Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 12:39pm PT
|
Stupid idiot.
You want to be homo then be homo.
You waste your time worried what some rubber stamp so called Christians says.
Go be homo fool.
Instead you waste your time studying homo.
No wonder you're an idiot .......
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 12:51pm PT
|
You can talk about moral relativism or absolutism all you want, but in the end, you choose your beliefs, whatever 'ism' you label them with
Absolutely true, which is why this discussion leads nowhere. Christianity has at its foundation the accounts of persons purporting to be eyewitnesses. Most criticisms of Christianity on this thread end up being criticisms of Christians. This proves nothing, since basic Christian doctrine says that all humanity sins and falls short of the glory of God.
Of course, if those who choose to disbelieve (as opposed to those who never heard) discover that they disbelieve in error, they have no cause for complaint if God chooses to give them what they themselves chose -- i.e. separation from God. Christians don't cause this to come about, yet that seems to be inherent in Tvash's position, since he condemns Christians for believing what God has revealed about Himself.
If I misunderstand, please correct me.
Thanks.
John
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 12:58pm PT
|
It's hardly a rubber stamp or about "being a homo"
Marriage affords over a thousand rights - child custody, inheritance, hospital visitation rights, property ownership, tax liability, and on and on.
Ask Edie Windsor, who's partner of over 30 years and wife of 2 years died, leaving Edie with an inheritance tax bill fo $360,000 no heterosexual would have to pay. (She won in the supreme court).
Or Major Margaret Witt - a decorated combat nurse who's long military career ended abruptly when the Air Force found out she was gay (she won in court, and DODT ended shortly there after).
Or Janice Langbehn, who was not allowed to visit her dying partner when she suffered an aneurysm while the couple and their 3 children were on vacation in Florida, a state that didn't recognize their out-of-state same sex marriage. Langbehn's partner died in that hospital without the comfort of her beloved. Florida still doesn't offer marital equality, although 3 court rulings indicate that may change sooner than later.
Or my friend Don and his husband, who can now enjoy a rich, joyful family life with their three adopted kids here in Washington because our voters successfully beat back a Christian funded effort to ban homosexual marriage here in 2012.
Yeah, this stuff matters. It matters to all of us, whether we acknowledge that or not.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 01:07pm PT
|
If you choose to subscribe to a theology that separates Saved from Damned based on whether people share your personal belief in God, you accept, embrace, promote, and approve of that form of judgement, regardless of how you choose to externalize it and thus absolve yourself.
See how sensible you can be. ;)
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 01:23pm PT
|
I'm not talking about Unitarians, here. I'm talking about Christians who believe homosexuality is a sin.
No, actually that is not what you are talking about AT ALL!
What you are really talking about is that "Christians" trying to legislate against gay marriage piss you off. "It's really that simple," as you said above.
But THAT is a totally different issue than all your broad brush CLAIMS (that I have adequately answered).
Look, any particular Christian might or might not believe that homosexuality is a sin; there are MANY that do not believe it is!
But that belief is nothing more until a person tries to IMPOSE that belief on society via legislation.
But THAT sort of action has nothing whatsoever to do with "Christianity!"
THAT has to do with the fact that many PEOPLE, some Christians included, have committed themselves to a "moral" society, and that looks like many different things to many different people.
SOME people want to stop gay marriage. I'm not one of them, and I'm a Christian!
SOME people want to greatly reduce or even ban private gun ownership, certainly ban the carrying of guns by private citizens. I'm not one of them, and I'm a Christian.
SOME people want to make abortion illegal. I'm not one of them, and I'm a Christian.
SOME people want to increase the national minimum wage. I'm not one of them, and I'm a Christian.
How much do you want? How much do you NEED to get the point???
You paint with the broadest strokes "Christians," and you lump "Christianity" into your jumbled, clumpy mud-pie. You don't know what "Christianity" actually teaches, and you fixate on the behaviors of a SUBSET of "Christians" to justify your sweeping statements.
The same person who believes that homosexuality is a sin SHOULD recognize in Christ himself the same person who said, "Neither do I condemn you...."
BELIEVING that homosexuality is a sin does NOT justify condemnation, legislation, discrimination, or bigotry!
Stop conflating!
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 01:30pm PT
|
Put in glowing terms, John, but the reality is that you've omitted a few things - separation from God means eternal torture, no? For not believing in a God for which there is zero - zero - verifiable evidence. Kind of cruel and frankly psychopathic, don't you think?
Eternal damnation for the horrible sin of using our gift of reason?
The divide between the saved and damned, far from being 'absolute' - is actually quite malleable, considering how many versions of it exist between denominations. Born Agains believe one is only saved by being born again - which counts many Catholics and other Christians (not considered 'Christian' by Born Agains, of course) out, for example. Every denomination believes they've 'got it right' - yet they all continue to disagree as to what gets you into Heaven and what doesn't. For Born Agains it's one stop shopping - get saved and you're good to go. Murder someone? Just ask Jesus to forgive you. BAM. Back to Heaven with youz! Catholics are divided here - piling up grace, good works - getting into Heaven can be paid for with a variety of currencies, it seems.
This is how "God reveals himself?"
I'm confused.
Unless Christianity is a human invention - then this mess makes perfect sense.
So, an outsider (formerly a Catholic) takes a look at this mess and surmises it's all really a human construct.
Wow. Such a terrible sin, eh?
Now if an Atheist cures cancer, adopts 10 kids, and never murders anyone - to Hell with him!
How can one take such a doctrine seriously? There appears to be zero moral consistency in it, and even less justice.
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 01:38pm PT
|
Fantastic Job Madbolter! Ur an Inspiration!!
God Bless You!
Tvash you should thank MB1 for setting straight all ur misconceptions!
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 01:40pm PT
|
separation from God means eternal torture, no?
Correct: no!
Now I see your problem: "formally Catholic."
Catholocism is NOT a Biblical religion; it is an amalgamation of "Christianity" with paganism and neoplatonism.
The notion of eternally-burning hellfire is based upon misinterpretations of a couple of texts that are not even about that subject, and there are countless texts that clearly specify that this doctrine is not correct. No matter; most Christians believe it... because their roots remain back in Catholocism.
As you rightly note, such a doctrine flies in the face of reason and our (ironically, God-given) intuitions about justice. Also ironically, it is not a Biblically-grounded doctrine.
Oh, Locker... no, I'm no Republican. lol
|
|
GDavis
Social climber
SOL CAL
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 01:51pm PT
|
I like this guy.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 01:55pm PT
|
"As you rightly note, such a doctrine flies in the face of reason and our (ironically, God-given) intuitions about justice. Also ironically, it is not a Biblically-grounded doctrine."
LOL. I didn't say Catholic doctrine flies in the face of reason - I said the variety of Christian doctrine means the idea of an absolutist theology (EI - the 'correct version') flies in the face of reason. In other words, your belief that you've got it right and others have it wrong.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 02:11pm PT
|
"SOME people want to stop gay marriage. I'm not one of them, and I'm a Christian!"
First of all, take yourself out of the equation. This discussion isn't about your beliefs - its about Christian beliefs. As you yourself stated, many Christians do actively engage in discrimination against homosexuals. That ACTION is primarily what I object to. I've already observed on several occasions that not all Christians do this - Unitarians, for example.
The Born Again movement, about a third of the American populace, certainly believes in hell, far more than many Catholics, actually (who tend to cherry pick beliefs on an individual basis). After all, that's what Born Agains are 'saved' from.
I should be acknowledged, however, that belief informs action, no? A belief that homosexuality is a sin drives many Christians to discriminate against homosexuals. While my primary objection is the action, I believe the sin thing is morally and technically wrong.
Let's flesh this out in your particularly case though. For starters, I never claimed to know what you as an individual, believe.
Would you vote FOR marital equality?
Do you believe homosexuality is a sin?
If yes to both, how do you reconcile the two?
This aren't 'gotcha' questions. I'm not stupid. If you don't actively oppose marital equality as a Christian, I very happy with that position. After all, you could be a change agent for Christian reform on that issue rather than a political foe me and my allies have to battle against. I'm not "anti-Christian", although the belief system doesn't make sense to me. I'm anti-bigotry, but most particularly, anti-bigoted action.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 02:32pm PT
|
Put in glowing terms, John, but the reality is that you've omitted a few things - separation from God means eternal torture, no? For not believing in a God for which there is zero - zero - verifiable evidence. Kind of cruel and frankly psychopathic, don't you think?
No, I don't. We have at least the following verifiable evidence:
1. New Testament Scripture is among the most clearly attested and verifiable as to its original contents of antiquity, with the exception of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which themselves verify that Isaiah was written prior to the birth of Jesus Christ. We have documents and fragments dating back many hundreds of years earlier than other classical texts (e.g. the Iliad and Odyssey, the writings of Julius Caesar, Plutarch, Heroditus, Plato, Aristotle, etc. etc.) The evidence supporting the accuracy of the Old Testament text is, if anything, even stronger. We therefore have strong evidence that Scripture was accurately recorded;
2. The authors of the New Testament include several who purport to be eyewitnesses. All of those eyewitnesses were persecured for their refusal to recant what they said, and most were killed as a result. Many secular texts are in accord, including letters to Domitian, for example, describing how Christians were killed only if they refused to recant. Using native reasoning (God-given or otherwise), leads to the conclusion that those who wrote the New Testament and who purported to be eyewitnesses, particularly of the Resurrection of Jesus, believed what they said; and
3. Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire -- and elsewhere -- through martyrdom of Christians, rather than through conquest.
That much you can verify, if you choose.
Eternal damnation for the horrible sin of using our gift of reason?
Eternal damnation (i.e. death) for failing to accept God's gift of salvation from it.
The divide between the saved and damned, far from being 'absolute' - is actually quite malleable, considering how many versions of it exist between denominations. . . . getting into Heaven can be paid for with a variety of currencies, it seems.
This is how "God reveals himself?"
I'm confused.
The confusion arises only from choosing to disbelieve Scripture. If I say I climbed the Nose, it's on El Cap, it starts at the toe, goes past Boot Flake (ignoring the Jardine Traverse) and the Great Roof, and has a long bolt ladder for the last pitch, am I wrong because someone else says, "No. The Nose is on Half Dome, starts below Crescent Crack and goes to the Visor?" God revealed His essential details in His Word. If others want to say it's wrong or incomplete, that doesn't make His revealed Word wrong simply because some disagree.
So, an outsider (formerly a Catholic) takes a look at this mess and surmises it's all really a human construct.
Wow. Such a terrible sin, eh?
Now if an Atheist cures cancer, adopts 10 kids, and never murders anyone - to Hell with him!
How can one take such a doctrine seriously? There appears to be zero moral consistency in it, and even less justice.
True, if you get to decide moral consistency and justice. Again, using Scripture for Christian doctrine, God said all sin and fall short of the glory of God, but God's free gift is salvation for those who believe in Jesus. Thus, under God's standard, we're all deserving of death.
You would prefer a system that differentiates man's imperfect attempts at moral conduct (as determined by humanity). Too bad. If you want a gift, you can't complain that the giver was less generous than you wished. The definition of a gift requires that you have no entitlement to it.
I need to stop spewing and get back to work. I do appreciate discussing this (and every other topic we've discussed) with you, not to mention your excellent trip reports, but my confidence in heaven does not go so far as to require me to try to hasten my trip there by avoiding my gainful employment, thereby promoting starvation.
John
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 02:38pm PT
|
In other words, your belief that you've got it right and others have it wrong.
But you yourself have that same perspective. No?
You've been posting pretty vociferously here to the effect that your opinions are the correct account of "Christianity," and you derive all sorts of sweeping claims from that perspective. What makes your confidence that YOU "have it right and others have it wrong" any different?
Ohhh... because you are more "tolerant"? LOL
First of all, take yourself out of the equation. This discussion isn't about your beliefs - its about Christian beliefs.
You just can't GET what you are doing, can you?
See next....
As you yourself stated, many Christians do actively engage in discrimination against homosexuals.
Yup, and THAT does not entitle you to make a SINGLE sweeping statement about "Christians." It's the most basic quantificational error that can be made: "some" or "many" does not entitle you to generalizations.
That ACTION is primarily what I object to. I've already observed on several occasions that not all Christians do this - Unitarians, for example.
Okay, then stop talking generally. Quit using phrases like "Christians believe..." and "Christianity is...."
Even as a "loose generalization" with acknowledged exceptions, YOUR statements are so sweeping and inaccurate that they are simply incorrect.
The Born Again movement, about a third of the American populace, certainly believes in hell, far more than many Catholics, actually (who tend to cherry pick beliefs on an individual basis). After all, that's what Born Agains are 'saved' from.
So what.
I should be acknowledged, however, that belief informs action, no? A belief that homosexuality is a sin drives many Christians to discriminate against homosexuals. While my primary objection is the action, I believe the sin thing is morally and technically wrong.
You're entitled to believe whatever you want. So are they.
In a free republic, people are going to try to magnify their values. I share your idea that these entirely religiously-based values have no place being imposed on a free society.
So, let's stay focused on the "imposing" behaviors rather than individual beliefs or even entire belief systems!
Would you vote FOR marital equality?
I have, although I think that your question as posed neglects what I take to be FAR weightier nuances of the issue. As just one example, what right does the federal government have to be elevating or minimizing certain values, such as "marriage" in the first place???
Horrible thread drift could result from me even raising that question, so I don't want it "answered" or to start a debate about it. My POINT is just that the whole reason you have such an ax to grind about this IS the issue of "equality" that really inheres in much more subtle aspects of the feds' involvement in a host of things they never should be in the first place!
Do you believe homosexuality is a sin?
Yup, I do.
If yes to both, how do you reconcile the two?
It's not hard at all. I can have ALL sorts of value beliefs that I have exactly zero desire to impose on anybody else! I can call a particular activity "sinful" without judging any particular practitioner of it "lost."
Who am I to judge the heart? OMG... WHO am I to have the audacity to KNOW how God sees any particular individual, what perspectives they have, the causal chains of their life... on and on??? I can talk in general terms about behaviors that are clearly condemned by the Bible without ONCE resorting to condemning any particular person! God have mercy on MY soul!
And regarding "morality by legislation," that is a contradiction in terms. God cares NOTHING for a "morality" that emerges from force and fear of punishment! That is the most basic element of Christian doctrine! So, it is literally an abomination for "Christians" to attempt forced morality or to create theocracy out of a republic!
This aren't 'gotcha' questions. I'm not stupid.
As you see, I don't take them (or you) as such!
If you don't actively oppose marital equality as a Christian, I very happy with that position. After all, you could be a change agent for Christian reform on that issue rather than a political foe me and my allies have to battle against.
And such would be my hope. Seriously!
Just please don't paint "Christians" with such broad strokes. MANY of us are not frothy-mouthed "nutters" who seek the feeling of power that comes from "making the world right."
Educate, yes. Legislate, no!
Christ's kingdom is not of this world, and it is my goal to systematically remind fellow Christians of that FACT! So, you do indeed have an ally in me on that front.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 02:56pm PT
|
Antiquity, claims of being an eye witness, nor martyrdom indicate veracity. Antiquity, of course, says nothing there. Eye witness claims (made by anonymous persons decades after Christ's death) are dubious. Any defense attorney or prosecutor knows this too well. Finally, martyrdom indicates only the depth belief, not its veracity. Ask any suicide bomber.
The rapid growth of Christianity under Roman persecution also doesn't indicate veracity of belief - nor does the rapid growth of Mormonism today. The early Roman empire saw a huge influx of poor immigrants with almost no social services. Christianity provided that, so, for many, it's existence meant the difference between life and death. It's not hard to imagine, given our more recent civil rights movement, our Civil War, etc, that many were willing to die for that movement. Peer pressure can also produce this result. Ask a kamikaze pilot. All were volunteers. Virtually no Japanese pilots refused.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 02:59pm PT
|
The El Cap analogy doesn't fit. The Nose is a set route with a simple topo put up in recent times - it's very well documented back to the original teams who put it up. The word of God? Not so much. Which denomination gets it right? Any one you so choose.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 03:06pm PT
|
We all decide our own moral consistency, or lack thereof, individually by choosing, rejection, or manufacturing the beliefs that support them. This is a dynamic process that changes throughout our lives and varies widely depending on the circumstances. Morals have proven to be quite flexible during wartime, for example. I've cobbled together a moral code that is a hodgepodge of karma, the Eight Fold Path, the Golden Rule, the Boy Scout Motto, the Bill of Rights, other sources, and stuff I just made up. Am I a moral person? Ask people who know me. They'd provide the best answers.
Man is an imperfect creature - everything is imperfect. Perfection is a religious construct. It doesn't exist for me. I try to appreciate the world for what it is and make the best of it.
I can't want a gift that I deem doesn't exist. Given that I believe in a causal universe and man's evolved propensity for myth, I've determined that God and salvation are much more likely human constructs than reality. We project images of ourselves - into others, ventriloquist dummies, animals, you name it. That's a very human trait.
Even without the Big Carrot, though, I try to lead as moral a life as I can. This short life has more meaning - for myself, for those around me, that way. I could certainly spend my time trying to make things worse - but that seems well covered already.
Would I like to escape death and be always loved? Sure. Who wouldn't? The fundamental nature of the universe is indifferent to our individual desires, however. It's big. We're not.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 03:29pm PT
|
C. Edwin Koop, former Surgeon General, also believed homosexuality was a sin. That did not prevent him from separating his personal beliefs from the responsibilities of his position. He sent an AIDS pamphlet (widely criticized by members of his own faith) to every adult in America.
Very admirable.
If you vote in favor of marital equality - we are moral and political allies. I'll point out what I feel are the religious underpinnings of bigotry practiced by others because that is a topic that I feel requires discussion, but in the end, action is all I really care about.
As for me being "right" - that's a projection. I have what I view are considered opinions, but in the end, I muddle through, just like everyone else.
As for painting all Christians the same way - I'd drop that. That's not how I think - my critiques have been specific in nature. Forums are imperfect vehicles of communication, no? Brevity leads to generality and all that. Then there's projection. It's not worth discussing further, really. Obviously, I can differentiate.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 03:34pm PT
|
Regarding federal involvement in marriage, that's a necessity. Ask any person who has married a same sex partner in a country that allows that. Wanna bring your partner into the US as your spouse? Fuggetabboutit - unless such a marriage is recognized by the United States.
There are over 4 million federal employees. Want your same sex spouse to have benefits?
And how about those federal taxes? Filing married or single? What about inheritance taxes when your same sex spouse passes on?
You get the idea.
The devil is in the details.
The feds have been in the marriage business from day 1.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 03:44pm PT
|
Forums are imperfect vehicles of communication, no?
So true! Reminds me again and again of one of my favorite lines: "The biggest mistake in communication is believing that it's happening at all."
We all muddle through!
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2014 - 03:45pm PT
|
The feds have been in the marriage business from day 1.
Yeah... just another thing I wish they weren't.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!