3 "phobic" VALUES OF GOD

[Sammy-San]

See if you can find a dictionary that says that.

Reproductive organs? There is no reproduction potential in perversion.

 

[DamianWarS]

Because there should remain a few good places for decent living on this good earth.
It is our responsibility to be good stewards and try to maintain some sanity and not just piling people on top of each other.

That not all be overcome with the the blatant spread of wanton flesh.

that sounds more like an answer of why you're against it not why God is against it. God has value for all peoples of the earth including the people born in countries that appear overpopulated or that are in conflict. Your position of prosperity should allow you to be more generous than closed fisted... generosity is a part of the stewardship God gives us.

 

[SilverBear]

Reproductive organs? There is no reproduction potential in perversion.

Rape is full of reproductive potential.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

that sounds more like an answer of why you're against it not why God is against it. God has value for all peoples of the earth including the people born in countries that appear overpopulated or that are in conflict. Your position of prosperity should allow you to be more generous than closed fisted... generosity is a part of the stewardship God gives us.

Throw it all away, have NOTHING OF GOODNESS ANYWHERE, that is what we should promote?

Bring the HELL HOLES to all of North America, like they are busily doing in Europe?

Anyone with lots of prosperity (including states) is free to be compassionate and throw their money at the hell-holes, but please don't contaminate totally the entire world!

 

[Raphael Jauregui]

I'm against Islam because it is heretical and demonic. I'm also against homosexuality because it is sinful.

First, how can Islam be 'heretical?' It is not a Christian religion and, therefore, does not accept 'orthodox' or 'heterodox' views within the Christian traditions. Calling it demonic does not make any sense either. It is simply another faith or religion. There are many different denominations of Islam. Secondly, how is it sinful to be gay? Being gay is just who a person is. Just as there is diversity among heterosexuals, there is diversity among homosexual or gay people. Some gay people are also asexual, but who are still in loving romantic faithful relationships. What could the argument be against homoromantic asexual relationships? Personally, I'm in favour of and full support of same-sex marriage, civil unions, and relationships whether sexual or asexual.

 

[Raphael Jauregui]

There are 3 values of God that many people like to label "phobias," i.e. mental diseases.
1. Islamophobia - being AGAINST ISLAM.
2. Homophobia - being AGAINST PERVERSION.
3. Xenophobia - being AGAINST IMMIGRATION.

I do not understand how any argument could be made that xenophobia, a type of racism, can be 'godly' and I find the suggestion that any form of racism can be good to be particularly disturbing. Xenophobia literally means that you are afraid of 'strangers' or 'foreigners.' That is NOT what God has called us to be. In fact, Jesus exhorted us to make disciples of ALL nations. Regarding Islamaphobia, how can someone minister to and build relationships with our Muslim neighbors if someone is afraid or hateful of them? Finally, homophobia is wrong and can kill. Treating LGBTQI people as less-than human simply because of who they are is a leading cause of stigma which results in abuse of LGBTQI people. That causes depression and fear. When same-sex marriage and/or civil unions become legal in countries, the suicide rates among LGBTQI communities unsurprisingly drops. That's because they don't feel as much fear of being abused by society.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

I do not understand how any argument could be made that xenophobia, a type of racism, can be 'godly' and I find the suggestion that any form of racism can be good to be particularly disturbing. Xenophobia literally means that you are afraid of 'strangers' or 'foreigners.' That is NOT what God has called us to be. In fact, Jesus exhorted us to make disciples of ALL nations..

Of course - make disciples of all nations. What you prescribe would be the elimination of nations, hence making obeying the exhortation of Jesus impossible.
If you are not against foreigners taking over (part of) our place, you are among other things PROMOTING COVETOUSNESS, by allowing its fruition.

In response to your very first question, post number 184 is such an argument, being radically against immigration, what is the cash value of the claim of "xenophobia" these days.
And of course wanting NO IMMIGRATION is NOT a form of racism - those who are citizens of other states may be of the same race - if all the world were of the same race the same considerations would apply - that they SHOULD stay where they are and NOT be invited to or otherwise invade our borders.

 

[Raphael Jauregui]

Of course - make disciples of all nations. What you prescribe would be the elimination of nations, hence making obeying the exhortation of Jesus impossible.
If you are not against foreigners taking over (part of) our place, you are among other things PROMOTING COVETOUSNESS, by allowing its fruition.

"Who is my neighbour?" Jesus made the answer abundantly clear. Everyone is our neighbour. "Love your neighbour as yourself" he said. "There is neither Jew nor Greek...for all are one in Christ Jesus." Galatians 3:28. And, lest we forget, Jesus' family were refugees who fled to Egypt without the permission of the Roman Empire. They were required to stay in Judah for the census. They fled to save lives. So, yes, we should welcome refugees and immigrants. Xenophobia or fear of someone who is a 'foreigner' is wrong.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

"Who is my neighbour?" Jesus made the answer abundantly clear. Everyone is our neighbour. "Love your neighbour as yourself" he said. "There is neither Jew nor Greek...for all are one in Christ Jesus." Galatians 3:28. And, lest we forget, Jesus' family were refugees who fled to Egypt without the permission of the Roman Empire. They were required to stay in Judah for the census. They fled to save lives. So, yes, we should welcome refugees and immigrants. Xenophobia or fear of someone who is a 'foreigner' is wrong.

"Jesus made the answer abundantly clear. Everyone is our neighbour."

He certainly did not! He never even once even said, "Everyone is our neighbor," so far's we know.

To actually make it clear he would have actually said it. AT LEAST.

 

[DamianWarS]

"Jesus made the answer abundantly clear. Everyone is our neighbour."

He certainly did not! He never even once even said, "Everyone is our neighbor," so far's we know.

To actually make it clear he would have actually said it. AT LEAST.

When Jesus was asked "who is my neighbor?" (Luke 10:29) he replied with the parable of the good Samaritan (Luke 10:30–37). When finished he did not answer instead he asked back "Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?" (Luke 10:36) and the man's reply was "The one who showed him mercy." (Luke 10:38) to which Jesus affirmed replying "You go, and do likewise." (Luke 10:38).

What the parable shows us is love to neighbour does not have discrimination and it shows the glory of God best when it happens in unexpected circumstances. The parable shows the Samaritan, considered a dog by Jews, helping a Jew who was in need of mercy. If the parable defines a neighbour it starts at least with people in need of mercy. As we scan the countries of the world many need the mercy of God but have yet to receive. "Throwing money" their way will not show them this mercy. The Samaritan could have thrown money at the man in the ditch and considered that more than enough but instead he went to length to help the man and completely restore him. You can go to them and show them this mercy but if they come to you what better opportunity is there?

Among the three that passed the man in need which one are you because in the context of this conversation it seems you would rather do whatever you can to avoid any contact whatsoever. Jesus tells us that the same judgment we show others will be applied to us so if we generously show mercy to others, regardless of merit, then Jesus tells us he will too will show us that mercy. Likewise if we choose to avoid the problem at all cost then again Jesus tells us he too will show us that same mercy. Our right to defend our borders is a political civil freedom but it has nothing to do with Christ. In Christ we surrender our rights, even the rights you think makes sense, all to serve him.

Hate does not serve Christ.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

When Jesus was asked "who is my neighbor?" (Luke 10:29) he replied with the parable of the good Samaritan (Luke 10:30–37). When finished he did not answer instead he asked back "Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?" (Luke 10:36) and the man's reply was "The one who showed him mercy." (Luke 10:38) to which Jesus affirmed replying "You go, and do likewise." (Luke 10:38).

What the parable shows us is love to neighbour does not have discrimination and it shows the glory of God best when it happens in unexpected circumstances. The parable shows the Samaritan, considered a dog by Jews, helping a Jew who was in need of mercy. If the parable defines a neighbour it starts at least with people in need of mercy. As we scan the countries of the world many need the mercy of God but have yet to receive. "Throwing money" their way will not show them this mercy. The Samaritan could have thrown money at the man in the ditch and considered that more than enough but instead he went to length to help the man and completely restore him. You can go to them and show them this mercy but if they come to you what better opportunity is there?

Among the three that passed the man in need which one are you because in the context of this conversation it seems you would rather do whatever you can to avoid any contact whatsoever. Jesus tells us that the same judgment we show others will be applied to us so if we generously show mercy to others, regardless of merit, then Jesus tells us he will too will show us that mercy. Likewise if we choose to avoid the problem at all cost then again Jesus tells us he too will show us that same mercy. Our right to defend our borders is a political civil freedom but it has nothing to do with Christ. In Christ we surrender our rights, even the rights you think makes sense, all to serve him.

Hate does not serve Christ.

"If the parable defines a neighbour it starts at least with people in need of mercy."
Not true.
I think everyone knows the parable is about a single individual by the side of the road badly in need of help. Not "people," not more than one.

"Throwing money" is precisely what the Good Samaritan did.
He paid the expenses of a hotel where the injured man FOUND BY THE WAYSIDE could recover.
He did not, note, he did not take the injured guy into his own place.
Neither should we take into our own place, our own country, those in distress in other places. Those we do NOT personally come upon by the side of the road. Follow the Christ example and help them where they are, where they need help. There is no suggestion in the story of Christ that we should go beyond that and rearrange the entire world. No suggestion we should think state borders shouldn't count and other such nonsense.

You say the "Christ neighbor" who was "restored" was a Jew - in that case the example of who is the neighbor is certainly not of someone from another country - there is no parallel to make that case.

YOUR PERSONAL ATTACK IS NOT APPRECIATED.
On this forums site one is supposed to NOT make it personal, but only speak to arguments themselves.

And for sure hatred can serve Christ, when it is hatred of EVIL.
We should hate evil, wherever it is found. For the sake of Christ, for the sake of truth and goodness!

So the entire viewpoint presented in post #190 is pretty much false.

 

[Raphael Jauregui]

"Jesus made the answer abundantly clear. Everyone is our neighbour."

He certainly did not! He never even once even said, "Everyone is our neighbor," so far's we know.

To actually make it clear he would have actually said it. AT LEAST.

As someone posted and pointed out above, Jesus answered the Pharisees' question, "who is my neighbour?" by showing how the Good Samaritan, an oxymoron in the minds of the Pharisees, was the neighbour to the hurt man! Samaritans and Judeans did not interact as a matter of social regulations. Jesus challenge those harmful and discriminatory norms by saying that a Samaritan had been the best neighbour even more so than the Pharisees! What lesson were we to learn? When the Pharisees tried to say that not everyone is their neighbour, Jesus said that even the people you don't like are your neighbors, even the foreigners like the Samaritans were to the people in Judah.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

As someone posted and pointed out above, Jesus answered the Pharisees' question, "who is my neighbour?" by showing how the Good Samaritan, an oxymoron in the minds of the Pharisees, was the neighbour to the hurt man! Samaritans and Judeans did not interact as a matter of social regulations. Jesus challenge those harmful and discriminatory norms by saying that a Samaritan had been the best neighbour even more so than the Pharisees! What lesson were we to learn? When the Pharisees tried to say that not everyone is their neighbour, Jesus said that even the people you don't like are your neighbors, even the foreigners like the Samaritans were to the people in Judah.

WHERE does it say, "the Pharisees tried to say that not everyone is their neighbor," and where does it say "Jesus said that even the people you don't like are you neighbor." Could you please give the references?

 

[Raphael Jauregui]

WHERE does it say, "the Pharisees tried to say that not everyone is their neighbor," and where does it say "Jesus said that even the people you don't like are you neighbor." Could you please give the references?

The Pharisees asked Jesus, and the context says that it was to trick him or make excuses for why they don't help people, "but who is my neighbour?" Jesus replied by telling the parable of the Good Samaritan, the story of a good foreigner who helped someone. Samaritans were 'unclean' to the people of Judah and they could not intermingle if they wanted to be ritually pure. Jesus challenged their stereotypes so radically that he told the story of the Good Samaritan. He also said "love your neighbour as yourself." Jesus also explains, in Matthew, that as you did to the least of these in the world, you have done to him. I want to do good for anyone in need. There is no, and I mean none, biblical or even moral way to be xenophobic. There's no moral way to be hatefully fearful or spiteful to any of the people you mentioned.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

The Pharisees asked Jesus, and the context says that it was to trick him or make excuses for why they don't help people, "but who is my neighbour?" Jesus replied by telling the parable of the Good Samaritan, the story of a good foreigner who helped someone. Samaritans were 'unclean' to the people of Judah and they could not intermingle if they wanted to be ritually pure. Jesus challenged their stereotypes so radically that he told the story of the Good Samaritan. He also said "love your neighbour as yourself." Jesus also explains, in Matthew, that as you did to the least of these in the world, you have done to him. I want to do good for anyone in need. There is no, and I mean none, biblical or even moral way to be xenophobic. There's no moral way to be hatefully fearful or spiteful to any of the people you mentioned.

Mostly a made-up story, apparently. At least some critical parts, probably - why the simple request for actual references yields little except "in Matthew"? Because it would show the story is not quite true to scripture?

Like for instance, it is said that Jesus explains, "in Matthew, that as you did to the least of these in the world," whereas anything I can find close to that refers to "my brethren." Perhaps it can be suggested and hypothesized and speculated that "that's what he really means," with talk of his "brethren," he actually means "everyone in the world"? Mostly reading in what the author of the story wants to be the accepted ideology?

You can interpret "xenophobia" that way, but mostly these days what is being talked about when people are being branded with that label is being against immigration, and such a very moral stance need have nothing hateful or spiteful about it. It certainly may be because the person is fearful of what massive invasions of wanton flesh will do to what may at present be a pretty reasonably functioning society. A proper "fear" which may amount to mostly a different understanding than that of the one trying to dismiss a position with calling the one holding it a nasty name, and probably a "fear" that should be acted upon.

 

[Raphael Jauregui]

Mostly a made-up story, apparently. At least some critical parts, probably - why the simple request for actual references yields little except "in Matthew"? Because it would show the story is not quite true to scripture?

Like for instance, it is said that Jesus explains, "in Matthew, that as you did to the least of these in the world," whereas anything I can find close to that refers to "my brethren." Perhaps it can be suggested and hypothesized and speculated that "that's what he really means," with talk of his "brethren," he actually means "everyone in the world"? Mostly reading in what the author of the story wants to be the accepted ideology?

You can interpret "xenophobia" that way, but mostly these days what is being talked about when people are being branded with that label is being against immigration, and such a very moral stance need have nothing hateful or spiteful about it. It certainly may be because the person is fearful of what massive invasions of wanton flesh will do to what may at present be a pretty reasonably functioning society. A proper "fear" which may amount to mostly a different understanding than that of the one trying to dismiss a position with calling the one holding it a nasty name, and probably a "fear" that should be acted upon.

Wow...

 

[Sammy-San]

I'm against Islam because it is heretical and demonic. I'm also against homosexuality because it is sinful. But I don't see any biblical principles that would make a person patently against immigration. Where are you getting that third one from?

Why does it agree with Christianity that things like witchcraft and fornication are sins? To deceive people into thinking it is holy?

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

Why does it agree with Christianity that things like witchcraft and fornication are sins? To deceive people into thinking it is holy?

If you are referring to Islam, it is quite possible it has a few things right. No matter. Should not be deceived by that.
"Islam" means "subjection," all the world is to be subjected to it, by force if necessary; for Mohammed force might have been the primary first principle, to subdue with the sword (subdue and kill) ALL the "infidels." That is what he practiced, and Muslims are supposed to follow what he said and do what he did.

 

[DamianWarS]

If you are referring to Islam, it is quite possible it has a few things right. No matter. Should not be deceived by that.
"Islam" means "subjection," all the world is to be subjected to it, by force if necessary; for Mohammed force might have been the primary first principle, to subdue with the sword (subdue and kill) ALL the "infidels." That is what he practiced, and Muslims are supposed to follow what he said and do what he did.

the word "islam" means "surrender" the context being to the will of God. The word "muslim" means "one who surrenders" (to the will of God). The word "infidel" simply means "unbeliever". These words have somewhat been demonized but they are not inherently hostile; we use similar terminology with in Christianity. Regardless, God doesn't care about allegiances to political systems or countries. To follow Christ is to surrender such allegiances. To give someone an opportunity to know Christ is better than to forbid them from entering your country, we may not control the foreign policies of our countries but "immigration" should be a non-issue in our faith and we certainly shouldn't parrot perceived values of another faith back to them.

 

[Sammy-San]

If you are referring to Islam, it is quite possible it has a few things right. No matter. Should not be deceived by that.
"Islam" means "subjection," all the world is to be subjected to it, by force if necessary; for Mohammed force might have been the primary first principle, to subdue with the sword (subdue and kill) ALL the "infidels." That is what he practiced, and Muslims are supposed to follow what he said and do what he did.

Was that put there to deceive people into viewing it as holy?