My question, JCB, is whether, per your tag line, those who live in an unholy land are in any way touched and improved by your presence there. Jesus ordered us to love our enemies. That does not suggest that we ought to overlook sin, but it does suggest that our approach to dealing with those who are trapped in sin is to be restorative. As Wright observes, the insults are counter-productive.
The New Testament is full of lists of sins that will not be found among the residents of heaven. (Matthew 5:28-32; Matthew 19:18-19; Mark 7:21-22; Romans 1:26-32; 1 Corinthians 6:9,1-; 2 Corinthians 12:20; Galatians 5:19-21; Ephesians 5:3-7,18; Colossians 3:5-8; 1 Timothy 1:9-10; and Revelation 21:8, just to cover a few.) And yes, homosexuality (arsenokoitai and malakoi) is on that list.
But the lists do not stop there. It is clear that if you have even looked upon a woman with lust in your heart you are guilty of adultery. If you have even been angry at someone without cause you are guilty of murder. The lists include envy, slander, pride, foolishness, gossip—I could go on. If you are capable of examining those lists and come away content that you are not guilty, then I suppose you are entitled to throw the first stone.
I see no justification for attacking someone who is among the more thoughtful and reasonable voices on this forum.
You would be correct if you countered that even Jesus used insults. Very true. But he saved the insults for those who were so convinced of their own righteousness, the Pharisees, that they were standing between the people and the God who loves them.
We take care in dealing with those caught in sin because, like them, we are also sinners.
“I see no justification for attacking someone who is among the more thoughtful and reasonable voices on this forum.”
oh, pfft.
If you don’t understand something, ask first!
My question, JCB, is whether, per your tag line, those who live in an unholy land are in any way touched and improved by your presence there.
Which was my point in the first place: is anything improved by using a word that has become synonymous with huckster rip off artists and hateful fire and brimstone only preachers? I submit it is not. I want the same improvement JCB claims to want....
I see no justification for attacking someone who is among the more thoughtful and reasonable voices on this forum.
I certainly tried to be thoughtful and reasonable in making my points (until I got totally ticked off) - and for my efforts, I was called light in the loafers. Or, put another way, JCB almost called me a sodomite. This after refusing to acknowledge that I was narrowly talking about the english word sodomite, as it connotes today, in the United States. I was clearly not talking about every Greek and Hebrew translation of that word through world history. Those are very different things. And I would also add that the meaning and usage of catamite is disputed throughout history too.
You would be correct if you countered that even Jesus used insults. Very true. But he saved the insults for those who were so convinced of their own righteousness, the Pharisees, that they were standing between the people and the God who loves them.
Which is ironic, ain't it? Who was acting Pharisaical in this exchange?