Christianity and Race

gop_jeff said:
I'm assuming that you are referring to Jesus' words:
"Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you."

Maybe you aren't familiar with these words of Christ: "Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment." (John 7:24)

We are not to judge in the sense that we should never call people unfit to be Christians. But we are certainly supposed to judge what actions are godly, according to the standard God has given us (the Bible) and what actions are not.



Really? Where in our Constitution am I mandated to listen to anyone? Freedom of speech does not mean a guaranteed audience. And I would really appreciate if you can fine the Scripture passage that states "Thou shall not ignore people." Thanks.



You can look at this post to see my typical usage (and explanation) of the word "liberal." 18th century liberalism and 20th century liberalism share little in common except a name.


1.What about the sawdust stuff? You think you don't have sawdust in your eyes. We all do. That was Jesus' platform for promoting tolerance. So now you want to take one scripture that could be interpreted as being directed specifically to the Jews (who held Moses' law) and allow moral judging by all?? Quite a difference between the status of you or me and those people Jesus was talking to at that specific moment.

2.I don't mean as a specific mandate or law. What are you a lawyer. The U.S. is all about public discourse and debate. It would be unAmerican (my opinion obviously) to not engage a person, as you are providing me, in that debate and public discourse. Of course, you can ignore anyone if you want. Similar with Christianity. I think you can surely think of scripture that directs Christians to counsel the ungodly.......

3.Why not call it what it is then, those "socs" or "socialists"? The philosophy of liberalism is still used to provide people the ability to access their rights. On one end is libertarian, you know all about that. On the other end is not socialism. That is a different doctrine. Wanting a few social safety nets to protect people from hardships is not socialist, it's smart. Because it protects us all as a group, believe it or not.
 
gop_jeff said:
Do you have proof of the corruption of the "powerful Evangelical church?" Or is that just atheist rhetoric?


i've gotta go now

i'll come back to this topic
 
shadrack said:
When practiced properly??

Do you think Christianity is practiced today like it was 50 years ago, and do you think it was practiced 100 years ago like it was in 1950, and do you think it is practiced today like it was in medieval times?

Based on your standards everyone practicing Christianity differently than you at any time in history other than today are immoral.

The Lord has had people worship in different ways, yet the morals stay the same.

That's quite a judging statement. Isn't there a reference to judgement in the Bible.

yeah the Lord said "Judge righteous judgments" John 7:24
 
shadrack said:
You are a typical "good" Christian, ignore others' reality because it doesn't fit your Biblical "truth".

That's nice.

No he is ignoring him cause WJ is a flaming racist and all that he spouts is bigotted tripe.
 
shadrack said:
1.What about the sawdust stuff? You think you don't have sawdust in your eyes. We all do. That was Jesus' platform for promoting tolerance. So now you want to take one scripture that could be interpreted as being directed specifically to the Jews (who held Moses' law) and allow moral judging by all?? Quite a difference between the status of you or me and those people Jesus was talking to at that specific moment.

I am under no illusion that I am a sinful man by nature. What I'm saying is that you are wrong in stating that Christians should never judge. We are certainly to judge actions, to see whether they meet the standard that God has set. But for me to look at you and say something to the effect of "shadrack is a terrible guy, much worse than me, he doesn't deserve good treatment by me or God" is wrong. But it is not wrong for me to call something a sin when it clearly is.

2.I don't mean as a specific mandate or law. What are you a lawyer. The U.S. is all about public discourse and debate. It would be unAmerican (my opinion obviously) to not engage a person, as you are providing me, in that debate and public discourse. Of course, you can ignore anyone if you want. Similar with Christianity. I think you can surely think of scripture that directs Christians to counsel the ungodly.......

In the context of ignoring someone on this board, I choose to ignore WJ because he constantly types racist, hateful remarks. I choose not to read them. If you think that's wrong, then you don't have to have him on ignore.

3.Why not call it what it is then, those "socs" or "socialists"? The philosophy of liberalism is still used to provide people the ability to access their rights. On one end is libertarian, you know all about that. On the other end is not socialism. That is a different doctrine. Wanting a few social safety nets to protect people from hardships is not socialist, it's smart. Because it protects us all as a group, believe it or not.

Topic for the political forum.
 
gop_jeff said:
I am under no illusion that I am a sinful man by nature. What I'm saying is that you are wrong in stating that Christians should never judge. We are certainly to judge actions, to see whether they meet the standard that God has set. But for me to look at you and say something to the effect of "shadrack is a terrible guy, much worse than me, he doesn't deserve good treatment by me or God" is wrong. But it is not wrong for me to call something a sin when it clearly is.


Christians certainly should not pass judgement on others. No Christian can ever justify a judgement on the basis of whether a person is or is not doing (remember "practice properly") works by the law. Judgement of others based on technicalities of law is the perfect example of where the criticism "judge with right judgement" applies. In Christ, you are no longer under the law. It is the heart that matters. And you or anyone else can not judge what is in a man's heart.



Now, if your congregation wants to discuss the Bible to understand Christianity to the best of your ability.......and if you want to rebuke sin (as you interpret sin to be based on prior discussions) amongst your brothers in an effort to maintain the congregation's religious beliefs......or even cast out those who don't agree with your interpretation, then so be it......but each person who judges should hope and pray that within those judgements there is not even an ounce of hypocrisy because that ounce may be the weight that tips the scales against you......you will be judged by the standards you set for others.......your conscience may be clear but you will not be innocent.

So, if you want to judge a man based on "proper" works by the law......judge on, Christian. You interpret scripture to suit your own cultural or political desires. Dispensing judgement without examining yourselves. Christians who are in support of the politics of war waging are not in support of civil rights activists......go figure......judge on, Christian.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top