Using the NT to condemn sinners and defame pastors...

[GoldenKingGaze]

I have for twenty years now seen use of the NT to criticise pastors and revivals, and to condemn sinners to rejection and negative actions. I most disadmire people who look hard through the NT like the book of Romans and out of context draw verses to condemn people or a person. In history it was extreme and reveals how far it can be taken and it was so evil it was used to kill people by burning or drowning them... Inquisitions, witch hunts. Slanders and actual sinners died. I have angry contempt for such hermeneutics. Jesus taught us such people would accuse true believers and Paul the apostle warned of the, now established, doctrines of demons.

In interpreting Scripture there are the matters of context, the translation, not arguing a change of plain meaning by striving over the meaning of a word or two in the paragraph. Being led by the Spirit and Sola Scriptura are important. Ancient tradition, the original people addressed and a school of thought matter too. Love matters... but some seem motivated by hate or condemnation. I suppose they are bigots.

Some use Romans 1 to condemn homosexuals. Like my dad. He separates Romans 1 from chapter 2. And does not read the whole thought from Paul the context and that of the whole book. A book about salvation and justification by faith. With no condemnation to those in Christ. Yet even my dad uses it to condemn. His understanding of the times of the first century are undeveloped. He uses conspiracy theories. He reads that they are worthy of death, and that if we approve of what they do, we are also worthy of death. We read those last verses of the chapter together and it was evidently an error. But then he claims he prophesied and the Spirit gave him an extra revelation. And he refuses to read Chapter 2 for context.

What can I do in regards to my dad and critics?

 

[akaDaScribe]

I have for twenty years now seen use of the NT to criticise pastors and revivals, and to condemn sinners to rejection and negative actions. I most disadmire people who look hard through the NT like the book of Romans and out of context draw verses to condemn people or a person. In history it was extreme and reveals how far it can be taken and it was so evil it was used to kill people by burning or drowning them... Inquisitions, witch hunts. Slanders and actual sinners died. I have angry contempt for such hermeneutics. Jesus taught us such people would accuse true believers and Paul the apostle warned of the, now established, doctrines of demons.

In interpreting Scripture there are the matters of context, the translation, not arguing a change of plain meaning by striving over the meaning of a word or two in the paragraph. Being led by the Spirit and Sola Scriptura are important. Ancient tradition, the original people addressed and a school of thought matter too. Love matters... but some seem motivated by hate or condemnation. I suppose they are bigots.

Some use Romans 1 to condemn homosexuals. Like my dad. He separates Romans 1 from chapter 2. And does not read the whole thought from Paul the context and that of the whole book. A book about salvation and justification by faith. With no condemnation to those in Christ. Yet even my dad uses it to condemn. His understanding of the times of the first century are undeveloped. He uses conspiracy theories. He reads that they are worthy of death, and that if we approve of what they do, we are also worthy of death. We read those last verses of the chapter together and it was evidently an error. But then he claims he prophesied and the Spirit gave him an extra revelation. And he refuses to read Chapter 2 for context.

What can I do in regards to my dad and critics?

I'm not sure I follow. Are you looking for ways to defend homosexuality as ok?

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

I'm not sure I follow. Are you looking for ways to defend homosexuality as ok?

No, sin is sin, adultery, murder, homosexual acts, necromancing... but my dad thinks it is a super sin. And a lot of people seem to use the NT to condemn.

 

[Dave-W]

What can I do in regards to my dad and critics?

You have to start with the proper understanding of who God is and what He is like.

 

[Greg J.]

You have to start with a proper understanding of who humans are and what we are like. (@Dave-W )

What is it exactly that he condemns homosexuals for? In terms of earthly fallenness, they are no different than we are, except that they not only have to fight Satan's accusations/guilt, but also the condemning attitude humans' have for homosexuals. When that condemnation comes from a Christian, that means the Christian is putting a stumbling stone in their way to Christ—which is a sin. It is through our love that people come to Christ.

As for our born again spirits which God alone did:

For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not? (1 Corinthians 4:7, 1984 NIV)
__________

I would suggest he stop setting himself as God over the Lord for his own good:

Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death— even death on a cross! (Philippians 2:5-8, 1984 NIV)

Does he see himself as a servant to homosexuals with the mercy, grace, kindness, slowness to anger, abounding in the love of God, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin? (Exodus 34:6-7; also see James 1:20)

“As for the person who hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge him. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save it. (John 12:47, 1984 NIV)
__________

And to work on his attitude:

Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. (Philippians 2:3, 1984 NIV)

Paul wrote that to believers. Is his attitude like that toward any believers, perhaps those that disagree with him? If not, then his attitude is corrupt, which also affects his attitude toward unbelievers.

“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? (Matthew 7:1-4, 1984 NIV)

Has he stopped sinning yet? If not, why is he not broken in heart about himself toward God? The smallest sin he ever committed means he is deserving of eternal punishment. Has he earned anything better for himself than homosexuals?

For God does not show favoritism. (Romans 2:11, 1984 NIV; similar also in Acts 10:34, Ephesians 6:9, Colossians 3:25; favoritism is a sin James 2:9)

Now about food sacrificed to idols: We know that we all possess knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. The man who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know. (1 Corinthians 8:1-2, 1984 NIV)
__________

However, @GoldenKingGaze,

Do not rebuke an older man harshly, but exhort him as if he were your father. Treat younger men as brothers, (1 Timothy 5:1, 1984 NIV)

And also that sometimes children simply cannot teach their parents. For all our lives ideally we are to be obedient to our parents, for God receives how we treat our parents as if were were dealing with him (as with all those with legitimate authority over us)—and parents are given the responsibility by God for training their children. It's hard for some parents to make the switch to recognizing their student has become his equal in some things (no student/child can be above his master/parent). Feel free to print this out and let him stumble on it. Edit it if you want first (but then remove my name).

For what it's worth, I suspect that psychologically, he has embedded anger from a variety of things (typically, pain or rejection while a child that became a part of his personality) and homosexuality triggers it, but did not put it there in the first place.

 

[TuxAme]

No, sin is sin, adultery, murder, homosexual acts, necromancing... but my dad thinks it is a super sin. And a lot of people seem to use the NT to condemn.

It's a mortal sin if acted upon- merely being homosexual is not.

 

[bcbsr]

I have for twenty years now seen use of the NT to criticise pastors and revivals, and to condemn sinners to rejection and negative actions.

Didn't Jesus do the same thing? Try reading Matthew 23

 

[SkyWriting]

I have for twenty years now seen use of the NT to criticise pastors and revivals, and to condemn sinners to rejection and negative actions. I most disadmire people who look hard through the NT like the book of Romans and out of context draw verses to condemn people or a person. In history it was extreme and reveals how far it can be taken and it was so evil it was used to kill people by burning or drowning them... Inquisitions, witch hunts. Slanders and actual sinners died. I have angry contempt for such hermeneutics. Jesus taught us such people would accuse true believers and Paul the apostle warned of the, now established, doctrines of demons.

In interpreting Scripture there are the matters of context, the translation, not arguing a change of plain meaning by striving over the meaning of a word or two in the paragraph. Being led by the Spirit and Sola Scriptura are important. Ancient tradition, the original people addressed and a school of thought matter too. Love matters... but some seem motivated by hate or condemnation. I suppose they are bigots.

Some use Romans 1 to condemn homosexuals. Like my dad. He separates Romans 1 from chapter 2. And does not read the whole thought from Paul the context and that of the whole book. A book about salvation and justification by faith. With no condemnation to those in Christ. Yet even my dad uses it to condemn. His understanding of the times of the first century are undeveloped. He uses conspiracy theories. He reads that they are worthy of death, and that if we approve of what they do, we are also worthy of death. We read those last verses of the chapter together and it was evidently an error. But then he claims he prophesied and the Spirit gave him an extra revelation. And he refuses to read Chapter 2 for context.

What can I do in regards to my dad and critics?

You treat Dad just as you would wish to be treated.
You subtly teach dad to do the same to others.

 

[Jude1:3Contendforthefaith]

One thing to remember is that preaching and words are Nothing compared to actually physically stoning someone etc.

Yeshua’s Words cut to the heart but if the person listens and repents it works out for good.

 

[James Richards]

I have for twenty years now seen use of the NT to criticise pastors and revivals, and to condemn sinners to rejection and negative actions. I most disadmire people who look hard through the NT like the book of Romans and out of context draw verses to condemn people or a person. In history it was extreme and reveals how far it can be taken and it was so evil it was used to kill people by burning or drowning them... Inquisitions, witch hunts. Slanders and actual sinners died. I have angry contempt for such hermeneutics. Jesus taught us such people would accuse true believers and Paul the apostle warned of the, now established, doctrines of demons.

In interpreting Scripture there are the matters of context, the translation, not arguing a change of plain meaning by striving over the meaning of a word or two in the paragraph. Being led by the Spirit and Sola Scriptura are important. Ancient tradition, the original people addressed and a school of thought matter too. Love matters... but some seem motivated by hate or condemnation. I suppose they are bigots.

Some use Romans 1 to condemn homosexuals. Like my dad. He separates Romans 1 from chapter 2. And does not read the whole thought from Paul the context and that of the whole book. A book about salvation and justification by faith. With no condemnation to those in Christ. Yet even my dad uses it to condemn. His understanding of the times of the first century are undeveloped. He uses conspiracy theories. He reads that they are worthy of death, and that if we approve of what they do, we are also worthy of death. We read those last verses of the chapter together and it was evidently an error. But then he claims he prophesied and the Spirit gave him an extra revelation. And he refuses to read Chapter 2 for context.

What can I do in regards to my dad and critics?

Is a Christian sinless? No they are not, they are imperfect, saved and justified by faith in Christ.
Can a Christian, who is saved by grace through faith, commit adultery without conscience, believing it is OK to do so? No they cannot.

Likewise, it is not OK to live A homosexual lifestyle and believe it is OK to do so as a christian

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

Didn't Jesus do the same thing? Try reading Matthew 23

No, Jesus did not condemn a revival. Jesus did not condemn but save sinners, the ones he addressed in Matthew 23, resisted the Holy Spirit revivals, and resisted Jesus. They were killers. They stoned the prophets or it was their ancestors who did. They were being warned that if they died that way that they would be lost. They had at that point been resisting John the Baptist call to repentance... and Jesus wanted them to repent from sin and did not call for negative actions like stoning, or drowning.

Jesus did not condemn but warn and even died for them to move them back into the fold.

 

[BarWi]

Some use Romans 1 to condemn homosexuals. Like my dad. He separates Romans 1 from chapter 2. And does not read the whole thought from Paul the context and that of the whole book. A book about salvation and justification by faith. With no condemnation to those in Christ. Yet even my dad uses it to condemn. His understanding of the times of the first century are undeveloped. He uses conspiracy theories. He reads that they are worthy of death, and that if we approve of what they do, we are also worthy of death.

My two cents worth is that many, maybe most Christians make the mistake of reading the Bible through a single lens of literalism when the context needs to include the spiritual meaning God wove into His word, grounded in metaphor.

Simple example: When spiritual and literal meanings are blended, each individual is both justified by faith (an act that transcends time) and condemned by sin (takes place in time). Individuals are thus earmarked outside of time for salvation, even though they still sin in time. The death that the homosexual is guilty of (as we all are by our various sins) is a spiritual, not literal one. This is how a homosexual (and all of us) can be both 'in Christ' and in condemnation at the same time, because the cause of sin is spiritual (something internal, not physical), that cause must be spiritually destroyed. Jesus didn't die so that we can sin with impunity; He died so that when we chose sin over Him (remember, that choice is due to a spiritual cause) the wrath of God destroys the thing [spiritual sickness] that caused the sin, not the sinner himself. This is how Paul's words: "For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Rom 6:23) are true without contradiction, that although we kill ourselves spiritually with bad choices, the Lord wages war: "The LORD will go forth like a warrior, He will arouse His zeal like a man of war. He will utter a shout, yes, He will raise a war cry. He will prevail against His enemies." (Isa 42:13). He rails, not against the individual, but against the spiritual death that caused the sin.

God loves individuals, he hates the spiritual defect within us that causes our sin. I'm not saying we're not responsible for our thoughts and actions. Initial sin is our responsibility, but if we keep clinging to the bad stuff we originally "tested the waters" with, we pile on damage to our spirit that soon places us in a position to love the sin too much to be able to escape from it. This can be seen in addiction. Many or most addicts want to stop after they begin to realize they're killing themselves, but are unable to quit without help. Same with sin, which is--when carried out beyond our ability to stop it--a spiritual addiction of sorts.

Since what must die within us is arguably some form of "badness", we become spiritually "less" if this badness is removed or destroyed from within us. Christ again has the answer: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains by itself alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit." (Jn 12:24) This is the mystery of salvation: death and rebirth. When the cancer that exists in our soul is destroyed the Lord raises up new, repaired portions of the soul to replace it. Death and rebirth, the dualism of salvation.

Your dad's mistake is that of millions of other Christians and theists of other stripes as well: too much literalism. God forgive those Christian leaders who force their flocks to think strictly in literal terms.

 

[Beanieboy]

Put simply, it’s exegesis - looking to the bible to support your opinion, vs looking to the bible for what it actually refers to, the internet being easy access to what biblical scholars say on the issue, the finally, taking it to prayer with God, and listening. It’s human - he has hatred, so he uses the bible, or rather, misuses the bible, or listens to those who preach the message of what he wants to believe, to justify discrimination or hatred of his neighbor, rather than Christ’s command love his neighbor as himself, and if he fails to do this, he is not only not following Christ, but also does not know God (1 John 4:7-8).

I am amazed at the number of people who call themselves Christians that actually fight to keep discrimination legal, thinking themselves as obeying God, when it is the antithesis of what Christ taught. Instead, they become a modern day Pharisee, praising themselves for how holy they are, by pointing at the tax collector and condemning him, in order to exalt themselves.

Even when this is pointed out, they will condemn the other as hating the truth. I have even had countless people tell me that God hated me. Those are lies of the devil, and I don’t want to even imagine what the judgement is for anyone mis representing God’s love in such an arrogant manner.

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

Put simply, it’s exegesis - looking to the bible to support your opinion, vs looking to the bible for what it actually refers to, the internet being easy access to what biblical scholars say on the issue, the finally, taking it to prayer with God, and listening. It’s human - he has hatred, so he uses the bible, or rather, misuses the bible, or listens to those who preach the message of what he wants to believe, to justify discrimination or hatred of his neighbor, rather than Christ’s command love his neighbor as himself, and if he fails to do this, he is not only not following Christ, but also does not know God (1 John 4:7-8).

I am amazed at the number of people who call themselves Christians that actually fight to keep discrimination legal, thinking themselves as obeying God, when it is the antithesis of what Christ taught. Instead, they become a modern day Pharisee, praising themselves for how holy they are, by pointing at the tax collector and condemning him, in order to exalt themselves.

Even when this is pointed out, they will condemn the other as hating the truth. I have even had countless people tell me that God hated me. Those are lies of the devil, and I don’t want to even imagine what the judgement is for anyone mis representing God’s love in such an arrogant manner.

Do you mean eisegesis?

 

[Beanieboy]

Do you mean eisegesis?

Yes, thank you. I always thought they were saying Isa Jesus/ExoJesus.

 

[pescador]

How many homosexuals did Jesus turn away? Of course, the answer is zero -- none!

Jesus told us to do two primary things: 1) Love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and 2) love your neighbor as yourself. It doesn't say to love your "righteous" neighbor; there are no qualifications. In the parable demonstrating loving your neighbor, it was a (despised) Samaritan who helped the injured man, identifying the need without regard to his meeting some (arbitrary) standard.

Those Christians who judge and condemn others are the ones to whom Jesus said "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the kingdom of heaven—only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. Matthew 7:21

Those self-righteous "evangelicals" who judge and condemn others are no different from the Pharisees.