Relevant News Story for Christians

[seeingeyes]

We will have to agree to disagree regarding these two points. It is, imo, a contradictory stance of gay rights activists and these decisions are relevant to politics and societal implication. ..both for law and politics.

It's not really a matter of opinion to say that the government inducing restrictions on people's behavior limits freedom, is it?

 

[Aviela]

It's not really a matter of opinion to say that the government inducing restrictions on people's behavior limits freedom, is it?

My point was it's a matter of opinion whether or not the gay rights activists involved in these situations have a contradictory stance. ...and it's my opinion they do for the reasons I've stated.

 

[BryanW92]

There's not a contradiction there. If abortion or gay marriage or divorce is legal, you are not obligated to do any of those things.

So, everything should be legal and then we can each just decide whether to do it or not? Should civilization be left to "each did what was right in his own eyes"??

 

[Aviela]

That's the thing, the legal system is supposed to protect society and individuals rights. However, if it's infringing on certain rights then there is an issue. However, the view of whether something is safe or not safe and/or healthy or not healthy can be a moral choice. This is where the law becomes difficult. This is where the law and Christianity becomes difficult. Because these two things can contradict one another. What is biblically safe and healthy may contradict what society is claiming to be safe and healthy.

I just think it's important to think about Christians being fired or retaliated against for upholding Christian principle in countries that are supposed to be Christian countries. That in itself is an interesting issue.

 

[seeingeyes]

So, everything should be legal and then we can each just decide whether to do it or not? Should civilization be left to "each did what was right in his own eyes"??

I didn't say that, I said that laws reduce freedom. There's always a trade off.

 

[seeingeyes]

That's the thing, the legal system is supposed to protect society and individuals rights. However, if it's infringing on certain rights then there is an issue. However, the view of whether something is safe or not safe and/or healthy or not healthy can be a moral choice. This is where the law becomes difficult. This is where the law and Christianity becomes difficult. Because these two things can contradict one another. What is biblically safe and healthy may contradict what society is claiming to be safe and healthy.

I just think it's important to think about Christians being fired or retaliated against for upholding Christian principle in countries that are supposed to be Christian countries. That in itself is an interesting issue.

Yes, it is difficult. For one thing, Christians must decide whether their is a benefit to holding non-Christians accountable to Christian laws.

 

[Aviela]

Society needs boundaries we all need boundaries. That is why civilized countries tend to think it's civilized to have law. Boundaries keep us safe just as the boundaries our parents use keep us safe. I see this as different then restricting one's freedom. But, I also think there is a fine line between these two things at times.

 

[ToBeBlessed]

It seems that one of the Duck Dynasty members has received flack for the same issue... So do you think this show / these 2 fellows will receive the same support from Christians?

Duck Dynasty was a very highly rated show, I believe the most highly rated prime time television show for the Lifetime channel and one of the highest rated for all of prime-time cable tv.

In that context, Duck Dynasty received much more publicity. Since it was/is so popular, they had a platform of not only Christians, but also people that believed it was their First Ammendment right to free speech.

I wish the HGTV brothers would get as much publicity and public sentiment would get them their show back, but since it never aired and they do not have an audience yet, I feel it is a completely different scenario.

i hope all Christians support them and they do get their show back, but I think the chances of it are slim.

 

[Aviela]

Duck Dynasty was a very highly rated show, I believe the most highly rated prime time television show for the Lifetime channel and one of the highest rated for all of prime-time cable tv.

In that context, Duck Dynasty received much more publicity. Since it was/is so popular, they had a platform of not only Christians, but also people that believed it was their First Ammendment right to free speech.

I wish the HGTV brothers would get as much publicity and public sentiment would get them their show back, but since it never aired and they do not have an audience yet, I feel it is a completely different scenario.

i hope all Christians support them and they do get their show back, but I think the chances of it are slim.

Thanks for posting

I see what you mean by some of the aspects of duck dynasty and the HGTV twin brothers being different because their show hasnt aired and they don't have an audience yet. However, I do see certain resemblances with both situations. That especially in a Christian country Christians should be able to stand up for Christian principles. I also hope they get support and that anyone going through a similar struggle gets support. Hopefully Christians will band together and help one another out with these struggles.

 

[standingtall]

Since it was/is so popular, they had a platform of not only Christians, but also people that believed it was their First Ammendment right to free speech.

The Duck Dynasty fiasco wasn't about anyone's First Amendment rights.

 

[tremble]

However, would you be just as supportive of these fellows if they chose to stand up and deal with this through the court system and tried to make a difference for Christians that way?

I'm not sure what the fight would be about? That the TV company should not fire them for their beliefs? It seems to me that the firing is what's brining attention to the issue in the first place, so maybe it's not such a bad thing.

Perhaps a court battle could bring more attention to it, but what most people will probably see is what "seeingeyes" has already suggested about financial motivations. It will look like a couple of guys who are upset about losing a lucrative deal rather than a couple of guys who are genuinely concerned about a case of mistaken homophobia.

On the other hand, if the argument is that Christians can be opposed to the act of homosexuality while still being friendly and loving towards the individuals, maybe a victory there would benefit both sides. I'm not sure what evidence would be needed to convince the courts of that; it could lead to issues of relating vs compromising.

Or would you be supportive of them regardless of their decision...trusting that they were following God's will

I may not understand your question properly, but what I supported was that they decided to help the people they'd agreed to help on the show even after the show was canceled, indicating that they'd be paying for it out of their own pockets. In other words, they did not let the financial aspect stop them from showing love even though that had a pretty good excuse to back out. I think it's proof that they really DID find "worthy families" as they claimed in the article and that their efforts to help those families are genuine rather than just a show for entertainment.

I understand what you are saying and I'm not arguing that point the God takes care of us but God calls us in different ways and can ask different things of different people. God also provides according to our needs so that we can accomplish His will.

Again, I may be misunderstanding your point, but my earlier post was based on instructions Jesus gave to his followers. I understand that some Christians may use different tools for evangelism, or some praise groups will sing different songs, or some Christians will choose different charitable projects to work on, but the basic principle is still there. They are doing those things even if the expression varies from one group to another.

It's like that with what Jesus said about how we cannot work for God and money at the same time without cheating on one or the other. Some Christians may decide they want to go to a third world country to help the poor. Some may decide they prefer to stay in a first world country to evangelize full time. Some may decide they want to try a combination of both. There are a hundred million little variations that may occur from one group to the next.

But all of them should still be following the basic principle of not allowing money to be the motivation for why we help others. This is a fundamental value of Heaven and part of the reason why Jesus said we must be "born again". We die to the worldly ways of wages and are born again into the Heavenly system of gifts, where we help one another just because we want to and not because we are afraid of dying if we don't force people to pay us for our help.

 

[Aviela]

I'm not sure what the fight would be about? That the TV company should not fire them for their beliefs? It seems to me that the firing is what's brining attention to the issue in the first place, so maybe it's not such a bad thing.

Perhaps a court battle could bring more attention to it, but what most people will probably see is what "seeingeyes" has already suggested about financial motivations. It will look like a couple of guys who are upset about losing a lucrative deal rather than a couple of guys who are genuinely concerned about a case of mistaken homophobia.

On the other hand, if the argument is that Christians can be opposed to the act of homosexuality while still being friendly and loving towards the individuals, maybe a victory there would benefit both sides. I'm not sure what evidence would be needed to convince the courts of that; it could lead to issues of relating vs compromising.



I may not understand your question properly, but what I supported was that they decided to help the people they'd agreed to help on the show even after the show was canceled, indicating that they'd be paying for it out of their own pockets. In other words, they did not let the financial aspect stop them from showing love even though that had a pretty good excuse to back out. I think it's proof that they really DID find "worthy families" as they claimed in the article and that their efforts to help those families are genuine rather than just a show for entertainment.



Again, I may be misunderstanding your point, but my earlier post was based on instructions Jesus gave to his followers. I understand that some Christians may use different tools for evangelism, or some praise groups will sing different songs, or some Christians will choose different charitable projects to work on, but the basic principle is still there. They are doing those things even if the expression varies from one group to another.

It's like that with what Jesus said about how we cannot work for God and money at the same time without cheating on one or the other. Some Christians may decide they want to go to a third world country to help the poor. Some may decide they prefer to stay in a first world country to evangelize full time. Some may decide they want to try a combination of both. There are a hundred million little variations that may occur from one group to the next.

But all of them should still be following the basic principle of not allowing money to be the motivation for why we help others. This is a fundamental value of Heaven and part of the reason why Jesus said we must be "born again". We die to the worldly ways of wages and are born again into the Heavenly system of gifts, where we help one another just because we want to and not because we are afraid of dying if we don't force people to pay us for our help.

My point is that God can ask us each to do individual things and in individual ways… Biblically speaking of course. Not everyone is called to quit their job or to just walk away etc. Some may be called to write letters to use the court system, to consult a lawyer. Etc. We are not all called to leave our work in order to make certain principles clear or to be Christian examples. These two fellows lost work and they're choosing to let it go from what I understand. If that is what God is asking of them, I think that's great. But just because God is asking that of them doesn't mean God is asking that others should do things in that particular way. If another fellow Christian experiences the same problem and they decided to deal with it in a more legal fashion would you be opposed to that. God also commands us to follow the law. He also commands us to go to our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. God met many people along the way that he did not command to leave their jobs. By saying this, I am in no way condoning that we should put anything above God. But things are not always cut and drive for everyone and every situation.

As far as the legal aspect would be concerned, it would / could be the right to express one's beliefs without fear of retaliation...loss of income, etc. etc.

 

[tremble]

If another fellow Christian experiences the same problem and they decided to deal with it in a more legal fashion would you be opposed to that.

I'm not opposed to Christians using the courts. I suppose it'd depend on the context and, as you suggest, listening to God for guidance on whether to use the courts or not.

Not everyone is called to quit their job or to just walk away etc.

Correct. I am referring to instructions that Jesus gave to those who would be his followers. There are lots of people in the world who are not interested in being Jesus' follower, and so those teachings don't apply to them.

God met many people along the way that he did not command to leave their jobs.

There are many issues Jesus did not directly address. I'm more concerned about what he actually DID say than what he did not say. Do you feel that Jesus' instructions from Matthew 6:19-34 apply to you as a Christian? It's from his famous "sermon on the mount" and it's directed to his followers in general rather than a select few.

 

[Aviela]

Correct. I am referring to instructions that Jesus gave to those who would be his followers. There are lots of people in the world who are not interested in being Jesus' follower, and so those teachings don't apply to them.



There are many issues Jesus did not directly address. I'm more concerned about what he actually DID say than what he did not say. Do you feel that Jesus' instructions from Matthew 6:19-34 apply to you as a Christian? It's from his famous "sermon on the mount" and it's directed to his followers in general rather than a select few.

I think all of what Jesus had to say is important. However, I think it's important to see the Bible in context And each situation as it is and pay attention to what God is telling us to do. I don't think there's a point-blank general answer for everything as you seem to be suggesting with simply walking away from one job. Sometimes we are called to stay in an environment and to do Gods work with in that environment. This is not an on unbiblical concept. Nor does that mean that someone is not a Jesus follower.

 

[tremble]

Hi aviela. I need to go to bed now but I look forward to continuing this discussion with you tomorrow. Perhaps the break will give me time to think on how to express my positition from a different angle.

 

[Aviela]

Hi aviela. I need to go to bed now but I look forward to continuing this discussion with you tomorrow. Perhaps the break will give me time to think on how to express my positition from a different angle.

Ok That may be but I also think it's important we not digress too far away from the OP of this thread.

 

[tremble]

Ok Aviela. Fair point about not digressing from the topic. I'll leave it there for now and if you are interested we can either discuss in via pm or you can start a new thread on that topic. If you don't, maybe I will, though I've kinda been saying the same things for a while now and I wonder if people are getting tired of hearing it. ^.^

 

[Aviela]

Ok Aviela. Fair point about not digressing from the topic. I'll leave it there for now and if you are interested we can either discuss in via pm or you can start a new thread on that topic. If you don't, maybe I will, though I've kinda been saying the same things for a while now and I wonder if people are getting tired of hearing it. ^.^

I think you have made an important point. I just think that God is not asking everybody to leave their job and I think he asks some of us to stay in certain environments so that we can be a witness and minister in certain ways. This can be a real challenge for Christians as well.

It is a good thread idea.

 

[tturt]

posted: I'm not concerned about it, honestly, in any aspect.

So what about your freedom of speech?

 

[seeingeyes]

posted: I'm not concerned about it, honestly, in any aspect.

So what about your freedom of speech?

This isn't a question of freedom of speech.