GDL
Well-Known Member
I personally would rather not judge at all when it comes to religious matters. Right and wrong seem to be relative to the time one lives and the environment one lives in therefore it’s seems to be eve changing when talking about that standard of right and wrong from place to place. Even with in the Christianity itself there are things that of happens today would be considered unacceptable and flat out wrong. But it was considered ok in those days according to scripture. Now sure I have my one thoughts about all that but honestly they are just my own thoughts from my perception of the world and how I interact with it. It seems a lot of people on the “Christian forums” are mean and rude a lot of times but this is only my perception. It doesn’t mean because I perceive it that way it is the truth. It seems this fits in all areas where we are unsure if we are willing to admit we are unsure. I may believe Jesus is real another may question because they have a distrust in the history we are provided on all subjects so they take an agnostic approach and say “I don’t know”. Are they wrong? Are they denying God? It doesn’t seem that way to me. I try to understand why they struggle to believe the information presented to them.
It seems you have many concerns, many of which I have also dealt with personally along the way.
At this point I do want to judge, but only with righteous judgment, and thus I am cautious in my desire and judgment. Again, Paul had to push strongly to get a congregation to judge one of its own as it should. To not desire to be able to do this is understandable, but seems youthful (please take this in the spirit it's being presented even if it does sound judgmental).
Right and wrong, or good and bad, Biblically are not relative, but unchanging.
I had a talk with a man from a European country recently who has some awareness of God, but is not a believer. As we worked through some topics, it seemed appropriate to and in line with the flow to discuss the topic of standards. Although he expressed that he thinks we should all get along, I asked him some things that I though might flush out the cultural differences between his culture and what has been the American culture, including some Biblical morals and ethics, some of which we share, and some of which we do not. He viewed me as being a bit overconcerned about a point or two. I wasn't, but I was pretty sure they would solicit some perspective of difference. I tried to make him see that this is his culture and that we think differently on these points and what problems this could very well cause us in certain circumstances.
Ultimately, having and living only God's standards and under His rulership will be the lasting unity. They will be no different than they have ever been, because they are God's perfect character to which we shall all conform.
There is certainly rudeness on some of these threads. I'm sure I've committed some of it. Some of what is said in the NT would certainly be considered rude and sarcastic, and some of it is. At times it's warranted.
Yes, the agnostic and the atheist are denying God. Romans 1 makes it clear that God has made Himself clear to all and thus there is no one who is not liable to Him for denying Him. This does not mean we have to treat them harshly and I too at times try to understand why they say God is not clear to them. One thing about being labeled as arrogant for our views by some of such people, is that such an allegation can be expected against those who have our views. In truth, the arrogance is in the rejection, not in the belief or its confident expression. I do more than wonder at times how some Christians think they can irrefutably prove God's existence let alone to a mind that Romans 1 says has become worthless (some translations say reprobate or depraved (Rom1:28), but the word at its base has do do with being tested to prove no value) and turned over to itself by God in its rejection of the light and knowledge of certain things about Himself He has given to everyone.
Upvote
0