And for full disclosure I once traveled in this circle and was accepted among them, though I have alienated myself from them lately due to my view on my faith, and how it affects my political views.
This moral fringe has blurred the lines between faith and politics to the point they see no difference. While they condemn Muslims for their theocracies, in truth these so-called “good Christian conservatives” would impose a Christian theocracy upon this nation if they could. Here is Sussex we have seen our share of such attempts.
I can only speak for myself, and can only relate my experiences. Those GCCs that I have been involved with seem to have a thread of commonality running through them. At the center is a PAC, the 35th Representative District Conservative Committee. This Pac was formed to support what its head, Jack Clark, described as “good conservatives”. It was used to raise money, and to give money. Full disclosure again, I worked some of the events that this PAC put on. And let me say, as far as I know there is nothing illegal about what they have done or are doing.
This PAC has political ties to quite a cast of characters here in Sussex, and most would describe themselves as, “good Christian conservatives”. As I have said, it is not for me to judge their Christian faith, but I will judge their attempts to impose their faith upon others.
One of the people this PAC supported was Glen Urquhart, who was a strong supporter of prayer in schools, and often argued that there is no separation of church and state implied in the U.S. Constitution, here is a video that was shot in Jack Clarks barn,
This is how these people talk when they think they are among friends. He says at the end, ask your liberal friends why they are Nazis?
This PAC has supported other candidates and elected officials, some who share this fringe view of Christianity and conservatism, and some who do not.
Glen Urquhart’s campaign manager was Vance Phillips, Mr. Phillips is another person who wears his Christianity upon his sleeve, he is also a Sussex County Councilman, and has been involved in a law suit brought against the council because of his, and other member’s insistence on holding a Christian prayer during the monthly council meetings.
This PAC is simply the beginning of a daisy chain of people. Mr. Phillips’ co-council member Sam Wilson is another of the PAC’s favorites. Mr. Wilson has long argued for bringing prayer back to schools, one can only suppose that he would have it be a Christian prayer. Mr. Wilson was also involved in the law suit over the prayers during public meetings, costing tax payers thousands of dollars.
Many here in Sussex will already know of Mr. Phillips’ pending civil law suit over allegations that he sexually abused an eighteen year old woman.
Both Mr. Wilson and Mr. Phillips were recently involved in a controversy over statements made during a council meeting concerning a grant request from the NAACP. Many felt that the statements they made were racist and not very Christian. For the latest controversy with Mr. Wilson, listen to this recording of the most recent council meeting in which Mr. Wilson. a “good Christian conservative” judges needy parents and children, is this a Christian point of view?
Sam Wilson was, and is a strong supporter of Sussex County Register of Wills Cindy Green, and while I believe Mrs. Green to be a good person, she has made some questionable choices in who she supports. Both Mrs. Green and Sam Wilson were big supporters of Eric Bodenweiser, who is awaiting a second trial based on allegations that he sexually abused a ten-year old boy. His first trial ended in a hung jury. During that trial Mr. Bodenweiser admitted to having given pornography to the ten-year old boy. Mr. Bodeweiser ran for state Senate, but had to drop out after the charges came to light. Mr. Bodenweiser was also a very outspoken supporters of prayer during public school board meeting in the Indian River School District. He organized prayer protest during the public segment of the meetings.
Not only did this take time away from citizens who had actual district business to bring up, but like the Sussex County Council, the IRSD was also sued. It seems as though these “good Christian conservatives” have no problem costing tax payers thousands of dollars when it suits their purpose.
Eric Bodenweiser may have been, up until his arrest, the most outspoken, and volatile member of this fundamentalist fringe. He also may have been up until his arrest the most outspoken and ardent supporter of Sussex County Sheriff Jeff Christopher, who I am sure would self describe himself as a “good Christian conservative”.
Sheriff Christopher may not have the support of all of the other people I have listed here due to his law suit against the County Council, he and Mr. Wilson are not on the best of terms. And it is a documented fact the Sheriff Christopher and Vance Phillips had an actual physical confrontation. This all arose from the dispute over what powers the sheriff’s office did or did not have.
Sheriff Christopher also brought a law suit against the state General Assembly for passing legislation he felt was unconstitutional, a law suit that he lost. And in doing so, again costing tax payers thousands of dollars. So once again, a so-called conservative has no problem frivolously spending tax payer’s dollars when it suits their agenda.
The latest demonstration of this moral superiority complex may have been within the Cape Henlopen School District. Board member Sandi Minard has been involved in two separate clashes over book banning and censorship of reading list. The first involved her wanting to remove all books from the district libraries that contained “violence, despair and sexual references”. This is even more ironic considering that Ms. Minard had also in the past fought to have the Bible taught in the school district, a book that one has to admit has violence, despair and sexual references.
And more recently, Ms. Minard was instrumental in the censorship of a summer reading list. Supposedly removing a book due to graphic language, but many felt it was due to the homosexual content of the book.
Much time and effort was spent fighting off these blatant impositions of one person’s moral views. This was so clearly a case of someone in a position of authority attempting to impose their individual views upon others in a public setting.
Let me back up and point out that Ms. Minard has been , and most likely is still involved in some manner with the 35th PAC and the others I have listed above. In fact when I put her name in a search engine, I got back a photo of Glen Urquhart and a story of her endorsing him for elected office.
I have focused here on people either in elected office, or those seeking elected office. However, there is a large number of people behind these people, people who support the view that they must impose their faith upon as many people as possible, and are using these elected offices as a platform to do so. They see it as their mission from God.
Some of these supporters include the recently fired radio talk show host, Bill Colley, who used his microphone to spread the views of the fundamentalist fringe. But underneath the veneer of so-called “good Christian conservative” there lurked a deep-seated hatred of people who did not conform to his ideal of what a “good Christian conservative” was.
You also have groups such as the 9-12 Delaware Patriots, and other groups that exist only to impose their views through manipulation of our founding principles upon as many people as possible.
Let me say, this is America, these people are free to hold to whatever definition of faith they choose. They are also free to work to convert as many people to those views as they can. What they are not free to do, in my opinion, is to impose, through elected office, their religious views upon others. They have no right or authority to impose their prayers upon other citizens during public meetings, or in public schools. They have no arbitrary authority to decide what is and what isn’t acceptable for public consumption.
This is America, not some third world dictatorship where the elite ruling class decides the moral compass of the people. These so-called “good Christian conservatives” should focus on the beam within their own eye, before attempting to remove the mote from their brother’s eye.
You know, I would have read on until I hit the part where you state homosexuality is a sin. Obviously, you base your Christian beliefs on the Bible of the false prophets.
Frank,
As a fellow Christian, I actually agree with the first half of your post. I freely admit to not having enough first hand knowledge of the individuals you mention later, so I can’t really comment on the second half. However, I think you’ve made some excellent points and expressed them very well.
A true non-backsliding Christian (and don’t we all do that from time to time), regardless of their political views, would have to honestly agree with your statements and keep them in mind in their endeavors. Not so sure the finger pointing in the second half is consistent with the first, but I commend you nonetheless. Thanks for a thought-provoking piece.
Redneck, if you truly read what I wrote, then you see that I say, ” I see things that in my imperfect understanding of God’s word, I feel are sinful.”
I say imperfect because, only the truly vain will state they know God’s will, or have a perfect understanding of his word, the Bible. I do read the Bible as a whole book, and interpret it as such.
And if you continue to read you will see that I say, ” It is not my place to decide whether they have committed a sin or not, that is God’s place. I am responsible for my own soul, as they are for theirs.”
So while I may, in my imperfect understanding, see this as sin, I have come to a place in my faith where I no longer feel responsible for the sin of others, and certainly not in any political way, which is the point of the post.
FlyLady, thank you for the kind words, as for the “finger pointing” as you say, I have only related things about public figures, and things that I either have first hand knowledge of, and or that is part of a public record. I use these examples to show the hypocrisy of some, and the blind eye of others.
” When I look around this world that surrounds me, I see sin everywhere. …..I see homosexuality, I see abortion, I see adultery, I see lying, cheating, stealing, violence against children, and on and on.”
Frank,
If you actually ventured outside the “world that surrounds” you (i.e. your TV), you would not “see sin everywhere.”
Delecrat, it is the chicken or the egg question, does pop-culture reflect life, or does life imitate pop-culture. I do find it telling that of the three comments so far, two have focused on this one sentence, out of over 2,000 words, in an attempt to attack me. Is it that the subject of homosexuality has become so taboo that you cannot even use the word without it being taken out of context and being attacked for the mere use of the word? If you are reading in context, you would see that I am not talking about homosexuality, or even sin. I am talking about people thinking that they have the knowledge, or the authority to decide what is sin for others, I have merely stated that I see these things as sin for myself and therefore do not participate in them. But maybe your field of view is so narrow that the broader picture is lost to you.
Frank, when it comes to matters of spiritual teachings, where one derives his information becomes important.
“I see homosexuality, I see abortion, I see adultery, I see lying, cheating, stealing, violence against children, and on and on.”
You lumped sexual orientation, a state of mind one is born with, together with actions people choose to do that no one looks favorably on. Really? You see people who are born gay in the same light as those who lie, cheat, steal, and beats up on children?
It doesn’t matter what you said after that sentence. Nowhere in the Bible is homosexuality condemned as a sin. The fact that you believe it is tells me you are following the book of false prophets and I’m not going to be ensnared in the false prophet’s trap. That’s all I’m saying.
Well I consider myself to be both a Christian, and a conservative, however as I have said, I do not feel the two actually compliment each other.
They don’t? The conservative wing of the GOP is pro-life. The bible is pro-life. How more “complimentary” can you get?
…if I have not participated in an abortion, then I have not committed that sin.
If you support the Socialist-Democrat Party, which advocates abortion, even gruesome, late-term abortions, then you are as culpable as the Nazi’s who didn’t actually pull the lever that released the gas, but did support the party responsible for the genocidal slaughter. Or maybe it isn’t a sin to facilitate murder?
Redneck, you seem to want to focus on my interpretation of what is sin. Are you as concerned with what the people I have listed see as sin? And the fact that they feel justified in legislating morality of their choosing. You seem to want to turn this into a discussion of the Bible, when the post is about how some would turn this nation into their vision of a theocracy.
The difference between myself and them, is that I have realized that even if I see these things as sin, it is not my place to attempt to judge that sin through legislation, nor do I condone legislation that promotes it. What I am saying is, is that my interpretation of sin applies only to me, so I choose not to sin in that manner.
Sin is an individual sport, and laws are intended to serve all equally. The difference is not what I or they see as sin, but that they see it as their calling to legislate their views upon all.
I would again say, I read the Bible as a complete text, I would direct you to Genesis 19.
Frank, I’d like to point out that the story of Sodom and Gomorrah had nothing to do with homosexuality and everything to do with the inhospitality towards foreigners. In the most literal translation of the story, at most one can say is God was condemning bestiality, as the strangers were angels and not human. In a looser translation, since the men didn’t know the foreigners were angels, it could be argued that God was condemning homosexual gang rape, but not homosexuality. Of course, we would have to wonder why God didn’t take issue with Lot offering his two virgin daughters up for a gang rape or why God didn’t take issue with the two daughters getting their father drunk and having sex with him. Now do tell us, since you have taken it on yourself to describe what you believe is and is not sin, exactly what Genesis 19 was really trying to teach us. I think you’ll be hard pressed to find anyone who will agree with you that gang raping virgin daughters is ok in God’s eyes or getting pregnant by one’s own father is hunky-dory with God.
So, again, I will restate my point: if one is going to use the Bible to tell me what is and is not sin, they had better be using the real Bible and not the false prophets’ bible where they try to convince me homosexuality is a sin. Get the Bible stories right and I might read the rest of what you have to say.
What I am saying is, is that my interpretation of sin applies only to me, so I choose not to sin in that manner.
So you pick-and-choose which violations of the Ten Commandments are sins, and which are not?
Redneck, I see that you are determined to not talk about what the post was intended to point out, for whatever personal reasons you may have.
The post is not about my personal beliefs, that is the whole point. I am saying that simply because I may hold a different interpretation of the Bible does not give me the right to impose it upon others through politics or legislation. If you do not see homosexuality as a sin, then that is your interpretation, and that is your right also. Only God will sort us out. The point of the post is that there are people, some I have listed, that would impose their beliefs upon you, and me, and everyone.
If you are so offended that I called your homosexuality a sin, that you cannot see the point of the post, well then I am not sure we can have any conversation.
No Rick, you too are missing the point because you are too caught up in your traditional rhetoric. What I am saying is that I am not responsible for the sins of others. If I read the word of God and choose to follow it as best I can, it does not give me power and authority over others, either in this world, or the next, to judge them or legislate against them.
Tell me Rick or Redneck, using your own interpretations of sin, can you stop anyone from sinning? Or can you save their souls?
Tell me Rick or Redneck, using your own interpretations of sin, can you stop anyone from sinning?
Who needs “your own interpretations” of sin? A rational Christian deems the murder of an unborn child to be a sin. But abortion is a political issue. Hence, promoting pro-life conservative Republicans over pro-abortion Republicans or Democrats has the potential to “stop” mothers and doctors from committing the sin of murder.
You are correct, Frank. While you may not be pushing for legislating morality, none-the-less you are just as guilty of doing exactly what you accuse others of doing.
“I see homosexuality, I see abortion, I see adultery, I see lying, cheating, stealing, violence against children, and on and on.”
In your list of “sins”, each one is a choice of action – except for the one you put at the top of the list. When one lists who people are born to be as a sin, all credibility past that statement is lost on me. Sorry.
“Tell me Rick or Redneck, using your own interpretations of sin, can you stop anyone from sinning?”
Isn’t that why we have prisons – to stop the lying, cheating, stealing, violence against children, and abortions not performed within the guidelines of the law, like we did Gosnell?
Rick, I agree with you on abortion, we already have laws against murder, and in my view we should enforce them. The argument then comes down to when does life begin. For me it is at conception and I base this not only on my faith, but science. Once an egg is fertilized it will become a human being, that is unless either God or man intervenes. That is science, there is no question about it. So if life begins at conception, wee should protect it as we would any other life.
Abortion is not an individual sin in which the only person affected is the person practicing that sin, with abortion an innocent is murdered, in my opinion. We have laws to protect children from murder, but radicals on the left have also imposed their morality, or the lack of it upon all. However, the mother still has the choice not to, and that is her sin and she will have to answer not to me, but to God.
Redneck, I have done nothing to stop you from practicing homosexuality. If you choose that life, that is your right. As for whether or not someone is born homosexual? That is your belief and your are free to feel that way. You seem to want to avoid direct questions. Would you pass a law that says I cannot hold my own belief that it is a choice? I would not pass a law that says you cannot believe you are born that way.
But their are people who would pass laws to make homosexuality illegal based on their religious beliefs, and that is the point of the post. While you are consumed with the fact that I believe homosexuality is a sin and would do nothing to punish the people in this world, there are people out there right now that are working to get people elected to office that would act upon their views of homosexuality.
I also do not claim, as you seem to do, to know the will of God, I merely state my imperfect understanding as I know it. You on the other hand state it as fact, vanity my friend, vanity.
… has the potential to “stop” mothers and doctors from committing the sin of murder.
Let’s not leave out the men who tell the women they impregnate to abort because they don’t want the baby. Or don’t men do that?
“The argument then comes down to when does life begin. For me it is at conception and I base this not only on my faith, but science. Once an egg is fertilized it will become a human being, that is unless either God or man intervenes. That is science, there is no question about it. So if life begins at conception, wee should protect it as we would any other life.”
Since you’re relying on science, please look up the definition of pregnancy. Warning: It’s not what you say it is. By your definition of when life begins, god is the biggest abortionist on this planet.
Okay, this is exactly why, these people can get elected and then attempt to impose their views on you, no ability to focus on a point. Do you want Sandi Minard censoring reading list? Do you want law makers deciding what is and isn’t a sin and then punishing you in this world? Then get your minds around the point here instead of waging the old battles that allow them to frighten you into supporting them.
Pandora, I did say, “Once an egg is fertilized it will become a human being, that is unless either God or man intervenes.”
As a person of faith it is not for me to judge God’s will. As someone who lost a child during my wife’s second pregnancy, I have gone through this. It was not, and is not for me to know at this time why my second child was not meant to live. Maybe it was a trial for me, or my wife, or my mother who it hit very hard.
This is what I mean when I say it is not man’s place to play God in this world just because they become elected to office.
It seems that so many people here are so caught up in their old battles that they can’t let go of the old rhetoric.
I have pointed out the problem from the right of the political spectrum, but there is just as much moral legislating from the left, just look at the last two General Assemblies.
Frank, let’s try it this way:
God says we will not fornicate. Is that a condemnation of heterosexuality?
God says we will not commit adultery. Is that a condemnation of heterosexuality?
God says we will not have sex with our father’s wife (as opposed to mother, since polygamy was acceptable). Is that a condemnation of heterosexuality.
God says 144,000 “not defiled by women” will immediately take their place in heaven in the end times. Is that a condemnation of heterosexuality?
You get the point. None of the verses condemn heterosexuality just as none of the six “clobber passages” often quoted to prove homosexuality is a sin actually condemn homosexuality.
Now, for specifics in your last response:
1. I never claimed to know the will of God. Just as you freely expressed what you believe the Bible says, I freely expressed my belief. I don’t appreciate the ad hominen attack that I am somehow vain for expressing what I believe the Bible says, yet, presumably, somehow you are not vain for expressing your belief.
2. How does one “practice homosexuality”? The same way one “practices heterosexuality”? Just as heterosexuality is a state of mind – the way one was born – so is homosexuality. You can deny the fact (lots of science backs me up), but denying the science doesn’t make your belief true. A little known fact, or at least one often overlooked by the far right conservative Christians: sex acts do not equate to sexual orientation. Gay sexual acts are a sin if a heterosexual sheds his natural function and gives it a try (Romans), but by the same token, if a homosexual sheds his natural function and engages in heterosexual acts, then he has sinned. I will challenge you as I have hundreds of others over the years (maybe a bit of hyperbole there): show me conclusive proof that gays choose to be gay and how they manage to suppress their “natural heterosexual orientation”.
3. I never suggested, implied, or hinted at wanting to pass a law preventing you to hold your belief that gays choose to be gay. You’re trying to build a strawman argument and I won’t waste my time addressing the implied accusation that somehow I endorsed the idea of creating a law to force you to think as I do.
4. The one common ground we agree on: yes, there are people who think a law is a good law if its only basis is coming from verses in the Bible and these people should never hold public office.
5. Regardless of my personal views on homosexuality, I don’t pretend to understand Scripture and make jumps in logical reasoning to strengthen my convictions. I try my best to express my opinions given the facts as I understand them at the time. “Homosexuality”, as is “heterosexuality”, are relatively modern words describing one’s state of mind, specifically sexual orientation. The concept of sexual orientation back when the Bible was written was nonexistent. People had sex, and lots of it, and God set some rules. I can understand that. So when Christians come along and rewrite the Bible to say “homosexuality is a sin”, they have changed what the Bible says. God gives several stern warnings about adding to or taking from His words, the sternest warning expressed in Revelations. So the moment you said homosexuality is a sin, I knew I was either reading the words of a false prophet or reading the words of a follower of false prophets. So I quit reading.
Sorry.
It’s funny that most “liberals” (actually, lockstep Puritanical conformists) reject religion and kneel at the shrine of Darwin, yet they can’t face the fact that homosexuality violates two of the most important tenets of Darwinism- survival of the fittest and propagation- and is thus, abnormal.
Redneck, I am sorry that you have become so consumed with defending homosexuality that you cannot see the point of the post. Let me try once more to explain it to you.
I no longer care if two men or two women wish to act in a way that I personally see as being a sin. I am not asking anyone else to share that view, I am only pointing out that there are people who would impose their views upon all.
Either you are completely clueless, or you simply wish to be argumentative for argument sake. So what if I see it as a sin? If I am not working to pass laws to punish you in this world what affect does my opinion have on you?
Your attitude will only lend to those who wish to punish all who do not conform to their views. If you are so blind as to not be able to see that my personal views are no threat to your chosen life style, then you will simply continue to focus on terms like, “practicing homosexuality”. And attempting to show that God approves.
As for fornication? That is sex outside of marriage, and yes it is condemned heterosexuality, as well as would be homosexual sex outside of marriage.
Adultery is also a condemned heterosexual practice.
And while I see these as sin as well, again based on my imperfect understanding of the word, I do not want to pass laws that would punish people in this world.
What I have tried to illustrate is that I no longer believe it is my place to judge sin of others, though I may still recognize it, I am responsible for my soul alone. You unfortunately seem to be only concerned with my view on homosexuality, and care nothing about people who still wish to punish you for your chosen life style.
In an earlier comment you said, “So, again, I will restate my point: if one is going to use the Bible to tell me what is and is not sin, they had better be using the real Bible and not the false prophets’ bible where they try to convince me homosexuality is a sin. Get the Bible stories right and I might read the rest of what you have to say.”
In this comment you make it clear that you and you alone know the will of God, while I have repeatedly stated that my “OPINION” is based upon my “IMPERFECT UNDERSTANDING” of the word. So yes, I see your statement as vanity, in my opinion.
Frank, first, I have no “chosen sexuality”. I didn’t take a test and my guidance counselor said, “You might want to consider becoming a practicing….”
Second, I never did say what my “chosen lifestyle” is, but if you want to know, it is one of a slightly poor, hard working individual who writes for a hobby. As for my sexual orientation, I never stated what it is so, please, stick to the facts you know.
Third, I never claimed to know God’s word, but did explain the use of the two words that describe sexual orientation are relatively modern inventions, that is, there are no ancient Greek and ancient Hebrew equivalents the writers of the Bible would know since the idea of “sexual orientation” did not exist back then. I then stated that God made it clear that one is not to add to or take from His Word. Unless you want to provide proof the ancient writers did, indeed, understand the modern concept of “sexual orientation” or God never said we couldn’t change His Word, then I’m not being vain, but merely stating facts as I understand them at the time, which means at the time I write a response. My exact words: ” I try my best to express my opinions given the facts as I understand them at the time.” Perhaps you missed that point.
Lastly, when I said “So, again, I will restate my point: if one is going to use the Bible to tell me what is and is not sin, they had better be using the real Bible and not the false prophets’ bible where they try to convince me homosexuality is a sin. Get the Bible stories right and I might read the rest of what you have to say,” I was merely restating the fact, as I understand them at this time, that when a Christian concludes “homosexuality is a sin”, he is either a false prophet or a follower of a false prophet because God said no such thing. Man said it by changing God’s words to fit his agenda and the word substitution drastically changes the meaning of what God actually said.
And it’s not homosexuality I am defending, but the truth of the Bible. If, for example, you were a Jehovah Witness, I would take exception if you stated Jesus was not God. The Jehovah Witnesses changed God’s word in John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”. The Jehovah Witness added one little word, “a” to the last phrase so that John 1:1 reads ” …and the word was a god”. (Yes, the last word is not capitalized in the Jehovah bible, either.) Surely you can see how the addition of one little one-letter word seriously altered the meaning of the verse. To me, changing the words of God that described sex acts to mean sexual orientation is as egregious an error as the Jehovah Witness changing the meaning of John 1:1.
Yes, the truth hurts when I point out that people who change the meaning of verses in the Bible to suit their argument are false prophets or followers of false prophets, but I think it is pretty hard for anyone to debate that God is ok with us changing His Word. All the sins you listed, presumably based on your Christian beliefs, are descriptions of specific actions (“… I see abortion, I see adultery, I see lying, cheating, stealing, violence against children, and on and on.”) except for your first one, which is a condemnation of a state of mind (“I see homosexuality….”). You can claim all you want that you aren’t judging, but you just did when you listed homosexuality as a sin as opposed to specific actions. Tell me, is a celibate homosexual committing sin?
Oh yeah, that’s right. You have a loop hole to cover that argument. People choose who they have sex with and if they choose to have sex with women or with no one, then they aren’t homosexual.
Sorry. I can’t accept the belief that sexual orientation is chosen as fact since the science does not back up the claim.
That leads us to an impasse, but I would appreciate it if you debate what I actually say and leave out the ad hominen attacks (like “…you are completely clueless…” or taking my arguments and jumping to incorrect conclusions (like “You unfortunately seem to be only concerned with my view on homosexuality, and care nothing about people who still wish to punish you for your chosen life style.”)
Oh, in case you missed it, in point 4 in my previous response to you, I clearly stated we share common ground on our views about making laws to dictate to others how to think. However, as you pointed out in your Bodenweiser piece, the court of public opinion is very important in persuading people in how they view others. So when you state Biblically incorrect statements because, in your opinion this is what God wants you to understand, in the court of public opinion the obvious harm towards a person or a specific group of people is readily seen, but less readily seen is the harm done to the public view of Christians. I am a Christian and I gave you reasons why I objected to the broad statement, “homosexuality is a sin”, reasons of which none had to do with defending homosexuality as you claim I have done. If your words elicited such a strong response from me, what picture of Christians do you think you are drawing for the weekend Christians, agnostics, atheists, and non-Christians? A horribly scribbled picture, in my opinion.
The last comment is Redneck missing the point, once again. So Redneck you keep on getting caught up in what is or isn’t a sin and the people who want to legislate morality will be half way there thanks to people such as yourself being more concerned with the definition of sin, than with the freedoms they are losing.
Ok Frank, since your style of debate is ad hominen attacks, illogical conclusions, and avoidance of addressing what is really said, let me try it this way.
Far right conservative Christians, false prophets, and followers of false prophets, like yourself, have driven this country into the ground, almost all the way to Hell. This post is a good example of how they are accomplishing their agenda of turning us as far away from God as possible.
There, I feel better for saying it. Now, anytime you want to debate intellectual ideas and philosophies, let me know.
By the way, who is akismet? My email notifications of responses to your post says “in response to akismet-1f5222012e6c632d2214fda65acef85e”
Redneck,akismet is the wordpress software for the site that sorts through spam and such, don’t freak out into some paranoid fringe fit.
Your last comment only again proves that you either chose not to read the entire post, or you are as bad as the fundamentalist fringe I was writing about. If you had read the entire post you would know that I am saying that what I think does not matter when it comes to sin, anymore than what the people I listed believe. The difference being, that I no longer believe it is my place to enforce my beliefs upon others in this world.
You on the other hand are just as bad as those I listed. You have become angry and defensive simply because my belief does not coincide with yours. If I am not 100% in agreement with your belief, then I have somehow cause the end of faith as you know it.
Please tell me how my believing one thing, affects what you believe? The freedom we are guaranteed in the 1st Amendment allows both of us to believe what we choose. However, there are people who would force you and your children to believe only as they do, much in the same manner as you have attacked me for holding a different view.
My view of the word of God is that no man, including me, and including you, knows as fact what the will of God is. So neither can I say that your belief is wrong, nor can you say mine is wrong, that is unless we are vain and dare to speak for God.
You seem angry and defensive simply because I hold a different point of view. That is a shame.
If I sound angry or defensive, then I have chosen the wrong words to express what I was trying to convey. On this end of the computer screen, I was merely entering into an intellectual debate on what the Bible verses really say as opposed to what some claim they say based on how I understand those verses. I entered the debate because your editorial centers on religious beliefs and the efforts of some to encode their beliefs into law.
Twice, and now a third time, I will state that we do share common ground, that is, no one should make an effort to enshrine their own moral and religious beliefs into law. For me to make the claim that we do share a common point means I must’ve at least skimmed, if not read, your entire editorial even though I claimed I stopped reading at a certain point.
Ok, so stating I stopped reading your editorial before really starting it was a bad way to make a point and is probably what set the tone for the rest of our exchanges. For that, I apologize and will have to reconsider a literary technique to get one’s attention without sounding confrontational and dismissive of one’s efforts.
I reckon we’ll have to call this one a draw because our previous exchanges will pretty much keep us in opposite corners of the debating ring no matter what either one of us has to say from here on. Nothing wrong with calling a draw. I still follow your blog so even if it doesn’t appear so in this post, I obviously respect what you have to say. I read every post you make even if I only respond to one here and there.
Redneck, I do believe that if you are going to discuss what I have written, then you should do me the favor of reading it in its entirety. I have a tendency to write in a manner that leads people through my own progression on an issue, so while at the start of a post it may seem as though I hold one view on an issue, by the end I have tried to convey my own evolution in the hopes that others will see a path to changing their own.
As for debating the Bible, I am always open to that, however this post was not intended to be a post about who is right and who is wrong, actually it was meant to be exactly the opposite. My intention was to state, that no one is wrong when it comes to interpreting the Bible, since no one can know the will of God. I accept that I may be wrong on my interpretations of the word, but only God can and will judge me. If I see this or that as being sinful, and choose not to practice that sin, then who have I hurt? No one.
This statement you made in your last comment, ” I was merely entering into an intellectual debate on what the Bible verses really say as opposed to what some claim they say based on how I understand those verses.”, comes very close to exactly what I have responded to you several times, even though you could not resist stating, “what the Bible verses really say as opposed to what some claim they say”, though you did quantify it with, “how I understand those verses”.
I do not think we are so far apart on the issue that we do not want others to impose their religious beliefs upon us or others, we simply need to recognize that we also do not need everyone to believe as we do, or we become that which we oppose.
Far right conservative Christians, false prophets, and followers of false prophets, like yourself, have driven this country into the ground, almost all the way to Hell. This post is a good example of how they are accomplishing their agenda of turning us as far away from God as possible.
How about the “false prophet” who currently resides in the White House?
“Far right conservative Christians” don’t control the mass media- the far Left does. And what have they wrought? A complete disintegration of traditional social norms. Using MTV, rap “music” and “sitcoms,” the goal seems to be to make every 12-year-old girl a whore and every male adolescent a weak, hand -wringing narcissistic metrosexual.
The Founders, “conservative Christians” all, laid the foundation that built the greatest nation on earth- and now, the “liberal” (actually, lockstep Puritanical conformist) left hammers-away, until there’s nothing left but rubble.
Rick, I have to admit I am a little confused by your latest label, “Puritanical conformist”, when talking about liberals. Puritanical is in reference to Puritans, and or anything, “very strict in moral or religious matters, often excessively so; rigidly austere.” Not sure how the two go together.
If anything the people I listed in my post are closer to be,”Puritanical conformist”, rather than so called liberals.
I believe he means that, like the Puritans, the left demands conformity.