• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Homophobia is un-Christian

bmk2416

Member
The bible tells you repeatedly that judgment belongs to god alone. The bible tells you repeatedly that you don't know Jack and so you should not put your wisdom and understanding above god's. That acknowledgment that he knew nothing at all of god's will or plans - that humbling of his own ego before his god - was when Job's torment finally stopped. That's hwo consistent that message is throughout the bible. There's an entire book devoted to it, and it's horrifying. The message of the bible is clear. You are to put your faith and trust in god and let him do his job in his own time. Whether or not you are happy in the meantime is inconsequential. You. Don't. Know.

But judgement is not being passed by objectively saying something is or isn't a sin, a judgement is more like a guilty or not guilty verdict in a trial and passing down a punishment, stating that something is a sin is more like presenting evidence.

For example I can determine that you've committed murder if you explicitly tell me you have. If I say you've sinned, at that point I'm simply stating facts, no judgement has occurred.

In fact I think that's the whole point, not having to judge someone even when they are sinning allows you to love them.
 

serp777

Well-Known Member
The better question is why Christians just don't throw out the old testament, exodus, and Leviticus. I mean Christians tend to cherry pick their ideal values from the bible so why not just get rid of everything that doesn't align with 21st century values? Oh i know. Its because that would take out like half the book.
 

Rick O'Shez

Irishman bouncing off walls
The better question is why Christians just don't throw out the old testament, exodus, and Leviticus. I mean Christians tend to cherry pick their ideal values from the bible so why not just get rid of everything that doesn't align with 21st century values? Oh i know. Its because that would take out like half the book.

Yes, to me the Old and New Testaments are like chalk and cheese, you'd think they belonged to two completely different religions.
 

Vidarsdottir

Just some chick
It's My Birthday!
But judgement is not being passed by objectively saying something is or isn't a sin, a judgement is more like a guilty or not guilty verdict in a trial and passing down a punishment, stating that something is a sin is more like presenting evidence.

For example I can determine that you've committed murder if you explicitly tell me you have. If I say you've sinned, at that point I'm simply stating facts, no judgement has occurred.

In fact I think that's the whole point, not having to judge someone even when they are sinning allows you to love them.

We could go into Paul's admonition against mixing god's laws with secular laws and the very common idea of everyone's relationship with god is different and how god's plan for them has lead them right where they should be on their path and blah blah blah, but it would further confuse the issue. There shouldn't even BE an issue, especially when it comes to someone outside of your congregation (those are the only people you ARE supposed to judge to a certain extent, and kick 'em to the curb if necessary). When it comes to the wider society in which you live, you are not part of god's jury. You're not even in the jury pool. As a matter of fact, the laws are most likely very different for the other person, but you cannot know that. What is a "sin" to you may be perfectly natural to me, while that which is perfectly natural, right and even holy to you is, in one HUGE aspect (if you are a Christian), a red flag about your lack of honor as a person to me. Who's right?


I'll tell you who's right. It doesn't matter. Let's examine WHY it doesn't matter.

We both go to the grocery store today. You happily zip through the produce department and suddenly we are face to face. You don't recognize me from church, and if you look at my jewelry you can clearly see I am not of the same faith as you. If you are wearing a cross, I know instantly you are not the same faith as me. My jewelry tells you that I am "sinning" and your jewelry tells me that you hang out with people with very bad orlog and therefore most likely have it yourself. Do you point at me and yell "sinner" as I call you a "nithing"? No. Absolutely not. At least I hope not.

Your deity tells you to leave "those others" to him and his judgment. You have to put your faith and trust in your god that he did not put a very dangerous woman between you and those 4/$1 avocados. My own path tells me that you are your deeds and I am to start with you, as an individual, on neutral ground until you tell me with your behavior exactly what kind of worth you and the deity you represent have. As a matter of fact, if you need help I am supposed to help you because you are another person and I don't know who you are as a spiritual being or where you are on your path. There is a certain standard of behavior expected of me when dealing with others and there is a certain standard of behavior expected of you when dealing with others. The biggest problem for you is that I know your standards given to you by your own deity but you don't know mine. So really, what do you do?

I really hope you don't call me a "sinner" in any way, shape or form even if I meet that definition in your faith path. We all meet that definition in the Abrahamic faiths, so you're one as well. There are a ton of things you could do/wear/say that would tell me you are anything from an Oathbreaker (just as bad as a murderer) to your standard lazy person (frownie face! Industriousness is one of the NNV!). But telling you that is not my job, understanding the rules are different for you and treating you fairly and treating you exactly as you treat me IS my job. We come from very different places spiritually, but the end result is the same. "If you can't say/do anything nice, don't say/do anything at all".

Now, from a practical standpoint: what you should do is exactly what your deity told you to do - leave the judging of me and my "weird" jewelry to him. Remember that you speak for your deity with your behavior. You're an earthly ambassador. If you don't follow his instructions to you about how to treat others, you are telling me that deity and his instructions have very little, if any, worth to you. That gives them even less worth to me. Is that the message you want to send? That's the message that has been being received for decades now, all because for some bizarre reason, despite all instruction to his people to the contrary, there are actually packs of people who wear the same symbol that you do who kick their deity's words to them to the side and do things like sue the federal government for the legal right to treat certain categories of "sinners" worse than the average Satanist would. That's pretty much the exact opposite of "love", it is absolutely the wrong message to send and I'm willing to bet is why your deity tells you to "leave those others" to him and his judgment in the first place.
 

bmk2416

Member
We could go into Paul's admonition against mixing god's laws with secular laws and the very common idea of everyone's relationship with god is different and how god's plan for them has lead them right where they should be on their path and blah blah blah, but it would further confuse the issue. There shouldn't even BE an issue, especially when it comes to someone outside of your congregation (those are the only people you ARE supposed to judge to a certain extent, and kick 'em to the curb if necessary). When it comes to the wider society in which you live, you are not part of god's jury. You're not even in the jury pool. As a matter of fact, the laws are most likely very different for the other person, but you cannot know that. What is a "sin" to you may be perfectly natural to me, while that which is perfectly natural, right and even holy to you is, in one HUGE aspect (if you are a Christian), a red flag about your lack of honor as a person to me. Who's right?

The thing is if someone knows something to be a sin and would cause someone else to be away from God it would be unloving to not bring it to their attention. I fully agree with you though that it is not acceptable to bring any form of punishment upon someone, but that doesn't mean we're not supposed to stand against it and speak against it. For example you speak out against the dangers of drugs and alcohol to your kids, it doesn't mean that you don't love them and it doesn't mean you can't disagree in a loving way.

A lot of the word "judgement" in the Bible is lost it translation, there are two types of judgement in the original Greek, one is forming an opinion about somebody, and the other is bringing down a verdict and a penalty. We are supposed to be discerning and by human nature we aren't able to not be, however God is the judge and we're not supposed to be bringing down a verdict or a penalty, we're simply supposed to bring it to attention and lovingly find a way to help.

In all of your examples the problem isn't that the person made a judgment about sin, the problem was that they didn't expose it in a loving way.

And that's what needs to be checked, are my actions in stating the sin loving? (Which in my opinion, and from what I gather yours as well, includes learning about someone and building a relationship among other things) And am I trying to remedy this with punishment? (because that's not my job)
 
Last edited:

Vidarsdottir

Just some chick
It's My Birthday!
The thing is if someone knows something to be a sin and would cause someone else to be away from God it would be unloving to not bring it to their attention. I fully agree with you though that it is not acceptable to bring any form of punishment upon someone, but that doesn't mean we're not supposed to stand against it and speak against it. For example you speak out against the dangers of drugs and alcohol to your kids, it doesn't mean that you don't love them and it doesn't mean you can't disagree in a loving way.

A lot of the word "judgement" in the Bible is lost it translation, there are two types of judgement in the original Greek, one is forming an opinion about somebody, and the other is bringing down a verdict and a penalty. We are supposed to be discerning and by human nature we aren't able to not be, however God is the judge and we're not supposed to be bringing down a verdict or a penalty, we're simply supposed to bring it to attention and lovingly find a way to help.

In all of your examples the problem isn't that the person made a judgment about sin, the problem was that they didn't expose it in a loving way.

And that's what needs to be checked, are my actions in stating the sin loving? (Which in my opinion, and from what I gather yours as well, includes learning about someone and building a relationship among other things) And am I trying to remedy this with punishment? (because that's not my job)

It is not your place to make a judgment about sin when it comes to those outside of your immediate family or your congregation - full stop. The bible tells you how to deal with family and those in your congregation who do such things (put them away from you) but it also tells you to leave "those others" to god. In the modern vernacular in the part of California where I live, this sounds like "Mind your business and suck it up, buttercup". Yes, that is hard on the human ego, but human ego does you no favors when your holy book is full of examples of how you fail when you don't surrender human ego to god's will - a will which you ultimately do not know, because you can't know and god has told you to mind your business and suck it up.

When it comes to those within the wider society who are not in your family or congregation, Christ already modeled proper behavior for you. When the Roman Centurion approached him and asked him to heal his gay sex slave that he loved, Christ himself did not judge. Was Christ too stupid to realize that Pagans, most being polytheist, generally accept all deities and their representatives that display some degree of power and ability unless they have a good reason not to do so? I doubt it. Did he simply forget to make the Roman repent and promise to never, ever have the gay sexy time with his slave that "he loved" again? Nope. Doubt that, too. Both Matthew and Luke (where the story is found) would have mentioned the repentance. Christ himself did not even point out any sin - and this is the same man who chased people around the temple with whips and threw a tantrum of epic proportions over sin! So why did he not do ANY of that? Did he not love the Roman and his purchased boyfriend?

You may think perhaps Christ didn't love them, and that's why he didn't "warn" them. Combined with the repeated "suck it up, buttercup. I got this, you don't even touch it" when it comes to dealing with others throughout the bible, it's obvious to me that Christ himself was aware of the line between those in his faith and those outside of it when it came to his interactions with them. If Christ himself did not judge them enough to tell them they were sinning, let alone demand repentance before rendering aid, what makes you think that you not only have that right, but that you have that duty? It is clear that when it comes to those outside of your own, or "those others" as the bible calls us, you do not have that right and that "duty" you have given yourself is contrary to not just the instructions given by your own god, but is harmful to its reputation. You do not win any friends for your faith path when you turn it into one driven by an "us vs them" or "sinners vs righteous" mentality with humans as arbiters of decency and righteousness.

Or to put it another way when it comes to judging the 'sin' of those outside your congregation - failing to follow the example modeled you by Christ himself when it comes to behavior toward those in the wider society has produced nothing but bad fruit. That right there is, biblically speaking, more than enough evidence of the wrongness of that sort of behavior.

Disclaimer: all instances of "you" are the general "you", not YOU personally (unless they fit, but you're the one who knows that, not me).
 

ChristineES

Tiggerism
Premium Member
Hatred of any kind is un-Christian. Since Yeshua told His disciples to love their enemies, that covered the last group we could hate.
 

Robert.Evans

You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
Hopefully you agree with me on one point: the Gospels give several stories where the apostles said or did something based on how they thought Jesus believed, only to have Jesus say (paraphrasing, of course) "no, no, no! You've got it all wrong! Do the OPPOSITE of what you're doing."

Do you think you know Jesus' mind better than the apostles did?
Good question... hard to tell. It would depend on what you were speaking of I guess. Most of what they spoke of was for their time and their faith, which has evolved since then.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
As I've observed here before, Christ didn't say "Love your neighbour as yourself, but only if they're straight".
I'm pretty sure that Christ wouldn't have discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation, or have been concerned about peoples' sex lives.
But he was.

Matthew 5:31-32
"It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery."

Matthew 5:27-28
"Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."​

 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Hatred of any kind is un-Christian. Since Yeshua told His disciples to love their enemies, that covered the last group we could hate.
Of course, going by Jesus' own example (at least as presented in the Bible), the sort of love he was describing allowed him to call people he disagreed with "a brood of vipers" and to attack his enemies with a bullwhip.

The Bible has something for everyone.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Good question... hard to tell. It would depend on what you were speaking of I guess. Most of what they spoke of was for their time and their faith, which has evolved since then.
So... you think that modern-day Christians are less error-prone than the first disciples? What sort of evolution of faith is responsible for this?
 

ChristineES

Tiggerism
Premium Member
Of course, going by Jesus' own example (at least as presented in the Bible), the sort of love he was describing allowed him to call people he disagreed with "a brood of vipers" and to attack his enemies with a bullwhip.

The Bible has something for everyone.
He called that to the religious leaders of the time who were teaching the people. It would be the same as now, if he were to yell at a bunch of Televangelists who make millions of dollars for themselves, have expensive cars, etc rather than givng it to charity or even to the organization, in which they tell people they use the donations for.
 
Last edited:

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
He called that to the religious leaders of the time who were teaching the people. It would be the same as now, if he were to yell at a bunch of Televangelists who make millions of dollars for themselves, have expensive cars, etc rather than givng it to charity or even to the organization, in which they tell people they use the donations for.
Oh. So he was okay with hating religious leaders?

Were the moneychangers in the temple religious leaders, too?
 

ChristineES

Tiggerism
Premium Member
Oh. So he was okay with hating religious leaders?

Were the moneychangers in the temple religious leaders, too?
The money-changers, according to some of the Bible scholars I spoke to, were defiling the Temple. Kind of like going to the auditorium of a big Church and selling religious books for a profit to line their pockets rather than glorify G-d. I see stores at Churches, and sometimes I wonder if Yeshua would be upset about that, too. But I am not sure.
 

Mycroft

Ministry of Serendipity
"Sin" is an action, not a person. Get my drift?

I'd have to go along with this. I've read the Bible probably more times than the average Christian has, and nowhere within it does it say anything about just being homosexual being a sin. Nowhere. It's quite specific, very specific, in pointing out that acts of homosexuality are a sin, but not that being a homosexual is a sin.

In short: god appears to hate the sin, not the sinner.
 

Rick O'Shez

Irishman bouncing off walls
In short: god appears to hate the sin, not the sinner.

That's all very well, but in discussions like this we regularly see homosexuality, an orientation, bracketed together with bad behaviours ranging from stealing and gluttony right through to rape and paedophilia.

I still haven't seen a coherent explanation of why a sexual orientation is a sin anyway. Surely a "sin" implies a conscious decision to do something bad. Being gay isn't a conscious decision.
 

lovemuffin

τὸν ἄρτον τοῦ ἔρωτος
the thing about not conflating acts and orientation is that when you're dealing with something as fundamental to human identity as sexuality, I'm not sure it's really wrong to conflate them. I would be pretty nonplussed if someone told me that being straight wasn't a sin but having sex with women was.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
The money-changers, according to some of the Bible scholars I spoke to, were defiling the Temple. Kind of like going to the auditorium of a big Church and selling religious books for a profit to line their pockets rather than glorify G-d. I see stores at Churches, and sometimes I wonder if Yeshua would be upset about that, too. But I am not sure.
Regardless, it seems that when you say "hatred of any kind is Unchristian", there are some exceptions.

So...

- hatred of competing religious leaders is okay.
- hatred of people who openly engage in commerce in sacred places is okay.

Any other exceptions?
 
Top