Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

retrofade

Tennessee Pastor/Sheriff's Deputy calls for LGBTQ individuals to be rounded up and executed

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, bsu_alum9 said:

I don't really disagree with you on the fact that "most" Christians don't believe this garbage.  But Independent Baptists do (and this deputy is one of them). And they have about the same number of members in the United States as the LDS church.  So there are lots of people going around following this stuff.

I think Christians break down into two camps when it comes to Mosaic law.  Some Christians purely follow what they would consider the Law of Christ.  Basically, explicitly following what Romans and Galatians have to say about Jesus and the law.  Other Christians believe Jesus fulfilled the law of Moses in terms of the ceremonial aspects of it, but the moral aspects are still in place.  My best friend is a Southern Baptist pastor.  They are definitely in the Romans and Galatians camp.  It gets a little more complicated with LDS theology, but I would put us in the second camp (for the most part).

 

Edit:  As an example, Southern Baptists would have no problem (from a law perspective) of shopping on Sunday or attending a sporting event, while Mormons would have a problem with both of those things from a "keep the Sabbath day holy" perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CV147 said:

You make that leap when you compare the whole of Christianity to the disgusting speech of one man.

Uh, you ignore the fact that Scripture fully supports what the hell he's saying.

"Christianity" is a set of ideas and principles, not a group of people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Orange said:

80% of Christians believe in God as described in the bible.  Which, of course, includes old and new testament.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/04/25/key-findings-about-americans-belief-in-god/

Kind of shocking that it is not higher.  God did not change from one testament to the other.  The law as it applies to Jews and Gentiles did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BYUcougfan said:

Kind of shocking that it is not higher.  God did not change from one testament to the other.  The law as it applies to Jews and Gentiles did.

Well that's debatable.  He was pretty damned bipolar in the OT, then became the "loving, forgiving" god of the NT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Orange said:

Uh, you ignore the fact that Scripture fully supports what the hell he's saying.

"Christianity" is a set of ideas and principles, not a group of people.

Yes. I agree with that. But also you paint broadly when you say things like "Christianity at its finest!"

Christianity has very diverse ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another hypothetical to consider:

If this were a story about an immigrant that killed someone while smuggling drugs, and someone said "Immigrants at their finest!"

That would be bigotry, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, 406WarriorFan said:

Emotional left wing tripe doesn’t count as facts, Mopey. I don’t agree with your racist, misogynistic, homophobia either.

I thought you had me on ignore?

It's only a matter of time until he has everyone "on ignore" but still responds to us all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, retrofade said:

It's only a matter of time until he has everyone "on ignore" but still responds to us all.

Interestingly enough, this is an area where he and bluerules would agree. I think they're both atheists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bsu_alum9 said:

Throughout the New Testament Jesus referred to the Old and called it the Law.  Only on a few subjects did he specifically mention that things should be changed - like the sacrifice of animals.

This reminds me of the story where intolerant folks brought the woman "caught" in adultery, a capital offense under old testament law.  in an effort to trap Jesus, the demanded judgement. Funny, I would think "caught" would include the man being brought to Justice too. Anyway, resulted in Jesus saying to the accusers, "he who is without sin, cast the first stone". After the left, he forgave the woman.  

110926run_defense710.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, modestobulldog said:

This reminds me of the story where intolerant folks brought the woman "caught" in adultery, a capital offense under old testament law.  in an effort to trap Jesus, the demanded judgement. Funny, I would think "caught" would include the man being brought to Justice too. Anyway, resulted in Jesus saying to the accusers, "he who is without sin, cast the first stone". After the left, he forgave the woman.  

To me, that's the beauty of the philosophy of Jesus Christ. He doesn't look at any particular sin and say it deserves death.

There are many hypocrites who sin themselves but judge others. Whose sin is greater, really? To some, whatever you can see is the biggest sin, but to me the sins the community doesn't see are just as bad or worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I understand the Bible, admittance to heaven requires perfection, in both thought and action.  Hence the need for a savior.  Jesus said to look at a woman with lust is as committing adultery, similar with hatred and murder. Sin is merely missing perfection.  Jesus, the sinless one paid the penalty for sin to all that trust him.

As I get older, I don't think you can legislate personal morality.  Sin can be sexual or a white lie.  I think churches should be mindful we are all flawed and it is hypocritical to elevate non-heterosexual sin over heterosexual sin. Just my 2 cents.

110926run_defense710.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, modestobulldog said:

As I understand the Bible, admittance to heaven requires perfection, in both thought and action.  Hence the need for a savior.  Jesus said to look at a woman with lust is as committing adultery, similar with hatred and murder. Sin is merely missing perfection.  Jesus, the sinless one paid the penalty for sin to all that trust him.

As I get older, I don't think you can legislate personal morality.  Sin can be sexual or a white lie.  I think churches should be mindful we are all flawed and it is hypocritical to elevate non-heterosexual sin over heterosexual sin. Just my 2 cents.

Exactly right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion homosexual sex is a sin, just as sex out of wedlock is a sin, just as adultery in your mind is a sin.

I cannot and will not condemn anyone for these things. I will instead look after my own sins, or in other words, the plank in my own eye, and try to make myself a better person while I serve and love my neighbor.

That's my business. What people do in their lives that doesn't impact me isn't my business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, CV147 said:

In my opinion homosexual sex is a sin, just as sex out of wedlock is a sin, just as adultery in your mind is a sin.

I cannot and will not condemn anyone for these things. I will instead look after my own sins, or in other words, the plank in my own eye, and try to make myself a better person while I serve and love my neighbor.

That's my business. What people do in their lives that doesn't impact me isn't my business.

I agree.

110926run_defense710.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Orange said:

Well that's debatable.  He was pretty damned bipolar in the OT, then became the "loving, forgiving" god of the NT.

It’s funny when people make a public display of their own ignorance. Pointless to try and correct him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, CV147 said:

Another hypothetical to consider:

If this were a story about an immigrant that killed someone while smuggling drugs, and someone said "Immigrants at their finest!"

That would be bigotry, right?

Sure.

But I said "Christianity", not "Christians."

Serious question, do you know words?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Orange said:

Sure.

But I said "Christianity", not "Christians."

Serious question, do you know words?

I think if you're now wanting to argue semantics to prove your statement is not bigoted, then you're fighting a losing cause.

But OK.

Your original post was in reference to a dumbass bigot sheriff/pastor calling for the execution of LGBTQ people, right? You were saying he is representative of Christianity.

In my last hypothetical with immigrants, I am doing the same thing. The dumbass actions of a segment of a group cannot logically be said to be true of the whole.

I would argue that both statements are bigoted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...