Whole Foods Sues Texas Pastor

[PapaZoom]

You don't understand the question?

Just as an example, from a different recent thread here about one of the new "Bathroom laws". A post made by a self-identified Christians (and you will know that, in contrast to the pastor of the OP, denying a member's Christianity is against the forum rules).

"It will happen any day, because now it is legal to rape and molest because all one has to do is say the feel like the opposite sex. See you all don't get it and never will."

I can link to this post, if you want, but calling out a lie seems also to be against the forum rules. So I don't want to make this person's uncomfortable.

But this is a lie. Even if you defend it by saying this person honestly believes this... it is still a "false witness" against others. It simply isn't true.


In a part of this thread that was deleted (even if it didn't defend homosexuality, but the powers that be do what they want), another Christian here told a lie about unbelievers. I tried to call her out for it... to no avail.


These are just two examples directly from this board. There are tons of further examples from the real world.

It doesn't support your claim that ".......so many Christians lie without the slightest hint of remorse..."

I won't defend the quote above. But it doesn't meet the criteria for a lie unless the person knows it's not true but still passes it off as true. It looks more like and exaggeration and hyperbole to me.

Also, since remorse is an internal emotion, you can't know a person isn't remorseful unless you have first hand knowledge of that person. A lie is a particular thing. An opinion, even if mixed in with outrageous statements, isn't a lie. You can't quote someone, claim it's a lie unless you actually know it meets this criteria: A lie is a statement that is known or intended by its source to be misleading, inaccurate, or false.

 

[PapaZoom]

What, you agree?

"[Your] willful ignorance must be a staggering load....."

I don't get it. Explain.

 

[civilwarbuff]

I said it before, and I get confirmed over and over again.

Homosexuality is the great unifying target that defines Christianity. Everything else is just "meh".

So it was just a red herring.....

 

[PapaZoom]

Perhaps they were lying for Jesus, and so their consciences are clear?

You'd have to prove they were actually misrepresenting the truth in order to deceive. All you're doing at the moment is being snarky.

 

[Freodin]

It doesn't support your claim that ".......so many Christians lie without the slightest hint of remorse..."

I won't defend the quote above. But it doesn't meet the criteria for a lie unless the person knows it's not true but still passes it off as true. It looks more like and exaggeration and hyperbole to me.

Also, since remorse is an internal emotion, you can't know a person isn't remorseful unless you have first hand knowledge of that person. A lie is a particular thing. An opinion, even if mixed in with outrageous statements, isn't a lie. You can't quote someone, claim it's a lie unless you actually know it meets this criteria: A lie is a statement that is known or intended by its source to be misleading, inaccurate, or false.

And because you can never know the real knowledge that a person has, or know his true intentions... hey, nothing is a lie! Puh, literalism is great.

In that regard, as leviticus prohibits men from "...having sex with another man as with a woman...", there is no homosexual sin. No gay man has sex with a man as he would have with a woman.

No, seriously. When someone spreads falsehoods, and continues to spread falsehoods after having been called out on that and corrected, I call that a "lie".

 

[Freodin]

So it was just a red herring.....

You might have noticed that this thread isn't about homosexuality either. But topics shift.

And again, confirmation for my observation. Homosexuality (the opposition against it) is all that counts. Everything else can be safely ignored.

 

[PapaZoom]

And because you can never know the real knowledge that a person has, or know his true intentions... hey, nothing is a lie! Puh, literalism is great.

In that regard, as leviticus prohibits men from "...having sex with another man as with a woman...", there is no homosexual sin. No gay man has sex with a man as he would have with a woman.

No, seriously. When someone spreads falsehoods, and continues to spread falsehoods after having been called out on that and corrected, I call that a "lie".

It's not difficult to know when someone is actually lying. But that's face to face generally. On these forums, spreading misinformation and falsehoods could simply be due to ignorance on the matter being discussed.

 

[Armoured]

Still waiting...

 

[PapaZoom]

You might have noticed that this thread isn't about homosexuality either. But topics shift.

And again, confirmation for my observation. Homosexuality (the opposition against it) is all that counts. Everything else can be safely ignored.

I don't think other issues are ignored. But homosexuality gets a lot of play because the LGBT activists are shoving their political agendas at all of us. There's a push back as a result. To my knowledge, there are no gossip activists pushing for legislation to legitimize gossip as a proper form of communication.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

You'd have to prove they were actually misrepresenting the truth in order to deceive.

In some of my previous discussions, I already have.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I don't think other issues are ignored. But homosexuality gets a lot of play because the LGBT activists are shoving their political agendas at all of us. There's a push back as a result. To my knowledge, there are no gossip activists pushing for legislation to legitimize gossip as a proper form of communication.

More accurately, the "push back" comes from socially conservative Christians whining about how they can no longer treat gay people like second-class citizens.

 

[PapaZoom]

In some of my previous discussions, I already have.

If you did actually show deliberate deception, then yes, that proves a lie. IMHO

 

[PapaZoom]

More accurately, the "push back" comes from socially conservative Christians whining about how they can no longer treat gay people like second-class citizens.

Well I suppose that's one way to see it. I don't agree with the statement and don't at all see the statement as "more accurate." whining is a loaded word and used deliberately to mischaracterize Christian attitudes and suggesting that the motivation is to treat gays like second class citizens is disingenuous at best.

 

[Freodin]

It's not difficult to know when someone is actually lying. But that's face to face generally. On these forums, spreading misinformation and falsehoods could simply be due to ignorance on the matter being discussed.

What a generous approach.
So when someone says something false, negative and insulting about a whole group, even when the truth is before his eyes (like, posts in the same thread they are reading), Christians can handwave it away it as "ignorance"... but if someone preaches that God loves you even when you are an active homosexual, then you are a "Satanic church"?

 

[Armoured]

Well I suppose that's one way to see it. I don't agree with the statement and don't at all see the statement as "more accurate." whining is a loaded word and used deliberately to mischaracterize Christian attitudes and suggesting that the motivation is to treat gays like second class citizens is disingenuous at best.

Looks pretty accurate to me. I concede it's probably not a conscious desire.

 

[PapaZoom]

What a generous approach.
So when someone says something false, negative and insulting about a whole group, even when the truth is before his eyes (like, posts in the same thread they are reading), Christians can handwave it away it as "ignorance"... but if someone preaches that God loves you even when you are an active homosexual, then you are a "Satanic church"?

You're putting words and meaning into what I'm saying that I actually didn't say and certainly don't mean. I'd rather discuss things in honest and open ways.

If the truth is before their eyes and they know it but still hold to the falsehood, they are liars.
If the truth is before their eyes but they don't believe it, they are at worst simply being ignorant.
Claiming "ignorance" cannot be an excuse if one is not actually ignorant of the facts.
You can make a claim that isn't true and not be lying about it. If Young Earthers are wrong about the age of the earth, but they strongly believe in a young earth and say so, they are not lying for promoting their view.

 

[PapaZoom]

Looks pretty accurate to me. I concede it's probably not a conscious desire.

Something is only really accurate if it's actually true. And you can't know what a person thinks under the surface. So you're basing your view on your personal assumptions. We know only know something if we really know it. Truth must correspond to reality. For someone to lie it must actually be a lie they are doing and not simply a wrong belief.

 

[Freodin]

You're putting words and meaning into what I'm saying that I actually didn't say and certainly don't mean. I'd rather discuss things in honest and open ways.

If the truth is before their eyes and they know it but still hold to the falsehood, they are liars.
If the truth is before their eyes but they don't believe it, they are at worst simply being ignorant.
Claiming "ignorance" cannot be an excuse if one is not actually ignorant of the facts.
You can make a claim that isn't true and not be lying about it. If Young Earthers are wrong about the age of the earth, but they strongly believe in a young earth and say so, they are not lying for promoting their view.

Yes, I agree... but I think you make it too easy for yourself.

Does a lie stop being a lie because you sincerely believe in it? In my first example, is it excusable to state that rape is legal, because you believe it... even if you have no reasons for it? If you just repeat what someone told you, someone who did indeed intentionally tell this falsehood?

It doesn't seem to be that black and white, does it?

So why can't people give the same leeway to people who sincerely believe that a loving relationship in body, mind and soul between two persons of the same gender is not "sexual immorality" and not frowned upon by God.

Might it be wrong? Yes, but so is telling people that transgenders are dangerous predators who are after little girls in bathrooms.

 

[PapaZoom]

Something is only really accurate if it's actually true. And you can't know what a person thinks under the surface. So you're basing your view on your personal assumptions. We know only know something if we really know it. Truth must correspond to reality. For someone to lie it must actually be a lie they are doing and not simply a wrong belief.

Here's a perfect example of what I mean and then I have to go.

In the case of this pastor, he knowingly fabricated a story about the cake, manipulated the seal on the box, and tried to pass the story of Whole Foods making an anti gay cake as true. The pastor was lying. All the evidence shows he was lying. Video evidence shows it and even his YouTube video shows this.

But had he sent someone else to pick up the cake and they altered the cake and put on the fake seal and then gave it to the pastor, his claims, though false, would not be lies - from him.- His claim wouldn't be true but it wouldn't be a lie in this case either.

In the second case it would be incorrect to say he was lying. It would be correct to say, "that's not true," or "that's false."

If after being presented with the evidence showing the truth of the matter the pastor still believed he was right, that would show he's just an ignorant person and at that point he's at least complicit in the lie.

There are liars in this world and then there are just plain ignorant people who refused to see what's right in front of their eyes.

 

[Freodin]

Here's a perfect example of what I mean and then I have to go.

In the case of this pastor, he knowingly fabricated a story about the cake, manipulated the seal on the box, and tried to pass the story of Whole Foods making an anti gay cake as true. The pastor was lying. All the evidence shows he was lying. Video evidence shows it and even his YouTube video shows this.

But had he sent someone else to pick up the cake and they altered the cake and put on the fake seal and then gave it to the pastor, his claims, though false, would not be lies - from him.- His claim wouldn't be true but it wouldn't be a lie in this case either.

In the second case it would be incorrect to say he was lying. It would be correct to say, "that's not true," or "that's false."

If after being presented with the evidence showing the truth of the matter the pastor still believed he was right, that would show he's just an ignorant person and at that point he's at least complicit in the lie.

There are liars in this world and then there are just plain ignorant people who refused to see what's right in front of their eyes.

Which would mean he doesn't inherit the kingdom of God, right?

Well, in a way, I agree with you here. And can understand that it might be too easy for us to call others "liar". But would it be better if I changed my starting point to "why do so many Christians loudly display their ignorance to the world without remorse?".

Regardless. You are right about the pastor. Current evidence shows that he was indeed lying. And contrary to what other posters here claimed (and I call that a lie) unbelievers agree that this is wrong.

So why then is the focus of this thread not about the scam that he propagated, but about this pastors homosexuality?