dean
New Member
Posts: 8 
|
Post by dean on Mar 9, 2015 12:41:19 GMT -6
I appreciate all of you guys commenting and you have some really valid points - Great points made by you too, Daniel. I can certainly see legislation in a different light now, but I'm stilling having trouble wrapping my mind completely around it, probably because I've stepped to far into the Politically correct world without even realizing it. Even God gave the 10 commandments, that would certainly be a form of legislation that I just simply had not thought of as such. I get caught up in the fog of things, we have a Government that looks to Science alone above God for answers -- We have a society that now is more into "tolerating all things" unless it's Christian - people getting offended - people getting sued over choice, etc... in the midst of all these things happening, my mind wonders to how can we best minister to these folks - which taking the mindset of those examples set above, I think you can see why I had trouble wrapping my brain around a universal morality by legislation...
Couple things -- I love the kids in my youth group - regardless of what they are going through right now or later on. My issue comes at times with knowing how to best love them in a biblical fashion *does that make sense*? I'm a black and white fellow, not a ton of room for gray in my eyes - but I don't want to turn anyone off by being to direct or blunt with them. Balance is something that is rather hard for me at times.
Legislation by Morality - I have plenty of Homosexuals in/around my life. My problem stated above - loving them biblically - is where I struggle. I want to know better how to respond to them in 2015 without losing, compromising, bowing to 2015 worldly standards - instead keeping Biblically strong - and - on message, while loving them in a Biblical fashion.
I certainly would say legislating that killing a child is wrong -- it seems common sense to me, as well as Biblical.
You have science that says the baby is not a human -- so you can extract/abort it up until whatever time. People have bought into this and live by it --- how on a biblical grounds do you combat them with love and determination ---without completely turning them away?
For me, the same is true with Homosexuality --- I would say it's wrong, common sense - biblical sense..
Science comes in and says it's not a choice - they're born with this - it's not their fault. Others come in and say - they're not hurting anyone else - why you worried about what goes on in their private bedroom - leave them alone..
You as a believer - go and vote to ban all Homosexual actions --- then go to Minister to anyone in the Homosexual lifestyle -- the reactions back to you is usually not going to be friendly...
How do you lovingly tell these folks - you're wrong - and not completely turn them away?
I feel like I'm rambling now --- forgive me.
Looking forward to reading more of you guys comments toward this topic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dr rich Klein on Mar 9, 2015 13:00:31 GMT -6
"I wish the speaker would have ..."
It is a thirty-five minute chapel service.
The object was to stimulate new/fresh/beginning thinking on the strategy
that is initiated by a loving approach, instead of the usual angry, defensive, negative approach.
You might contact him.
He has more than enough information to inform fully.
|
|
|
|
Post by brianwagner on Mar 9, 2015 13:25:58 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by stjernss on Mar 9, 2015 22:40:43 GMT -6
Terrific presentation! Thanks for passing that on Rich! Imagine if Christians everywhere had Cynthia's attitude and approach toward others. I particularly liked the reference to Romans 15:7 where it says to accept one another, just as Christ also accepted us. That's a great way of looking at things.
|
|
|
|
Post by stjernss on Mar 12, 2015 0:28:34 GMT -6
With regard to legislating morality, the question that comes to my mind is: How much freedom should people have to live as they please? Certainly if someone's actions harm another person, that's a compelling reason to legislate against it (murder, rape, abortion, theft, etc.) because we (and society) have every right to protect the innocent. But when it comes to things we simply believe are immoral or not what God intended (homosexuality, gay marriage), is there a compelling reason for us to legislate against those types of things? Compelling enough to override the likelihood that unbelievers will be driven away from the faith by such legislation? And how does forcing moral living on unbelievers jive with our message to the them that they can never be right with God through moral living - but only through faith in Christ?
|
|
|
|
Post by CowboysDad on Mar 14, 2015 9:31:40 GMT -6
Scott, you've always been such a careful thinker and I appreciate your thoughts. I am struck with the complexity of this question on many fronts, and I admit that I am still working through things carefully in my mind. It's not an easy question. Evidently most Christians would agree that there is a “compelling reason” to legislate against at least some behaviors that we would call sin, particularly those that directly "harm another person." Perhaps by compelling reason you might mean to say as well that there is a moral obligation or even a social responsibility for Christians to legislate against such behaviors. Any definition of what is directly harmful to other individuals or to our society as a whole is of course at the very center of the debate. If we limit such harm to matters of direct physical aggression against our bodies or against our property, then we would be overlooking public nudity, consentual prostitution, and the viewing of child pornography, for example. Returning to my earlier post in which I used the example of abortion as a similarly divisive matter that has arisen between Christians and non-Christians, would you agree that both sides of the abortion debate spring from different worldviews that will never merge, thus creating the same potential for damaging our Christian witness? Those who support legislation promoting the biblical definition of marriage as a societal norm would of course argue that the harm done by the breakdown of that norm is as compelling a reason to legislate as that which prompts many Christians to legislate against abortion. In both cases Christians would be forcing moral living on unbelievers. We might find too that some unbelievers would oppose legislation promoting a biblical definition of marriage as readily as legislation promoting a pro-life position, and perhaps they are as heated in their opposition to one as to the other. If the overriding concern is our witness to the unbeliever, then could it not be argued that we should no longer support pro-life legislation? Still percolating,
Daniel
|
|
|
|
Post by stjernss on Mar 18, 2015 21:23:24 GMT -6
Thanks for the response Daniel. You raise some interesting points and I don't pretend to have the answer on exactly where the line should be drawn. I don't mean to say that our witness to the unbeliever is the overriding concern, for me the overriding concern (or question) is, in what way do our actions (or battles) promote the cause of Christ? And by the cause of Christ, I mean winning souls, rescuing lost sheep, bringing people out of darkness into the light. Satan is extremely clever and I think he loves to lure us into devoting time and energy to things that don't ultimately make a dent in his kingdom - keeping in mind that he's perfectly content with lost people living morally so that if we succeed (through legislation or otherwise) in getting unbelievers to sin less in some way, we haven't defeated him at all and we haven’t gained anything for the Kingdom of God. It’s very difficult to win people to Christ when you’re battling against them so I think we need to choose our battles VERY carefully. I’m not saying that we shouldn't try to legislate morality, but when the majority of society disagrees with us, we should be VERY restrained in doing so (prayerfully asking for wisdom!). When we find ourselves pitted against the mainstream of society (as is becoming the case more and more on the issue of homosexuality), we should be asking ourselves: Does whatever we hope to gain by winning this battle justify driving away from the faith those we’re fighting against? Are there truly eternal consequences if we walk away from the fight and give them the freedom to do what they want? (BTW - walking away certainly doesn't mean we condone it or that we do not speak out against it – it just means we let the world go its own way). So I guess my main point is to suggest that we look at things more from an eternal perspective. Does the way society defines marriage in this temporal (and I might add, condemned) world really matter in the eternal scheme of things? Going back to something I wrote earlier – will we be celebrating in heaven that we prevented gays from marrying before they were sent to hell? Will we be able to point to all the people who came to Christ as a result of our successful defense of the traditional definition of marriage? Or were we more concerned with temporal harm to society which we perceived would result from allowing gay marriage? I guess perhaps even more important than an eternal perspective is the thing that is lost in all of these types of culture war battles – LOVE. Are we looking at these battles through the lens of LOVE for the unbeliever or the lens of the LAW? To bring up an example that we've discussed before, Daniel, will the Christian baker someday in heaven look back and think to himself, “Boy I’m glad I didn't sell that wedding cake to that gay couple!” or might he start to think, “Hmm, I had an opportunity there to interact with them, to reflect God’s love to them, to bring some light into a situation that desperately needed it. God brought them into my sphere of influence and I turned them away. I might have planted a seed that could have led them to be here with me today.” To me that’s a good illustration of looking at things through the lens of the law vs the lens of love (Note: I don’t mean to disparage those whose conscience tells them it would be wrong to contribute something – cake, photography, etc. – to a gay wedding. I can respect that - just giving my perspective). I think the DTS video provided by Dr. Klein earlier in this blog was very thought provoking and it showed the power of unconditional love (loving well!). Seeing as Christians are widely perceived by unbelievers in our country as being unloving, even hateful, toward gays, I think this fight over gay marriage (and gay rights for that matter) has done more harm to the cause of Christ than good. I think if we want to show the kind of love and acceptance for them that we saw in the video, we need to let them live life their own way and love them in spite of it. Okay, I kind of got off the subject of legislating morality and back on gay marriage and I didn't address several of your points, Daniel. I want to throw out a couple points on the abortion issue but that will have to wait until later. Hope you guys don't think I've gone totally off the deep end  |
|
|
|
Post by CowboysDad on Mar 19, 2015 8:48:52 GMT -6
Thanks, Scott. I'm simply trying to build some foundational points before enlarging the argument:
1) Do we as Christians agree that some legislation of morality within our society is acceptable and even necessary?
2) If so, then can we acknowledge that such legislation necessarily imposes morality on an unbeliever before any heart transformation has occurred?
3) If so, then can we acknowledge that some worldviews will never merge and that it is not possible to avoid all potential division created by such legislation?
4) If so, then can we acknowledge that there are some issues that Christians are compelled for good reason or conscience to legislate against despite potential division, which may include a hardening toward a universal moral Law in general or the moral truth that coincides with the Christian faith in particular?
|
|
|
|
Post by brianwagner on Mar 19, 2015 10:03:56 GMT -6
The cake request for a homosexual wedding is a good illustration. Whether the state says homosexual marriage exists or not, a Christian can not fellowship in an immoral activity, Eph. 5:11. As a baker he or she can show their love by giving some other valued service to those two individuals for free!
|
|
|
|
Post by stjernss on Mar 21, 2015 15:20:22 GMT -6
Daniel/Brian, Thank you very much for your feedback. I appreciate being forced to think through things. With regard to your questions, Daniel:
1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
4. Yes - and here is our point of contention - which issues.
I didn't say that it was never appropriate to legislate morality. I only said that we need to be VERY careful in what we choose to legislate and to ask the question what do we gain if we win the fight versus what we lose? If all we've gained is a superficial external appearance of morality in this temporal world which has no eternal redeeming value, then I don't think it's necessarily worth fighting for if it's a huge point of contention between us and the world. So if public nudity (to use one of your earlier examples) were to become a huge issue between us and the mainstream of society, then I would say that's not an issue to fight over. Someday in heaven will limiting public nudity have meant that more lost people were brought into the fold? I don't think so. So to me it's not a critical issue worth driving people away. I would say the same about legalized prostitution and probably a host of other issues to which our knee jerk reaction would usually be "We can't allow that!!!". But God didn't put us in charge of this world. We are aliens and strangers here. Why should we expect the world to cater to us and our beliefs? To the extent that we can convince the world that our way is best, great. But if trying to force our way creates a huge divide, then again I say we need to question whether it's worth it. Would we think it's reasonable for the Muslims to expect mainstream America to cater to their beliefs? Of course not. Unfortunately, in our culture, we Christians are just another group out there (like the Muslims) who are seen by the world as trying to force our beliefs on everyone else. We can all agree that we are to be lights in the world, but let's remember that Jesus told us very specifically what the light we're supposed to be shining is. He said that HE is the light of the world. He didn't say anywhere that the law is the light of the world and for good reason - the law can't save anyone. Morality can't save anyone. I think we need to always keep that in mind and always make sure that promoting the gospel has a far, far, far greater priority than promoting morality. I think to a great extent today, Christians have gotten sidetracked into shining the light of the law thinking that in doing so they're standing up for what's right but they're actually gaining nothing for the cause of Christ and even hurting it. I also think about the verse: Let your light shine among men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father who is in Heaven. Note that our focus from that verse is on OUR good works. There's no implication that our light is to coerce any good works on the part of unbelievers. So I'm just saying that we should be VERY restrained in our present day world when it comes to legislating our moral beliefs. As far as abortion goes, I wouldn't put that in the same category as things like gay marriage or public nudity, etc. Abortion involves a deadly assault on an innocent life and so I think the justification can be made for fighting against that.
Brian - in my view, supplying a cake for a gay wedding (even serving it at the reception) does not constitute an endorsement of or participation in homosexuality. Just to make my perspective clear, if I were a Christian baker and a gay couple came to me, I would say to them: "I'd be happy to make you a wedding cake but I want you to understand something up front. I'm a Christian and I don't believe that God intended this type of relationship. More importantly, I don't think it's what's best for you guys and I genuinely care about you guys and your future. But we all have to live life how we see fit and you guys are free to live as you choose, so what kind of cake do you want?" Now in most cases, they're probably going to walk out the door and not want to do business with a Christian. But for those who chose to do business with me, I'd give them MORE than what they paid for. I'd plant a seed which would have them saying "This guy thinks we're totally wrong in what we're doing and yet he still treated us with acceptance and love." Who knows where that might lead? All I'm doing is selling (and perhaps serving) a cake. There's nothing inherently immoral or unethical about that (that's why non-Christians think it's so ridiculous that we'd refuse. We add all these extra implications). If the motivation for my actions is love for the gay couple and an attempt to go behind enemy lines (so to speak) and bring some light into a situation that desperately needs it, what specifically am I doing that's immoral or unethical? In what way does that constitute fellowshipping in an immoral activity? I just can't see that I'm engaging in anything sinful whatsoever. If anything, I'm bringing light into an immoral activity. Do you really think Christ would disapprove of such a course of action? Do you think he would one day scold me saying "Why did you sell them that cake? Why did you participate in that?" And on the other side of the coin, which course of action do you think Satan would rather see from Christians? I have no doubt he would rather see us NOT sell them the cake than to take the other approach. I'm sure he loves it when we don't sell them the cake (or conduct other business with them). So I'm having trouble seeing ANY negative consequence to my selling them that cake. To me it's showing them non-judgmental love and acceptance (like that shown by the Christian woman in that video) while not condoning or endorsing what they're doing. I would also say that attempts to show love after refusing to sell the cake (as you suggest) would fall on deaf ears because ultimately, not selling them the cake can only appear as non-acceptance. It can only appear as unloving. I personally know unbelievers who view Christianity in a VERY negative light specifically because of this issue. So I go back to my main question, what do we gain for the cause of Christ by our actions and what do we lose?
Brothers, I appreciate your gentle responses to my rants. I fear sometimes that I come on too strong in stating my perspectives. I certainly value and respect each of your opinions.
|
|
|
|
Post by brianwagner on Mar 21, 2015 17:43:29 GMT -6
I appreciate stjernss your thoughtful response. And I agree with your statement that we should not condone or endorse sinful behavior. I am a having a hard time not seeing how contributing to an event which celebrates fornication would not be such an endorsement. I would see it like painting the sign for a brothel, when that is legalised. Where am I getting it wrong?
|
|
|
|
Post by CowboysDad on Mar 21, 2015 19:45:17 GMT -6
In his original post Dean wrote, "When it comes to worldly laws being created to legislate morality - is this the way to go? Does this actually do more harm for Christianity than good?"
Scott, I honestly didn't think that you would disagree with any of my foundational points. I thought it would be wise, however, to walk through them for Dean and for all in order to dispel the notion that is so commonly forwarded that we shouldn't legislate morality. Having established those foundational points, clearly there will then be issues on which Christians don't agree and then that's where the discussion grows even more interesting. Some Christians are pro-choice. Others (I hope most) are pro-life. Some would sell the cake and others would not. Some would even legislate for their freedom not to sell the cake. Others would not. More later.
|
|
|
|
Post by stjernss on Mar 23, 2015 20:42:39 GMT -6
Brian, thanks for the response. I understand exactly where you’re coming from but let me see if I can make my perspective more clear. I guess the first thing I would say is that what you describe as “contributing to an event that celebrates fornication” I would describe as bringing light and God’s grace to a dark event in desperate need of it. With regard to whether supplying the cake is an endorsement of the event, let me ask this: If I sell a cake that’s going to be used at a Muslim religious celebration (like the end of Ramadan), does that constitute an endorsement of Islam? (Or is that another situation where I shouldn’t sell them the cake?) I would say it’s not an endorsement; I’m simply accepting them and not putting expectations and conditions on them to believe like I do in order for me to treat them the same as everyone else. Taking a different tact, I would say that I think your depiction of a gay wedding as “an event celebrating fornication” is a wee bit overstated. What happens in gay wedding ceremonies is the same as what happens in traditional (heterosexual) wedding ceremonies. Do people consider traditional wedding ceremonies as “celebrations of marital sex”? Do the promises being made at the traditional wedding focus on how each one is going to satisfy the sexual needs of the other? Of course not. The wedding ceremony isn’t about sex. It’s about two people making a public commitment to love, honor and cherish one another, and that’s true in the gay wedding as much as it is the traditional wedding (but let’s be honest – it’s hard for us to think of a gay wedding like that. It doesn't fit our stereotype). So I disagree with your implication that a gay wedding is primarily about sex or primarily about celebrating sex. I don’t think you would make that same implication for a heterosexual wedding. I totally agree with your categorizing homosexual sex as being like fornication (although if they’re married, technically, is it still “fornication”?  ). So let me throw out an idea that is still percolating a bit in my head. The Bible defines homosexuality as a sexual sin (like fornication or adultery). It’s an immoral sexual act which the Bible clearly condemns. I’ve already said that what happens at gay weddings is the same as at traditional weddings. Obviously, the things that take place at a traditional wedding aren’t sinful in any way. But those are the same things that occur at the gay wedding. So when I “contribute” to a gay wedding, am I DIRECTLY contributing to any specific act that the Bible actually condemns??? God doesn’t hate people promising to love each other or promising to live sacrificially for each other. The REAL problem, the REAL sin, which is clearly stated in Scripture, is a man lying with a man (and my cake’s not contributing to that). So, I’m having trouble seeing the wedding ceremony itself as something to be totally shunned at the cost of driving people away from the faith. I see it simply as a sad attempt by poor lost sheep to fulfill desires for love, companionship and stability (desires which we all have!) in a misguided and perverted way. It’s sad because it’s something really meaningful and important to them (and we should be sensitive to that) and it’s sad because they have no clue how far they’ve strayed off course. Okay, I better stop on this point while I’m behind. One of the nice things about being a lay person is that I can have all sorts of wacky ideas and get away with it. I have a few more wacky ideas which I’d like to share later. I appreciate you guys indulging me. |
|
|
|
Post by brianwagner on Mar 24, 2015 12:21:09 GMT -6
Thanks again stjernss for explaining further. I think you were helping yourself see where I was coming from by discussing it more in depth. I agree that the event is a misguided and perverted attempt to achieve God's design for love and companionship.
I do think you will need to differentiate in your mind the difference between what society calls a marriage and what actually makes the marriage bond in God's eyes (Matt 19:5). I think it is clear that it must be a male and a female. Thanks again for your openness and willingness to discuss these things and your evident love for souls!
|
|
|
|
Post by stjernss on Mar 24, 2015 21:55:01 GMT -6
Thanks Brian! I guess I better be totally clear on something. I'm not saying that marriage between two men (or two women) is okay in any way, shape or form. You are absolutely right that God intended marriage to be between a male and female. We’re totally on the same page on that one. Another thing that scripture makes clear is that God intended the sexual act between a man and woman to take place only within the bond of marriage. That that’s an extremely important part of what God intended for marriage. But as we all know (and lament), in our world today the prevailing “heterosexual lifestyle” makes sex a normal part of dating. So what I’m wondering is, we allow the world the freedom to choose its own way when it comes to THAT violation of what God intended (and with terrible social results – divorce, poverty, crime…), why won’t we allow the world to choose its own way when it comes to God’s intention that only males and females marry? If we tried to legislate against fornication; if we tried to force our morality in that area on everyone else, we’d drive people away so fast it would be scary. So what I’m saying is, I believe we hurt the cause of Christ when we try to force our morality on people or when we force the world to conform to what we believe God intended. I don’t think gay marriage falls into a category of something we should legislate against, just as I don’t think fornication should be.
My earlier hand waving exercise regarding the wedding ceremony was an attempt to rationalize that I’m not really doing anything inherently wrong if I sell them the wedding cake. I didn’t mean to imply that the marriage itself is okay. But let me state my point regarding the cake in a slightly different way just for clarity. If I’m a Christian baker and the gay couple walks into my shop for a wedding cake, I know that NOT selling them the cake is going to be a major stumbling block (as I said, I’ve known people personally for whom the cake issue is a big knock on Christianity). I also think that if I treat them as I described earlier, trying to show love and acceptance, that I could be planting a seed which at least has a chance of turning into something. There would at least be a chance of them being saved. So here’s the choice in my eyes – on the one hand, I have the possibility (though perhaps very remote) of winning a soul for eternity. On the other hand, I have my NOT being the one who sells them the cake. To me, it’s a choice between something that REALLY matters in eternity and something that, in the grand scheme of things, means no more than the leftover crumbs from the cake. I’m having trouble seeing what tangible benefit my not selling the cake brings to the kingdom of God other than my ability to utter the statement “I stood for a principle. I didn’t sell them the cake.” With the first choice, I could be rejoicing with someone forever. - Scott
|
|
). So let me throw out an idea that is still percolating a bit in my head. The Bible defines homosexuality as a sexual sin (like fornication or adultery). It’s an immoral sexual act which the Bible clearly condemns. I’ve already said that what happens at gay weddings is the same as at traditional weddings. Obviously, the things that take place at a traditional wedding aren’t sinful in any way. But those are the same things that occur at the gay wedding. So when I “contribute” to a gay wedding, am I DIRECTLY contributing to any specific act that the Bible actually condemns??? God doesn’t hate people promising to love each other or promising to live sacrificially for each other. The REAL problem, the REAL sin, which is clearly stated in Scripture, is a man lying with a man (and my cake’s not contributing to that). So, I’m having trouble seeing the wedding ceremony itself as something to be totally shunned at the cost of driving people away from the faith. I see it simply as a sad attempt by poor lost sheep to fulfill desires for love, companionship and stability (desires which we all have!) in a misguided and perverted way. It’s sad because it’s something really meaningful and important to them (and we should be sensitive to that) and it’s sad because they have no clue how far they’ve strayed off course. Okay, I better stop on this point while I’m behind. One of the nice things about being a lay person is that I can have all sorts of wacky ideas and get away with it. I have a few more wacky ideas which I’d like to share later. I appreciate you guys indulging me.