Extremism and Sepratism

[SoliDeoGloria]

When one looks at the history of most major religions, it is interesting to note that what was praticed by many of these groups would be considered extremism or sepratism today. With that being noted, one might wonder if who or what we define as extremists or sepratists is dependant on the social norm of the day? Take for example, there are certain views that a Christian may take today that would define them as extremists while only forty years ago it would've been considered the norm. Do you agree with this, and if so do you think this is a correct way of thinking? BTW, for personal refferrence, I am not promoting the extremist version of using violence for promoting one's personal beliefs so please don't turn this into a debate over how religions have done that in the past. We all know that is true, so can we please leave it alone and concentrate on nonviolent issues? Thanks

Sincerely,
SoliDeoGloria

 

[michel]

I was listening to a programme on TV here in Englad that is on on Sundays - called 'Heaven and Earth'; strangely enough they were talking about just this subject.

One Vicar who was interviewed thought it was more important to get people in the Church than stick to the 'rules'; he openly welcomes Gay couples - on the basis that if his broadmindedness brings them into the Church, he is in fact 'loving all' which he was saying, to him, was G-d's main aim - to get us to love everyone.

One of his points was 'love the sinner, not the sin' - which I find a remarkably fresh and wonderful way of seeing things.

 

[Mister Emu]

remarkably fresh

hmmm, this has been the majority Christian view in my experience. The people marching around saying "God hates ****" are a minority.

Also, to the original question yes, what society deems extreme is based on the current state of social affairs.

 

[michel]

hmmm, this has been the majority Christian view in my experience. The people marching around saying "God hates ****" are a minority.

Also, to the original question yes, what society deems extreme is based on the current state of social affairs.

Ah, but this relates to a topic yesterday - I can't remember which - in that we only see the 'bad guys' who shout loudest, not the good, silent majority. hence, Christians can be perceived as 'G-d hates Gays' types.

How do you think Christianity can present itself in a truer aspect?

 

[Mister Emu]

How do you think Christianity can present itself in a truer aspect?

Not sure, the media only likes sensation. Saying, While we don't like homosexuality, we love the homosexuals, is not sensational, a bunch of people marching around a gay pride conventions with signs like "Aids is the cure" and "Burn in Hell queers" is sensational. I doubt a true portrayal will ever get on mainstream media.

 

[michel]

Not sure, the media only likes sensation. Saying, While we don't like homosexuality, we love the homosexuals, is not sensational, a bunch of people marching around a gay pride conventions with signs like "Aids is the cure" and "Burn in Hell queers" is sensational. I doubt a true portrayal will ever get on mainstream media.

Which is exactly the point I am trying to make; can you see a way of promoting the good in what you believe, without people automatically associating what you preach with the negative of the minority ?

The way I see it, we are ambassadors of our faiths; do you not feel that you personally have a duty to portray the best about what you believe in?

 

[Mister Emu]

Which is exactly the point I am trying to make; can you see a way of promoting the good in what you believe, without people automatically associating what you preach with the negative of the minority ?

That is my point, you can't. The media chooses what most believe, and see(in my person experience). Thus they have ingrained the idea that Christians are bigotted, mean, and want you to burn in hell. I have met people that believe those marchers represent most if not all of Christianity, and think that kindness is a minority.

The way I see it, we are ambassadors of our faiths; do you not feel that you personally have a duty to portray the best about what you believe in?

Yes I do believe I do. I try my best in my daily life. I do not believe however that it will get to the media. "Guy helps family move in" vs. "Preacher rails against new homosexual couple, condemns them to hell and seeks to remove them from neighborhood" tell me which the newspaper/news channels would pick up?

 

[michel]

That is my point, you can't. The media chooses what most believe, and see(in my person experience). Thus they have ingrained the idea that Christians are bigotted, mean, and want you to burn in hell. I have met people that believe those marchers represent most if not all of Christianity, and think that kindness is a minority.

Yes I do believe I do. I try my best in my daily life. I do not believe however that it will get to the media. "Guy helps family move in" vs. "Preacher rails against new homosexual couple, condemns them to hell and seeks to remove them from neighborhood" tell me which the newspaper/news channels would pick up?

So you just 'give up' ? - I am not 'having a go' at you - this isn't even aimed at you - I believe that you are a good Christian, and you do as you preach, but I am looking for an answer. I am trying to remember the quote (which I can't) - but you might well recognize it - the one about "Is it just as bad not to do anything against evil ?....."

 

[Mister Emu]

So you just 'give up' ? - I am not 'having a go' at you - this isn't even aimed at you - I believe that you are a good Christian, and you do as you preach, but I am looking for an answer. I am trying to remember the quote (which I can't) - but you might well recognize it - the one about "Is it just as bad not to do anything against evil ?....."

Never give up, never surrender.

No, I won't give up. I will live as well I can, help where I can. I just don't see it getting to the news. I can only hope and pray for a change in the hearts and minds of the "big media". I think news today is more about proving your point rather than getting the truth, I hope that changes.

 

[michel]

Never give up, never surrender.

No, I won't give up. I will live as well I can, help where I can. I just don't see it getting to the news. I can only hope and pray for a change in the hearts and minds of the "big media". I think news today is more about proving your point rather than getting the truth, I hope that changes.

I agree with you - but I feel ashamed of this feeling of powerlesness. I think that to wait for a change in the hearts and minds of the media and politicians (for good luck, add them to the pot) is a bit like waiting for a miracle to happen.

Sure, lead and show people by the way you live your faith - but in my book that's not quite enough....... What frustrates me so is this feeling of inadequacy.

 

[Mister Emu]

I agree with you - but I feel ashamed of this feeling of powerlesness. I think that to wait for a change in the hearts and minds of the media and politicians (for good luck, add them to the pot) is a bit like waiting for a miracle to happen.

Sure, lead and show people by the way you live your faith - but in my book that's not quite enough....... What frustrates me so is this feeling of inadequacy.

I understand you. It is quite frustrating. As of yet however, I have neither the money nor the power to do anything about it

I am trying however(at least on the politicians ). I would like to get into politics. I plan to be atleast one good politician

 

[michel]

I understand you. It is quite frustrating. As of yet however, I have neither the money nor the power to do anything about it

I am trying however(at least on the politicians ). I would like to get into politics. I plan to be atleast one good politician

Wow ! I wish you luck.

 

[Mister Emu]

Thanks Michel.

 

[SoliDeoGloria]

Great points you two!!!

I am trying however(at least on the politicians ). I would like to get into politics. I plan to be atleast one good politician

Please forgive me for going a bit off subject here, but this statement causes me to wonder how many other people have gotten into politics with the same intentions and sort of got sucked into all the things we see as negative about politics due to the overwhelming temptation and surrounding environment. I truly wish you well on your goal.

Now that I got that off my chest, I was wondering what you two felt about sepratism or extremism being defined by the social norm (i.e. do you think it is right or wrong to define it this way, especially extremism being as how sepratism couldn't be defined if there wasn't a 'norm')

Sincerely,
SoliDeoGloria

 

[Mister Emu]

I truly wish you well on your goal.

Thank you, I hope I will not fall from the road I travel now.

I think it is a bit unfair to call something extreme because it does not fit with the "norm". I also however think that extreme(ist) can mean different things to different people.

 

[Hirohito18200]

I was wondering what you two felt about sepratism or extremism being defined by the social norm (i.e. do you think it is right or wrong to define it this way, especially extremism being as how sepratism couldn't be defined if there wasn't a 'norm')

I think thats a perfectly exceptable way (at least too convenient to pass up) to define them, but just make sure you have the "norm" well defined before trying to search for the extremists, since that is the root of the problems aforementioned ^^.

However, I wouldn't say that the "God hates gays" minority is such a minority. Even though most of those types are not active and vocal, those core beliefs are still harbored and influence decision making and personal assessment. They may SAY they love everyone but when you are utterly repulsed by a behavior that defines a person, I contend that it is impossible to love the person in even close to the same way. I haven't seen an inkling of a counter example

 

[SoliDeoGloria]

think thats a perfectly exceptable way (at least too convenient to pass up) to define them,

What a revealing statement. Especially the part about how convenient it is.

However, I wouldn't say that the "God hates gays" minority is such a minority. Even though most of those types are not active and vocal, those core beliefs are still harbored and influence decision making and personal assessment. They may SAY they love everyone but when you are utterly repulsed by a behavior that defines a person, I contend that it is impossible to love the person in even close to the same way. I haven't seen an inkling of a counter example

Read the cannonized Biblical Gospels. There are plenty of examples of Jesus Christ being repulsed at things His disciples did to the point of even calling one of them "Satan" and yet loved them enough along with the rest of creation to consciously give Himself as a sacrifice for their sins. But once again, we could start a whole different thread on this subject so I gotta stop doing that.:banghead3

Sincerely,
SoliDeoGloria

 

[stemann]

Christianity like most religions has just tried to find a way of keeping with the social normality whilst not sacrificing its core beliefs. Many of the more outlandish beliefs and teachings in the Bible (slave owning, daughter selling, etc) have been completely abandoned for one reason or another (I'm not sure what the actual reasons are), and so the majority of Christianity cannot claim to 'hate' gays as this would not be, well, Christian.

So, like someone in this thread said, you hate the sin, not the sinner. I read in this story once, St. Peter asked this kid 'Are you a bully?' and he said, 'No I hate bullies', so St. Peter said, 'hatred is a sin, boy,' and he countered, 'Actually I don't mind bullies, I just don't like what they do.'

Christians are supposed to love everyone, as Jesus taught, but I suppose part of that would also be trying to persuade homosexuals to stop being homosexual, i.e. to stop them from sinning and save them from goin to Hell.

But, if they themselves didn't think what they were doing is a sin, then some people believe they are leading a good life anyway (by persuing what they believe to be good) and so will be blessed. I think.

 

[SoliDeoGloria]

Christianity like most religions has just tried to find a way of keeping with the social normality whilst not sacrificing its core beliefs.

I guess it is hard for Christianity to not be the norm after being the norm for so long although it is not the first time. Christianity, in it's very beginnings was considered a wacked out cult. The Roman, Byzantine, and British empires at least made claims of being strongly infulenced by Christianity. Christianity is not the only religion to have a rough start and then become the social norm in certain countries. Islam was the same way. As a matter of fact, we might all be Muslims if it weren't for Charles the Great of France.

I don't agree however with those who are changing their beliefs for the sake of becomming socially exceptable or with all of a sudden calling those who decide to stick with their core beliefs "extremists" for doing so.

Many of the more outlandish beliefs and teachings in the Bible (slave owning, daughter selling, etc) have been completely abandoned for one reason or another (I'm not sure what the actual reasons are), and so the majority of Christianity cannot claim to 'hate' gays as this would not be, well, Christian.

You should look up the History of this. It was actually a British evangelist who started preaching that the slave industry was unbiblical and that The Bible did not actually support slavery but recognized that slavery existed and made rules surrounding it. Those rules were actually supposed to eventually put an end to slavery. After this Bristish evangelist was ostracised in The U.S., he went back to Great Britian and it is no suprise that Great Britian had actually ended slavery long before the U.S. did.

So, like someone in this thread said, you hate the sin, not the sinner. I read in this story once, St. Peter asked this kid 'Are you a bully?' and he said, 'No I hate bullies', so St. Peter said, 'hatred is a sin, boy,' and he countered, 'Actually I don't mind bullies, I just don't like what they do.'

Nowhere in the Bible is hate in itslef considered a sin so I'd be suprised if this story you read had any real validity to it. As a matter of fact, there are things that are allowed to be hated in the old and new testaments (Amos 5:15, John 12:25).

Christians are supposed to love everyone, as Jesus taught, but I suppose part of that would also be trying to persuade homosexuals to stop being homosexual, i.e. to stop them from sinning and save them from goin to Hell.

It's about time somebody keyed in on this.

But, if they themselves didn't think what they were doing is a sin, then some people believe they are leading a good life anyway (by persuing what they believe to be good) and so will be blessed. I think.

I'm sorry but I didn't quite understand this statement. Don't feel bad though, I've been accused of posting confusing statements quite a bit as of late.

BTW, Homosexuality is not the only issue when it comes to this subject. It is just the most recent and popular one. And Christianity is not the only religion dealing with the issue of being called extremists as of late.

Sincerely,
SoliDeogloria

 

[Hirohito18200]

It's about time somebody keyed in on this.

The phrase has been repeated repeatedly (is that repetitive?) but is meaningless. Either you can not pass any judgement on the person despite their behavior, or you can judge the person because of it, you cannot judge strictly the behavior and not the person. Judging the person must lead to some consequence, which is in the very least not loving them in the same way. You could not love someone who you adamantly believed was going to hell the same way you could a religious comrade. It would be like trying to assess a person based on their works of faith while ignoring their faith. That sounds ridiculous, but it works both ways.