Steps toward civil discourse in this sub-forum

[drstevej]

Isn't civility the topic of this thread?

Nah, it is one side demanding the other follow their rules.

 

[Polycarp1]

Nah, it is one side demanding the other follow their rules.

And, Heaven knows, that's never happened on CF before, right?

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Polycarp1,

What part of the Bible commands, or indeed even enables, Christians to hurl invective towards others for disagreeing with them?

I would say none, but the question to you is what part of the Bible countenances same-sex unions?

What part of the Bible enables any Christian to set him/herself up as the authority to whom others should turn for the authoritative meaning of the Biblical text?

All of it, the Christian is someone submitted to the Holy Spirit which leads into truth. The authority is Jesus Christ and not the Christian.

Whether or not homosexual people may marry each other (and no Phinehastic quibbling, what is meant by that usage is same sex marriages) is immaterial to the duty of members to be civil to each other under the rules of the board, and the duty of Christians to show courtesy and respect towards others, even returning good for evil and a soft word for a bitter one.

I agree but who doesn’t? Furthermore I suggest one needs to be civil enough to understand the others worldview, according to many on here referring to the Bible there is no such thing as same-sex marriage, yet you have rather provocatively asked for no quibiling about it. I think to be civil one cant assume ones own view is so right it cant be argued.

What has been shown in this forum by and large is the inability of people who call themselves followers of Jesus Christ to obey even his simplest commandments as regards how they should bear witness to others.

I might agree with you if I thought it acceptable to be judging others.

(Of course many such people believe in the Bible rather than in Jesus,

Whereas I would say they don’t. Indeed without Jesus Christ’s Biblical testimony how would one know Him.

For the gay person, the "Good News" seemingly is that they are fated to live a life without love, and choose between being sneered at and castigated by the "good Christians" or living a lie about themselves. There is no promise of joy, acceptance, fellowiship, God's love, or anything but legalistic condemnation. If any of you wonder why your "witness" is so barren, consider what you are witnessing about. You have as much as told gay people that God's grace is not sufficient for them.

But this is a crucial point and on which suggests a different gospel althogether. According to the Bible there is not only no such thing as a gay person but in Christ Jesus there is no distinction (Gal 3, Col 3)
Secondly Jesus Christ’s teaching is that our joy is complete in Him Matthew 13:44, John 15:10 “you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father's commands and remain in his love. I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete”
Our joy is following Jesus Christ’s teaching, the gospel is the good news of what Jesus Christ has done ie Hebrews 12:2, 1 Peter 1:8.
You seem to be suggesting that the good news and joy is found in sexual relationship.

And for that you should be ashamed.

I don think so as I think you are proposing a fundamentally different gospel.

 

[*Starlight*]

What portions of the NT support homosexual marriage or any other homosexual activity? :o

Inquiry minds want to know.

It's there right between the portion that condemns slavery and the portion that supports using computers

How about no evidently false teaching that is in direct and opposite contradiction to the Bible, such as same-sex unions?

First of all, whether it's contradicts the Bible or not depends on the interpretation. And second, even if something disagrees with the Bible, it doesn't mean it's false. Something's false when it contradicts reality.

Dear KCKID,
Sorry but Christians know there is no such thing as ‘gay marriage’.

Not "Christians know", but "some Christians believe". Christianity is a very diverse religion, and your brand of it isn't the only one.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear *Starlight*

It's there right between the portion that condemns slavery and the portion that supports using computers

that makes no sense, there is a condemnation of same-sex unions but no apparent condemnation of using computers. So if there isnt a countenance for same-sex sex and there is a condemnation you have the answer, computers is irrelevant.


Originally Posted by Phinehas2
How about no evidently false teaching that is in direct and opposite contradiction to the Bible, such as same-sex unions?

First of all, whether it's contradicts the Bible or not depends on the interpretation.

Yes, if ones interpretation contradicts the Bible it is disbelief and rejection of the truth.

And second, even if something disagrees with the Bible, it doesn't mean it's false. Something's false when it contradicts reality.

That depends what one has faith in, the reality of human reasoning or the reality of God, remember God is supernatural.

Not "Christians know", but "some Christians believe". Christianity is a very diverse religion, and your brand of it isn't the only one.

For you ok, but not for me, for me there is only one brand of Christianity and it is also very diverse, but they all believe the Bible.

 

[*Starlight*]

Dear *Starlight*

that makes no sense, there is a condemnation of same-sex unions but no apparent condemnation of using computers. So if there isnt a countenance for same-sex sex and there is a condemnation you have the answer, computers is irrelevant.

What about slavery? The Bible supports the existence of slavery in some places, but there's no place in the Bible which says "slavery is wrong". Does it mean that slavery isn't wrong?

Yes, if ones interpretation contradicts the Bible it is disbelief and rejection of the truth.

You're making an assumption that the Bible, and in the way you understand it, is the truth. But that's your personal belief, not a fact.

That depends what one has faith in, the reality of human reasoning or the reality of God, remember God is supernatural.

What I meant is the reality around us. For example, if someone said that the computer in front of me doesn't exist, then I can see that his/her statement is inconsistent with the reality around me, and that's why it's incorrect.

For you ok, but not for me, for me there is only one brand of Christianity and it is also very diverse, but they all believe the Bible.

Yes, that's from your point of view, but there are Christians with a different point of view than you.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear *Starlight*

What about slavery? The Bible supports the existence of slavery in some places, but there's no place in the Bible which says "slavery is wrong". Does it mean that slavery isn't wrong?

Sorry but not only is slavery not the issue here, I don’t even agree with your proposition. What about theft? The Bible says theft is wrong (Mark 7, 1 Cor 6, Romans 1) As to slavery, I see the Bible condemns slavery as in the slave trade in the same passage it condemns same-sex sex (1 Tim 1) but of course the Bible does support slavery in that we are all either slaves to righteousness or sin.
John 8:34 “Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. “
Romans 6:16 “Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness?”
If you are going to propose slavery is countenanced please give the Biblical evidence and explain in what way you think slavery one thing supported might affect another thing?
Also if you believe slavery is supported are you for it?

You're making an assumption that the Bible, and in the way you understand it, is the truth. But that's your personal belief, not a fact.

Well I understand the Bible to mean what it says in context as do millions of people, but you are making an assumption is understood differently and I am making the assumption that is disbelief.

What I meant is the reality around us. For example, if someone said that the computer in front of me doesn't exist, then I can see that his/her statement is inconsistent with the reality around me, and that's why it's incorrect.

I agree, similarly if I cite the Bible I can see what it says so when people try and tell me its just an opinion its inconsistent with the reality if what it says.

Yes, that's from your point of view, but there are Christians with a different point of view than you.

But that’s just your point of view which I don’t share, for me a Christian has faith in the one whose testimony is in the Bible so I believe the Biblical account. Indeed the basic statement of faith used here, the Nicene Creed is derived from the Bible as I understand it.

 

[*Starlight*]

Dear *Starlight*
Sorry but not only is slavery not the issue here, I don’t even agree with your proposition. What about theft? The Bible says theft is wrong (Mark 7, 1 Cor 6, Romans 1) As to slavery, I see the Bible condemns slavery as in the slave trade in the same passage it condemns same-sex sex (1 Tim 1) but of course the Bible does support slavery in that we are all either slaves to righteousness or sin.
John 8:34 “Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. “
Romans 6:16 “Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness?”
If you are going to propose slavery is countenanced please give the Biblical evidence and explain in what way you think slavery one thing supported might affect another thing?
Also if you believe slavery is supported are you for it?

Of course I'm not for it, what I meant is that even if the Bible says something it doesn't mean that it's true. And it's relevant to the discussion about homosexuality too, because even if the Bible is against homosexuality, it doesn't mean that it's correct.

Well I understand the Bible to mean what it says in context as do millions of people, but you are making an assumption is understood differently and I am making the assumption that is disbelief.

Since people understand the Bible in different ways, then the Bible can be understood differently. If someone understands it in a different way than you then it is disbelief in your interpretation, just like on your side there's disbelief in someone else's interpretation.

I agree, similarly if I cite the Bible I can see what it says so when people try and tell me its just an opinion its inconsistent with the reality if what it says.

First of all, if you cite the Bible, someone may understand it differently than you. And second, if you cite something from the Bible it doesn't mean that it's correct, unless you present evidence that the specific statement you cited is correct in the way you understand it.

But that’s just your point of view which I don’t share, for me a Christian has faith in the one whose testimony is in the Bible so I believe the Biblical account. Indeed the basic statement of faith used here, the Nicene Creed is derived from the Bible as I understand it.

A Christian can believe in some things in the Bible, but not other things.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear *Starlight*

Of course I'm not for it,

Ok are you for same-sex unions? If you are interested in what the Bible says about slavery one assumes you are interested in what the Bible says about same-sex unions.

I meant is that even if the Bible says something it doesn't mean that it's true.

Ok so you are saying that even if the Bible says slavery and same-sex sex are wrong, they might not be?

And it's relevant to the discussion about homosexuality too, because even if the Bible is against homosexuality, it doesn't mean that it's correct.

Any evidence to support your view? I posted Bible references and quotations or is this just your opinion again?

Since people understand the Bible in different ways, then the Bible can be understood differently.

Since millions don’t understand the Bible in different ways but see that it condemns same-sex unions, the Bible cant be understood differently.

I agree, similarly if I cite the Bible I can see what it says so when people try and tell me its just an opinion its inconsistent with the reality if what it says.

First of all, if you cite the Bible, someone may understand it differently than you.

And millions don’t. so whats your point?

And second, if you cite something from the Bible it doesn't mean that it's correct, unless you present evidence that the specific statement you cited is correct in the way you understand it.

It does mean it is correct if others understand it in the same way and believe what it says is reliable.

A Christian can believe in some things in the Bible, but not other things.

That’s your view, my view is that a Christian believes the Bible is reliable and that’s the norm. Take for example the Anglican Communion and Evangelical Alliance both believe the Bible is a trustworthy and reliable standard in matters of faith and conduct
http://www.cofe.anglican.org/faith/anglican/
http://www.eauk.org/about/basis-of-faith.cfm
So I don’t think your view is very widely accepted.

 

[CaDan]

Let's try to keep this on-topic, folks.

A friendly reminder this time.

 

[kiwimac]

Civility is good but it will not happen as long as people hurl accusations at one another. Goodness knows this IS a fraught topic. But we must allow that those whose views disagree with our own are just as much Christians as we consider ourselves to be.

 

[Phinehas2]

Hi kiwimac,
Can you clarify that please?

Civility is good but it will not happen as long as people hurl accusations at one another.

Maybe I am missing something but i see accusations of homophobia, bigot, hateful, but which are the accusations back from the other side?

Goodness knows this IS a fraught topic. But we must allow that those whose views disagree with our own are just as much Christians as we consider ourselves to be.

Thats nothing to do with it, what makes a Christian is described in the forum FAQ's if you wish to check. If someone proposes non-Christian views that doesn't mean they arent a Christian, but it does mean they have non-Christian views which need correcting.
The other thing to remmember is, Jesus and the disciples and apostles said some very strong condemnations about certain people in general, when people hear these words and feel guilty they can get terribly upset, when they hear them and feel the need to repent they dont get so upset. 2 Peter 2 for example.

 

[jamielindas]

If someone proposes non-Christian views that doesn't mean they arent a Christian, but it does mean they have non-Christian views which need correcting.

Here is the rub though... who or what determines the criteria for what are christian views?
I know that my views don't have christian origins, but many of my views (and values) do overlap with christian views.

Also... most christians are reading from the same text (or at least a version of the same text). Who determines whose interpretation of the text is correct? You? your pastor? his? hers? Priests?

I have definitely see some christians accuse other christians of
-not being christian enough
-not having the right perception of jesus
-reading/interpreting the bible incorrectly

how does this get reconciled between christians?

 

[kiwimac]

Phinehas2,

That comment was aimed at both sides here. The invective can be quite . . . fraught at times. Secondly, Individual christians do not get a free card to judge other christians that is reserved for those in authority over them.

 

[catlover]

And, Heaven knows, that's never happened on CF before, right?

Only left wing, granola eating, tree hugging, Subaru driving liberals are uncivil...

Now, the right wing neocons are sporting halos while they post on the other hand.

 

[catlover]

Hi kiwimac,
Can you clarify that please?
Maybe I am missing something but i see accusations of homophobia, bigot, hateful, but which are the accusations back from the other side?
Thats nothing to do with it, what makes a Christian is described in the forum FAQ's if you wish to check. If someone proposes non-Christian views that doesn't mean they arent a Christian, but it does mean they have non-Christian views which need correcting.
The other thing to remmember is, Jesus and the disciples and apostles said some very strong condemnations about certain people in general, when people hear these words and feel guilty they can get terribly upset, when they hear them and feel the need to repent they dont get so upset. 2 Peter 2 for example.

Fortunately, Phinehas you don'[t determine who is and isn't promoting a non Christian view...

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear catlover

Fortunately, Phinehas you don'[t determine who is and isn't promoting a non Christian view...

Which is what I have said, but the key being you don’t either.

 

[*Starlight*]

Dear *Starlight*

Ok are you for same-sex unions?

Yes

If you are interested in what the Bible says about slavery one assumes you are interested in what the Bible says about same-sex unions.

Well, I'm more interested in what facts say. I don't know any facts about homosexuality which would make it something inherently bad. Do you know any?

Ok so you are saying that even if the Bible says slavery and same-sex sex are wrong, they might not be?

When the Bible says that something is wrong, it doesn't mean that it's automatically correct. It may be correct about some things and wrong about other things.

Any evidence to support your view? I posted Bible references and quotations or is this just your opinion again?

My view that the Bible isn't always right, or my view that homosexuality is good? Well, I'll give you evidence for both.

First, the evidence that the Bible isn't always right... most of 1 Corinthians 11. Some more specific examples from it are "The head of the woman is man" and "Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory?" Both of these statements are wrong.

Second, homosexuality is good, because heterosexuality is good. The only practical difference between both is that homosexuals can't naturally have children. But having children isn't the only good thing about heterosexuality, it's also good because it's something that creates a bond between two people who want to be together, always love and support each other, and desire each other's happiness. These things apply equally to heterosexual and homosexual couples, and that's why homosexual couples are good, just like heterosexual ones.

Since millions don’t understand the Bible in different ways but see that it condemns same-sex unions, the Bible cant be understood differently.

That makes no logical sense. In the same way, you could say "since millions of apples are red, there are no green apples". Even if millions of Christians agree with how you understand the Bible doesn't mean that there aren't any Christians who disagree with you. And since there are Chrisians who disagree with you, it means that the Bible IS understood differently by different people.

I agree, similarly if I cite the Bible I can see what it says so when people try and tell me its just an opinion its inconsistent with the reality if what it says.

Everything in the Bible has a specific context, based on the culture, the reasons why it was written, the specific audience it was written for, personal opinions of the person who wrote it... and these things can't be determined beyond any doubt. That's why there are different ways to understand the Bible.

And millions don’t. so whats your point?

My point is that some people disagree with you. What's your point?

It does mean it is correct if others understand it in the same way and believe what it says is reliable.

That's weird... are you saying that the Bible is correct because there are other people who understand it in the same way as you do and believe what it says? That can be said about any religious book, including Dianetics (from Scientology). So either you believe that ALL religious books are equally correct, or your argument fails.

That’s your view, my view is that a Christian believes the Bible is reliable and that’s the norm. Take for example the Anglican Communion and Evangelical Alliance both believe the Bible is a trustworthy and reliable standard in matters of faith and conduct
http://www.cofe.anglican.org/faith/anglican/
http://www.eauk.org/about/basis-of-faith.cfm
So I don’t think your view is very widely accepted.

Umm... "the Bible is a trustworthy and reliable standard in matters of faith and conduct" doesn't mean "the Bible is absolutely correct about everything it says".

 

[catlover]

Dear catlover
Which is what I have said, but the key being you don’t either.

True...

 

[Texas Lynn]

LOL!!!! I would like to see you offer some proof that backs your flawed opinion.

You mean like you yourself have not done?