You know, that's really annoying to those of us who don't believe in Jesus.
...That agnosticism is a woefully incomplete crackpot idea. To wit:
"Atheists and agnostics do not know from where they come or where they are going. Further, they are proud of this as though it is a badge of some kind of intellectual accomplishment. Therefore, Christians rightly hold atheism and agnosticism in contempt as woefully incomplete crackpot ideas. Shouldn't a world view be able to explain the world it views? "What kind of mind equates the ugly religious fervor of atheism with the honest questioning of agnosticism? Agnosticism is not an idea, "crackpot" or otherwise. It is merely a lack of certainty.
...And insisting the homosexuality is degeneracy.
Personally, I'm prepared to believe that people are born homosexual. That means it's natural.
But that doesn't mean it's normal.
In fact it is an obvious deviation from the norm, in that the norm is sexual congress between heterosexuals with the purpose of propagating the race. (Nature's purpose anyway.)
In that sense, homosexuality is "deviant". But that does not mean "degenerate".
The former merely indicates a variation from the norm - an entirely neutral term. The latter is a value judgement meaning debauched, dissolute, corrupt—evil.
They are not interchangeable.
Homosexuality might not be normal, but there is no good reason why consenting adults of the same gender shouldn't have sex if they want to. And there is no harm to anyone else, or to society as far as I can see, if they do.
As long as they don't do it in the street and scare the horses.
Sure, to me it's kind of gross. But "kind of gross" doesn't make something unnatural or evil.
As I pointed out is a recent post, there is no good reason to support gay 'marriage', and I don't want to be endlessly screeched at by gay activists that I must "celebrate" their preferences.
But I don't see a scintilla of evidence that Nature's God would disapprove of a homosexual being true to his nature, as he was made, as long as he didn't hurt anyone else.
Call me crazy.
The Gunslinger
Tolerance not Indulgence
I'm a bit surprised GS that you are annoyed that Christians believe our national salvation is through Christ. While I see your comments are focused primarily on homosexuality, in my practice of Christianity I've been taught that you love the sinner but hate the sin. I'll grant that the quotation you included concerning atheism and agnosticism is extreme, especially the part about crackpot ideas.
ReplyDeleteOur nation is in a moral free fall from a Christian point of view and so many of the threads you have started can only lead a Christian to that conclusion.
Voters send their surrogate thieves to Washington, yet they refuse to see they are as guilty of theft as the people they elect to commit the crime. Some even claim they are charitable because the money they have authorized to be stolen is helping the poor or some worthy cause. They do not honor their personal Christian obligation to charity, but steal from others and boast how much they care. Washington is a cesspool of liars, thieves, hypocrites and swindlers, and the people who send them there know it and do it willingly. That makes them just as guilty.
I am not claiming that Christians are perfect, they are not and all true Christians know they are sinners. But wouldn't it be wonderful if our President, Congress and Justices acted like true Christians, honored their oaths of office, stopped the stealing, lying, cheating and swindling? If they did, we could discuss cool stuff like which automatic weapon is better for a Navy seal team instead of the unconstitutional outrages of the current government.
Just please don't accept everyone claiming to be a Christian as a spokesman for all Christians, but do understand why Christians believe a return to Christ would be good for the country. We need more people clinging to their guns and bibles. We would be the better for it.
I have known more homosexuals who were truly nice,tolerant people than so-called "Christians" (who were caught up in repugnant,egotistical self-righteousness).I judge people by how they interact with other people."Natural vs. Normal" is a particularly great point,"Gunny".The Bible has carried many folks (including my own forebearers)thru hard times...but I'm inclined to believe it had more to do with their interpretations of the lessons from the Bible,and their particular character.No "middle-man" priest/interpreter between God and the Individual...does that make me more a Lutheran than a Calvinist or Catholic?....I have a suspicion of bureaucrats of any stripe...
ReplyDeleteTest...
ReplyDeleteMy comments aren't showing up.
This is a very very good post...
trubolotta,
ReplyDeleteI'm a Cultural Christian. And I call myself a "defender of the faith". I believe that Christianity, based as it is on the equality of men before God, and the idea of free-will, is responsible for the evolution of the Western concept of Individual liberty.
And I don't mind that Christians think that Jesus will save America. They wouldn't be Christians if they didn't.
I guess I'm saying two things here.
1) I can see how homosexuality might be considered a SIN when your 4000 B.C. tribe is small, struggling, and needs to grow to survive, and you're wasting your seed...
But in the modern world, where the survival of the clan or the nation does not depend on everyone having lots of children, it doesn't make any sense—and it makes Christians just sound intolerant—to insist that homosexuality is SINFUL.
And no one has ever satisfactorily explained WHY.
Again, it's not something to celebrate, in my opinion, but it's also not something to condemn.
It just is.
If we get all the "Gay Rights" bullshit out of it, like "marriage" and "adoption", and other absurdities, there's just no "there, there" for us to be concerned about. What consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedroom is not our business. And if they respect each other, love each other and make each other happy, why would God mind?
2) When one is talking in a public forum, likely to be attended by people that do not profess one's beliefs, it's probably a good idea not to sound too much like a preacher. It's the wrong venue. Which is more or less what I was reacting to: a commenter, who, in the middle of a political discussion declared that "We must turn to Jesus!"
Well, that's nice...but what does a non-believer DO with that? I'm not going to argue. But I'm not going to shout "Amen" either.
So, I ignored him. And we never had a conversation. Opportunity missed.
I could never cleave my polictical beliefs from my religious beliefs, but I certainly agree with you that there is a proper time and place for each separately and both together.
ReplyDelete