How About This Headline?
Rev. Al Sharpton rips Christian right
For focusing too much political discussion on abortion, same-sex marriage
This from a man who calls himself a 'Reverend'
"We have been inundated in the faith community with bedroom sexual morality issues and not dealing with the broader moral issues of poverty, of injustice and of health care," Sharpton said at a news conference amid a two-day meeting of talks and revivals.
"We can no longer be misused by some in the Christian right that will not deal with the broader issue of injustice and fairness and inequity in our society," the 2004 Democratic presidential candidate said.
Perhaps we should take Kerry's advice to 'make the most of [education], ...study hard and ...do [our] homework, and... make an effort to be smart, [so we] can do well.' As I've stated before Jesus does not condone or reward slothfulness. Injustice, Fairness, Inequity in our society??? Get everyone off their butts and off to work; encourage them to honestly apply themselves, and much of these concerns vanish.
Does the Reverend Al Sharpton think Jesus will reward him for rewarding the slothful while ignoring infanticide and perversion?
from the mind of... Eric | 9:09 AM
9 Comments:
Keep in mind that Jesus is relatively silent on "sexual sins" and totally silent on abortion. Keep in mind further the length and depth and breadth of criticism Jesus and the Bible gives to economic sins, oppression, failure to tend to and side with the poor, criticism of and warnings about wealth and I'd say that, yes, there's something wrong with a church that focuses its money, time and efforts on "sins" that are not that central when it comes to the Bible and ignoring the sins mostly talked of in the Bible.
Not that there's anything wrong at all with encouraging marriage, fidelity and discouraging abortion (and supporting families so they don't get in that situation and don't feel pressed to resort to "convenience" abortions), but there's much more to what God has to say in the Bible than just, "thou shalt not have sex or show your naughty bits."
Same ole song and dance.... YAWWWNNNN
Your argument presupposes that Jesus spoke a language completely devoid of inference, and nuance; that the people of his time couldn't read into his words what people today can plainly read into scripture-- Nevermind the fact that Jesus spoke extensively in parables! The Bible doesn't have to specifically mention abortion as evil-- or mention it period! --to know that abortion is a grave crime against God. Ditto with homosexuality!
If you want to talk about the 'most talked about' sins in the Bible let's talk about our responsibility to God and Neighbor.
As to Sin and Law:
Deuteronomy 6:5
Deuteronomy 10:12
Matthew 22:36-40
As to Abortion:
Psalm 139:13-16
Jeremiah 1:4-5
As to Homosexuality:
Leviticus 18:22
Leviticus 20:13
Romans 1:26-28
If we are to 'love the Lord [our] God with all [our] heart[s], and with all [our] souls, and with all [our] minds....' Is it not reasonable to assume this includes loving, and Respecting His law? And if 'God changes not' is it not also reasonable to assume he still views homosexuality as evil? That if he knows the name of child in the womb, and has his/her days planned and mapped out, that Abortion is likewise evil?
Apparently not to Liberal Christians.
The fact that too many people can't see what is obviously there is astounding to me. Romans 1:18-25 gives such people no excuse, and calls them fools...
"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen."
I'm sorry all this is not plain enough for you.
Now, as to, "...but there's much more to what God has to say in the Bible than just, 'thou shalt not have sex or show your naughty bits.'"
This is yet another example of poor biblical interpretation. Sex is not at all bad, being created by God for procreation and intimacy between one man and one woman who are married one to the other. As for not showing your dirty bits... again, there's nothing dirty or bad about them. Keeping them under wraps only makes sense, since a man and woman are to keep themselves free of sexual sin-- Adultery. Muslims merely take it to the extreme and puts the onus entirely on the woman. 'Thou shalt not covet' encompasses the lust men and women would feel for others if hiding our 'dirty bits' was unthinkable.
"Is it not reasonable to assume this includes loving, and Respecting His law? And if 'God changes not' is it not also reasonable to assume he still views homosexuality as evil"
So, the Law says that "Man shall not lay with Man, and they shall be put to death if they do." (Leviticus 20, I believe.)
If you believe in OT law and if you think "God changes not," then does that mean that you advocate putting gays to death? OR do you think that that law does not apply today?
"is it not also reasonable to assume he still views homosexuality as evil?"
And, by the way, many biblical scholars and very serious Christians who love God's Word, simply don't agree with your interpretation that God EVER viewed homosexuality as a sin.
Sexual immorality? Harmful sexual acting out? Sure. But not homosexuality. I know you don't agree but we take the Bible seriously and simply don't agree that those ~4 verses that you think condemn homosexuality are talking about committed healthy gay relationships.
"If you want to talk about the 'most talked about' sins in the Bible let's talk about our responsibility to God and Neighbor."
Yes, let's do so. PLEASE.
Read the Bible front to back. You will find that few if any other sins are talked about more than economic oppression, maltreatment of the poor, failing to care for the least of these.
I believe a close runner up (especially obvious in the OT) would be failing to trust in God, relying upon our wealth, military and position to save us instead.
I think yet another top topic (and sort of the inverse of my previous paragraph) would be what might best be called, "Kingdom Living" - living God's kingdom come, God's will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Living with all things in common, so that none were in want. Living in God's joyous year of Jubilee.
I don't know for a fact that these would be the top three topics, but they're definitely up there. Go ahead, do a count if you want and let me know.
I wouldn't give an ounce of figs for any of your so-called bible "scholars" who can't comprehend the in's and out's of language... Any language.
For example:
Take another look at the following statement and consider revising it.
"we take the Bible seriously and simply don't agree that those ~4 verses that you think condemn homosexuality are talking about committed healthy gay relationships."
You DON'T agree that 4 verses are talking about committed healthy gay relationships? Well! Then we agree at last!
I know what you meant, but what it says is completely different from what you intended. Which only underscores my point. Language can be vague, it can be precise, and it can be filled with inuendo and nuance. Your so-called scholars err greatly in their interpretation... Professing themselves to be wise they became fools.
Where does the New or Old Testament command Kingdom Living? We ARE to give of our means to the church and charity, but nowhere does it say we are to throw everything into the communal pot* and wait for redistribution according to need... that, my friend, is Communism, and it's failed everywhere and everytime it's reared its ugly head. Why? Because man's heart is "...deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?"
--Jeremiah 17:9
But fear not, we'll enjoy Kingdom Living when Christ is King in Jerusalem; who will dispense TRUE justice, fairness, and equity. May that day come soon.
----
* Ananias and Sapphira [Acts 5:1-10] died because they lied to the Holy Ghost about their profit so they could give less than what they promised.
Re: "The fact that too many people can't see what is obviously there is astounding to me."
Christian slaveholders, Christian Jim Crow supporters and Christian chauvinists have all said the same thing regarding their own pet "lesser-thans." Homosexuals are "it" now. They, too, will eventually be welcomed into the church, its leadership and its pulpits -- just like slaves, former slaves, blacks and women before them.
Also, what Dan said.
And just like gluttons and drunks.
Because this is the point: Behavior is one thing, and that's what has everybody all freaked out about homosexuals: what they *do.*
But homosexuality is an *is* thing. Just like fatness and drunkenness. A sober drunk is still a drunk. And a dieting fat person is still a fat person!
And yes, if sin is sin is sin, then gluttony and drunkenness and risky homosexual behavior -- and risky hetrosexual behavior -- are all the same degree of sinfulness. IMHO.
"Where does the New or Old Testament command Kingdom Living?"
Kingdom living would be how many folk describe living the Christian life. Living, as Jesus said, Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven...
Or, as Michah said: God has told you, O man, what is good; And what does the Lord require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Or, again, as Jesus said, "When you have done it unto the least of these, you have done it to me."
It means not putting off "until heaven" living the life God wants us to live: a life of peace, love, compassion...etc. - "against such things, there is no law".
What part of that notion is problematic?
Post a Comment
<< Home