Evangelicals and Trump

[Cacti 191]

^^^

Are we to seriously consider the works of a dead, religious, European white male?

[Beau Vine 54003]

My parents were devout and zealous Baptists all my life.  Yet I literally never saw them help anyone less fortunate than us.  To them, the work of God was "saving others."  Getting others to see that if you "profess your belief in God, you'll be saved and go to heaven."  But yeah, actually physically or financially helping the poor was not in the playbook. 

[NWBuck 8547]

8 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

My parents were devout and zealous Baptists all my life.  Yet I literally never saw them help anyone less fortunate than us.  To them, the work of God was "saving others."  Getting others to see that if you "profess your belief in God, you'll be saved and go to heaven."  But yeah, actually physically or financially helping the poor was not in the playbook. 

 

[Nivek 16859]

I had to buy a class A motor home because I drive a wimpy 150 and couldn’t pull the 5th Wheeler I wanted to around America. I wish I was a badass that drove a 250. 

Sounds like you needed a co-pilot.

[troph 24562]

1 minute ago, Nivek said:

Sounds like you needed a co-pilot.

do you know how to pitch a tent?  or remove a stripped screw?  

Edited July 14, 2020 by troph

[Guest]

euphemisms at a brisk pace...

[Wulaw Horn 18981]

7 hours ago, troph said:

do you know how to pitch a tent?  or remove a stripped screw?  

It was actually a rivet I found out.  No screw driver was handling that. 

[Gatorubet 30105]

do you know how to pitch a tent? 

Kim Basinger leave-your-hat-on scene?

[Nivek 16859]

12 hours ago, troph said:

do you know how to pitch a tent?  or remove a stripped screw?  

Yes , yes, and yes (punch and hammer).    Auto work is easy though I turn into a raving lunatic during the time (fuck japan engineers, fuck american engineers, fuck german engineers, etc)

[workswithseed 2036]

27 minutes ago, Nivek said:

Yes , yes, and yes (punch and hammer).    Auto work is easy though I turn into a raving lunatic during the time (fuck japan engineers, fuck american engineers, fuck german engineers, etc)

That's a lot of engineers to fuck, hopefully they're all hot babes. Oh, maybe not 

[Nivek 16859]

4 hours ago, workswithseed said:

That's a lot of engineers to fuck, hopefully they're all hot babes. Oh, maybe not 

Pulling the intake manifold off to change spark plugs...  grrrrrrr(/dmx)

[Wulaw Horn 18981]

On 7/13/2020 at 4:47 PM, RomaVicta said:

Thanks for responding, Wulaw. I haven't put a lot of thought into this, but one more thought is roused by your post. "Called to be like God," is interesting. Of course God can do as He/She likes. That's not an option for humans. God can wipe out cities and destroy people, yet Jesus says man is not to do that. God judges, but the Bible says that man should not judge.

I wonder if this same division would apply to hate because of the simplicity of the commandment "love thy neighbor..." teamed with all the love Jesus advocated.

If you wish to answer, I'd like to read your answer. If you wish to let it lie, that's okay, too. I'm truly not trying to bait you into a long argument. 

So, this is an really interesting question that I’ve never seen asked before in this particular application. My sense is no- that we don’t have a prohibition against “hating sin” because as fallen humans we are too likely to mess it up and engage in other hate. 
I think it’s ok to say, that as beliebers we are called to hate sin. This is very true of God, obviously, as his inability to be near or a part of sin is total. Witness the spiritual cleaning he called the Jews to do in Old Testament times before they could come into his presence, or the way Moses, his earthly intermediary was shielded from him when he gave the commandments or how severely he was punished for his disobedience. 
Of course, we can’t know this as it’s Gods prerogative as king to rule and deal as he sees fit. 
I’m so small and insignificant and limited that I have a hard time knowing his mind. Even as a toddler would have a hard time knowing your mind no matter how you try to explain it to them. I think the easiest way to track it is through analogy which is why (I think) Jesus taught in parables as well as many/most important concepts being taught in such a way. 
I think God wants us to hate our sin more than the other guys. Jesus speaks of this when he tells the person judging to first remove the plank from their own eye before attempting to extract the speck from his brothers eye. We have no way of knowing if the person admonishing the brother was a better or worse dude than the person being admonished,  but I think it’s fair to say that in essence Jesus calls us to a pretty high standard before we go about putting other people’s misdeeds into a spotlight. Check your own house first, as it were. 
Finally, the admonition against judging you brought up, to me, is misunderstood more than almost any passage in the Bible (and now I’ve really set myself up to fall for the old banana in the tailpipe trick as I’m probably about to mangle this or get it wrong)...

I don’t read that as say in we can’t call an act as sinful or not sinful in another’s Life. Good and bad, right and wrong were written on our hearts as being a made in the image of God, and we were also given the law, instructions and teachings from God incarnate in the form of Jesus here on earth to point the way. If this prohibition against judgment were to mean we can’t tell if a brothers act is sinful then that creates moral relativism which is antithetical to God as the great I AM (there is no moral relativism there). Finally, if we can’t judge then explain why their are entire books of the Bible essentially dedicated to church discipline? It’s a non starter to say the you can’t judge another’s acts as sinful or not. Their heart? And relationship to God?  That’s his business and not mine. But their actions?  I don’t think we are called to avoid pointing out the sin in our brother, but we damn sure better do it in as living and helpful way as possible and be very circumspect, less we be rebuked by our creator. 
Thats a lot of words bc any proper reading of the Bible requires a 30 thousand foot view as well as a microscopic view, and they have to be congruent and that’s something, I’m afraid, that is beyond my limited human powers. If any of the stuff I talked about in providing context in my answer doesn’t make sense to you feel free to hit me up for an explanation. 
I speak for myself only in this, if any of my fellow more leaned brothers or sisters  on this site want to amplify, argue or amend my answer I’m interested to see what they have to say and open for other POV’s. 

[F250 28689]

59 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

If this prohibition against judgment were to mean we can’t tell if a brothers act is sinful then that creates moral relativism which is antithetical to God as the great I AM (there is no moral relativism there)

My issue with this statement is there clearly are cases of moral relativism in scripture. Slavery and ethnic cleansing were committed without ever being judged as an immoral act in the Old Testament. There does seem to be a major evolution in Christianity/Judaism regarding what is now considered immoral versus what wasn't a few thousand years ago.

[Wulaw Horn 18981]

4 minutes ago, F250 said:

My issue with this statement is there clearly are cases of moral relativism in scripture. Slavery and ethnic cleansing were committed without ever being judged as an immoral act in the Old Testament. There does seem to be a major evolution in Christianity/Judaism regarding what is now considered immoral versus what wasn't a few thousand years ago.

Slavery was allowed but not condoned, imo. Look at the judgment God poured out on Egypt when the Jews cried out against their slavery.  Much like polygamy, which existed and happened with negative consequences at all times, the lesson is, essentially, don’t do this. 
I honestly have no idea how to deal with the ethnic cleansing other than suggesting that we are called not to murder but not prohibited against killing as a for example. Perhaps the ethnic cleansing was justified in a kill or be killed sense- but I’m sure there are many scholars smarter than I who have spent more than 3 minutes thinking about this. 

[F250 28689]

12 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Slavery was allowed but not condoned, imo. Look at the judgment God poured out on Egypt when the Jews cried out against their slavery.  Much like polygamy, which existed and happened with negative consequences at all times, the lesson is, essentially, don’t do this. 
I honestly have no idea how to deal with the ethnic cleansing other than suggesting that we are called not to murder but not prohibited against killing as a for example. Perhaps the ethnic cleansing was justified in a kill or be killed sense- but I’m sure there are many scholars smarter than I who have spent more than 3 minutes thinking about this. 

There are and I've read most of the explanations but none really makes sense other than relativism, it was a different period and culture with a different set of moral standards.

[Mdhorn 5911]

5 minutes ago, F250 said:

There are and I've read most of the explanations but none really makes sense other than relativism, it was a different period and culture with a different set of moral standards.

A lot of temples were built with slave labor.

[workswithseed 2036]

There isn't a word for slave in Hebrew. Abed/Abad was used.

[TwiceHorn 31282]

As far as judgment goes, yes, Christians are called upon to assist their brethren in overcoming sin and becoming closer to God and grace.

But, it was once explained to me that we help a fellow traveler identify sin and overcome it with the fellow traveler's consent.   If a church member "submits to judgment" in order to become a better Christian then we can "name" the sin, or judge it (they are slightly different) in the course of helping him or her overcome it.

Christians do not have a roving mandate to judge those who do not submit to judgment.

Similar thing in AA (wonder why that is, hmm?):  we do not take others' inventories for them.  But if a sponsee or another alcoholic requests help in identifying a character defect in order to produce a more searching and fearless moral inventory, we do so.

[NWBuck 8547]

Couple of quick reflections...

I've often heard that "judge not, lest ye be judged" thing is more about humility than it is about "don't be judgy". Just a reminder to approach situations with care, love, and full remembrance of both our total brokenness and the grace that restores us.

There's a school of thought that "sin" is "that which breaks relationship" (with God, with others, with community, etc.). In that mindset, "judging" that places us over or apart from others (better than this sinner!) is itself sin; while discernment that calls us to recognize brokenness in order to work for restoration is not.  Of course one person's discernment and seeking restoration (intent) is another's being judgmental (impact)... so the messiness of humanity continues to call us to humility.

[troph 24562]

There are and I've read most of the explanations but none really makes sense other than relativism, it was a different period and culture with a different set of moral standards.

Straight couples can have sex before marriage and if it’s still a sin it’s akin to taking a few cookies from the cookie jar before dinner - everyone does it.

Straight couples can divorce and if it’s still a sin, it’s like a traffic ticket - everyone does it.

Gay couples wanting to marry - Katy bar the door! The world is over run by Satan.

Woman wants to have a nose job, a boob job and Botox three times a week - odd but whatever this is America.

Trans person wants medical treatment to help alleviate a medical condition - the trans agenda worse than the gay one, now Satan is *really* coming after us!

Relativism in modern Christianity is no greater than on sex and love. And it’s ok for me but not for you.

The reality is, where other people stand with G-d is none of your business unless they ask for it to be your business and any scripture talking about one calling out another is based on existing relationship. Every letter Paul wrote were to people he knew and who wanted his input. Jesus was largely minding his own business teaching 12 close followers and others showed up.

It’s the uninvited, outsider view of calling out others for what you perceive to be their sin without any knowledge of G-d about that person that is just backward. It’s not the gospel. There’s no where you’ll find Jesus rebuking strangers the way Christians do today.

Be the light of the world, let your good deeds demonstrate the love of G-d but don’t think calling out what you think is sin in a strangers life is going to do anything or that is part of Biblical commands because it’s not evident anywhere.

[Nivek 16859]

^ you forgot to include indoctrinating you/your children.   

[TwiceHorn 31282]

7 hours ago, troph said:

Straight couples can have sex before marriage and if it’s still a sin it’s akin to taking a few cookies from the cookie jar before dinner - everyone does it.

Straight couples can divorce and if it’s still a sin, it’s like a traffic ticket - everyone does it.

Gay couples wanting to marry - Katy bar the door! The world is over run by Satan.

Woman wants to have a nose job, a boob job and Botox three times a week - odd but whatever this is America.

Trans person wants medical treatment to help alleviate a medical condition - the trans agenda worse than the gay one, now Satan is *really* coming after us!

Relativism in modern Christianity is no greater than on sex and love. And it’s ok for me but not for you.

The reality is, where other people stand with G-d is none of your business unless they ask for it to be your business and any scripture talking about one calling out another is based on existing relationship. Every letter Paul wrote were to people he knew and who wanted his input. Jesus was largely minding his own business teaching 12 close followers and others showed up.

It’s the uninvited, outsider view of calling out others for what you perceive to be their sin without any knowledge of G-d about that person that is just backward. It’s not the gospel. There’s no where you’ll find Jesus rebuking strangers the way Christians do today.

Be the light of the world, let your good deeds demonstrate the love of G-d but don’t think calling out what you think is sin in a strangers life is going to do anything or that is part of Biblical commands because it’s not evident anywhere.

That was the greatness of Father Sarducci, hilariously pointing out that there is no point system associated with sin.

[troph 24562]

That was the greatness of Father Sarducci, hilariously pointing out that there is no point system associated with sin.

And to be clear - my position isn’t well my sin isn’t any worse that “yours” - I don’t have any convictions about my personal sex life or medical treatments. In fact I can say without a doubt that the adage “love is love” is very true - besides being a better match emotionally and physically - my former straight relationship and my lesbian one now are no different including the positive benefits for both of us and the benefit it provides to my kids.

 

Anyway I’ll get off the sex and love “sins” now. We can move on.

 

If we want to talk about kindness, charity and the like I’ll be the first to say “I’m trying real hard, Ringo.”

[workswithseed 2036]

1 hour ago, troph said:

And to be clear - my position isn’t well my sin isn’t any worse that “yours” - I don’t have any convictions about my personal sex life or medical treatments. In fact I can say without a doubt that the adage “love is love” is very true - besides being a better match emotionally and physically - my former straight relationship and my lesbian one now are no different including the positive benefits for both of us and the benefit it provides to my kids.

 

Anyway I’ll get off the sex and love “sins” now. We can move on.

 

If we want to talk about kindness, charity and the like I’ll be the first to say “I’m trying real hard, Ringo.”

There is only one unforgivable sin.

[RomaVicta 29793]

12 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

As far as judgment goes, yes, Christians are called upon to assist their brethren in overcoming sin and becoming closer to God and grace.

But, it was once explained to me that we help a fellow traveler identify sin and overcome it with the fellow traveler's consent.   If a church member "submits to judgment" in order to become a better Christian then we can "name" the sin, or judge it (they are slightly different) in the course of helping him or her overcome it.

Christians do not have a roving mandate to judge those who do not submit to judgment.

Similar thing in AA (wonder why that is, hmm?):  we do not take others' inventories for them.  But if a sponsee or another alcoholic requests help in identifying a character defect in order to produce a more searching and fearless moral inventory, we do so.

Thanks to Wulaw for his considered answer. I think the above by Twice Horn covers anything I might add. 

I wish that more Christians were as thoughtful in their religious philosophy as Wulaw. The responses have been enlightening as well, my friends.

[RomaVicta 29793]

55 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

There is only one unforgivable sin.

Masturbation?

[Wulaw Horn 18981]

13 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

As far as judgment goes, yes, Christians are called upon to assist their brethren in overcoming sin and becoming closer to God and grace.

But, it was once explained to me that we help a fellow traveler identify sin and overcome it with the fellow traveler's consent.   If a church member "submits to judgment" in order to become a better Christian then we can "name" the sin, or judge it (they are slightly different) in the course of helping him or her overcome it.

Christians do not have a roving mandate to judge those who do not submit to judgment.

Similar thing in AA (wonder why that is, hmm?):  we do not take others' inventories for them.  But if a sponsee or another alcoholic requests help in identifying a character defect in order to produce a more searching and fearless moral inventory, we do so.

That’s a really smart point. I didn’t make it but thank you for expounding on that. Church discipline is ok bc as a congregant you’re are agreeing to live in harmony with your fellow believers so there’s an expectation of that. Or, even on a place like the internet if I know you are a believer and I see you engaged in some manner of heresy or sin then maybe I have the right to call you on that as, by professing your faith and publicly acting in a way antithetical to it you are harming the faith and blowing your (and others) witness, but it doesn’t make sense for me to tell Roma he’s a dirty depraved sinner when he’s just minding his own business and just told me he’s not a believer (no offense Roma, in the conception of a Christian we are all dirty depraved sinners so I’m not calling you out just using you as a for example). 
people would probably be wise to pay attention to this line of thought. 
thank you for making this point. 

Edited July 15, 2020 by Wulaw Horn

[Wulaw Horn 18981]

11 hours ago, NWBuck said:

Couple of quick reflections...

I've often heard that "judge not, lest ye be judged" thing is more about humility than it is about "don't be judgy". Just a reminder to approach situations with care, love, and full remembrance of both our total brokenness and the grace that restores us.

There's a school of thought that "sin" is "that which breaks relationship" (with God, with others, with community, etc.). In that mindset, "judging" that places us over or apart from others (better than this sinner!) is itself sin; while discernment that calls us to recognize brokenness in order to work for restoration is not.  Of course one person's discernment and seeking restoration (intent) is another's being judgmental (impact)... so the messiness of humanity continues to call us to humility.

Another really great point and well said. 
I ended up not talking to my brother for 5 years over something like this. When I got divorced and remarried he said all my kids were going to be bastards and I was going to be an adulterer for the rest of my life.  I told him this was something I was prepared to live with and take my chances, but I thought the grace of God was sufficient to ensure my salvation and that I could make a good life with my new wife, and that one horrible decision I’m deciding to marry my ex shouldn’t condemn me to a life of misery and loneliness (he hated the ex too- everyone did- me less than everyone else in my life). 
we didn’t talk because he couldn’t deal with that answer, not because I was mad at him for calling my wife and I adulterers and our unborn kids bastards. After about 5 years my parents moved back from Europe and we started seeing each other as a family again somewhat, and he and my wife talked and buried the hatchet when he apologized 6 months ago and we now have full restoration of relationship. 
That story is all to say- yeah- this stuff can be really messy, even when the “judger” has the best of intentions. 

[Wulaw Horn 18981]

50 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Masturbation?

Rejection of God.
Masturbation will just make you grow hair on your palms and go blind someday. 

[hpslugga 4044]

52 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Masturbation?

Actually it’s a person (presumably a man) that fails their family. A lot of people, even atheists, think that it’s the sin of unbelief, but it explicitly says in First Timothy 5:8 “But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.”

But either way, as George Carlin would have said, it’s all bullshit and it’s bad for ya.

Edited July 15, 2020 by hpslugga

[ChiTownDoc 21101]

On 7/13/2020 at 10:39 PM, Nivek said:

Sounds like you needed a co-pilot.

 

[Wulaw Horn 18981]

13 hours ago, F250 said:

There are and I've read most of the explanations but none really makes sense other than relativism, it was a different period and culture with a different set of moral standards.

 

13 hours ago, F250 said:

There are and I've read most of the explanations but none really makes sense other than relativism, it was a different period and culture with a different set of moral standards.

I read some commentaries today on Joshua that I thought made sense in a non relativistic way. 
Basically 3 or 4 parts to it:

1) the anihilation wasn’t total and complete, the way it’s written about in the book was BCE shit talking that everyone did- including the Egyptians, Assyrians, Meads, etc and so forth

2) the conquest wasn’t instant, it took place over years and years and was more a dispossessing of land

3) the Jews offered them peace and to go on and get out and the Canaanites didn’t take the peace. 
4) they were into some really bad shit, including human and child sacrifice that was deserving of Gods judgment, he used Israel as that tool of judgment, and still, it had mercy in it (see points 1,2 and 3) but it needed to be rooted out, because it was so vulgar that his people couldn’t live side by side with it (think Allies engaging in total war to beat Hitler, with the evil of that regime). 
nome of those points relied on “different time, different place”. I don’t know if they are true or if something else is true, but my sense is that the answer is not- God changes his mind and that was ok but now it’s not. 

[workswithseed 2036]

1 hour ago, RomaVicta said:

Masturbation?

It's that plus a rope that cuts off some air, so it intensifies the orgasm, so I am told 

[Wulaw Horn 18981]

7 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

Actually it’s a person (presumably a man) that fails their family. A lot of people, even atheists, think that it’s the sin of unbelief, but it explicitly says in First Timothy 5:8 “But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.”

But either way, as George Carlin would have said, it’s all bullshit and it’s bad for ya.

Yeah- men are called to so much more by the faith than modern secular humanism calls them to. We are also to live our wives sacrificing like Christ loved the church, even dying for them. 
I’m not good at that stuff. But the people back in the day who used the Bible to “keep women in line” and make sure they obeyed them were so hilariously stupid and unchristian it makes my head spin. 
As a man walking by the tennants of my faith I’m responsible for dying to my wife and her desires, spiritually guiding her and my kids, providing and protecting for them, and that’s just my reponsibility around my 4 walls, to say nothing of my fellow believers, advancing the kingdom, and humanity writ large. 

[hpslugga 4044]

3 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Yeah- men are called to so much more by the faith than modern secular humanism calls them to. We are also to live our wives sacrificing like Christ loved the church, even dying for them. 
I’m not good at that stuff. But the people back in the day who used the Bible to “keep women in line” and make sure they obeyed them were so hilariously stupid and unchristian it makes my head spin. 
As a man walking by the tennants of my faith I’m responsible for dying to my wife and her desires, spiritually guiding her and my kids, providing and protecting for them, and that’s just my reponsibility around my 4 walls, to say nothing of my fellow believers, advancing the kingdom, and humanity writ large. 

I’m sure you believe that. There’s just no reason to.

[Wulaw Horn 18981]

Just now, hpslugga said:

I’m sure you believe that. There’s just no reason to.

I’m not sure what you are saying. Are you saying I’ve misread what’s expected of man in the text?  If so you’d be incorrect. Are you saying that modern secular humanism calls for a man to lay down his life for a woman and kill his own desires for hers on the tee of marriage?  If you are saying that I’ve not seen that standard expressed in modern terms. 
Men are expected and allowed, societally, to live as overgrown children. That’s my take from watching movies, sitcoms and reading think pieces about modern marriages. They aren’t being called to something sacrificial and self less day after day after day by the culture. 
Witness the “I’m a good guy- I pay my child support.”  He’s not a bad guy, he doesn’t run around on me (much?) and he pays the bills, etc and so forth. 
You should note- I’m not making the arguments that believers are better husbands and fathers, I’m literally only making the argument that what we are called to (and fail at) is a higher level of self sacrifice than the predominant culture. 

[SimonBolivar 10931]

25 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

Actually it’s a person (presumably a man) that fails their family. A lot of people, even atheists, think that it’s the sin of unbelief, but it explicitly says in First Timothy 5:8 “But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.”

But either way, as George Carlin would have said, it’s all bullshit and it’s bad for ya.

That Tim is a real jerk.

[Sbbruin 21737]

31 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Rejection of God.
Masturbation will just make you grow hair on your palms and go blind someday. 

My vision has been deteriorating for years.  And now I've woken up to this.  Pray for me.

[Huckleberry 32702]

3 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Men are expected and allowed, societally, to live as overgrown children. That’s my take from watching movies, sitcoms and reading think pieces about modern marriages.

You're using movies and sitcoms for source material on social expectations and actually attempting serious analysis based on that? Please tell me you're joking because you're usually a smart dude. 

[Rougarou 594]

36 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

Actually it’s a person (presumably a man) that fails their family. A lot of people, even atheists, think that it’s the sin of unbelief, but it explicitly says in First Timothy 5:8 “But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.”

But either way, as George Carlin would have said, it’s all bullshit and it’s bad for ya.

Actually, it's blasphemy (and not in the sense of how we know blasphemy as saying something denigrating, but in the sense that you have known the Lord and been saved and then you choose to reject, for good and all time)

Edit to add: that's my understanding at least.

• Matthew 12:30-32: "Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. And so I tell you, any sin and blasphemy can be forgiven. But blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come."
• Mark 3:28-30: 28 Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: 29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation. 30 - Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit.
• Luke 12:8-10: "I tell you, whoever acknowledges me before men, the Son of Man will also acknowledge him before the angels of God. But he who disowns me before men will be disowned before the angels of God. And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven."

Edited July 15, 2020 by Rougarou

[Brisketexan 104624]

14 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

men are called to so much more by the faith than modern secular humanism calls them to

Yet -- and here's the HUGE problem for American Christianity -- many, many "secular humanists" are 1000X better at the most basic commandments of Christianity (e.g., "love your neighbor") than the bulk of vocal "Christians" out there.

I don't disagree that a thoughtful, analytical Christian trying to live the "Way" that is Christianity will have a larger code to follow than just our basic western ethics.  But I'll suggest as Rabbi Hillel did -- love others, that is the law, the rest is commentary.  American Christians are gung-ho about commentary, they are shitty about The Law.  It's bassackwards.  It's why young people, even those who grew up in the faith, are utterly disgusted and DONE with "Christianity" -- not only is it not followed, in its most outward and visible form, it's used as a shield to excuse all manner of cruelty and harm of others by those who use prooftexting and selective reading of scripture to serve their own ends, not God's.

[Wulaw Horn 18981]

3 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

You're using movies and sitcoms for source material on social expectations and actually attempting serious analysis based on that? Please tell me you're joking because you're usually a smart dude. 

Eh,

I think that sitcoms and movies can tell us a lot about societal expectations, just like kids stories and the like. It’s our shared common language and it tells us stuff. 
mom open to you making the argument that modern man is in some way called to a higher standard than he is called to by Christ and the rest of the authors of the New Testament if you want to make that argument. 
I’m not, as I said, even sure what HP’s point is for sure. 

[Rougarou 594]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

I don't disagree that a thoughtful, analytical Christian trying to live the "Way" that is Christianity will have a larger code to follow than just our basic western ethics.  But I'll suggest as Rabbi Hillel did -- love others, that is the law, the rest is commentary.  American Christians are gung-ho about commentary, they are shitty about The Law.  It's bassackwards.  

I think that the idea and definition and characterization of love, as modernity defines it (e.g. Love is Love and that's all you need to know) has been watered down. There is such a thing as tough love and a love that is harder that puts you in conflict with people because you will not agree or accept certain "truths" because of your "truth", out of love.

[Wulaw Horn 18981]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Yet -- and here's the HUGE problem for American Christianity -- many, many "secular humanists" are 1000X better at the most basic commandments of Christianity (e.g., "love your neighbor") than the bulk of vocal "Christians" out there.

I don't disagree that a thoughtful, analytical Christian trying to live the "Way" that is Christianity will have a larger code to follow than just our basic western ethics.  But I'll suggest as Rabbi Hillel did -- love others, that is the law, the rest is commentary.  American Christians are gung-ho about commentary, they are shitty about The Law.  It's bassackwards.  It's why young people, even those who grew up in the faith, are utterly disgusted and DONE with "Christianity" -- not only is it not followed, in its most outward and visible form, it's used as a shield to excuse all manner of cruelty and harm of others by those who use prooftexting and selective reading of scripture to serve their own ends, not God's.

Sure. I agree with all this. And as I said, I’m not saying Christians succeed at a greater level than secular humanists in being the men we are called to be. I’m merely pointing out there is a higher calling on us through our Christianity than exists through modern culture. I’m willing to listen to arguments against that you Huck or HP, but I think they would be wrong (as I’m reading you it seems like you think the same). 

[NWBuck 8547]

2 hours ago, workswithseed said:

There is only one unforgivable sin.

 

1 hour ago, RomaVicta said:

Masturbation?

I was going to guess "Being an Aggie", but I think this covers that...

[Huckleberry 32702]

dp

Edited July 15, 2020 by Huckleberry

[Huckleberry 32702]

6 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Eh,

I think that sitcoms and movies can tell us a lot about societal expectations, just like kids stories and the like. It’s our shared common language and it tells us stuff. 
mom open to you making the argument that modern man is in some way called to a higher standard than he is called to by Christ and the rest of the authors of the New Testament if you want to make that argument. 
I’m not, as I said, even sure what HP’s point is for sure. 

Sitcoms are going for comedy. Comedy needs humor. Human beings find humor in abnormality. Using sitcoms as the basis for social norms is the exact opposite of what you should be doing. 

There's nothing funny about dad going to work, coming home 10-12 hours later, helping the kids with homework, doing some household chores, going to bed, then doing it all again the next day.

[Brisketexan 104624]

2 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Sure. I agree with all this. And as I said, I’m not saying Christians succeed at a greater level than secular humanists in being the men we are called to be. I’m merely pointing out there is a higher calling on us through our Christianity than exists through modern culture. I’m willing to listen to arguments against that you Huck or HP, but I think they would be wrong (as I’m reading you it seems like you think the same). 

I'm saying that these days, I'd rather my family be among a group of dedicated secular humanists than a group of self-professed Christians.  One of them is much more likely to give a shit about their fellow man. 

I don't give a shit about what the playbook for each says -- one of those groups actually runs decent plays a lot better than the other in this country.

[troph 24562]

You can’t read the gendered provisions about what a man is commanded to do with respect to his wife and wife with respect to her husband without reading in context of the times. Failure to understand contextual relevance is why we have outcomes like Trump and rejection of Science. Husbands should not be the supreme head of any household unless the woman chooses that. Equal partnership with negotiated roles is far more respectful of the humanity of a woman and therefore God than the literal Biblical model.

The message and commandments to men with respect to their wives came with an understanding - women were property. Treat them kindly and love them with sacrifice. Today women aren’t property. So the kindness and sacrifice frankly goes both ways now. I do not know a successful relationship that doesn’t have a “love your [person] as Christ loves the church” even if the language used by other folks isn’t steeped in biblical terminology.

[Wulaw Horn 18981]

23 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I'm saying that these days, I'd rather my family be among a group of dedicated secular humanists than a group of self-professed Christians.  One of them is much more likely to give a shit about their fellow man. 

I don't give a shit about what the playbook for each says -- one of those groups actually runs decent plays a lot better than the other in this country.

Sweet. You can talk about whatever you want. I was literally taking about the playbook and what we are called to. Period. Full stop.