Why I will not buy a Ford

[TheDag]

You write as if companies have a right to my business, and that I am depriving them of my consumerism.

No one company has a right to our loyalty. If they are behaving badly, in a way that directly offends Christian morals (and me), why on earth would I support them.

The best way I can 'love my enemy' is by trying to get them to realize the error of their ways.

Is boycotting really loving your enemies? Sounds more like avoiding your enemies to me.

 

[dpartlow]

Is boycotting really loving your enemies? Sounds more like avoiding your enemies to me.

I believe that it is. As parents we scold our children when they do something wrong because we love them, and expect them to apologize for their misdeed.

Think of a boycott as sending a child to 'time out'. When that child returns and apologizes (repents), they are then embraced.

 

[TheDag]

I believe that it is. As parents we scold our children when they do something wrong because we love them, and expect them to apologize for their misdeed.

Think of a boycott as sending a child to 'time out'. When that child returns and apologizes (repents), they are then embraced.

I personally would actually see it as telling the child to get out of the house rather than a time out. As for your earlier comment about it being hard to avoid various companies seem as they make so many essentials I also have to disagree on that. What it comes down to is how much are you willing to pay? You can buy food from places where they don't use those practices. It does however cost more.

 

[BrBob]

The best way I can 'love my enemy' is by trying to get them to realize the error of their ways.

See, the way that is said, in conjunction with advocating a boycott, comes across as just plain arrogance. Arrogance is not a fruit of the Spirit of God and it spawns resistance and contempt rather than repentance.

The way of love involves making a relationship and gently leading the person (or company in this case) to Jesus. A boycott is about like walking up to a prostitute and shouting at her. It does no good and it annoys the prostitute!

God Bless
Bob
Spearfish, SD

 

[Texas Lynn]

I believe that it is. As parents we scold our children when they do something wrong because we love them, and expect them to apologize for their misdeed.

Think of a boycott as sending a child to 'time out'. When that child returns and apologizes (repents), they are then embraced.

In this case Ford did nothing whatsoever to justify a small group of "Christians" boycotting them.

 

[dpartlow]

See, the way that is said, in conjunction with advocating a boycott, comes across as just plain arrogance. Arrogance is not a fruit of the Spirit of God and it spawns resistance and contempt rather than repentance.

The way of love involves making a relationship and gently leading the person (or company in this case) to Jesus. A boycott is about like walking up to a prostitute and shouting at her. It does no good and it annoys the prostitute!

God Bless
Bob
Spearfish, SD

Bob, to take your analogy to the ridiculous extreem, are you saying Christians should sleep with prostitutes so that we are not seen to be boycotting them? Because that would be condescending.

Your argument makes no sense.

 

[BrBob]

NO, that isn't a good anology. You see, sleeping with a prostitute would be joining in the sin, not just loving the sinner and creating a relationship with her. To apply that to Ford, sleeping with the prostitute would be contributing your own money, NOT FORD's money, to the groups you feel are objectionable.

Bob
Spearfish, SD

 

[Texas Lynn]

Bob, to take your analogy to the ridiculous extreem, are you saying Christians should sleep with prostitutes so that we are not seen to be boycotting them? Because that would be condescending.

You are right, that is ridiculous. But so is the assertion an exercise of political power like this right-wing boycott is an exercise of "Christianity" rather than an UnChristian act of hatred.

 

[bunced]

I want to chime in here. I don't consider myself in any way right-wing (in fact, probably the nearest generalisation you could come to for me would be on the lines of socialism). But I think it is a bit odd to consider boycotting a business an act of hatred. In the commercial world, a business has to earn customers, through quality products, through good advertising and, more and more, in the UK at least, through ethical business practices. Rises in things such as fairtrade (paying the growers a fair price for their work rather than exploiting them) shows that consumers have the power to change things by voting with their feet. And as businesses see that ethical business practices bring more custom in, then they will begin to change and consumers would have shown their preference and changed things.

I struggle to see where the hatred is in this. I think as consumers, and more specifically as Christians, we have a responsibility to shop ethically and to support those who trade ethically as far as possible. Otherwise we become complicit in unethical practices such as worker exploitation.

 

[Texas Lynn]

... I think it is a bit odd to consider boycotting a business an act of hatred.

Not in all cases surely. But the motive here is clear. Ford's offense to AFA was marketing to the LGBT community. Opposing that is an act of hatred.

 

[BigNorsk]

Scripture actually spoofs the very idea of having nothing to do with people of the world due to sexual immorality.

1Co 5:9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people--
1Co 5:10 not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler--not even to eat with such a one.
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?
1Co 5:13 God judges those outside. "Purge the evil person from among you."

Notice that Paul wrote not to associate with sexually immoral people, however, he specifically did not mean sexually immoral people of the world, because it's impossible to be in the world and do that.

We are not to avoid the sexuall immoral of the world, nor the idolaters, greedy and so on. These people are actually our mission for being here.

It is within the church that we do not have anything to do with the immoral. Those who claim to be Christians but whose lives are filled with sin, those people we are to discipline and have nothing to do with if they do not repent. But those outside the church, we are here clearly told that we are not to avoid them.

That's a case closed. God has spoken.

Marv

 

[TheDag]

Not in all cases surely. But the motive here is clear. Ford's offense to AFA was marketing to the LGBT community. Opposing that is an act of hatred.

great point

 

[Texas Lynn]

Scripture actually spoofs the very idea of having nothing to do with people of the world due to sexual immorality.

1Co 5:9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people--
1Co 5:10 not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler--not even to eat with such a one.
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?
1Co 5:13 God judges those outside. "Purge the evil person from among you."

Notice that Paul wrote not to associate with sexually immoral people, however, he specifically did not mean sexually immoral people of the world, because it's impossible to be in the world and do that.

We are not to avoid the sexuall immoral of the world, nor the idolaters, greedy and so on. These people are actually our mission for being here.

It is within the church that we do not have anything to do with the immoral. Those who claim to be Christians but whose lives are filled with sin, those people we are to discipline and have nothing to do with if they do not repent. But those outside the church, we are here clearly told that we are not to avoid them.

That's a case closed. God has spoken.

Marv

Who trumps who between Paul and Christ? Paul said this but Christ associated with Republicans and sinners. Who to follow? Are we Paulists or Christians?

Besides, you failed to show how the passage applies to this issue.

 

[TheDag]

Who trumps who between Paul and Christ? Paul said this but Christ associated with Republicans and sinners. Who to follow? Are we Paulists or Christians?

Besides, you failed to show how the passage applies to this issue.

Ok I'm a little confused. Lyn you seem to be suggesting here that Jesus said we should avoid sinners. Then you go on to point out Jesus associated with sinners. Or did you misunderstand Marv's post where he said the instruction was for only those within the church?

I think the point being that seem as Ford is a company and therefore can't be christian then boycotting is not in line with biblical principles because we are told to witness and reach out to these people.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Ok I'm a little confused. Lyn you seem to be suggesting here that Jesus said we should avoid sinners. Then you go on to point out Jesus associated with sinners. Or did you misunderstand Marv's post where he said the instruction was for only those within the church?

No, I rejected his premise. He quoted a Pauline epistle; I quoted a description of Christ from the scripture. He did not provide any evidence that the people being attacked (LGBTs) are any more "sinners" than he is.

The concept is absurd as all Christians are sinners and those that have delusions they are not are overcome by their own smugness and arrogance. If all "sinners" were banned from church all churches would be empty.

I think the point being that seem as Ford is a company and therefore can't be christian then boycotting is not in line with biblical principles because we are told to witness and reach out to these people.

Boycotts are apporpriate when businesses commit wrongs. Ford did no such thing and the assertion otherwise is false. There are no "Biblical principles" which preclude marketing to groups hated by extremists.

 

[TheDag]

No, I rejected his premise. He quoted a Pauline epistle; I quoted a description of Christ from the scripture. He did not provide any evidence that the people being attacked (LGBTs) are any more "sinners" than he is.

The concept is absurd as all Christians are sinners and those that have delusions they are not are overcome by their own smugness and arrogance. If all "sinners" were banned from church all churches would be empty.

Just as I thought you did misunderstand. Read his post again. Read every word. At no point in time did Marv say no sinner should be allowed in churches. Hence what Marv was saying when quoting Paul is the same as what you were saying when you gave a descrioption of Christ's actions.
It is also true that he did not provide any proof that LGBT's are any more sinners than he is. of course he never claime they were any more sinners than he is in his post. A careful reading of peoples posts for what they say rather than what one thinks they are saying is most helpful.

I acknowledge that you seem to have a different opinion to other christians in regards to LGBT's but that does not make it an automatic assumption that you are right. You might be but you also might be wrong. To assume people are just being hateful and are extremists because they hold a diferent opinion to you is also most unhelpful. I personally have not seen Marv make any hateful posts on any topic although I have not read every post he has ever made so I can't bee 100% certain but considering every post of his I have seen is polite I would like to think that he is not a hateful person like you seem to be suggesting.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Just as I thought you did misunderstand. Read his post again. Read every word. At no point in time did Marv say no sinner should be allowed in churches. Hence what Marv was saying when quoting Paul is the same as what you were saying when you gave a descrioption of Christ's actions.
It is also true that he did not provide any proof that LGBT's are any more sinners than he is. of course he never claime they were any more sinners than he is in his post. A careful reading of peoples posts for what they say rather than what one thinks they are saying is most helpful.

I acknowledge that you seem to have a different opinion to other christians in regards to LGBT's but that does not make it an automatic assumption that you are right. You might be but you also might be wrong. To assume people are just being hateful and are extremists because they hold a diferent opinion to you is also most unhelpful. I personally have not seen Marv make any hateful posts on any topic although I have not read every post he has ever made so I can't bee 100% certain but considering every post of his I have seen is polite I would like to think that he is not a hateful person like you seem to be suggesting.

Tell you what, let's let the Brother speak for himself. You say I did not understand his post but you misread mine and attacked me so let's see if he has anything to say.

 

[TheDag]

Tell you what, let's let the Brother speak for himself. You say I did not understand his post but you misread mine and attacked me so let's see if he has anything to say.

Just out of curiosity in which post did I misunderstand you? are you able to rephrase so I understand?

 

[BigNorsk]

The main point of my post due to it's context was that we are not to avoid the sinners of the world. Indeed, we are given a mission to make them disciples.

We do not discipline nonbelievers. They are not subject to church discipline. Church discipline is for those within the church.

Many people confuse that. It's pretty common today to see people in congregations that never discipline anyone within the congregation who are instead trying to discipline nonbelievers, they've got things flipped.

Now I don't know where you ever got the idea that for some reason that means I said that everyone in the church thereby cannot sin or else we kick them out. That is not how church discipline works. It is a process where repeatedly the person is asked to repent. Only a person who repeatedly chooses his sin over the church would ever be removed from church fellowship.

Marv

 

[Texas Lynn]

Just out of curiosity in which post did I misunderstand you? are you able to rephrase so I understand?

#115. The idea of injecting "church discipline" into this discussion is unfortunate and inapplicable. All Christians are sinners. To rehabilitate sinners is not applicable to discussion of a political group's boycott of a business over it's marketing to a group they hate.