I've been following a little trail of piddle that slung its way at The Queen of Spain recently. Actually, the woman who posted about the Queen wasn't nearly as interesting as someone else referenced. So, I started digging around a bit more.
Turns out her friend has a husband ... author of "Duh Magazine." I'm just curious. What do you think about this little online publication?
I'm taking a guess here, but if Jesus had a blog I think He could be the Son of God without posting "homo alerts." What, exactly, is the slang "homo" in the original Greek and Hebrew, anyway? Is that something they teach you in seminary? Systematic Name Calling 101
I find it interesting that Believers can be so drastically different ... that some of us may even hold to a lot of the same theology, but we live it out in completely different ways. Thoughts anyone?
Anyone?
15 comments:
Hi. This is the "not nearly as interesting" chick. I've tried really hard to distinguish my feelings from Dani's. And report that I was just really challenged to speak boldly about what I believe. And that it did not necessarily correspond with all she believes.
D'uh Mag is harsh. Calling anyone names is wrong. I've never, and would never.
And ultimately, this woman Dani is not a friend. She's someone I identified with for a few statements, and wrote twice, and the rest I've stated before.
I like that you say "child of the big dude".
Not sure why, but for some odd reason I felt compelled to try to, oh I dunno, clear my name? Oh well, it's was worth a try.
She's everywhere...
In all seriousness, though...would Jesus blog?
Captain Mom, I'll admit, I did not spend much time on your blog, because ... well, Dani does pull one's attention! So, I've changed my wording in the post.
Queen, you've given me a great idea. I'll have to make it a poll!
Wow, I didn’t know I am “everywhere” – Can’t be all that bad, now can I?
Yes, it says HOMO Alert on my husbands site! It also refers to some guys as the Lavender Mafia. Pretty funny if you ask me.
It's true that the websites my husband and I have are occasionally harsh, confrontational, and offensive at times. The content of what we post does not cater to what Christians expect, but to what non-Christians want to read about. As it turns out, and thanks to sites like yours, we have high volumes of non-believers visiting our sites because they are offended. But, at the same time they keep coming back for more because they like the truth with straight talk, including appropriate harshness and offensiveness. Yes, sometimes we are intentionally offensive - But then again, so was Jesus.
Jesus was offensive! He is called the "Rock of offense," remember? Most people, in fact, were offended by Him. As Jesus said, "Blessed is he who is not offended because of Me" (Mat. 11:6; Luke 7:23).
Have any of you stopped to ask yourselves: Why are so many bloggers, especially unbelievers, checking out our sites, writing about us, and linking to us if we are just rude, offensive and "un-Christ like"?
Perhaps it is because the loving but mushy, “Jesus loves you” and "May God bless you" message is missing from the picture? Many non-believers and Christians expect that "loving" approach, which is an absolute turn off to 95% of the population. All of the fluff in the Message is one reason why heathens do not like to listen to most Christians. If they wanted to read a nice "feel good" message, there are millions of other sites to choose from. Why do people keep coming back to our site? Because there is only so much "fluff" and "niceness" a person can stand. My husband and I prefer to keep it real - Take it or leave it.
Christians today are trying to be nicer than God. In the Church there is a standard of "niceness" that Jesus failed to reach while on earth. Comparing God's attitude and behavior with that of the Church today shows that believers are far more feminized and they are more polite, understanding, tolerant, and respectful to the wicked than the God of the Bible is.
The Church today is also less offensive, rude and sarcastic than God's men in the Bible were which is why we have mega churches where tolerance has become a virtue and we have a growing number of HOMOsexuals who claim to be "Christians" and even leaders. Today, most Christians would never be caught mocking or judging the wicked, as God's men in the Bible sometimes did.
Many Christians today would condemn Christ's attitude as "unloving" and "intolerant."
Jesus promised his followers, "You will be hated by all nations for My name's sake. And then many will be offended" (Mat. 24:9-10).
A harsh style is difficult for more sensitive Christians to appreciate, but necessary at times. This style is not for everyone as there are different parts of the Body that we all function. But, the biblical approach to communicating with the world includes not only love and compassion, but harshness at times as well. If you look closer, you will see that the Bible sometimes ministers through ridicule, humor, sarcasm and even mocking.
Jesus spoke several unkind and harsh words which are unacceptable in today's "Christian" culture. The especially harsh term hypocrite is used in the Gospels twenty-three times. Christ often insulted the scribes, Pharisees and lawyers. He even called the Pharisees "blind guides" (Mat. 23:16, 24) and "sons of hell" (Mat. 23:15). He said to Peter "Get behind me, Satan" (Mat. 16:23). He told the Pharisees "You are of your father the devil" (John 8:44), and made a whip and cleared "thieves" from the temple (John 2:14:15).
The Apostle Paul says in I Corinthians 6:8-10, “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor HOMOSEXUALS, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.”
I Timothy 1:9-11 says, “The law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust.”
So you are offended by calling a HOMOsexual a HOMO? Are you also offended when we call an abortionist a murderer? Or Bush a liar? Or Clinton an adulterer? Or a young couple sleeping together, fornicators? Is it more offensive to call a HOMOsexual a sodomite? Or should we just call them "gay"? What exactly, is the slang for "gay" in the original Greek and Hebrew, anyway?
Gentiles (as symbols of the godless) and sodomites are called "dogs" several times in the Bible (Mat. 7:6; 15:26; Deut. 23:17-18; Ps. 22:16; 59:5-6; Phil. 3:2; Rev. 22:15). And Jesus was harsh, not only to the Pharisees, as some believers wrongly assume, but to all the unrepentant (see His use of "hypocrite"). Jesus instructs Christians "Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw your pearls before swine" (Mat. 7:6). Yet the silly dilemma now is - Who could Christ possibly have meant by that, for we are too loving, tolerant, polite and respectful to refer to any human being by a mean-spirited term like swine or dog (or HOMO).
In the KJV, the seductive women among the people of God are worse than "whores" (Ezek. 16:33). That crude term appears in the Bible dozens of times. The men who use those women are "whoremongers" (1 Tim. 1:10; Heb. 13:4; Rev. 21:8; 22:15), which is the most raw term in the English language to describe promiscuous men. Sinners, especially HOMOsexuals truly are repulsive, regardless of how people may try to sanitize them.
The Bible does not say, "Hate the sin, love the sinner." It says, "As a man thinks in his heart, so is he" (Prov. 23:7). And that God "hates all workers of iniquity" (Ps 5:5).
God uses different methods to communicate the Gospel to people at different depths of depravity and so should we. At times, a Christian can be gentle, kind and even pray with an unbeliever. At other times, a believer might ridicule the unrepentant in hopes of waking him up.
===================
Captain Mom - I know we're not "friends," but I still hope you are encouraged to be more bold in sharing the Truth.
Whew.
Read all the comments.
Once I found myself staring at a car wreck with morbid fascination.
A lot of blog traffic doesn't necessarily mean you are RIGHT. You might be a car wreck.
I suggest Dani lay off the OT for awhile and spend some time in the gospels.
Wow, huh,
Just a thought, for what is worth, but I think that there is a difference between righteous indignation (which Jesus has more of a right to have than any of us, Matt 5:27ish)and just plain mean (think fruits of the spirit, patience, kindness, gentleness).
Sparrow--car wreck analogy...very funny. That's some of the scariest stuff I've ever seen.
The internet gives every moron and their dog a place to say whatever they want. Isn't the internet great...
I've been thinking about your observation more, Christine, that Christians live out our faith in different ways. I have been known to be guilty of relativism, but in this case I think there are some lines that we can draw about how Christians are to speak and behave.
Dani and many other Christians claim that it's OK to be downright mean and derogatory to other people because "Jesus was offensive." I think that what those folks miss is that Jesus was offensive primarily to the religious elites who kept everyone at arms' length by quoting law so that they didn't have to show compassion to the people that they didn't like. Jesus offended the religious folks who were certain that they would have a place in heaven by telling them that they wouldn't, but that those dirty nasty people that they didn't like would be welcome in heaven. Jesus was offensive to the people who were convinced that they had their religion right and everyone else was wrong.
The irony is that that's exactly what Dani and others do. They quote scripture until they're blue in the face to prove that they're right and those dirty nasty people they don't like (homos seem to be the nasty folks du jour) are wrong. What they seem to miss is that Jesus loved those people with more love than we can even imagine. Jesus was overwhelmingly compassionate to them, and Jesus welcomed them with open arms. Note that no one repented before Jesus healed them. Their change was a result of Jesus' love and compassion.
So Jesus was offensive to people who were certain they were right and he welcomed everyone else with open arms. I believe that's our Christian ethic as well, and hiding behind the "Jesus was offensive" excuse to be awful and degrading to other people is blasphemous.
By the way, there is no slang for "homo" in Greek and Hebrew. And there's much danger in interpreting passages that have to do with "degrading passions" to mean that two people of the same gender can't live in a committed, loving, monogamous relationship.
FWIW
Mary Beth
Jesus was not offensive to everyone who thought they were right, just the ones who thought they were, but weren't. Just because the relationship is committed, loving, and monogamous does not mean it is good.
We are accountable to an unchanging standard, one external to ourselves. We relate to it by being broken upon it, or being crushed by it.
Well, I will take a stab at it....
You are right...Believers, Christians, Christ followers, people of the book, faithful people often have VERY different ways of the expression of what that means to them.
It might pertain to differences of geography, gender, race, age, education, family of origin, college, friends, life circumstances, etc.
Now, I know that not everyone will buy into this, but as a Christ follower that is working to get a new church started in an area where only 20-30% of people are connected with a church on a regular basis, I find myself asking and thinking about a dichotomy that MAY exist in spiritual INSIDERS vs. spiritual OUTSIDERS. Notice that spiritual is in both. Not only am I a church planter, but also a corporate chaplain (I go into to companies and am available to listen, to encourage, the be a friend...NOT to preach or push doctrine). In all of this, I have begun to notice, that people do want truth, not gimmics, but they do not need truth cramned down their throats by someone they don't know. We are relational people and thus, we hear things better coming from people we know and trust. As a pastor, it would easy for me to speak in a fake pastor voice and go around yelling "Jeee-sus"...yes - they actually do teach you how to throw your voice in some preaching classes at cemenary...oh I mean seminary.
But what does that create. Who is lost...us or them. I am in need of God's saving grace just as much as the next guy. My life is hard and faith messy. My ducks are not in a row. I don't have it figured out. Name calling doesn't solve anything....neither does preaching and speaking one's perception of "truth"...one's understanding of Jesus' teachings without contextual relationship.
Blogging is a great thing...it allows people to place their thoughts out there...but in a context where some people who read them may get to know them while others, such as myself, visit blogs only occasionaly (with the exception of mrs. christine!)
I'm rambling now and need to leave, but I leave you with this.
Living out one's faith and convictions is far more messy with blurred lines than anyone would probably want to admit. Are there things that I am against and things that I think are bad...YES. Do I make that the banner staff I waive as a peace offering of letting a hurting world know that there is a God who loves them? NO. As hard as it is for a talker like me to do so...I seek to listen without condemnation (even if I disagree). You see it is not my job to convict...if it is my job, then that means I am God and boy are some people in trouble :)
Alas, and thankfully I am not God. I am a servant, a friend, someone who does not think you have to clean up your life to belong and that you can belong before and while you are coming to belief.
Conversation, community, conversion/transformation....I don't know that there has to be one order over another.
"Alas, and thankfully I am not God. I am a servant, a friend, someone who does not think you have to clean up your life to belong and that you can belong before and while you are coming to belief."
This was so well said and really stood out to me.
Someone else pointed out, and I agree, that the religious people where the ones that Jesus offended most. Heck, he dined with the sinners, the losers. I don't remember him having any dinner parties with the harsh, smug, self-righteous religious leaders. Just a thought.
"Jesus was offensive! He is called the "Rock of offense," remember? Most people, in fact, were offended by Him. As Jesus said, "Blessed is he who is not offended because of Me" (Mat. 11:6; Luke 7:23).
And here is some "speaking the truth in love."
The rock of offense phrase is not referring to Christians writing and speaking offensively to and of other people.
As a homosexual church may misuse the Bible to excuse sin, in a like manner, Dani, you are using Scripture wrongly to jusitfy rude words.
I've been reading a lot about this issue - it's been on my mind a lot. I used to be afraid of Christians and had a lot of stereotypes about them. Now I am one.
I feel that as a Christian I have to take a stand on social issues, even if it means being unpopular. My perspective has changed a lot -after seeing so many broken families and suffering children I began to realize that sin is truly destructive to humankind.
But one thing that bothers me is the abuse of the terms 'hate' and 'bigotry'. It seems like Christians who hold more traditional views get caricatured as 'haters' and 'bigots' just because they believe that the Bible identifies certain behaviors as sin. This strikes me as a really manipulative and unfair tactic.
Love is NOT forcing another person to share the same belief system. Love is how you treat people. Regardless of my views of what is right and wrong, I shouldn't use these views an excuse to treat someone else badly. Sadly, it seems like people feel justified in vilifying people who have different beliefs and treating them like crap. This isn't love at all. I've seen hate coming from Christians but also hate coming from gay activists. Both sides need to stop and look at what they are doing.
Anyone up for a bet that Dani's last name is Phelps?
Post a Comment