3 "phobic" VALUES OF GOD

[Strivax]

Is a neighbor a neighbor? Of a neighbor to himself?

Our neighbour, as I read the scriptures, is everyone else.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[Daniel9v9]

What's the difference between rejection and islamaphobia and homophobia?

There's a fundamental difference in that phobia is based on personal feelings or agenda, whereas rejection of sin has to do with obeying God's Word, which is true, holy and good.

In other words, what God says is evil, secularism will often say is good. This shouldn't surprise us. The world make up their own morals and values based on political and popular views. But we know that only God is good, thus we are to love and obey God in all things.

 

[Strivax]

There's a fundamental difference in that phobia is based on personal feelings or agenda, whereas rejection of sin has to do with obeying God's Word, which is true, holy and good.

In other words, what God says is evil, secularism will often say is good. This shouldn't surprise us. The world make up their own morals and values based on political and popular views. But we know that only God is good, thus we are to love and obey God in all things.

Actually, secularism simply demands reasons before it condemns something as bad or evil. Among reasons which it may see as valid are harm caused to self, others, or the environment. Among reasons which it does not see as valid are simple prejudices, either modern or ancient. And who's to say that ultimately, this is not obedience to God's actual Will.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[Daniel9v9]

Actually, secularism simply demands reasons before it condemns something as bad or evil. Among reasons which it may see as valid are harm caused to self, others, or the environment. Among reasons which it does not see as valid are simple prejudices, either modern or ancient. And who's to say that ultimately, this is not obedience to God's actual Will.

Best wishes, Strivax.

How can one in secularism, through reason, judge whether something is good or evil? In secularism there is no concept or sin, but they often hold that good and evil are relative. This does not reconcile with God's Word, which stands eternal.

 

[Strivax]

How can one in secularism, through reason, judge whether something is good or evil? In secularism there is no concept or sin, but they often hold that good and evil are relative.

It's quite a debate, of course. But I think most people, whatever their faith, or lack of it, have some kind of conception of good and evil, enough to provide a common-ground basis for discussion. After that, it's a matter of the quality of arguments put, what reasons are deployed, and how persuasive they are.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

Our neighbour, as I read the scriptures, is everyone else.

Best wishes, Strivax.

Would you care to be more specific, that is give actual references?

Lu 10:36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?
37 And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.

Thus the Jesus definition of "neighbor" is the one who showed mercy unto someone he came upon in need.
I think that is quite different from "everyone in the whole wide world."

If Jesus had agreed with you, would not verse 27 of the same Luke 10 read LOVE GOD "... and everyone as thy self"? It says specifically "thy neighbor," not everyone's neighbor, for instance.

"Neighbor" in the English language is certainly not the same as "everyone." Strong's Greek lexicon has "plesion" as someone close by, a countryman or perhaps fellow Christian.

I think a pretty good definition of "neighbor" in light of the TWO GREAT COMMANDMENTS is "thy neighbor thy spouse."

 

[Strivax]

Would you care to be more specific, that is give actual references?

So, as I read the parable of the good Samaritan*, here was a man from a background hostile to the Jews, who stopped and helped his enemy because his enemy needed help. This, when 'holy' Jewish people had failed to do so. It is true that Jesus never explicitly defined who our neighbour is, just told this parable, but I take His meaning to be that if a Samaritan can see a Jew as his neighbour, anyone can see anyone as theirs.

Best wishes, Strivax.

*Luke 10:25-37 KJV

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

So, as I read the parable of the good Samaritan, here was a man from a background hostile to the Jews, who stopped and helped his enemy because his enemy needed help. This, when holy Jewish people had failed to do so. It is true that Jesus never explicitly defined who our neighbour is, just told this parable, but I take His meaning to be that if a Samaritan can see a Jew as his neighbour, anyone can see anyone as theirs.

Best wishes, Strivax.

Sorry, what I said and what I think Scripture says is that Jesus DID explicitly define who the neighbor was.

 

[Strivax]

Sorry, what I said and what I think Scripture says is that Jesus DID explicitly define who the neighbor was.

I disagree. Jesus asked the lawyer who he thought was the neighbour, and then urged him to emulate the example He had given, but without specifying who to. Jesus was telling the lawyer to behave like a good neighbour, but left the lawyer to decide for himself who should benefit as the target of his good neighbourliness. Perhaps leaving the matter undefined was a way for Jesus to imply 'anyone and everyone'. I think so, anyway.

Thank you for making me revisit this teaching, and reinforce my understanding.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[Neogaia777]

Sorry, what I said and what I think Scripture says is that Jesus DID explicitly define who the neighbor was.

See here:

Who is my neighbor...?

Unclean!, Unclean!, Don't touch me! Your dirty... Unclean!

God Bless!

 

[Strivax]

Yes of course the terms are being somewhat misused, but try persuading those who use them to stop. They are ways to browbeat, to suggest IRRATIONALITY and bigotry having no basis, when condemning these things is THE POSITION OF GOD.

In order to show homophobia, islamophobia and xenophobia are not just irrational bigotry, you have to show plausible reasons why they might be a good idea. You have to show not only that God is agin' these target groups, but why God is agin' them. Otherwise, many people will simply think you prejudiced, and deplore your attitudes, and ignore you.

Best wishes, Strivax.

irrational: not logical or reasonable.
bigotry: stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.
prejudice: an unfavourable opinion formed beforehand without knowledge, thought or reason.

 

[dqhall]

A sinner may be forgiven when the sinner repents. To be merciful to sinners is not condoning the sin, nor forgiving the person who has not repented.

Homosexuality is unnatural lust. It accomplishes nothing. It has been shown to spread AIDS and Hep C that makes health insurance costs rise. To be heterosexual and teach children to be heterosexual is what is. To be celibate is not a sin. I do not use the word homophobia in my speech.

To be against Muslims cutting off the heads of non-Muslims has been called Islamophobia. I may risk being criticized for being against the violent practices of Islamic jihad.

Wanting to build a border wall may be the result of xenophobia or worries a people with different a different language or racial characteristics might take over. It is also a response to drug and gun smuggling that is happening along the border. Heroin from Mexico ends up on the streets of Chicago and guns from gun shows in the USA end up in the hands of Mexican gang members.

 

[Zayin7]

"Phobia" means 'fear of," not 'being against.' So.....................................?

This.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

Well its sort of a trick question really. Or at least thats what the world does with it.

For example I am against LGBT, and yet I'll be called a homophobe. Despite the fact I don't treat LGBT any different, aside form not supporting LGBT stuff. I am against islam (more so the extremists) and I am called islamophobic, despite being fine when I meet one. Theres no real winning with the non-christian world. If you even dislike something at all they will title you. As for xenophobic, my wifes from overseas so I'm all good with immigrants.

Now expanding on islam, I know what the bible says in the end days about the kingdoms around Israel attacking her. The countries to her south and west are muslim. So I do have an issue with that. Though I pray people who are in those countries will turn to the one and ONLY real God. So they won't be struck down during the battle. The countries to the east and north of her are of course China and Russia which are just communist countries.

 

[AlexDTX]

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.

Because all the false accusations, that being against these things is disease (or at least like unto mental diseases), do not seem to be capable of being overthrown, that the language incorporating them is becoming ever more entrenched, it seems necessary to endorse them, take them up as one's own, in order to overcome them.

Hence the necessity to insist these values are very godly, that the godly person will endorse these values. (And the people who enjoy beating up people with these fake names of supposedly irrational fears are quite anti-God.)

Perhaps there is some inherent truth in the "phobic" designation, in that those very concerned for God, who love God greatly, will "get all upset by" recognizing these things are against the will of God and hence we should be (in the present context of language usage) islamophobic, homophobic, and xenophobic?

I agree that a deliberate effort to change the meaning of words already extant and to create new words that further changes is wrong, but embracing those words and calling them "godly" endorses those words and distorts how God views those things. God loves all people. Evil is overcome by good, not another evil. I try not to refer to a homosexual as "gay" since that is a euphemism that twists and destroys the happy meaning of "gay". In discussing what homosexuality is, I call it perversion, and the practitioner a pervert.

However that is never the focal point of my conversation because I will also point out that masturbation, fornication, and adultery of heterosexuals are also perversions and such practitioners are also perverts. I will also admit that before I became a Christian I masturbated and committed fornication, thus I was a pervert, too.

Our goal as followers of Christ is to speak the truth in love by demonstrating the goodness of the Lord to others. We are to be wise concerning good, and simple concerning evil. Speaking the truth always causes conflict with the people who hide from the truth, so our intention is to bring truth without fanning those flames.

 

[Everybodyknows]

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.

Because all the false accusations, that being against these things is disease (or at least like unto mental diseases), do not seem to be capable of being overthrown, that the language incorporating them is becoming ever more entrenched, it seems necessary to endorse them, take them up as one's own, in order to overcome them.

Hence the necessity to insist these values are very godly, that the godly person will endorse these values. (And the people who enjoy beating up people with these fake names of supposedly irrational fears are quite anti-God.)

Perhaps there is some inherent truth in the "phobic" designation, in that those very concerned for God, who love God greatly, will "get all upset by" recognizing these things are against the will of God and hence we should be (in the present context of language usage) islamophobic, homophobic, and xenophobic?

You should add "being against genocide" to that list. How I long for the good old days when one could simply exterminate the enemies of God. Now the liberal left through their control of media and government force us to tolerate everything and anything. Just think how easily many of the world problems would be solved instantly with a little genocide.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

In order to show homophobia, islamophobia and xenophobia are not just irrational bigotry, you have to show plausible reasons why they might be a good idea. You have to show not only that God is agin' these target groups, but why God is agin' them. Otherwise, many people will simply think you prejudiced, and deplore your attitudes, and ignore you.

Best wishes, Strivax.

irrational: not logical or reasonable.
bigotry: stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.
prejudice: an unfavourable opinion formed beforehand without knowledge, thought or reason.

Good points Strivax! Thanks for all your input.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

I disagree. Jesus asked the lawyer who he thought was the neighbour, and then urged him to emulate the example He had given, but without specifying who to. Jesus was telling the lawyer to behave like a good neighbour, but left the lawyer to decide for himself who should benefit as the target of his good neighbourliness. Perhaps leaving the matter undefined was a way for Jesus to imply 'anyone and everyone'. I think so, anyway.
Thank you for making me revisit this teaching, and reinforce my understanding.
Best wishes, Strivax.

Well I didn't make you do anything. However...

Your "perhaps," does it not reveal the shaky ground you are on? SPECULATING that Jesus left it undefined (which I don't agree with and have indicated why), and that Jesus (perhaps) implied "anyone and everyone" is just that I think, speculation. Can you give further grounds for that claim, other than that perhaps (again) a lot of people believe it?
YOURS AND HIS - Douglas

 

[paul becke]

More propaganda from the liberal left, that's all it is.

Yes, quite strangely convoluted. The mainstream media, owned by very rich and decaddent people, reign supreme as the domestic propaganda vehicle, indeed, have a poultice on information, mixed in with infotainment, for the piblic's consumption.

However, fortunately, you will never convince most people that homosexual activity is OK, still less Christian. But you're not going to stop powerful people who are even introducing satanism into the public square, from trying to impose themselves via the legislature, when they go so far as to promote people of the same sex 'marrying' each other. But God, will for sure. And fairly soon by the look of things. The next thing on their agenda will be legitimising paedophilia. There is an awful lot we will need him to take care of, and most of us are confident that He will.

It needs to be realised too that the prefix, 'homo', here, does not signify 'man' but 'sameness', so the homosexuals touting themselves as champions of diversity, rainbows(!), etc, is beyond farcical - given that the most fundamental and, indeed, 'beautiful to the point of magical', relationship, is that between a man and a woman.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

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.

Because all the false accusations, that being against these things is disease (or at least like unto mental diseases), do not seem to be capable of being overthrown, that the language incorporating them is becoming ever more entrenched, it seems necessary to endorse them, take them up as one's own, in order to overcome them.

Hence the necessity to insist these values are very godly, that the godly person will endorse these values. (And the people who enjoy beating up people with these fake names of supposedly irrational fears are quite anti-God.)

Perhaps there is some inherent truth in the "phobic" designation, in that those very concerned for God, who love God greatly, will "get all upset by" recognizing these things are against the will of God and hence we should be (in the present context of language usage) islamophobic, homophobic, and xenophobic?

Twisting language and the truth of God is the core objective of satan. He has done this from the very start, as he told Eve did God say you would really die if you eat that apple? This twisting of reality and truth is a flat out demonic and satanically rooted attack. Sad thing is I see many many Christians that are now compromising and giving into cultural pressure....just imagine if Daniel did the same. Just imagine when the real tribulation starts. As Jesus said, when he returns will he find faith?