Help me out, "heathens"

[Beanieboy]

I was thinking this morning about all "our righteousnesses are as filthy rags —Isaiah 64:6" and Christians referring to nonChristians as "sinners."

There is often a mistake that Christians make (this is where you can back me up or disagree, non-Christians.) There is often a focus on non-Christians, and their sin, and a disregard for one's own. There is an unspoken entitlement the Christian seems to possess, as if they deserve to enter by their morals and actions, but then tells non-Christians that there is nothing they can do to enter heaven, and must come to Jesus. But first, they must repent and leave their sin.

As an example, on another site, some very radical conservative Christians seemed far more concerned that I was gay than non-Christian (I identified as Buddhist.) Most of my interactions were "All roads lead to Homosexuality," as in, Is it moral to download music in file share?
"That's not half as important as giving up your sexual lifestyle."

Apparently, "giving up the lifestyle" was a ticket to heaven.

Becoming a Christian was secondary or lower.

But this is what was asked:
That I make myself into a new creation, that I change first, ask forgiveness, and only then would Jesus be part of my life.

Christians don't ask that of ourselves. Jesus didn't say, "Zaccheus, come down from that tree, give up ripping people off when taxing them, and THEN I want you to eat with me."
He simply called him then, as he was. It was Christ who made him a new creation, changed him into a better person, changed his life, made him give up his selfishness.

God simply loves us. We don't earn it. He loves us and hopes we will love him and others in response. Because we don't earn it, it is also not yanked away.

However, Christians have told me that "God doesn't answer non-Christians prayer." That implies that Jesus won't listen when they want to become Christian. They acted as if I should do what they had done, which made them better than me. What had they done? Asked forgiveness. Asked Jesus into their heart. It's like a drowning victim thinking themselves a hero for grabbing the lifesaver you threw.

There are two really bad results:
1) The Christian believes that he has "earned" his way into heaven by following the law, and implies that. He implies that he is good, and thus a Christian, but "others", "sinners" NEED Christ, because they are bad.

2) To someone that is on the receiving end, one who would otherwise come to God, having been told how they must "change", may be discouraged, thinking that changing, becoming "perfect" is impossible. They may think that they aren't good enough for God, because the Christian implied that. You were barely good enough for the Christian. How could you be good enough for God? And thus, they simply walk away.

"Filthy rags" is simply to remind yourself that your works as a Christian are your way of obeying, of living Christ, not the reason why you are good and others are bad.

Saying that God loves his own, His children, implies that he doesn't love anyone who's not, unless you love God first. And what kind of God is that?

It also allows people to understand that everyone is a sinner, and God loves all of us. I often found, during my earlier years after speaking in tongues, the number of Christians I spoke to who "wish they were that close to God" that God would offer it to them. I said, "I think you have it wrong. God extends his arms. It's you who accepts it. I'm not in God's VIP list or anything." People wondered if God was listening when they prayed, wondered if they were important enough to God to hear them or answer their prayer, or give what they needed.

Imagine, if these Christians doubted God hearing them, how much more someone who wanted to get to know God would wonder if they were "good enough", when that message of needing to be "sinless" is so clear from Christians, who dismiss or forgive it in themselves.

I believe that it is God who is standing on his head, trying to get our attention, God who speaks as that thought inside us, hoping we answer.
Once that is understood, that we must do nothing but just allow God to love us, Christians are able to love others first as a response, and then we really will be known by our love.

Any non-Christians agree with how it feels from the receiving end:
A sense of superiority
Being judged or condemned
Implied that you aren't loved by God
Implied that they are good and you are bad
Implied that their actions make them deserving of heaven
Implied that your actions mean nothing, no matter how good you are, and won't save you
Imply that their bad actions (sins) don't really count, but your pettiest transgression does
Told that you must change first to be worthy, while they claim that it is Christ that makes you a new creation?

 

[Mumei]

Christians don't ask that of ourselves. Jesus didn't say, "Zaccheus, come down from that tree, give up ripping people off when taxing them, and THEN I want you to eat with me."
He simply called him then, as he was. It was Christ who made him a new creation, changed him into a better person, changed his life, made him give up his selfishness.

The assumption of most Christians is probably that Zaccheus, after he met with Jesus, ceased being a tax collector (or at least a corrupt, dishonest one) and tried to live his life in a better way. Similarly, they expect that if you've made a genuine conversion that you would leave your homosexual relationship, which represents a form of idolatry (especially in Protestant circles). They say that if Christ has made in you a new creation, you won't be homosexual.

Needless to say, it's completely false that you'll ever stop being homosexual, but that's the dogma.

And as for the inconsistencies, it's hard to say, I think. There's a difference in any religion between dogma and the way religion is practiced and understood by individuals. It has been awhile since I've been here, but I remember certain Christian individuals being very hateful, disparaging, and rude - and then turn around and be genuinely shocked when anyone says that they were acting in anything less than love.

 

[Ectezus]

Needless to say, it's completely false that you'll ever stop being homosexual, but that's the dogma.

Yeah, it's kinda like saying "Just pretend you're not homosexual anymore. As long as I am not bothered neither will God and you'll be saved."

Pretty much the same with Pascals wager, "Lets act like believe even if we really don't, maybe we can fool god."

Saying that God loves his own, His children, implies that he doesn't love anyone who's not, unless you love God first. And what kind of God is that?

*raises hand*
A man made god that just happens to have the same petty emotions we humans have. A supreme being that has been around for all eternity suddenly wants our love and if he doesn't get it you'll be punished? Give me a break... Even Sarah Palin in the Katie Couric interview made more sense.


- Ectezus

 

[CreedIsChrist]

I was thinking this morning about all "our righteousnesses are as filthy rags —Isaiah 64:6" and Christians referring to nonChristians as "sinners."

There is often a mistake that Christians make (this is where you can back me up or disagree, non-Christians.) There is often a focus on non-Christians, and their sin, and a disregard for one's own. There is an unspoken entitlement the Christian seems to possess, as if they deserve to enter by their morals and actions, but then tells non-Christians that there is nothing they can do to enter heaven, and must come to Jesus. But first, they must repent and leave their sin.

As an example, on another site, some very radical conservative Christians seemed far more concerned that I was gay than non-Christian (I identified as Buddhist.) Most of my interactions were "All roads lead to Homosexuality," as in, Is it moral to download music in file share?
"That's not half as important as giving up your sexual lifestyle."

Apparently, "giving up the lifestyle" was a ticket to heaven.

Becoming a Christian was secondary or lower.

But this is what was asked:
That I make myself into a new creation, that I change first, ask forgiveness, and only then would Jesus be part of my life.

Christians don't ask that of ourselves. Jesus didn't say, "Zaccheus, come down from that tree, give up ripping people off when taxing them, and THEN I want you to eat with me."
He simply called him then, as he was. It was Christ who made him a new creation, changed him into a better person, changed his life, made him give up his selfishness.

God simply loves us. We don't earn it. He loves us and hopes we will love him and others in response. Because we don't earn it, it is also not yanked away.

However, Christians have told me that "God doesn't answer non-Christians prayer." That implies that Jesus won't listen when they want to become Christian. They acted as if I should do what they had done, which made them better than me. What had they done? Asked forgiveness. Asked Jesus into their heart. It's like a drowning victim thinking themselves a hero for grabbing the lifesaver you threw.

There are two really bad results:
1) The Christian believes that he has "earned" his way into heaven by following the law, and implies that. He implies that he is good, and thus a Christian, but "others", "sinners" NEED Christ, because they are bad.

2) To someone that is on the receiving end, one who would otherwise come to God, having been told how they must "change", may be discouraged, thinking that changing, becoming "perfect" is impossible. They may think that they aren't good enough for God, because the Christian implied that. You were barely good enough for the Christian. How could you be good enough for God? And thus, they simply walk away.

"Filthy rags" is simply to remind yourself that your works as a Christian are your way of obeying, of living Christ, not the reason why you are good and others are bad.

Saying that God loves his own, His children, implies that he doesn't love anyone who's not, unless you love God first. And what kind of God is that?

It also allows people to understand that everyone is a sinner, and God loves all of us. I often found, during my earlier years after speaking in tongues, the number of Christians I spoke to who "wish they were that close to God" that God would offer it to them. I said, "I think you have it wrong. God extends his arms. It's you who accepts it. I'm not in God's VIP list or anything." People wondered if God was listening when they prayed, wondered if they were important enough to God to hear them or answer their prayer, or give what they needed.

Imagine, if these Christians doubted God hearing them, how much more someone who wanted to get to know God would wonder if they were "good enough", when that message of needing to be "sinless" is so clear from Christians, who dismiss or forgive it in themselves.

I believe that it is God who is standing on his head, trying to get our attention, God who speaks as that thought inside us, hoping we answer.
Once that is understood, that we must do nothing but just allow God to love us, Christians are able to love others first as a response, and then we really will be known by our love.

Any non-Christians agree with how it feels from the receiving end:
A sense of superiority
Being judged or condemned
Implied that you aren't loved by God
Implied that they are good and you are bad
Implied that their actions make them deserving of heaven
Implied that your actions mean nothing, no matter how good you are, and won't save you
Imply that their bad actions (sins) don't really count, but your pettiest transgression does
Told that you must change first to be worthy, while they claim that it is Christ that makes you a new creation?

I think there are many circumstances where Christians are able to judge. As Paul says "Do you not know that the saints will judge the world" and that faith without works is dead according to James and in revelation we will be judged according to our works.

Also we see that in the areas of the Christian Churches of the Apostolic See like Corinth, Antioch, Rome, Ephesus, Jerusalem that all Churches were given a bishop and presbyter to judge in matters of the Church. We see in the book of acts in the counsel of Jerusalem that there was discussion about the abstaining of strangled meats and sexual immorality and issues of the law. So there are many times when Christians do need to judge in matters of faith and morals. If error and heresy is spread it must be dealt with. Just as with other questions such as things like marriage, justification, the divinity of Christ, hermeneutics, prayer, creeds, sacraments like Baptism, etc.

Beanieboy, do you know what the sin of presumption is??? Since I believe that is the core of the issue you are bringing up.

Peter identifies two traits that accompany the sin of presumption: "...them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled..." (2 Peter 2:10).


"Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression" (Ps. 19:13).


Heb. 13:17, “Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.”

 

[andross77]

I was thinking this morning about all "our righteousnesses are as filthy rags —Isaiah 64:6" and Christians referring to nonChristians as "sinners."

There is often a mistake that Christians make (this is where you can back me up or disagree, non-Christians.) There is often a focus on non-Christians, and their sin, and a disregard for one's own. There is an unspoken entitlement the Christian seems to possess, as if they deserve to enter by their morals and actions, but then tells non-Christians that there is nothing they can do to enter heaven, and must come to Jesus. But first, they must repent and leave their sin.

As an example, on another site, some very radical conservative Christians seemed far more concerned that I was gay than non-Christian (I identified as Buddhist.) Most of my interactions were "All roads lead to Homosexuality," as in, Is it moral to download music in file share?
"That's not half as important as giving up your sexual lifestyle."

Apparently, "giving up the lifestyle" was a ticket to heaven.

Becoming a Christian was secondary or lower.

But this is what was asked:
That I make myself into a new creation, that I change first, ask forgiveness, and only then would Jesus be part of my life.

Christians don't ask that of ourselves. Jesus didn't say, "Zaccheus, come down from that tree, give up ripping people off when taxing them, and THEN I want you to eat with me."
He simply called him then, as he was. It was Christ who made him a new creation, changed him into a better person, changed his life, made him give up his selfishness.

God simply loves us. We don't earn it. He loves us and hopes we will love him and others in response. Because we don't earn it, it is also not yanked away.

However, Christians have told me that "God doesn't answer non-Christians prayer." That implies that Jesus won't listen when they want to become Christian. They acted as if I should do what they had done, which made them better than me. What had they done? Asked forgiveness. Asked Jesus into their heart. It's like a drowning victim thinking themselves a hero for grabbing the lifesaver you threw.

There are two really bad results:
1) The Christian believes that he has "earned" his way into heaven by following the law, and implies that. He implies that he is good, and thus a Christian, but "others", "sinners" NEED Christ, because they are bad.

2) To someone that is on the receiving end, one who would otherwise come to God, having been told how they must "change", may be discouraged, thinking that changing, becoming "perfect" is impossible. They may think that they aren't good enough for God, because the Christian implied that. You were barely good enough for the Christian. How could you be good enough for God? And thus, they simply walk away.

"Filthy rags" is simply to remind yourself that your works as a Christian are your way of obeying, of living Christ, not the reason why you are good and others are bad.

Saying that God loves his own, His children, implies that he doesn't love anyone who's not, unless you love God first. And what kind of God is that?

It also allows people to understand that everyone is a sinner, and God loves all of us. I often found, during my earlier years after speaking in tongues, the number of Christians I spoke to who "wish they were that close to God" that God would offer it to them. I said, "I think you have it wrong. God extends his arms. It's you who accepts it. I'm not in God's VIP list or anything." People wondered if God was listening when they prayed, wondered if they were important enough to God to hear them or answer their prayer, or give what they needed.

Imagine, if these Christians doubted God hearing them, how much more someone who wanted to get to know God would wonder if they were "good enough", when that message of needing to be "sinless" is so clear from Christians, who dismiss or forgive it in themselves.

I believe that it is God who is standing on his head, trying to get our attention, God who speaks as that thought inside us, hoping we answer.
Once that is understood, that we must do nothing but just allow God to love us, Christians are able to love others first as a response, and then we really will be known by our love.

Any non-Christians agree with how it feels from the receiving end:
A sense of superiority
Being judged or condemned
Implied that you aren't loved by God
Implied that they are good and you are bad
Implied that their actions make them deserving of heaven
Implied that your actions mean nothing, no matter how good you are, and won't save you
Imply that their bad actions (sins) don't really count, but your pettiest transgression does
Told that you must change first to be worthy, while they claim that it is Christ that makes you a new creation?

i only need to read the first couple paragraphs. I'm sorry you get the impression that Christians think they are better than others or that their sin is less serious than the sins of "heathens."

That is not true. I have committed many horrible sins in my actions, inactions, thoughts, and words. Only because i have faith in Jesus will i have eternal life.

This is true for anyone. God's grace is enough. We are all terrible sinners that fall short of God's perfect holiness. I'm sorry you have got that bad perception of believers.

If this post is just another lash-out because you claim to be Christian and are living the homosexual lifestyle and you want other certain Christians to accept that oxymoron and they do not......than i can't help you there.

But i will say as a follower of Jesus, that i am a sinner, in need of forgiveness just like Hitler and George Bush and Barack Obama. I accept Jesus as Lord of my life and His sacrifice for my sins and so I am forgiven. Anyone that chooses Jesus can be the same.

 

[b&wpac4]

i only need to read the first couple paragraphs. I'm sorry you get the impression that Christians think they are better than others or that their sin is less serious than the sins of "heathens."

That is not true. I have committed many horrible sins in my actions, inactions, thoughts, and words. Only because i have faith in Jesus will i have eternal life.

I don't think the claim is that all Christians act that way, but there certainly are those that do.

 

[Mumei]

Yeah, it's kinda like saying "Just pretend you're not homosexual anymore. As long as I am not bothered neither will God and you'll be saved."

Pretty much the same with Pascals wager, "Lets act like believe even if we really don't, maybe we can fool god."

Precisely.

The assumption is that he isn't actually a homosexual; he is a heterosexual who has been tricked / seduced / manipulated into that "lifestyle," and if he would turn back towards God and ask for healing and forgiveness, he'll make the gay go away and make him straight again.

 

[Oneofthediaspora]

I can guarantee that Beanie is a devoted and thoughtful Christian, which is more than I can say for you, judging by that post. Your ignorance is appalling.

You can guarantee that can you? Even when he states clearly that he is not a Christian.
How do you reach this conclusion then?

 

[b&wpac4]

You can guarantee that can you? Even when he states clearly that he is not a Christian.
How do you reach this conclusion then?

Where did he say he was not a Christian?

 

[Mumei]

You can guarantee that can you? Even when he states clearly that he is not a Christian.
How do you reach this conclusion then?

Past tense.

He is Christian now.

 

[FlamingFemme]

You can guarantee that can you? Even when he states clearly that he is not a Christian.
How do you reach this conclusion then?

Actually, his faith icon, as well as his descriptions of his own faith state very clearly that he IS a Christian.

And I would also happily jump on the bandwagon of guaranteeing that he is a thoughtful, spiritual, Christian man who lives his life by Christian (and some others) principles - As I'm sure there are others who would, as well.

 

[PhilosophicalBluster]

You can guarantee that can you? Even when he states clearly that he is not a Christian.
How do you reach this conclusion then?

*points to Christian icon*

 

[Oneofthediaspora]

Sorry about that ladies and gentlemen.
In my defence it was when Beanie said that some Christians seemed more concerned that he was gay than that he was a "non-Christian" that threw me.

So, you're a Christian then Beanieboy?

Congratulations and welcome home brother.

All the best,
Mike.

 

[Oneofthediaspora]

You are overthinking this. Christanity is a bronze age belief system based on magic, be who you are and be proud of it.

There speaks the voice of ignorance.
This "bronze age" business seems to be a fairly common piece of nonsense put around by ignorant people who dislike Christianity.

The general consensus in the world of archaeology is that the Bronze Age spans the period from 3300 to 1200 BC. Christianity as a theological concept dates no earlier than 30 AD (give or take a few years).

 

[The Nihilist]

There speaks the voice of ignorance.
This "bronze age" business seems to be a fairly common piece of nonsense put around by ignorant people who dislike Christianity.

The general consensus in the world of archaeology is that the Bronze Age spans the period from 3300 to 1200 BC. Christianity as a theological concept dates no earlier than 30 AD (give or take a few years).

Quite right. Only the god is bronze age.

 

[Oneofthediaspora]

Quite right. Only the god is bronze age.

Wrong again. The God is eternal, non contingent, the Ens Realissimum.
I must have missed the bit in Scripture where God said unto Moses "I came into being in the Bronze Age; which as you no doubt can imagine, causes a few philosophical problems."

Actually, unless I'm very much mistaken, I got the distinct impression that your view was that God is non-existent. Has this changed?

 

[The Nihilist]

Wrong again. The God is eternal, non contingent, the Ens Realissimum.
I must have missed the bit in Scripture where God said unto Moses "I came into being in the Bronze Age; which as you no doubt can imagine, causes a few philosophical problems."

Actually, unless I'm very much mistaken, I got the distinct impression that your view was that God is non-existent. Has this changed?

I don't believe in your god any more than I believe in Zeus, who also happens to originate in the Bronze Age. A bit later though, as I understand it.

 

[Oneofthediaspora]

I don't believe in your god any more than I believe in Zeus, who also happens to originate in the Bronze Age. A bit later though, as I understand it.

Hmm, let's consider something shall we.
The "historical period" ie the period from which we have any historical record begins c. 3300 BC. The Bronze Age begins c. 3300 BC.
The earliest historical mention of anything dates from the Bronze Age.

Surely you can see how this would cause a little problem for those silly enough to pretend to believe that if an idea was first recorded in the Bronze Age then said idea first came about in the Bronze Age.

I suspect that this would be of little importance to those who Tourette "Bronze Age" when Christianity is mentioned, but for the sake of not talking nonsense they would be better off just saying "old concept bad, new concept good" and not thinking about how old something like logic must be.

 

[FedererFan]

I think there are many circumstances where Christians are able to judge. As Paul says "Do you not know that the saints will judge the world" and that faith without works is dead according to James and in revelation we will be judged according to our works

Wouldn't that require that the Christian making the judgment be a saint? Who decides who's a saint? The person himself? Pretty presumptuous if you ask me. Also, what about Matthew 7:1-5? Seems like if someone is judging, they must feel like their sins are much less than the other persons. Who are they to judge what their sins are? Also, aren't all sins equal? So even if you've only sinned a little bit, you're still just as guilty as I am. And saying that Jesus forgives your sins but not mine doesn't mean anything. How can you truly know you sins are so forgiven such that you have the right to judge others?

 

[CreedIsChrist]

Wouldn't that require that the Christian making the judgment be a saint? Who decides who's a saint? The person himself? Pretty presumptuous if you ask me. Also, what about Matthew 7:1-5? Seems like if someone is judging, they must feel like their sins are much less than the other persons. Who are they to judge what their sins are? Also, aren't all sins equal? So even if you've only sinned a little bit, you're still just as guilty as I am. And saying that Jesus forgives your sins but not mine doesn't mean anything. How can you truly know you sins are so forgiven such that you have the right to judge others?

Well first off, what many modernists think judging is, is not really judging. But rather the preaching of the warning of sin and to live a life of self mortification.

Judging would be talking about someones adulteries while you yourself are committing adultery. But preaching about sin and the mortification of the soul is not judging because all of the apostles did that and the early fathers.

I think some people use "judge not , lest ye be judged", as a staple to validate and confirm ones own sins in order to validate oneself and ignore their own conscience. Yet that totally goes against many tenants of the NT, which tells Christians to rebuke and instruct.

This is the verse so many use to try to shame Christians for discerning poor behavior, ethics, morals, and values: the "judge not lest ye be judged" verse. Using only Matt 7:1 is entirely incomplete. This verse is not speaking to not judging at all -- it is speaking to not judging unfair or any other cheap and selfish way. Read the rest of the story ...

Matt 7:2-5 "For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged [if we judge with an evil heart or dark intent, His judgment of us will reflect it; if we judge nobly and honestly, His judgment of us will reflect that, too], and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you [if we use extremes or exaggerations or other unfair means, our judgment will reflect it]. Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye [point out his sins, "minor" in Jesus' example here] and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye [our own sins, even and especially those we will not admit, magnified by our selective blindness]? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' [tell him of his "minor" sins] when all the time there is a plank in your own eye [that there are greater or the same sins in our own lives which we do nothing about or think we are above]? You hypocrite* [pointing out the sins of others while by pretense we think of ourselves as above sin], first take the plank out of your own eye [sincerely ask the Lord for forgiveness and learn and live the Truth and Light by His Word], and then you will see clearly [be in a righteous position] to remove the speck from your brother's eye [to judge and to help him out of his bondage to sin]." At Galilee, the Decapolis, Jerusalem, Judea and the region across the Jordan, Jesus was talking to the multitudes gathered there after hearing of His message and of His healings to beseech them to not become like the pharisees and hypocrites who think they are above sin.