Jeanine

John, thank you for providing a space to make this conversation possible.

-Chase

John,

Rule #1: Never condemn a person, only condemn the sin. Like that old Sunday School adage goes: love the person, hate the sin.

It's the "hate the sin" that has gotten some innocent people into trouble lately. For example, consider the family therapist in California who said she would not counsel gays and lesbians for marriage (despite California's "legalization" of gay marriage) as she believed marriage was ordained by God as between a man and a woman. She believed that it was neither loving nor wise to counsel for something that God Himself would not advise.

And boy, did the poop hit the fan on that one. Almost no Christians stood by her. And talk about blacklisted…the political storm unleashed against her, the concerted effort against her character, her livelihood, shows that there is a price to be paid for following Christ.

In her life she saw most of the Christians (real world ones, not political pundits or pulpit thumpers) change "love the person, hate the sin" into "love the person, tolerate the sin".

Perhaps we should love the person by hating the sin. I hate pornography because it degrades women and men. I also hate pedophilia. I hate slavery.

Below is a take on the end result of homosexuality from one leader in the gay community (I found this from a commentator on Crosswalk — I'm sorry I can't attribute this properly).

A DIFFERENT APOLOGY

For 16 years, Michael Glatze was a gay leader who edited an award-winning magazine targeting gay youth and produced a PBS documentary on gay teen suicide. His advocacy among youth made him a media darling and earned him a National Role Model Award.

But in 2005, after speaking at Harvard, Michael began having doubts about the gay lifestyle and its affirming message. Feeling there was no one he could turn to for answers, he turned to God. That led to a life-changing discovery about homosexuality—it is anything but natural. Glatze explains,

[H]omosexual sex—and all other lust-based sex—is never satisfactory: It's a neurotic process rather than a natural, normal one . . . Homosexuality takes us out of our normal state, of being perfectly united in all things, and divides us . . . [it] allows us to avoid digging deeper, through superficiality and lust-inspired attractions. . . . As a result, countless miss out on their truest self, their God-given Christ-self.

Glatze goes on to describe his “coming out” (of the gay lifestyle) as “the most liberating, beautiful, and astonishing thing I've ever experienced in my entire life.”

Within days after the troika of “ex-gay survivors” publicized their apology, ex-gay Michael Glatze gave an apology of his own:

If I could take back some of the things I said [as a gay spokesperson], I would. Now I know that homosexuality is lust and pornography wrapped into one. . . . There is nothing that would give me more pleasure than to say the Truth about 'homosexuality' and atone for my sins in that regard . . . I hope I can share my story. I feel strongly God has put me here for a reason.

And then he says:

"Ohhhhh! That makes all the difference!!! It’s a good thing that it is universally agreed that the Bible is without error, embellishment, or myth. Given the evidence, I have no choice but to be a believer . . . I mean . . . it’s in writing . . . it must be true. Let me look in the phone book…hmmmmm…all the churches to choose from. I might need a little help choosing. This is so much easier now that I have lowered my standards for evidence. I guess I will have to start demonizing homosexuals and non-believers…but it’s ok…it’s written down."

First, I apologize for taking so long to answer. I have 5 young children, one of whom has special needs, and my time is very limited. I do, however, love discourse, and hope we can keep this in the realm of reason and respect.

Your questionings seemed sincere, but when you digress into vitriol, I think discourse has been shut down by you. I am, apparently, unworthy of your thoughtful of respectful response.

I suspect your outrage is piqued by my revealing your own inconsistency. You reject absolute truth, and yet you put forth your own absolute truth even as you challenge me to on that very point. Do you not believe, absolutely, that there is no truth – but that we can only adhere to what we can measure – and then only tentatively? You and I are closer on this point than you might think. I believe we do not have the ability to comprehend absolute truth – at least not in this reality in which we live. But I believe there IS absolute truth, and that this is a Person. We can be enabled by God to understand only what He reveals to us, because our lives are derivative from His. If He desires our understanding of truth, then we will have it.

Either you misunderstand me greatly, or you wish to characterize me as a fool by asserting I am stupid enough to believe something because it is in writing. I did, however, make the mistake of telling you that I believe something because it is "scriptural." What I said is that I was not making my own naked assertions. Your complaint is not with me! I am merely restating the claims of the bible. I believe the bible is the very Word of God. This is the point at which we differ. The absolute truth that I believe is the same as the author of that book. The bible is not an ordinary book. It is God's words to us. So your quarrel is not with me, but with the One who made you for Himself. I am stating biblical truths – not my own truths.

You seem uncomfortable with moral judgments. How can you escape the fact that every denunciation you make has, at its core, a moral judgment? Can you honestly say that I am wrong and you are right without also proffering a standard from which I deviate?

May God bless you, Mr. Burns, and keep you. I know this thread is very old, and it is probably too late for you to get my little message. I do thank you, however, for teaching me better to respond to those who are skeptical.

Julia Gwin

I don’t believe you need to have religion to have real and tangible goals to aspire to, or to be a “good” person. This is often where the religious people (narrow minded religious jerks, and not so big jerks – but, very religious), will beg to differ with me… and that is when it starts getting difficult to weed out who the real jerks are…

I believe the significance of Samantha’s analysis is very important. There are the obnoxious jerks (OJ’s) that theist and non-theist alike can smell from a mile away (i.e. Fred Phelps of GodHatesFags.com, Falwell, Hagee, etc). I don’t doubt for a moment, though, that the OJ’s believe they were/are doing good for this world … or the next. Most others, though, dismiss their type of fundamentalism and their type of literalism and fall into the vast majority of believers and, hence, become tolerable human beings (we will call them THB’s).

Yet a good many believing THB’s still believe the homosexual is something that God specifically spoke against. But instead of condemning out of hand, the THB wants to help the homosexual to a God-pleasing way of life. A good many of these THB’s would squash the most promising field of medical research since the discovery of antibiotics (embryonic stem cell) because their belief that the zygote is imbued with a god-given soul. I would bet money that a good many of the very nice people represented on this board hold something akin to these views.

From a motivational perspective, both the OJ’s and the THB’s genuinely want to do good, but both groups unknowingly do bad…they do the wrong things for the right reasons. It is easy to dismiss criticism of your actions and beliefs when your actions are motivated by our noblest and most charitable instincts. Mark Twain (a.k.a. Samuel Clemens) had the most perfect and cogent position on this:

“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you in trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.”

John said that 99.9% of Christians that he knows are THB’s. This would make sense, because 99.9% of ALL people are good. It is innate in us (and other species to some extent) to follow [what Christians know as] the Golden Rule.

The believing THB’s, unbeknownst to them, hold and promulgate views that demonize segments of society and warp public policy and education to the detriment of society…all with the very best and noble of intentions. I have asked theists before to consider the moral consequences should their beliefs be false. To my knowledge; none that I have asked have been able to wrap their head around the idea of themselves being wrong. I think this is said, but not unexpected. The human mind is a complex thing and is near impossible to step outside one’s self and look back with an unbiased eye. This is true for theist and non-theist alike. (I won’t go into neurology and the research on the matter but you can read a book review here: http://fvthinker.blogspot.com/2008/03/book-review-on-being-certain-believing.html )

Just like in politics…everyone believes themselves to be a moderate. Even the OJ’s. And as Samantha eluded to; It is only from the perspective of the non-believer that one can see the common traits of the OJ’s and the THB’s.