Texas Pastor Protection Bill

[RumTumTugger]

I think what Starlight means here is that if every Christian believed in the same politics that he does, he would still be a Christian. He seems to be one of the many that puts politics above his own faith. And if his politics clashes with said faith, he will choose the former over the latter every time. If someone believes their personal politics trumps everything else, including belief in God, was it that big of a loss?

Bingo. It is Starlight's fault that he left the faith not anyone else's that he let his political and moral views Trump God.

[pancreasman]

Bingo. It is Starlight's fault that he left the faith not anyone else's that he let his political and moral views Trump God.

I don't think it's quite as clear cut as that. Reading his mind like everyone else is doing, I see him rejecting Christianity, at least in part, because much of Christianity focusses on a narrow interpretation of the gospel that seems to leave out great swathes of Biblically mandated behaviour.

You can interpret it harshly, or you can interpret it it less so.

[RumTumTugger]

Perhaps you have a hard time grasping the concept that a Christian can be both passionate about soulwinning AND passionate about the plight of the poor. Our Church doesn't just talk the talk or blog about the social issues - we put our time and money where our mouth is. We're involved in feeding the poor, clothing the naked, women's shelters, a car clinic for single mothers, helping high school dropouts with education, habitat for humanity... and we just voted last Sunday to double our mission giving. We're actually in the process of evaluating where else we can be involved in the community without duplicating the efforts of others.

But, heck, here I go "bragging" again, so I should just shut up and let guys like you spew forth your ignorance and hate.

not to mention that because we think someone who is sinning needs to be told it is a sin doesn't mean we hate the sinner in fact if we didn't love him we would let him continue in his sin wouldn't we. something Starlight refuses to accept.

\

[Jesse]

Whether I am willing to be associated with "Christianity" or call myself a "Christian" depends on what I perceive "Christianity" and "Christians" to be. When my perception of Christians was of those who have a loving, kind, caring and thoughtful attitude toward others and who are passionately concerned with the plight of the poor and helping those in need in our society (as Sam seems an able ambassador of), then I was quite happy to call myself a "Christian" and be associated with "Christianity".

For a long time I overlooked those so-called Christians who were less-than-loving, less-than-kind, less-than-caring, who showed little compassion for the poor, and who thought the bible told them to be anti-gay, and considered those people not real Christians. The tipping point really came when I realized the extent to which Christians around the world were anti-gay - that it wasn't just a few quacks with terrible exegesis but it was in fact the majority of "Christians" world-wide who were really and for-real against giving rights to the oppressed or helping the persecuted and that in fact they were the ones oppressing the weak in the name of Christ. For me that was the tipping point where I said to myself "well, I can't really justify defining 'true Christianity' based on my own understanding of the bible and putting the majority of Christians in the 'not-true-Christians' basket. I've just got to accept that the majority of Christians do in fact get to define what 'Christianity' really is. That means that I've got to accept that all those 'Christians' that I've been writing-off as 'not-true-Christians' due to them being unloving, uncharitable, self-righteous, anti-gay, hypocritical, ignorant, bible-betraying, Christ-unlike, jerks, who I didn't want to be associated with, are actually 'Christians'. Hmm, well I don't want to be associated with them, so I don't want to call myself a 'Christian'."

I get the impression that this general trend is happening to quite a lot of people. A hundred years ago there was a huge contingent of liberal Christians and nominal Christians, who balanced out the fundamentalists and made "Christianity" palatable to everyone, because everyone could find something to like. Over the decades, increasingly the nominal and liberal Christians have dropped out of churches and out of participation in Christian groups. This has meant that those within Christian groups have become increasingly only-fundamentalists with very little balance. The result is that a lot of moderate Christians are getting increasingly scared-off from Christian groups as the fundamentalists make it a matter of "it's my way or the highway", with various litmus tests of faith - eg opposition to gay marriage, opposition to evolution, opposition to abortion - that serve to alienate moderate Christians.

I.e. if you do not follow my narrow political view of Christianity, I don't want to be a part of it. Christianity is not just a tag you get to put on when you feel like it. Nor does it change to fit your worldview. YOU change to fit ITs worldview. If the Christian God is truly God, then it should not be a problem to change a worldview you have because it is false. I find it odd that you would become a Christian knowing ahead of time what Christianity would naturally feel about homosexual marriage and abortion. I'm sorry, but I am not buying this.

[pancreasman]

I.e. if you do not follow my narrow political view of Christianity, I don't want to be a part of it. Christianity is not just a tag you get to put on when you feel like it. Nor does it change to fit your worldview. YOU change to fit ITs worldview. If the Christian God is truly God, then it should not be a problem to change a worldview you have because it is false. I find it odd that you would become a Christian knowing ahead of time what Christianity would naturally feel about homosexual marriage and abortion. I'm sorry, but I am not buying this.

There's a bit of that on both sides of this debate. On the conservative side it's usually framed as 'If you don't accept my narrow political take of Christianity, you're not really a Christian'

On Starlight's side, There is some truth in what you say. However I would frame it thusly: 'So many Christians cannot accept that my political views are supportable within Christianity, therefore I must step outside that fold.'

[Starlight]

You don't become or un-become a Christian based on the behaviour of some (most) Christians. You un-become a Christian because you no longer believe its major tenets are true.

Yes and no.

The identity that we associate with 'Christian' can be quite a complex mix of things. A lot of people who call themselves 'Catholic', for example, would give themselves that label because their parents were Catholic or because they attend mass once a year, rather than due to the presence or absence of religious beliefs. The Church of England, for example, has a long history of bishops who don't believe the supernatural tenets of their faith. Measuring Christianity by a list of religious tenets that are believed is quite a modern-evangelical perspective. But even in evangelical churches I met a lot of people who confessed to be "unsure and confused" about quite a large number of supernatural tenets of the faith, yet they regularly attended church and sincerely regarded themselves as Christians.

My own study of the Bible led me to believe that actions toward others were vastly more important to God than our alleged belief - "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter." - and the bible is very clear that love for others manifested in caring for the poor and those in need is first and foremost among God's commands. Despite coming from an evangelical background, my own bible study over the years led me more and more to hold the view that the evangelical part of the church was substantially wrong in how they interpreted quite a lot of the bible, and that the Catholic church was far more right in that actions mattered very significantly to God. So my own criteria of judgment tended over the years toward a "by their fruits ye shall know them" kind of perspective, rather than a do-they-sign-the-right-list-of-belief-tenets perspective.

Having said that, I do get how the behaviour of Christians is problematic IF you expect Christians, as a matter of doctrine, to behave better in general in line with Gal 5:22.

I expect Christians as a matter of being Christian to at least somewhat follow the bible and the teachings of Jesus. That means loving others and caring for the poor and oppressed, and manifesting at least some of the various fruits of the spirit. If that is not happening, I tend to feel they are betraying their own faith and the teachings of Jesus.

[Jesse]

There's a bit of that on both sides of this debate. On the conservative side it's usually framed as 'If you don't accept my narrow political take of Christianity, you're not really a Christian'

On Starlight's side, There is some truth in what you say. However I would frame it thusly: 'So many Christians cannot accept that my political views are supportable within Christianity, therefore I must step outside that fold.'

I would agree that placing your politics above your faith is bad form no matter what political spectrum you are coming from. Starlight has made it very clear that his political views are much more important to him than whatever faith he seems to have held. He seems to take things that don't agree with his views very carelessly. Doing that with a religious belief tells me he didn't consider it serious in the first place. It's why I don't consider him no longer being a Christian as much of a loss.

[pancreasman]

I would agree that placing your politics above your faith is bad form no matter what political spectrum you are coming from. Starlight has made it very clear that his political views are much more important to him than whatever faith he seems to have held. He seems to take things that don't agree with his views very carelessly. Doing that with a religious belief tells me he didn't consider it serious in the first place. It's why I don't consider him no longer being a Christian as much of a loss.

This is really interesting. You're reading him saying one thing, and I'm reading him saying the opposite.

I think he's saying 'I draw my 'politics', my concern for the poor and dispossessed, and larger social issues directly from the Bible. Much of modern Christianity has dismissed or downplayed these concerns, therefore I must follow what I see as Biblically mandated and if that stops me being in the Christian club, so be it.'

[Jedidiah]

This is really interesting. You're reading him saying one thing, and I'm reading him saying the opposite.

I think he's saying 'I draw my 'politics', my concern for the poor and dispossessed, and larger social issues directly from the Bible. Much of modern Christianity has dismissed or downplayed these concerns, therefore I must follow what I see as Biblically mandated and if that stops me being in the Christian club, so be it.'

As someone came close to saying above; a Christian is someone who believes the foundational truths of the Bible, believes the Gospel, and trusts in Jesus Christ above all else. You do not drop that because someone is not playing the way you want them to.

[Cow Poke]

You did not 'actually' say it but it was implied when you started questioning Sam about 'soul winning' and then started a thread about it elsewhere which was a thinly veiled attack on Sam.

Couldn't stand it, eh, Pman? Had to go start your very own thinly veiled attack thread?

[lilpixieofterror]

Couldn't stand it, eh, Pman? Had to go start your very own thinly veiled attack thread?

Of course, but I do notice the question still hasn't been answered. Hummm... I wonder why... (it isn't as though anybody has denied that ignorant evangelism doesn't exist and it was Sam who brought the entire topic up to begin with).

[Cow Poke]

There's a bit of that on both sides of this debate. On the conservative side it's usually framed as 'If you don't accept my narrow political take of Christianity, you're not really a Christian'

For the record, I don't believe I have ever said that on Tweb, or IRL. Now, the mindreaders on Tweb may try to INTERPRET my words thusly, but.... we know how accurate that mindreading can be.

[lilpixieofterror]

For the record, I don't believe I have ever said that on Tweb, or IRL. Now, the mindreaders on Tweb may try to INTERPRET my words thusly, but.... we know how accurate that mindreading can be.

But if they took the time to understand you and not to make up things that they think you believe; they wouldn't have anything to whine about!

[lilpixieofterror]

That's very clearly not what your posts conveyed, CP. Not by a long shot. They read as somewhat hostile and definitely prickly.

You know what I find amazing about your type Sam? How you seem to want myself and others to 'see the best in others', but when people dare to disagree with you; you see the worst in them. Why do I need to try to see the best in others (instead of the open hostility, you display here) and you don't? I know you will not answer this and/or make excuses for your own behavior, but I'm sure others will read this and see why I treat you the way I do and why you deserve every bit of it.

[lilpixieofterror]

Can you please provide the actual quotes where I said that?

Thanks

Why would he do that? Personal swipes at people is easier than having to deal with that pesky evidence stuff.