Sometimes the critics have a point.....

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,647
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Another discussion here reminded me of this....


Now, to supply full disclosure, I'm a conservative/traditional Christian and this applies not only to theology but also to morality. I am strongly pro-life, pro-family..... I was a virgin (until my wedding night, wink/wink) for moral reasons. I am opposed to state recognized same-gender "marriage" (although not necessarily "unions"). I'm fairly Victorian, lol. BUT, Christian moral conservatives get criticized a lot - from Christians and non-Christians alike - often for being hypocritical. And I think they have a point.

We can be VERY selective about our "sins" that bother us. Winking at some..... being HORRIFIED by others. For example, I remember being just a small boy and making one such observation. Our family (like many Church families) went out to eat after church every Sunday. One of our faves was an all-you-can-eat buffet called "HomeTown Buffet." The food was acceptable, fast, easy and pretty cheap. LOTS of church folks went there after church (you could tell). And they would often PILE their plates to overflowing..... stuff themselves with a plethora of desserts..... going back so often one thought the restaurant paid THEM by the trip. And SOME of these folks were..... how to say this nicely........ abundant in mass. Now, even this boy knew that gluttony was a sin. One the Bible talks quite a lot about. And my parents taught us kids that to overeat is a sin. This struck me at HomeTown Buffet as a kid because Mom reminded us 3 kids of that every time we went - we were not to make more than we needed to be just full. She's even add, "Don't eat like a snake - you'll get your next meal." But I witnessed all these CHRISTIANS consuming tens of thousands of calories. Huuuummmmmmmmmmmm. I eventually learned: gluttony is a sin winked at in modern Christianity. I've come to accept that (can't say I like it but I too have learned to not be offended or especially to notice). But the Bible does specifically call it a sin.

On the other end of the spectrum, there's SOME things sexual. Yes, I think the Bible has some pretty clear stuff to say about this (it made it into the Big Ten which gluttony only sorta did). But SOME of this stuff is on the SUPER BAD "abomination" list. WAY, WAY worse than killing oneself with cigarettes or with 4000 calories a day of Hostess Twinkies (I admit, they ARE one of God's greatest gifts). But even this is.... well..... variable. Two guys living together out of marriage is worse than two heterosexuals living outside of marriage. An unwed girl having sex is WAY worse than an unwed boy having sex ("Boys will be boys"). A pregnant girl may be shunned - without even a seconds thought about the father (who may have raped her!). A Dad visiting a porn site is....well.... it happens, but his high school son, that's a Fast Pass to hell! We call them "ADULT films" which just means morality means they should be hidden from the kids (doesn't that, by definition, make them unadult, shouldn't adults be MORE responsible, MORE moral?).


I TRY to at least be an equal opportunity condemner (especially to the one in the mirror). And I TRY at least to do what I say (even if that means I say..... um...... less). But to ME (just me), a LOT of this is attitude. In that waving a self-righteous, all-holy finger at others.... and not acknowledging 3 are pointed back at self. I suspect THAT is what the critics are criticizing (and rightly so). The "Holier than thou" attitude that puts others down in hopes that self can rise up by stepping on them. And I think the critics notice the inconsistencies (as I did, even as a young boy) and are criticizing that (and rightly so). And perhaps the critics are noticing something..... we claim to have all this motivation and strength.... okay.... why is there so little evidence that we are taking advantage of that, that all that actually makes a big difference (um.... they are right about that, too..... that's the sin that most bothers me about myself, the sinfulness I seem to tolerate in myself). Maybe if we just spent more time looking in the mirror...... looking at the log in our own eye......


During that 15 years or so between puberty and marriage..... when I remained a virgin..... eventually, I could count on one hand the number of virgins I knew my age (and I wouldn't need all my fingers). I had a girl think I was either just weird or gay. But the ones who knew it (and they were few since I did not "publish" this) just accepted it as part of me. Because while I at times made my morality known ( with "this is how it seems to ME... this is how I see this... this is what seems right to ME" NOT "This is what YOU should think, feel, do...."), I did it without finger pointing. If people ASKED, I told them..... if THEY brought it up in conversation, I said my view/heart/morality..... not that I'm better, cuz I have my sins. At least I TRIED to have that attitude.


I have two male friends. They've lived together for about 12 years now, and while it blessedly has never come up, I assume they are not chase. Do I share their morality? No. Do I need to preach a Hellfire and Brimstone sermon at them? No. Actually, they are two of the nicest guys I know.... and have never once brought up their "orientation" or "activities", it's never remotely even come up. They probably have embraced a morality I don't share...... frankly, I suspect I have some moral things about me that they don't share (I don't either). Now, if they insist I approve of their choices, agree with their morality on that point? We may then have a problem, but I don't expect that.



THAT should liven things up around here..... have at me.



- Josiah
 

Cassia

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
1,735
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Widow/Widower
Well good on you for sticking to your guns. While I don't share your experience I share your morality. Sex before marriage is in the same books as homosexuality imo because God condemns them both. However love is not a sin. Sex is something that God has placed restrictions on because He has patterned it after Himself ~
 

IACOBVS

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2017
Messages
285
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Liberal
Marital Status
In Relationship
THAT should liven things up around here..... have at me.



- Josiah

Some of your points are valid, and you're attempting to be nice, so I won't "have at" you. :)
 

Stravinsk

Composer and Artist on Flat Earth
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
4,485
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Deist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Widow/Widower
I believe there is both a rational and biblical case that not all sins are equal. Some are worse than others. The same goes for virtues, temperance is good, love is good - but they are not the same in the sense that they are both of equal value. That being said, it does not follow either that whatever a given society accepts as "less bad/ more good" doesn't necessarily make them so.

You started your text with examples of hypocrisy that are fairly common - especially in western culture where food is abundant/over-abundant. When I was a church goer I would do the same - we often went out to eat after church - and often ate too much. The hypocrisy sort of gets worse beyond mere gluttony though - for to the Christian Sunday is a type of holy-day - the day set apart for gathering, communal worship etc - and then when that (hour) is over, lol - it's time to buy and sell other(s) services. Sort of like an hour long Sabbath, then play time again.

Anyhoo - you started with examples of hypocrisy and ended with same sex unions/marriage. If I'm reading what you are saying I get the feeling it's sort of pandering to the notion of ("don't be so hard on this sin, because we're sinners too and hypocritical at that").

If that's the case then I have to strongly disagree. For there is few stronger cases against the Christian's stated beliefs than recognizing or being a part in "officiating" (through legal/church) same sex unions.

No matter what part of the Bible one points to - be that the "old" testament, the gospels, or the epistles - same sex unions are either condemned outright, or through the exclusion that a definition provides. Genesis provides the definition - man and woman. The law condemns man/man. Jesus affirms Genesis's definition - man and woman. Even Saul/Paul, a writer of whom I am not fond - affirms and defines marriage as between man and woman and condemns same sex unions.

So from a biblical standpoint, there really is no getting around this issue without a great deal of obfusticating and excuse making - which is exactly what I see when I hear people "defending" it as if it's ok/normal or even righteous. These people have to ignore many biblical passages (old and new testaments) as well as change around definitions for words to suit their stances. It mostly amounts to a whole lot of double-speak.

From a purely biological standpoint - there is no getting around it. The male and female sexual organs are complimentary, provide the possibility of providing fruit (offspring) and continuing the human race - where as homosexual relations provide neither of these and where offspring is concerned, cannot do so naturally without proxy/stealing from the natural - ie: sperm banks, artificial insemination, etc.

From a cultural standpoint - it is destructive. Same sex unions are not conducive to family - they only mock it. The notions that the west has to contend with today, where more and more people (especially younger people) grow up in a society where they are exposed to the notion that they are not either male or female - but can "identify" as one of a hundred or more "genders" and "sexual identities" - and even get sexual reassignment to change the physical (which will only change the sex organ, not the person's born gender) - is one of the longer term results of the push by homosexual activists and hard core feminists that together seek to weaken the resolve and integrity of the church's sound doctrine on this issue.

A young woman I met from another message board once said to me that she didn't really see any real difference between male and female. I do not believe her confusion (and yes, it is confusion) is an accident. Western culture has taken quite a few steps back in the name of "progressing forward" with the whip of hypocrisy and false guilt snap at their heels.
 
Top Bottom