Do We Have a Christ Followers Thread?

[South Austin 52,515]

2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I was aware of a big chunk of this, which is what makes it so surprising there were still some left to get offended? I guess the last 6 years have increased polarization everywhere. Still, to up and leave your community for a decades old precedent…sigh. 

My guess is that it was folks like me, who grew up in one denomination, and stuck with it out of tradition, loyalty, blood ties, etc., for as long as we could, even when our convictions were pulling us in another direction.

[TwiceHorn 31,489]

56 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

As far as I can discern, too “political” is aimed at the decision we made to allow gays to marry in our church. And I’ve heard that a couple parishioners specifically complained about that on their way out the door.  Those folks have known they’ve been a part of a church with fellow parishioners who are gay and have even served in leadership positions. Yet approving a liturgy to allow them to marry in our church was somehow the last straw.

Churches have pretty much always had positions on social issues, that is kind of their nature.  Social issues are not inherently political.

But now that the right wing has adopted social issues as platform planks, with only the barest connection, if any, to actual policy, people get confused.

It really shouldn't be all that hard for church members to accept that the secular state has different rules about social issues than a church and just leave it there.  

As a non-controversial example:  pretty much all churches and religions condemn adultery.  But adultery hasn't been a crime or at least an enforceable crime in most states for the better part of a century.

[SydneyCarton 48,108]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Churches have pretty much always had positions on social issues, that is kind of their nature.  Social issues are not inherently political.

But now that the right wing has adopted social issues as platform planks, with only the barest connection, if any, to actual policy, people get confused.

It really shouldn't be all that hard for church members to accept that the secular state has different rules about social issues than a church and just leave it there.  

As a non-controversial example:  pretty much all churches and religions condemn adultery.  But adultery hasn't been a crime or at least an enforceable crime in most states for the better part of a century.

Just fyi, not sure how it happened but you quoted my there, but the quoted text was South Austin’s. 

[South Austin 52,515]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

Just fyi, not sure how it happened but you quoted my there, but the quoted text was South Austin’s. 

And you better not steal my rep.

[Captainant 27,679]

7 hours ago, gsoda3 said:

i know what you mean, and it's a common sentiment, but the church is the bride of Christ of which He is the head.  

On the other hand, I'm pretty the institution currently known as "the church" isn't what Jesus was talking about, and probably more towards the Matthew 18 version of "the church" as "where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them". The big building perpetually in need of a new roof and worrying about hiring the right worship band isn't what the faith is meant to be focused on.

Shows like the righteous gemstones do so well because of how stark the contrast is between message and action for "Christianity" generally  right now

[Celery Man 20,962]

People use “the church shouldn’t be political” to keep Jesus away from their politically held social views.

[South Austin 52,515]

10 minutes ago, Captainant said:

The big building perpetually in need of a new roof and worrying about hiring the right worship band isn't what the faith is meant to be focused on.

True, but there is a line you cross, and like obscenity, you know it when you see it.

People like to worship and minister in community, and I think that’s what’s Jesus intended. In modern times, we have the ability to build a structure in which people can do that free from the heat, rain, snow, etc. That naturally costs money.

Beyond that, there is indeed an opulence among many churches when it comes to buildings and grounds, bloated pastor salaries, music and production, etc. Prosperity theology is the worst offender, and I completely understand why that drives cynicism against organized religion. 

[TwiceHorn 31,489]

35 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Just fyi, not sure how it happened but you quoted my there, but the quoted text was South Austin’s. 

Yeah sorry, I highlighted it out of his, but not the original.

[CHIEF 5,092]

2 hours ago, South Austin said:

We’ve had a few members leave my parish (Episcopal) over the past couple years because we were getting too “political.” I’m very familiar with our clergy’s sermons, the missions our laity supports, and our messaging. Openly as a church body, we don’t endorse candidates or criticize elected political leaders, and when a priest has addressed tragedies like that in Uvalde, there isn’t a shred of discussion on gun control.

As far as I can discern, too “political” is aimed at the decision we made to allow gays to marry in our church. And I’ve heard that a couple parishioners specifically complained about that on their way out the door.  Those folks have known they’ve been a part of a church with fellow parishioners who are gay and have even served in leadership positions. Yet approving a liturgy to allow them to marry in our church was somehow the last straw.

I don’t see where Jesus said anything about homosexuality, or drawing some arbitrary line for respecting their dignity at marriage rites. Yet when we decide to include them in the sacrament of marriage, that’s when it gets too “political.”

 

Jesus didn't, but Paul did in Romans 1:18-32:

18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness,

19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator-who is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. 28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

 

Most of the members of a congregation that leave probably leave over verse 32.  Having a gay wedding in their Church is seen as approval, even celebrated. It is, indeed, scriptural.

CHIEF 

[South Austin 52,515]

2 hours ago, CHIEF said:

Jesus didn't, but Paul did in Romans 1:18-32:

To which I say, again, where did Jesus say anything like that in scripture?  If you think homosexuality is a hill to die on for your take on Christianity (emphasize the Christ in Christianity), and homosexuality was a well-known practice well before Jesus walked the Earth, why didn't anyone bother to include in the New Testament something attributable to Jesus along the lines of "Oh yeah, gayness, not cool with that, not welcome in my group."?

And since you bring up Paul, let's see what he had to say about women:

"But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God." (1 Cor. 11:3 NIV)

"Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything." (Eph. 5:22-24)

"Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." (1 Cor. 14:34-35)

"A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety." (1 Tim. 2:11-15)

If people want to cite Paul when they leave a church over the ordination or marriage of homosexuals, then maybe on their way out they should also tell their wives to shut the fuck up and just make them a sandwich. 

Edited September 30, 2022 by South Austin

[fuggled 576]

13 minutes ago, CHIEF said:

 

Jesus didn't, but Paul did in Romans 1:18-32:

18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness,

19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator-who is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. 28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

 

Most of the members of a congregation that leave probably leave over verse 32.  Having a gay wedding in their Church is seen as approval, even celebrated. It is, indeed, scriptural.

CHIEF 

Honest question...why do we care what Paul said?  Why does he get the final vote?  Paul was obviously very influential and changed a lot of hearts and minds, but who decided we have to accept his opinion on all things?  In my best estimation, Paul was a man moved by God to be better and to encourage others to be better.  He's doing the best he can to share this message, but at the end of the day he's a fallible person and he probably didn't get everything 100% correct.  

[TwiceHorn 31,489]

24 minutes ago, CHIEF said:

They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

The sentences preceding the bolded present kind of a laundry list of sin, including that most mortal, "disobeying their parents" and further includes the lack of understanding, love and mercy.

And all of these things "deserve death."

In context, it's a little hard for me to "prioritize" any of those sins one way or the other.

Edited September 30, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[TwiceHorn 31,489]

11 minutes ago, fuggled said:

Honest question...why do we care what Paul said?  Why does he get the final vote?  Paul was obviously very influential and changed a lot of hearts and minds, but who decided we have to accept his opinion on all things?  In my best estimation, Paul was a man moved by God to be better and to encourage others to be better.  He's doing the best he can to share this message, but at the end of the day he's a fallible person and he probably didn't get everything 100% correct.  

Also, Paul was describing the human condition there, not attempting to elucidate or pronounce "the law."   And note that there is no reference anywhere to Christ, salvation, or redemption.

Later in Romans, Paul recounts that humans are relieved of the conditions and freed from "the law" by the salvation of Christ.

[CHIEF 5,092]

14 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The sentences preceding the bolded present kind of a laundry list of sin, including that most mortal, "disobeying their parents" and further includes the lack of understanding, love and mercy.

And all of these things "deserve death."

In context, it's a little hard for me to "prioritize" any of those sins one way or the other.

I'm not throwing stones, I actually laughed at the disobedience, cause I'm guilty. I was just trying to explain why some parishioners might leave for South Austin and others. I was just showing the scripture that they might use for justification.

CHIEF

[SydneyCarton 48,108]

I'll tell you what, the last few pages have really shown me that there are not multiple ways to interpret the tenets of Christianity, just one right one, and that this should be really really easy, y'all. 

[DeweyCox 366]

The Bible is clear, in both Old Testament  and New Testament, that homosexuality is sin. Just like with any other sin…we are to repent. 

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God. Some of you once lived this way. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

[crash_davis 23,113]

5 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I'll tell you what, the last few pages have really shown me that there are not multiple ways to interpret the tenets of Christianity, just one right one, and that this should be really really easy, y'all. 

It's even more fun when you get to arbitrarily choose which passages of the Bible to take as literal "thou must do this" (hate gays) vs the the other passages to take as "meh, I'll just ignore it" (not commit adultery). It's a choose your own adventure book, and no matter how you live your life, you are always going to be a "good" Christian because you set your own rules. 

Edited September 30, 2022 by crash_davis

[SydneyCarton 48,108]

6 minutes ago, DeweyCox said:

The Bible is clear, in both Old Testament  and New Testament, that homosexuality is sin. Just like with any other sin…we are to repent. 

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God. Some of you once lived this way. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

So anyone who's ever been drunk, much less regularly drunk, is out of heaven, eh? I wonder why alcohol doesn't seem to rile up the masses the way Homosexuality does?

3 minutes ago, crash_davis said:

It's even more fun when you get to arbitrarily choose which passages of the Bible to take as literal "thou must do this" (hate gays) vs the the other passages to take as "meh, I'll just ignore it" (not commit adultery). It's a choose your own adventure book, and no matter how you live your life, you are always going to be a "good" Christian because you set your own rules. And those rules are right there in the Bible.

This is a tremendous post, and the heart of the problem. I will only disagree with one thing you said; None of this is fun. Not even remotely. It actually breaks my heart. 

[Captainant 27,679]

7 minutes ago, DeweyCox said:

The Bible is clear, in both Old Testament  and New Testament, that homosexuality is sin. Just like with any other sin…we are to repent. 

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God. Some of you once lived this way. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Yes, we know that Paul hated the gays and wanted women to know their place. Try to keep up champ

[texasdago 7,573]

47 minutes ago, CHIEF said:

32 Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

Just curious... where is the list of sins in order of severity because I'm pretty sure God consider all sin, sin.  Man has come up with the greatest hits.

"For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it." - James 2:10

"For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” - Galatians 3:10

"For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.” - Mark 7:21-23

Well shoot... pride, foolishness seem to be on equal footing with murder, adultery, deceit... pride.  Huh.  Don't see any of that these days in our charged political environment.  God hates that just as much as man's "greatest hits"

[texasdago 7,573]

1 minute ago, Captainant said:

the verbally abusive, and swindlers

So why don't certain "followers" lose their mind over one person who sins like this just as much as the sin they claim to abhor?  See how its in the same list?  Y'all keep posting a list of sins and then point out one specific sin and ignore the rest.

Edited September 30, 2022 by texasdago

[crash_davis 23,113]

3 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

So anyone who's ever been drunk, much less regularly drunk, is out of heaven, eh? I wonder why alcohol doesn't seem to rile up the masses the way Homosexuality does?

This is a tremendous post, and the heart of the problem. I will only disagree with one thing you said; None of this is fun. Not even remotely. It actually breaks my heart. 

I find it funny when people quote passages of the Bible as it were the direct words from God. Well, what about the other passages which are conveniently ignored?

So is the book to be taken as literal and every word to be followed exactly or is it a list of rules which a person conveniently gets to decide which are important and which to ignore? All Christians read it as the latter, in which case, it's a fun choose your own adventure to salvation fiction book. 

[South Austin 52,515]

10 minutes ago, DeweyCox said:

The Bible is clear, in both Old Testament  and New Testament, that homosexuality is sin. Just like with any other sin…we are to repent. 

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God. Some of you once lived this way. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Again I go back to Jesus, whose words and deeds are (or damn well should be) the foundation for Christianity.  Jesus didn't say shit about homosexuality.  And for the "laws" and "sins" set out in the Old Testament, Jesus pissed all over much of that in favor of a new way of life that was loving and inclusive.   

As I did with Paul's words, if you cite to Old Testament to say that homosexuality should be considered a sin, I'll throw back to you a ton of other fucked up "laws" that I'm sure you agree have no place in whatever church you attend.

[SydneyCarton 48,108]

2 minutes ago, South Austin said:

Again I go back to Jesus, whose words and deeds are (or damn well should be) the foundation for Christianity.  Jesus didn't say shit about homosexuality.  And for the "laws" and "sins" set out in the Old Testament, Jesus pissed all over much of that in favor of a new way of life that was loving and inclusive.   

As I did with Paul's words, if you cite to Old Testament to say that homosexuality should be considered a sin, I'll throw back to you a ton of other fucked up "laws" that I'm sure you agree have no place in whatever church you attend.

Careful, Westboro Baptist exists.

[texasdago 7,573]

14 minutes ago, South Austin said:

Again I go back to Jesus, whose words and deeds are (or damn well should be) the foundation for Christianity.  Jesus didn't say shit about homosexuality.  And for the "laws" and "sins" set out in the Old Testament, Jesus pissed all over much of that in favor of a new way of life that was loving and inclusive.   

As I did with Paul's words, if you cite to Old Testament to say that homosexuality should be considered a sin, I'll throw back to you a ton of other fucked up "laws" that I'm sure you agree have no place in whatever church you attend.

Sorry, no shrimp or crab boils for you

"But all creatures in the seas or streams that do not have fins and scales--whether among all the swarming things or among all the other living creatures in the water--you are to detest."

Edited September 30, 2022 by texasdago

[texasdago 7,573]

Clearly did not read Leviticus

[South Austin 52,515]

1 minute ago, texasdago said:

Sorry, no shrimp or crab boils for you

"But all creatures in the seas or streams that do not have fins and scales--whether among all the swarming things or among all the other living creatures in the water--you are to detest."

Another Old Testament passage Jesus properly left behind in his ministry. 

[CHIEF 5,092]

7 minutes ago, South Austin said:

Another Old Testament passage Jesus properly left behind in his ministry. 

Yes, Paul being a Jewish lawyer, a descendant of Pharisees, was still very "hung up" on Jewish laws, especially on Messianic Jews still following much of them. Jesus knew it was impossible to keep the laws, especially for Gentiles that didn't follow Rabbinical Law. Jesus declared all food as clean in Mark 7:19.

CHIEF

[DaysOff 7,951]

So why don't certain "followers" lose their mind over one person who sins like this just as much as the sin they claim to abhor?  See how its in the same list?  Y'all keep posting a list of sins and then point out one specific sin and ignore the rest.

No. They're posting an English translation of a word that was closer to meaning child molester.

[1978horn 892]

I read this article a couple years ago about homosexuality and where it is in the bible...take it or leave it if you want.  I don't translate other languages, so I don't know if it is all true, but it is interesting for sure.

 

https://um-insight.net/perspectives/has-“homosexual”-always-been-in-the-bible/

TLDR version:  says that the bible was mistranslated, maybe on purpose, from boy molester/lover to homosexual.

 

I grew up in the evangelical church and attended regularly until about 10 years ago when my kids were little.  My wife and I left the church for it's lack of compassion and judgement.

Edited September 30, 2022 by 1978horn

[DeweyCox 366]

I struggled, mightily, with unrepentant sin until I was 42…when I came to realize that it wasn’t that I needed more Holy Spirit in me but that I needed to give the Holy Spirit in me more of me. My life, since that realization, has been amazingly wonderful, blessed, exciting, energized, purposeful…adventurous. 

The most impactful advice I’ve ever been given is “don’t settle for less than God’s best”. 

[TwiceHorn 31,489]

1 hour ago, South Austin said:

Another Old Testament passage Jesus properly left behind in his ministry. 

Also the one about cheeseburgers.

[South Austin 52,515]

1 minute ago, DeweyCox said:

I struggled, mightily, with unrepentant sin until I was 42…when I came to realize that it wasn’t that I needed more Holy Spirit in me but that I needed to give the Holy Spirit in me more of me. My life, since that realization, has been amazingly wonderful, blessed, exciting, energized, purposeful…adventurous. 

The most impactful advice I’ve ever been given is “don’t settle for less than God’s best”. 

[YGIFS 19,450]

That’s true, five apostles did break off to start a burger chain.  It’s right there in the book.  The book that has been translated, edited, and revised 370 times over 7000 years.  The world’s largest game of telephone.  

[DeweyCox 366]

2 minutes ago, South Austin said:

Seek and you shall find

[F250 28,777]

1 hour ago, South Austin said:

 

"A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety." (1 Tim. 2:11-15)

What is interesting with this is the reference to Junia in Roman 16:7.

"Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me."

Junia was a female apostle. Some will argue that she had no authority as an apostle or that she actually wasn't an apostle. There is a lot of debate about her status because of the implication it has on the female authority topic.

Also interesting is that it's likely Paul isn't the author of the Epistles to Timothy. A common theory is that these were written after the death of Paul. Although Paul is considered the author of Romans which he praises Junia.

[Mole 4,333]

 

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Also, Paul was describing the human condition there, not attempting to elucidate or pronounce "the law."   And note that there is no reference anywhere to Christ, salvation, or redemption.

Later in Romans, Paul recounts that humans are relieved of the conditions and freed from "the law" by the salvation of Christ.

The way the “clobber verses” — and much of the Bible in general — are commonly dealt with often seem backwards to me. It misses the entire point. 

Paul describes the brokenness of humanity, points to a laundry list of sins and failings, and then eventually presents the answer in Jesus. Jesus preached the same thing with a slightly different laundry list but the same answer.

We, the Church, then create laws and rules based on those lists of sins — the evidence of the problem, not the problem itself — as though “solving” those sins would solve the core problem. It’s a little like an alcoholic white knuckling sobriety (the dry drunk); the evidence of the problem isn’t there right now, but the problem is still there.

Of course, the point of Paul’s message is to lead us to the question: who can save me from this body of death?

2 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

That’s true, five apostles did break off to start a burger chain.  It’s right there in the book.  The book that has been translated, edited, and revised 370 times over 7000 years.  The world’s largest game of telephone.  

This doesn’t give enough credit to the amazing body of centuries of scholarship.

[YGIFS 19,450]

You’ll have to try hard to find a non-Catholic half-Jew who has studied and appreciated and broadcast the work of the Jesuits as much as myself.  However, the term “lost in translation” exists for A reason.   I am quite thankful for those centuries of scholarship though. 
 

I proudly get to say that my grand-aunt was the very first female graduate of Harvard Divinity school

Edited September 30, 2022 by YGIFS

['stache 21,817]

On 9/28/2022 at 9:39 AM, Brisketexan said:

Y2) American "conservative Christians" who openly demonize brown migrants and celebrate their suffering and cruelty inflicted on them.  BOTH claim to be Christian (one quite a bit more loudly than the other). 

One of very few credits I gave to Catholicism when I was technically part of it was its defense of helping immigrants. Oklahoma a few years ago tried to make it illegal to give an undocumented person a ride. Like to anywhere, work, school, church, if you had a brown person in your car, you needed to see their papers, and if you were pulled over with a brown person, you'd be suspected of violating the law. Yet another benevolent act by the bible belt conservative legislature in this state. The church pushed back hard because they regularly had volunteers help immigrants with rides and multiple other areas. Granted I always harbored some skepticism that it was more about the numbers, that a huge chunk of Catholicism around here are Hispanics who tithe, but they went about as political as they could to push back on that absurd law. I also support them sticking to their guns on capital punishment. How anybody can think that putting children in cages and shipping people to "liberal states" for political points is consistent with any form of religion is just absurd. Yet the same people use god and jesus on their campaign mailers and demonize the "others," you know the people who jesus said to help the most. Fuck religion, it's all a scam. 

[Celery Man 20,962]

Matthew 5:16

[F250 28,777]

3 hours ago, CHIEF said:

6 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. 

It's been years since I read Clement but I recall that these acts were not homosexual acts but more of a "NowThis" type of behavior that certain Roman cults would do. As I recall, Clement of Alexanderia wrote about this and it had a lot to do with Beastiality and Pegging.

Tldr, Pegging initiated by a temple priestess followed by castration of the male is what was being addressed here.

[South Austin 52,515]

1 minute ago, F250 said:

It's been years since I read Clement but I recall that these acts were not homosexual acts but more of a "NowThis" type of behavior that certain Roman cults would do. As I recall, Clement of Alexanderia wrote about this and it had a lot to do with Beastiality and Pegging.

Tldr, Pegging initiated by a temple priestess followed by castration of the male is what was being addressed here.

Again I say, where did Jesus say anything about beastiality and pegging!

[F250 28,777]

4 minutes ago, South Austin said:

Again I say, where did Jesus say anything about beastiality and pegging!

Asking for a friend?

[South Austin 52,515]

1 minute ago, F250 said:

Asking for a friend?

My Jewish friend.

[MeerkatBong 115]

20 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Non?   Yeah...no.  A metric shitton of Christians, typically the most vocal and assertive "Christians," believe and act EXACTLY that way.  They are flaming assholes to everyone, they celebrate cruelty, but then they wave around the "but I accepted Jesus as my lord and savior!" card around like this guy used his diplomatic credentials:

It's not just that they're mean assholes -- the world is full of mean assholes.  It's that they do so while simultaneously waving around a membership card in a club that has, as one of its two foundational tenets, "don't be a mean asshole."

In case you can't tell, as someone who has really grown into his faith in the past 20 years, I am utterly disgusted by American "Christians," and I am just fine if "the Church" dies.

I agree and know there are a metric ton of Christians who do not "get it" and believe and act in wicked and sinful ways--either purposefully or ignorantly. There are also a ton of Christians who do act in wicked and sinful ways and are truly repentant and want and try to change, etc . The difference it seems is that I am okay with not trying to be the judge of the character of another persons heart and will let God sort that out. 

Ultimately, I completely get that you have your position and that's that, but I don't think it's nearly so black-and-white as you do. But that's the beauty of religious freedom-- you are free to lead your family and impart on them your spiritual "wisdom" as you see fit.

I love that you get to do that within your sphere of influence and I hope it's helpful and life-giving to those who would see and hear you and think you are someone worth listening and following advice from.

For my tastes from reading about your spiritual takes on this site, you ring too much like one of those really smart teenagers, authoritative in what you think you know and really pleased with where you've landed on the position, but to more judicious and wisened people, it's a foolish sort of definitiveness.

But to each their own, compadre.

[RomaVicta 29,909]

12 hours ago, gsoda3 said:

really appreciate you explaining that, thanks.  i obviously don't know why your experience differs from mine or others but i'm earnestly praying you do find what you were looking for in the person of Jesus.    

Hey, gsoda3, my mind returned to our exchange last night. A question emerged. It's unprejudiced in that I truly don't know your answer.

What is my fate should I not find my way in the person of Jesus?

['stache 21,817]

3 minutes ago, MeerkatBong said:

I agree and know there are a metric ton of Christians who do not "get it" and believe and act in wicked and sinful ways--either purposefully or ignorantly. There are also a ton of Christians who do act in wicked and sinful ways and are truly repentant and want and try to change, etc . The difference it seems is that I am okay with not trying to be the judge of the character of another persons heart and will let God sort that out. 

Ultimately, I completely get that you have your position and that's that, but I don't think it's nearly so black-and-white as you do. But that's the beauty of religious freedom-- you are free to lead your family and impart on them your spiritual "wisdom" as you see fit.

I love that you get to do that within your sphere of influence and I hope it's helpful and life-giving to those who would see and hear you and think you are someone worth listening and following advice from.

For my tastes from reading about your spiritual takes on this site, you ring too much like one of those really smart teenagers, authoritative in what you think you know and really pleased with where you've landed on the position, but to more judicious and wisened people, it's a foolish sort of definitiveness.

But to each their own, compadre.

Yet another area that the political right has perverted. They've turned "freedom of religion" into "my freedom to exercise my religion by forcing it upon others through the law." It's truly disgusting how this freedom has been perverted. "My religion doesn't like gays, so all books featuring gay characters must be removed from school libraries, or else my freedom of religion is violated." The fallacy is so blatant, the people saying it even know it, they just don't fucking care so long as they get their point across that they hate the gays. 

[MeerkatBong 115]

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

Yet another area that the political right has perverted. They've turned "freedom of religion" into "my freedom to exercise my religion by forcing it upon others through the law." It's truly disgusting how this freedom has been perverted. "My religion doesn't like gays, so all books featuring gay characters must be removed from school libraries, or else my freedom of religion is violated." The fallacy is so blatant, the people saying it even know it, they just don't fucking care so long as they get their point across that they hate the gays. 

Yep. No arguments there; I agree 100% with you. And whether it's origins were in a good place (righteous concern, true belief driven, etc.) or wicked place (power hungry, ambitious, nakedly hypocritical), it doesn't matter. The end state is bad for all.

[RollLeft 5,045]

7 hours ago, South Austin said:

Again I go back to Jesus, whose words and deeds are (or damn well should be) the foundation for Christianity.  Jesus didn't say shit about homosexuality.  And for the "laws" and "sins" set out in the Old Testament, Jesus pissed all over much of that in favor of a new way of life that was loving and inclusive.   

As I did with Paul's words, if you cite to Old Testament to say that homosexuality should be considered a sin, I'll throw back to you a ton of other fucked up "laws" that I'm sure you agree have no place in whatever church you attend.

While I understand where you are coming from and agree with your sentiment that the new covenant brought a message of love and inclusiveness however your statement is only partially true.  And since it seems you prefer the words of Jesus over Paul, a simple rereading of Matthew 5 and especially 10 makes my point.  Your intent is right but just not inclusive of both sides of truth.  Also, while Paul early in his understanding was more legal, Cor vs Hebrews, he was the most progressive apostle.  No one save jews would even have a seat at the table if Paul didn't do what he was commissioned to do. Even Jesus had his priorities Matt 15:24-26. Sobering when one really takes it all in. No one is without sin, but neither are we without accountability.  And no one, i mean NO ONE likes to be held accountable.  Thats why everyone's finger is pointed every other direction but their own. 

Edited September 30, 2022 by RollLeft

[texasdago 7,573]

38 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Yet another area that the political right has perverted. They've turned "freedom of religion" into "my freedom to exercise my religion by forcing it upon others through the law." It's truly disgusting how this freedom has been perverted. "My religion doesn't like gays, so all books featuring gay characters must be removed from school libraries, or else my freedom of religion is violated." The fallacy is so blatant, the people saying it even know it, they just don't fucking care so long as they get their point across that they hate the gays. 

Another recent example is the "In God We Trust" law that was passed in Texas.  

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/31/1120239381/texas-in-god-we-trust-arabic-signs-chaz-stevens