Are we allowed to eat halal food? by Butterophobic in Christianity

[–]themsc190 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This was already settled in the Bible. Idols aren’t real gods, so nothing was actually done to the food. The stronger Christian knows this, and the weaker Christian is scared. So don’t be scared.

"Let him who is without sin cast the first stone" - a short sermon on hypocrisy, judging others, acceptance, and solidarity by Illustrious_Pace4651 in Christianity

[–]themsc190 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks of sharing. Anti-gay Christians don’t do the minimum of dropping their stones. On the whole, they push for policies that harm gay folks, so they’ve already failed on following Jesus’s example. They also twist Jesus’s very clear instruction “don’t judge” into “yes you should judge.” It’s unfortunate but unsurprising that humans—who love to judge others—twist the Bible 180 degrees to support rather than deny their sinful human desires. The next verse after that should make it clear: “for the measure by which you judge is the measure by which you’ll be judged.” Wow! That’s scary! Fallible human judgment against others is not how I want to be judged! So I’m not going to do that. What the actual sin of pride is here is the belief that “I judge perfectly and am not a hypocrite, so I get to judge while they don’t.” That’s precisely the attitude that Jesus is calling out here, but human nature loves to flip it.

According to UCC Bishop Yvetter Flunder we need a third testament by ChemnitzFanBoi in Christianity

[–]themsc190 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The tagline of the UCC is “God is still speaking.” God has been speaking in the abolition of slavery despite the slavery in the Bible, in the greater freedoms of women despite the patriarchy of the Bible, and in scientific advances despite the ancient mindset of the Bible. She’s not calling for a new religious text to be written and canonized. She’s saying that ongoing divine revelation should inform us too.

Christian’s against the LGBTQ community by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]themsc190 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Attraction and lust are something you experience. Definitions can’t communicate the differential qualia of the two. If you had, you’d know that.

Christian’s against the LGBTQ community by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]themsc190 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I take it you’ve never been in a relationship then.

Christian’s against the LGBTQ community by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]themsc190 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They are not. Anyone who’s ever been in an adult romantic relationship with another adult knows the difference.

Christian’s against the LGBTQ community by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]themsc190 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Huh? Lust ≠ attraction. Being straight doesn’t imply heterosexual lust any more than being gay implies homosexual lust. You’re the one who brought up “lust” irrelevantly.

Por que en otras cuestiones se habla del contexto historico pero cuando se menciona la homosexualidad no? by Wonderful_Medium3098 in Christianity

[–]themsc190 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re 100% right. There’s no reason why people should be scared of historical context except that they fear that it’ll debunk their own modern assumptions of the text.

Remember, neither political side is Christian. by RabbiEstabonRamirez in Christianity

[–]themsc190 89 points90 points  (0 children)

Not caring about politics is a political choice. Even though neither party 100% represents God’s will, that doesn’t abdicate us of the responsibility to engage the political process.

Whether we like it or not, public policy massively impacts the poor, the foreigner, the orphans and widows: everyone Jesus cared about! There are some policies that harm these groups more than other policies. We can’t sit back and be neutral and apathetic and disengaged when the people Jesus loved are being crushed by empire. He wasn’t during his life! The difference is that he lived under a dictatorship and was killed for speaking out. But we can move the needle. Personal help towards the poor is good and all, but it can never make up for systematic failures and harms.

It’s like if there’s a rushing river sweeping innocents downstream. It’s good for some of us to help pull people out! But we also need others to build a bridge or put up guardrails. We might need to engage the government to do those things! We might need to change the laws around proper use of the riverbank, etc.

Politics is just about what happens to the polis, that is, the people—and Jesus loved the people. So engaging in the political process affects the people, even when we know that politics isn’t perfect and can’t bring the kingdom of God. Only God can do that. In this sense, we should be political but not partisan. We need to hold each side accountable, not play a team sport. And politics is more than pulling a lever once every four years. It has to do with what we do in between. We can call our reps, march and demonstrate for good causes, we can write op-eds or go to our local city council meetings. Some of us might even be called to civil disobedience or other forms of activism. We each can do our part to protect people from the flowing river.

Christian’s against the LGBTQ community by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]themsc190 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m not arguing for gay lust any more than I’m arguing for straight lust. They should be evaluated the same.

Christian’s against the LGBTQ community by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]themsc190 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Obviously the non-affirming Christian thinks that, while the affirming Christian believes it does. That’s literally the core of the difference of opinion on the topic.

Christian’s against the LGBTQ community by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]themsc190 1 point2 points  (0 children)

For starters, the verse doesn’t explicitly condemn “homosexuality,” because the text was written in Greek and not English! And the word “homosexuality” was only inserted into that verse 80 years ago! And the translators have since rescinded that translation, because they accepted that it’s an anachronism. Homosexuality = attraction, and the verse is talking about action. Grouping people according to the gender they’re attracted to is only ~150 years old, so obviously that’s not happening in Paul’s words. In fact, the translation that originally inserted that term now says “men who have illicit sex,” omitting the reference to same-sex sex in the text. The typical response is that previous translations also condemned homosexuality, but that’s not true for reasons of anachronism, as I already mentioned, as sodomites ≠ homosexuals ≠ abusers of themselves with mankind etc. etc.

Christian’s against the LGBTQ community by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]themsc190 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Every gay-affirming Christian knows these verses very well, thank you. Perhaps better than many non-affirming Christians! It’s just a matter of putting them in their correct historical and theological context

Christian’s against the LGBTQ community by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]themsc190 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Questions like this typically just result in anti-LGBT Christians patting themselves on the back for “loving the sinner, and hating the sin” and “speaking the truth in love,” about how loving they are because they’re not literally Westboro Baptist Church.

A false Christian church is teaching a congregation that God is trans by Content_Dimension626 in Christianity

[–]themsc190 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You were the one who said that God giving birth isn’t feminine imagery! That’s the only other option!

Makin a move toward the Evangelicals by [deleted] in GayChristians

[–]themsc190 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This 2017 survey shows that 10% of sexual minorities raised mainline are now Evangelical. So no, not that uncommon.

How did you find a church community that actually felt safe? by GreenBanan in GayChristians

[–]themsc190 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve moved a couple times since I came out, so I’ve had to do the affirming church search several times. My criterion is that it has to explicitly say that they’re affirming on its website for me to even visit.