RYC Not really! It was more like you said that I gotta stop and think things out. It's just not as simple as they used to be.

Read the article just now. How many parts did you say your were doing at Flcc?

It seems that You used most of the same information for both articles. But I like it all the same.

I also saw your comments on the other article.

Nice!!!

RYC: Yeah, it was my wife... I should make it more clear, huh?

There is a huge difference between intolerance and indifference... you can only be tolerant about things you're passionate about... "absent convictions, there is no tolerance, there is only indifference" -- I read that in "The Cube and The Cathedral", by Geo. Weigel... I think he's onto something...

RYC: Thanks! I'm glad you enjoyed my entry.

America, alone, has over 300 million people There are no universals, no fact or stereotype that fits all.

The Judaic society was a paternalistic society, thus the notion of Brotherhood, and this was carried over into the writings of Paul. where men and women were considered separately - as brother, as sister.

It is my fervent belief that we should consider the personhood of each individual and do so without prejudice to gender, race, religion, age.

I don’t believe that one can categorize Christians any more than one can categorize non-Christians. People hold their own beliefs, and people are selfish by nature, greedy by habit, socialized by law and custom. The Ten Commandments force this conclusion. We don’t need any commandment or instruction not to do something, unless it is in our nature to do that very thing.

Some Christians are against abortion. Some are against homosexuality. Some are against people of other faiths, or nationalities. Some women may be subjugated (enslaved) by the edicts and interpretations of their particular sect, denomination, or whatever. I don’t find that - despite their claims to the contrary, that the extremists of any group make up the majority of that group.

As a rule, Liberals don’t want to kill babies and Christians don’t want to preach intolerance.

Who gains when the radical extremists are so vocal? The leaders, generally. Is pat Robertson taking in millions from a lot of followers, or is he sending his followers money? Falwell, Haggard, Joel Osteen and Rick Warren? Are they passing out money as freely as Jerry Bremer in Iraq? Is the psychologist James Dobson? How about D. James Kennedy or Joyce Meyer or Benny Hind? Who gains when the extremists get in power in our government?

The one statement is true, no matter who makes it. Christians have done more evil than good. We have been made to think of the Muslims as a violent, war-like people who will stop at nothing until Islam rules the earth. Indeed, much violence has occurred in the name of Allah. They may be ahead of the Christians, but the Christians had a six hundred year head start, so maybe not.

If one considers not just the crusades, or not just the annihilation of the Arawaks under Columbus and those who came later, or the antics of Hitler, or George Bush, or our treatment of the Native American peoples, or all the wars which we have started (for most of our wars have been preemptive), we have only to examine the influence of the church to neglect the underlying causes of ignorance, poverty, hunger. It is one thing to give comfort to someone, pray for someone, and an entirely different thing to build homes for the homeless, educate people and train them so they can get jobs, support programs which distribute the munificence of the world among all, rather than the few. One thing to preach tolerance, but be intolerant, and another thing to actually extend a helping hand.

Jimmy Carter may have been too decent to be a politician, but he is helping built things while our leaders are killing, and when it comes to doing something about the killing, the debate is whether we have enough killers in the filed, or if we need to send more. By and large, while we are not a Christian nation, but a nation with a significant number of Christians, our leaders who are waging war, denying the minimum wage, giving tax breaks to those who least need the relief, and cutting educational and social programs are professing Christians.

It takes more than prayer to get the job done. An old Peanuts cartoon shows Snoopy looking dejected and sad. Charlie Brown and Linus see Snoopy and say. “Snoopy is sad. Let’s cheer him up.” They pass by, pat Snoopy on the head, say “Be of good cheer,” and keep walking.

It takes action. Christianity is a pro-active faith. Rabbi Hillel, a hundred years before Jesus, said: “That which is unpleasant to you, you should not do unto another.”

That is a passive statement. It is a Hebraic notion. Jesus came along and said “Do unto others…” Jesus’ statement is proactive, and Christianity is built upon Jesus, is it not?

Extremists views and statements have been around since before forever. Jesus was called names and accused by the leaders of the temple. We aren’t looking at extremism in any light but human nature, and that nature having ancient roots. This doesn’t make it acceptable, but what it can do is help us get beyond this being a contemporary issue, or a issue of faith, or non-faith, or politics. It is a people problem. The appeal needs to be to people. The appeal needs to confront that such extremism is natural - it is essentially defensive, protective, selfish, thus natural. The appeal, then, is to get people to not do or think as they are inclined for illogical, or selfish reasons, but to explore the possibilities which might derive from a more universal and tolerant approach. We aren’t necessary asking for people to do what they should, but to consider the impact and ramifications of their time and energy when directed differently. What if we tithed in a way that guaranteed that the workers of the church were paid, the utilities were paid, the upkeep of the church were paid, but instead of foreign missions, we took our remaining widows mite and helped someone locally to paint a house, fix leaking pipes, help feed a family in need, offer to tutor children, help clean up a public playground?

I had to leave for a time. I don’t know exactly where to pick up. You say that Christians aren’t out to get anyone. That is the generally awful truth on all sides. We are often fighting to protect ourselves and that includes our sense of freedom, security, identify, beliefs. No one wants to be fearful and change itself can be fearful. So be it that we are made fearful that someone will still our voices from proclaiming God, or still our voices for Pro Choice, or an end to capital punishment, or being weak on justice, or anti-war, or giving in to terrorists. Whatever it is, if we are made afraid, we will become defensive. What is cooperation, tolerance, kindness were the goal? What if inclusion were a goal, rather than fortifying ourselves behind church doors?

Sodom and Gomorrah. The towns were doomed well before the incidents recorded. Only repentance would have saved the cities. That Lot offers his daughter, instead of the visitors, never seems strange. I never hear Jerry Falwell condemning Lot for offering his virgin daughters up for grabs., as you so ably pointed out, Jim.

So much for family values,” Reverend” Falwell. This man’s gluttonous lips seem to cherry pick which passages he wishes to use to serve his own greed for power. Discerning Christians will read the scripture for themselves, mediate and pray, search their own hearts and not be swayed by someone with a political agenda who yells at the top of his lungs that it is everyone else who has an agenda, not him, and he pockets the money, and goes off to some new location to get more money for his coffers.

Why doesn’t Levitical law apply to Christians? Jesus said He came to fulfill the law. That’s the scapegoat to say we don’t have to consider things about God, or Jesus that we don’t wish to apply. We say, God is a God of love. He’s also a God of wrath, jealousy in a protective sense. Are we to limit God because it is more pleasing to think of Him as loving, rather than wrathful? I think it easy to dismiss the things we don’t want to examine, rather than to delve in to the issue more fully.

You mention the laws regarding the Sabbath. Jesus said the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Is this a change in the Commandment, or a fuller explanation? Does it negate giving reverence to God. Perhaps it aids us in taking joy in revering God on the Sabbath, rather than feeling obligated or compelled. To do something joyfully, rather than through mere rote, or blind obedience.

Do we consciously seek to view the laws of Moses and the warnings of the prophets in light of Jesus’ words and actions, or think that Jesus has changed things, when He, Himself, claims otherwise?

The present study is not only valuable, but may be the most valuable time you have spent to date.

One thing that intrigues me is how often Christians are called on more “to be” than to act. To be disciple. That is primary. It occurs within one’s heart and mind and soul before it can be translated into an action, and if one never has an opportunity to translate anything into action, they can still examine within themselves. What is the privilege of a Christian who is in a coma, on an isolated island, at home alone? Is one only validated when the speak and act with others?

I wonder if the calling has less to do with worrying about what others think as with what each individual does, and what they do comes first through their faith, their understanding and their dedication.

Jim, this is the second part of your remarks. I have found both to be thoughtful and provocative. I am not intending my remarks to be critical or contradictory or unmindful of all you have said. I am glad to know you and your friends are actually doing something to think about your faith in such an in depth manner.

Really likeed jrmaxwell comment. He is an extremist huh.

I disagree with you. I am an intolerant Non-Christian you oviously refer too.

I do not think a majority of the the Christians are exrememists. Absolutely not. Just as I doubt that most Muslims want death and destruction of the West. I do believe the majority of Christians are moderate however for whatever reason a large number is very passive. Religion either places fear on them or they give overunjustified amount of respect to the extremists. Perhaps religion clouds there judgement when dealing with the extremist. Perhpas they have a feeling they know they are doing bad things but think that possibly they are right and do talk alot about Jesus . You for one claim to be moderate but sit by idlely as the wall of seperation between Church and State is being smashed. Passiveness is silent support for these people. Same thing with the Muslims. The silence of the majority is deafening.

I don't think all Christians are agianst homosexuals. Many Christians are very accepting and don't find it nesseccary to please God by hating Christians. Others don't find anyting in the Bible to really back up the oppression. Many do find someething that says they should hate gay peoplee. That is the problem with relgion you can find just about any justification for doing anything. All ya need to do is keep it out of politics and everyone is fine. Most democrats have respect for the Constituion and realise that Peoples liberty and freedom trumps others religious bais. They realise Religion is a private matter and should remain that way. Many "moderate Christians" are for against gay marriage saying that it doesn't harm gays to not let them get married and someehow it isn't predudice. It affect $$$ and ya cannot hurt people worse than with the pocket book. It is a shame.

My answer is simple. Legally the State or federal government recognises civil unions. Gay or straight you can get a civil union with al legal property, visitation, power of attorney etc rights. Thus Churches can recogise or not recognise any "marriage". Solves the whole problem and is the proper answer to this problem but You Christians are too damn insecure and not only need God's blessing but the States blessing too?? Weak weak weak.....Christians won't give up their "state validation" of marriage and the politicians need something to rally the wakked out trooops so won't happen.

I know many Christians don't find abortion murder. 85% of Americans are Chrtistian. 60% of people support abortion. The math just says say...yep. Tis true.

I must admit I am positive religion does more evil than good in the world. Religion gives rise to fanaticism and gives a place for exremist to grow and flurish and renders opposition impotent or just too hard to stand up to. Many Christians might want to speak out about the criminal Bush but don't want to be alienated from their church and society (the one they have) because the culture is that of group think and everyone else seems to be so convinced Bush or Abedinejad is a speaker for the Lord...it must be true? The figure just have faith that everyone else is right, in the Lord...blah blah blah...

We have had 9/11, we have our country that has allowed a man who lied us into a war, out a CIA agent, break numerous other laws, did nothing as New Orleans drown, Tourtures our enemies, makes outrageous profit on his war of choice not be punished or even loose his job. It all lies at thee feet of relgion. ALL of it.

GWB is the product of relgion in this country. As Osama is in muslim countries. Evangelicals do and must claim Bush as their crowning acheivement. He represents and is the end product of all their labor. And he is plain evil from just about anyones test or judgements. Lying, Murder, theft, greed all are glorified and acceptable by the relgious folk. They use semantics likee you but it to justify it all but it still smell rotten and those wise to the deceit see it for what it is.......evil. I say of the worst kind. Thou shall not use the lords name in vain. Evangelicals have used Jesus' name to enrich themselves, murder, steal and gain power.

Saudi Arabia, Egypt..etc would all be better places for the people economically, for women, for other faiths, for ideas....they would just be better and more freindly places without as mush religion in their lives. Why in God's name we want desperately to become more fundametalist, more extreme, more Christian in government I don't know.

But it is the moderates that don't speak up. They allow it and passively allow it to happen.

You are one of them. Seperation of Church and State protects everyones religion and everyone else from others relgion. Most importantly it protects America. I wish you could see it.

Just stopped by to say "Hello!"

I enjoyed your article, very well written.  I have a hard time refraining from “debate” though when I read some of the other comments.  I learned a long time ago that debate isn’t good for me (if I let it it can become all consuming)  and I’ve read enough of this guys comments to know he’s happy being unhappy, can’t debate that. 

Anyway, I look forward to the next part.

I'm going to have to think a bit more about your reply, but after doing some research, I have to admit that you have a point. I guess you just assume that whoever did the translating (and the Greek is translated as homosexual is several different versions) is staying very true to the original text. Apparently, it can't always be left up to that.

Also, I like your point about diversity within the Church. I really don't like that we have a Moral Majority or that politicians can appeal to the Christian Right. Why is Christianity conservative? Jesus wasn't political, in spite of being such a big public figure, and tried to stay out of politics (particularly when he side stepped the question of paying tax to Ceasar in Matt 22:15-22). Really, when you get down to it, most "Christian" political issues have no basis in religion at all. As you pointed out, pro-lifers probably fell just as strongly as any Christian about the taking of human life. It's just a matter of when you define the potential child as being a human, and when it is merely a clump of cells. A theory on why Christians have championed this issue of abortion stems from the belief of St. Thomas Aquinas in what he called a homunculus. Basically, the thought was, because of inaccurate early microscopes, that even single cell fertilized eggs had the shape of little humans (refered to as a homunculus). Therefore, because they were "little people," these homunculuses had souls and could not be aborted. Although modern science has proven this wrong, the view of the Church on this issue was never updated.

There are many other standard conservative viewpoints (such as welfare, foriegn politics, personal liberties) readily accepted by the Christian Right that fall under this category also. I simply don't think that religion, or at least Christianity, has much to say on whether we vote Democrat or Republican; it seems to me to be more an issue of culture.

Good article. I'd like to point out one inaccuracy -- I believe Jews can eat chicken. Pork, however, is forbidden, and that includes bacon (so you're right there).

As a non-believer I have always believed in the fourth point where religion does more evil than good.

While I do know obviously not all Christians are against homosexuals. But for the select few that are, I don't even see why they are against them. It would sound more for personal reasons of hating them with weak support from the Bible.

OMG why would someone ask you to write that?

RYC:  Thanks so much.  Blessings to you this day.

And RYC:  Wow........on all the holiday birthdays!!!!!! You're poor Mom!!  Have a GREAT day.

Thanks for visiting my site the other day. I enjoyed your article and the subsequent debate going on in the comments.

Have a nice day!