:rotfl:
Societal hypocrisy?
- Thread starter nikolai_42
- Start date
glorydaz
Well-known member
:rotfl:
This post is to all in general.
The odd thing is that though Scripture condemns one thing or another in those it views as "the lost" of this world; it doesn't really dwell on them much after that, other than when it is addressing "professed" Believers engaged in such things.
In this, the various last few Presidents, and their families, including the current one, and the various Politicans who assert they are Christians are fair game.
For both "the lost" and "the saved" to call out the false words and misdeeds of.
At the same time "the lost" are not fair game for the Believer, as the words and actions of the lost are not the issue in Scripture.
Rather, what gives rise to their misdeeds is - that they are "the lost" and have chosen to remain that way in their rejection of Christ, and so on.
This right here, for example, right off "condemns" just about every "Believing" poster on the Politics Forum, in one way or another...
Ephesians 4:17 This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, 4:18 Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: 4:19 Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness. 4:20 But ye have not so learned Christ; 4:21 If so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus: 4:22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; 4:23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; 4:24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness. 4:25 Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another. 4:26 Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath: 4:27 Neither give place to the devil. 4:28 Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth. 4:29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers. 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. 4:31 Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: 4:32 And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you.
While someone like a Franken, or a Kim Jung, would be considered those blind Gentiles, as such have never professed being "a Christian" and thus, are not subject to being expected to conduct themselves by the same measure that Scripture expects of the "professing" Believer.
Again, Scripture expects " the lost" to behave like "the lost."
Obama was crystal clear on this, for example, when he explained why although he himself is pro-life, he did not expect non-Christians to be.
His had been a crystal clear separation of church and state, but to the religious bigot - who is merely rationalizing his or her own insisted on view for others the Scripture itself does not expect from those outside "The Faith" until they are part of said "Faith."
Romans 6:15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? 6:17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. 6:18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. 6:19 I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness. 6:20 For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. 6:21 What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death. 6:22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life. 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
But none of this objectivity is what you are dealing with in many within the so supposed "religious right."
Either here on TOL, or elsewhere.
What you are actually dealing with is all sorts of backwoods bigotry in the guise of "under God" including, in many on TOL.
God's view - according to the Scripture such supposedly hold to - until its conscience interferes with their hypocrisy?
None other than this here...this is to be the "professing" Believer's attitude, words, actions towards "them that are without...Christ..."
2 Corinthians 5:13 For whether we be beside ourselves, it is to God: or whether we be sober, it is for your cause. 5:14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: 5:15 And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again. 5:16 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more. 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. 5:18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God. 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
In other words, but for that, all were all once in the same boat.
Again, passages of Scripture like those not only point that out, but also point out what the Believer's attitude is to be towards the lost.
Not spit on a Kim Jung, not spit on the homosexual, and so on - and not rationalize the hypocritical words and actions of the "professed" Believer who does.
Why?
Out of an intended, ever conscious sense of "there but for the Grace of God towards me in His Son, go I - so who am I to spit on the lost - when that is clearly not my calling..."
Just a matter, or not, of if the so called "Believer" has the following in his mind - that he or she is each called to forever have in his or her mind.
Romans 5:6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. 5:7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. 5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.
Keep that in mind, when dealing with many "proffesing" Believers - who right off rationalize their support of all sorts of their own bigotry "on Scripture."
Those passage are crystal clear - that we Believer's were given God's Grace by Him in His Son while we - were yet sinners ourselves - when we - were His enemies.
Keep all that in mind, those of you who are non-Believer's on here. Use it against those who are clearly not walking in its truth though "professing" being "Believers."
For what you are dealing with is often nothing more than the same old same old hypocrisy on the part of various within "The Faith."
This was written 2,000 years ago - notice - the same old same old...
Romans 2:23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God? 2:24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written. 2:25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. 2:26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? 2:27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
Nevertheless, Romans 5:8 towards one and all.
If nothing else, I at least got to put that out there once more - which is always a good thing.
Apparently many conservative evangelicals, despite Scripture, have come to the conclusion that the political "ends do justify the means," and are willing to support Moore irrespective of his moral baggage!
The Trump/Moore cases mark a moral "watershed" in American politics - conservative evangelicals will now be forced to explain as to why their actions were not a betrayal of their beliefs!
Last edited:
glorydaz
Well-known member
And back to the point of the OP. There is no comparison between the two.
What Rusha said. Consent matters. And children cannot give consent.
If 34-YO Roy Moore was chasing 18-YO girls, it would be creepy, but their own business. A 14-YO girl being pursued by a 30-something man is creepy and criminal.
And should be locked in a cage with other animals ...
I think your comparison misses the mark because the argument isn't that teenagers are choosing their own gender. They are simply being who they are. That there is a real biological basis for it. It's not a whim or a choice.
So why not give jim who wants to transition into jane, more male hormones instead of female ones, if its simply biology?
I didn't call it simple biology. And I'm not an expert but I don't think it works that way. If people could take hormones to do that then that would be a lot easier than physically transitioning like some people choose to do. Or to live a mixed life like others do.
A mixed up life.
I saw a TV show some years back and it was about women who were in East German Olympics. They were forced to take steroids and testosterone. One woman on the show said she dressed like a man because if she dressed feminine, she would be called a transvestite.
I do not believe women can be transvestites. I do, however, think most men who desire to be women have severe basic trust issues and are, at first, transvestites.
You said there was a real biological basis for it, if so, again why not give more male hormones to Jim, instead of changing him into jane?
I don't know if it can be reduced to that. Again, if it was that simple then I imagine that would be attempted more.
I think we're moving away from the original point. nikolai was making a comparison that I believe to be invalid because the argument isn't that people are choosing genders. You may disagree that it isn't a choice, but you can't show a double standard by misrepresenting what the other side says. I've read about studies that indicate that transgender people feel that way because of something deeply ingrained, not something they choose on a whim. But I'm not an expert so I can't speak much beyond that.
Last edited:
nikolai_42
Well-known member
No. Not biological. That's the point. Biology says you are either male or female and is (except in exceedingly rare cases) incontestable. Subjective impulses do not a gender make. Gender has to be independent of external influences. Thoughts and feelings and impulses are most emphatically not.
You equate gender and sex. Not everyone does.
MarcATL
New member
What's the cutoff time from it being OK to it being not OK, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years or just 40 years?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
You think molesting a 14-YO girl is "perversion?" I do. And it's a crime. And should be.
Two adults of the same sex having sex is disturbing to me and a sin, but it's not a crime. And shouldn't be.
For reasons Rusha made clear to you.
You should look up the accepted definition of "molestation" - Roy Moore molested nobody. The lying 14 year old has holes in her stories miles wide.